Yes Unka Dave! It is begging the question! And semantics and a certain problem with common speech. But We aren't going to get into the real nitty on this because we don't have the time, do we? Maybe we could just list bibliographies as arguments and rebuttals! If nothing exists "before" the universe, "before" doesn't exist either! Indeed, we cannot reasonably discuss "before existence" and so you could reasonably state that the universe has "always" existed.

And if LH would quit holding DOWN the table, I think I could get it off the ground! It's a great image but it doesn't apply to the field of philosophy. Or sophistry!

Meself, I would refer you to Arthur S. Eddington's "Time" in "The Nature of the Physical World" London, Cambridge University Press 1930, pp 36-62. complete with diagrams. In part, You, represented by a little circle at the center of a piece of paper, a vertical and a horizontal line passing through you to the edges of the paper. The upper vertical line is your future, the lower, your past. The horizontal line is your "now line" all the events you can perceive as you are "here now". Because objects and true events beyond your immediate sense receptors are subject to the universal speed limit (186,282 miles per second) need to draw a "seen now" line which angles back ever so slightly from your "now" line. The farther away the object is, the longer the delay in sensing it. This is to say, you sense it some time after the event as it's light reflection or source event takes that interval to reach you. This is very pronounced in the field of astronomy. We are just now receiving light from events tens of thousands and even billions of years ago!

So, imagine another person approaching your diagram from a different angle. At the moment you meet you are essentially at the same zero point so you share the center position but this other person's "now line" extends beyond your now line on one side and hasn't reached your "now line" on the other! He has the potential of having already experienced events that have not yet happened to you yet. That is his untouchable past is part of your flux future! And vice verse! That is a real brief outline of Eddington's argument. It is interesting reading and I highly recommend it to you.

It kind of reminds me of a short Sci-Fi story I read once (sorry, I can't recall the author) about a fellow sitting back in his lawn chair when a big flash of light strikes him and a man appears out of nowhere (or perhaps "Elsewhere" which is what the left and right side of your diagram represents!). The visitor staggers over and introduces himself and proclaims that he is a time-traveler from the past. In fact he is THE time traveler from the past for he is the first and probably the only one to ever succeed in the endeavor. He says "Of course there was a plus or minus factor about being able to achieve such a goal. The risks were great. There was a possibility that what I did could have destroyed the entire world of my time."

"Well, do you think it was worth the risk?" asks the Lawnchair guy. "Oh, I think it was. At least I have vindicated my theory." replies the Time traveler.

"Uh, from how far in the past did you come?" asks Lawnchair guy.

The Time traveler looks at his watch and say "Oh, from about fifteen minutes ago."

"It wasn't worth it." replies the Lawnchair guy. "Here, have a beer."