paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Do you mean that "Nothing" is a concept like "Trinity" that was invented by Paul, mythically?"nothing" is a concept that we can't understand with our human mind
Regards
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do you mean that "Nothing" is a concept like "Trinity" that was invented by Paul, mythically?"nothing" is a concept that we can't understand with our human mind
It's One. But not "Creating". Nothing is just nothing. All something comes from something else. We are part of that something. And that something was, is, and will always be The One. We are part of The One. This world is part of The One. There never was a specific beginning of The One. The only beginning we can see, is the beginning of our specific time line. It's not creating, but becoming. God, us, the world, all of it, is constantly becoming.
--edit
Dang. I did it anyway. I brought in my own personal view of what God is, and my view of pantheism... really tried not to.
It's a concept, for sure. What nothing is, must be something that isn't. Since something isn't nothing, and as soon as we ask what nothing is, we're asking what kind of thing is nothing, which makes it a something. A nothing can't be a something, unless it's everything.Do you mean that "Nothing" is a concept like "Trinity" that was invented by Paul, mythically?
Regards
One doesn't.How does one know that ONE is not creating?
There is one Cosmos yes...? You share the same Cosmos as all else in existence yes? There is, despite the apparent separation between beings...an underlying unity...yes?Could you put that into plain English please? That reads like something William Lane Craig would have said.
What does "...the underlying unity of Cosmic existence" mean?
"...natural anthropocentric fashion..." I know what 'anthropocentric' means but what does that phrase mean?
"the Cosmos at large is birthless and deathless" - is it, how do we know?
So we know that the Cosmos is real because it exists....of this there is no theory necessary to prove it yes? But you say that this realness came from nothingness, which is only a theory because it can't be proven yes?In that last post, I said nothing whatsoever about time. You said that it followed logically that because the big bang is expanding "into" nothing, that "'absolute nothing' was that from which the big bang originated".
All I explained was that this isn't necessarily true as per the "nature" of nothing. "Nothing" is not a space that something can "expand into" like a balloon inflating in an empty room. It is literally nothing. The universe is expanding, but it not expanding "into" nothing, it is simply expanding. There is nothing outside of the Universe for it to expand "into", so there was not necessarily any state that somehow preceded the existence of the Universe in any form. How is that not a logical addressing of your points or a skirting of the issue? It is a direct, plain-English response to your assertion that "'absolute nothing' was that from which the big bang originated".
See above. The Universe isn't "expanding into" nothingness, and I have no basis on which to assert therefore that this "nothingness" preceded the big bang (if, indeed, anything did precede the big bang). Again, you appear to be viewing "nothing" as comparative to "emptiness", like the empty space inside a room being filled by an inflating balloon. But emptiness is not nothing. I'm not sure I can adequately communicate the concept effectively in words, but it is more useful not to think of the Universe as expanding "into" something, but merely the Universe expanding. Again, I am not a physicist or a cosmologist so my understanding of these subjects can very generously be described as dramatic oversimplifications, but I'm trying the best I can to explain what little I understand.
Ok...understood...It's One. But not "Creating". Nothing is just nothing. All something comes from something else. We are part of that something. And that something was, is, and will always be The One. We are part of The One. This world is part of The One. There never was a specific beginning of The One. The only beginning we can see, is the beginning of our specific time line. It's not creating, but becoming. God, us, the world, all of it, is constantly becoming.
--edit
Dang. I did it anyway. I brought in my own personal view of what God is, and my view of pantheism... really tried not to.
It's a concept, for sure. What nothing is, must be something that isn't. Since something isn't nothing, and as soon as we ask what nothing is, we're asking what kind of thing is nothing, which makes it a something. A nothing can't be a something, unless it's everything.
Only if you confuse scientific hypothesis for beliefs.So we know that the Cosmos is real because it exists....of this there is no theory necessary to prove it yes? But you say that this realness came from nothingness, which is only a theory because it can't be proven yes?
So you believe in a theory of absolute nothing that can't be proven in preference to my logical assumption that Cosmic reality never had a beginning because to claim so requires some leap of faith into the magic of pulling a Cosmic rabbit out of a non existent hat....
What do you mean...I was responding to the claim of ImmortalFlame wrt nothing...?.Only if you confuse scientific hypothesis for beliefs.
What I mean is the the big bang is not a belief mate. You confused it for one and said it required faith.What do you mean...I was responding to the claim of ImmortalFlame wrt nothing...?.
Again, if you say that nothing must be something, then it can't be nothing, can it? Nothing is not the same as something, is it? So if there was something instead of nothing for the space to expand into, then that something must've been put within something too. Or was that something that space expanded into a something that was created inside a nothing? If you say that's impossible, then it is impossible regardless if God did it or not.So you are at science for fun! It is round and round yet not circular.
No confusion here....it is you who does not understand....I have referred to big bang theory as a theory consistently....and I do not believe it is credible. There are others who believe the theory is credible, and others again who are agnostic...What I mean is the the big bang is not a belief mate. You confused it for one and said it required faith.
No, plenty of people fail to grasp the simple point that theories EXPLAIN the facts and are not beliefs. You appear to be one of them.No confusion here....it is you who does not understand....I have referred to big bang theory as a theory consistently....and I do not believe it is credible. There are others who believe the theory is credible, and others again who are agnostic...
Are you denying that there aren't people who believe in the big bang theory as a scientific fact?
No, plenty of people fail to grasp the simple point that theories EXPLAIN the facts and are not beliefs. You appear to be one of them.
I think there might only be a leap of faith here if one was to suppose what happened before the beginning. And that we aren't brains in vatsSo we know that the Cosmos is real because it exists....of this there is no theory necessary to prove it yes? But you say that this realness came from nothingness, which is only a theory because it can't be proven yes?
So you believe in a theory of absolute nothing that can't be proven in preference to my logical assumption that Cosmic reality never had a beginning because to claim so requires some leap of faith into the magic of pulling a Cosmic rabbit out of a non existent hat....
This is a hypothesis. A theory involves one or more hypotheses and must explain processes and make predictions.Theory....A tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena..
What beginning...there was no beginning ...you just suppose there was.. If you have proof there was a beginning, please explain how all that exists come from nothing....I think there might only be a leap of faith here if one was to suppose what happened before the beginning. And that we aren't brains in vats
Argue with the editors of WordWeb...that is straight from the dictionary...This is a hypothesis. A theory involves one or more hypotheses and must explain processes and make predictions.