A Universe from Nothing?

[ChristineM]

You are obviously obfuscating with respect to Question 1 where you do not say whether you agree or not agree for obvious reasons. You had to in order to continue your denial. Let me explain.

You said in your post #4247 ChristineM, Jul 28, 2017 "Your belief s yours alone, just don't pay the preacher."

My question 1 was...Do you agree with my understanding that you are referring specifically to my beliefs?

Now if you said that you do not agree with my understanding that you are talking about my beliefs, then it is obviously a lie, if you say you agree, then it follows that when I say in my responding post #4255 ..."There is no belief involved in stilling the mind, it is a religious practice.", it is directly in the context of you raising the issue of my beliefs in your post #4247. Note how in your post, you purposely edited out "There is no belief involved in stilling the mind,"

Now my question to you is.....Do you think that my statement 'There is no belief involved in stilling the mind..." is in direct response to and in the context of, your statement to me..."Your beliefs..."?

Bull, my posts are accurate, with evidence. my report of my posts are accurate. How you try and manipulate my posts is your problem. Get over yourself and be a man, admit you messed up.

 

[godnotgod]

Probably in much the same way that I have ignored your inane "corrections".

If I say 'cup' and gnostic says 'saucer', because that is exactly what he did, is that a misunderstanding that needs correction, or not?

 

[ChristineM]

Regardless at what theorized level of energy of the vacuum is, anywhere from 10^−9 joules to 10^+113 joules or even infinity, the energy must have always been there. Where do you think it came from?

Back to square one, again.

You are guessing based on your personal belief. Is s not up to me to guess, i am quite happy with any and all the theories of how the universe was created because, no one knows the answer... That's NO ONE. It is you that limits the theories to only what you want to believe.

 

[ChristineM]

No distraction Christine, we are closing in on the error.....#4679

Yes he error is you made a statement and i proved it wrong, you have been waffling and tossing in diversion ever since.

 

[godnotgod]

Nope, definitely a physical thing i eat. Tis' easy to tell, if you only dream of eating, malnutrition and death sets in after a few weeks. Eating real food prevents malnutrition and often staves off death from malnutrition for 80, 90 or more years.

As for the rest of your hocus pocus, tell that to Neil Armstrong.

Sure, he was floating around in consciousness, that he called 'space', and he calls it 'space' simply because he has been conditioned in the same way that you have, to think it is 'the dimensions of height, width, and depth'. It isn't. HW&D are parameters created by the human mind and then superimposed over reality after which are mistaken for reality itself, just as the tick of the clock, superimposed over reality, is mistaken for something 'real' called 'Time', when 'Time' does not actually exist in reality.

Where does Armstrong's consciousness leave off and 'space' begin? Hmmmm?

If you dream of eating, you are experiencing (within the dream) 'dream hunger' which is being satisfied by 'dream sandwich', for example. You may even dream of dying of malnutrition in a dream, and for the dreamer, it is just as real as if he really were dying of malnutrition.

Watch:

There is no 'physical' thing called 'sandwich' that you eat. There are no actual 'material' particles that make up any physical 'sandwich'; all particles are virtual particles. We live in a world of superposition of possibilities. If you don't accept Quantum Physics, then you still think the world is a material world, whatever that means. Tell me what 'physical' and 'material' mean to you.

 

[ChristineM]

Sure, he was floating around in consciousness, that he called 'space', and he calls it 'space' simply because he has been conditioned in the same way that you have, to think it is 'the dimensions of height, width, and depth'. It isn't. HW&D are parameters created by the human mind and then superimposed over reality after which are mistaken for reality itself, just as the tick of the clock, superimposed over reality, is mistaken for something 'real' called 'Time', when 'Time' does not actually exist in reality.

Where does Armstrong's consciousness leave off and 'space' begin? Hmmmm?

If you dream of eating, you are experiencing (within the dream) 'dream hunger' which is being satisfied by 'dream sandwich', for example. You may even dream of dying of malnutrition in a dream, and for the dreamer, it is just as real as if he really were dying of malnutrition.

Watch:

There is no 'physical' thing called 'sandwich' that you eat. There are no actual 'material' particles that make up any physical 'sandwich'; all particles are virtual particles. We live in a world of superposition of possibilities. If you don't accept Quantum Physics, then you still think the world is a material world, whatever that means. Tell me what 'physical' and 'material' mean to you.

Nope he was in space, unless you can prove otherwise, end of story

 

[godnotgod]

Nope he was in space, unless you can prove otherwise, end of story

Except for the fact that you haven't proven that he WAS in space, because to begin with, there is nothing you can get hold of called 'space'. It's just an idea in your head.

