I repeat what I said: "God as Creator must exist outside time (part of Creation)"...The statement needs no other proofs as if one starts with the premiss that there is a God who created everything, then all else follows. To over simplify by allegory, if I bake a cake I cannot be contained within the cake. It is possible to argue that some essence of me is contained within but that is not the same thing.
This concept of time, especially with reference to the chronology of the texts which are always quoted, is the most important feature in trying to comprehend what is going on in the complexity of the group of texts we refer to as the Bible. Get the chronology right and we begin to see different pictures.
For example, ask any average Christian about the conversion of St Paul, and you will be told the story of St Paul on the road to Damascus, a blinding light and a voice from heaven. All Christians have known this story for nearly 2000 years. All? no as there is at least one exception...St Paul knew nothing about this at all! If we read the core of the NT in the correct chronological order, (Early epistles of Paul, followed by the gospels (in the sequence Mark, Matthew, Luke, John) then Acts, we have a different picture. Paul does not have any reference to the Damascus story and tells of his conversion much more simply; He propounds his Christian faith most eloquently, but makes no reference to the location of Jesus in time and space, i.e. he makes no reference to a historical or geographical Jesus. He writes to widely scattered groups outside the Holy Land before the gospels were written - and they are already Christian.
Recently I was listening to a homily based on the nativity narrative in St Luke's gospel. Referring to the census mentioned the priest asserted that as we know when this occurred, then despite all criticism, we do know when the birth occurred (6AD). I did not leap to my feet...I always let them chunter on and take up any argument in private. He had of course omitted the Annunciation which Luke tells us took place in the reign of Herod. Unfortunately Herod died in 4 BC. This gives a gestation period of ten years at the very least, a miracle greater than the concept of the Virgin Birth. (Add in the tradition that Luke was John Luke, a doctor, and we begin to wonder).
What has this to do with time? Quite a lot. It is the attempt by westerners to place things in time and space that leads to such anomalies. It is obvious from the reference to Luke above that there are at least three hands involved in the birth narrative. A later redactor trying to synchronise two or three accounts blends them together. Unfortunately the redactor has no historical knowledge of the period and does not realise the error he has compounded. Most people hear the story as a story and do not check the history involved...and this continues. For St Paul, when and where has no significance. It is the greater concept which counts.
The easiest place for most people to start examining the concept of time and chronology is not in the Bible. Try becoming "as a little child" and reading C.SLewis' Narnia. chronicles with time and space in mind. There are seven books - read them in published order. This is important as it is the correct chronological sequence of the writing. When you get to "The Magician's Nephew" you'll see the complexity involved. Great fun and little pain involved as you do not need a working knowledge of Hellenistic Greek and Ancient Semitic languages to grasp it - but Lewis gets the thinking reader into "chicken and egg" thinking in a very entertaining manner.
Elohim (Gods) bless...