This has been bugging me for a very long time. I posed this on another message board and was told it was a fallacy to think this way. What really bothers me is that I was given not an explanation why.

My argument was that if something has an eternal and unchanging past it would continue forever as it is because something would've happened to it in the span of its past eternity.

Is this really such a baseless assumption? I want a second opinion. If I'm wrong I would like to know why.