You like to think it's 'end of story', but answer: 'where does Armstrong's consciousness leave off, and 'space' begin?

Answer the question: what is 'physical' and 'material'?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

ok....but....I believe....

the Spirit moved upon the face of the waters

Genesis sounds like poetry
but I get it

in a state of existence....without form....and void....
darkness was upon the face of the deep

the stirring of God ....stirred the 'waters'
and the pronouncement....I AM!
is simultaneous to ....Let there be light

I do not believe matter and energy are the same thing
if they were we would not have two separate words with different definition

there is a line drawn.....

There s only the creation of form (and death). the essential underlying 'waters' is eternal.

Two separate words with different definition are merely relative distinctions of the one God made by the discriminating mind of sentient beings, north ans south, here and there, hot and cold, good and evil...Adam should never have eaten of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil! Still the mind and the Garden of Eden is present.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You, yourself, just recently said something to the effect that reality cannot be described so why are you descriptions of it (the alleged divinity thingy) more valid than gnostic's understanding of what you are babbling about? If our perceptions of reality are illusory or not real why are your perceptions of "Reality" any more accurate?

See YmirGF, you too like gnostic lack the mental clarity to see the nuance involved in some of my posts, I do not describe the absolute reality beyond words, I explain that reality is on the other side of words and and descriptions. I offer you the 'finger pointing at the moon' and you think my 'finger' is meant to be the same as the moon. The nuance is that while I use words to explain that the reality that words are meant to represent is on the other side of the words, they are used only as an expedient for the purpose, for how else can the 'finger pointing at the moon' metaphor be conveyed. To realize that reality, one must cease thinking....no thoughts..no obscuration of what actually is!

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Bull, my posts are accurate, with evidence. my report of my posts are accurate. How you try and manipulate my posts is your problem. Get over yourself and be a man, admit you messed up.

You see, you continue to refuse to answer the question as you know I am right. Here it is again and I am asking you to please provide a simple yes or no? Do you think that my statement "There is no belief involved in stilling the mind..." is in direct response to and in the context of, your statement to me..."Your beliefs..."?

 

[godnotgod]

See YmirGF, you too like gnostic lack the mental clarity to see the nuance involved in some of my posts, I do not describe the absolute reality beyond words, I explain that reality is on the other side of words and and descriptions. I offer you the 'finger pointing at the moon' and you think my 'finger' is meant to be the same as the moon. The nuance is that while I use words to explain that the reality that words are meant to represent is on the other side of the words, they are used only as an expedient for the purpose, for how else can the 'finger pointing at the moon' metaphor be conveyed. To realize that reality, one must cease thinking....no thoughts..no obscuration of what actually is!

Reasoning has some (many) thinking it clarifies reality, not realizing it is just a conceptual overlay which is at least one step removed FROM reality itself. What reality actually IS, must be seen and experienced directly, and not just conceptualized. They use the yardsticks of Reason, Logic, and Analysis to ascertain the nature of reality, when they should be using reality to ascertain the nature of their yardsticks. Then their yardsticks (or schtiks) will actually make 'sense', as they will then be seen and understood within the context of reality, and not the other way around. They want to 'explain' The Infinite with the finite; to encapsulate it within some concept, because that is what the mind is comfy with; it cannot conceive of a reality that does not include the machinations of itself. Therein lies the problem.

One might say that 'the finger pointing to the moon' is akin to the escaped prisoner in Plato's Cave informing the other prisoners of a glorious Sun just above and outside the cave entrance, but this 'informing', or 'pointing' makes no sense until they actually go topside to see for themselves. Instead, they just remain in subject/object split mode, continuing to intellectualize ABOUT what 'Sun' actually IS, convinced they've got hold of some 'truth'.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes he error is you made a statement and i proved it wrong, you have been waffling and tossing in diversion ever since.

You so far refuse to answer my question that will end this saga, please try it? Do you think that my statement "There is no belief involved in stilling the mind..." is in direct response to and in the context of, your statement to me..."Your beliefs..."?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Back to square one, again.

You are guessing based on your personal belief. Is s not up to me to guess, i am quite happy with any and all the theories of how the universe was created because, no one knows the answer... That's NO ONE. It is you that limits the theories to only what you want to believe.

You assume that the vacuum energy of the universe was created, and no one knows that.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Reasoning has some (many) thinking it clarifies reality, not realizing it is just a conceptual overlay which is at least one step removed FROM reality itself. What reality actually IS, must be seen and experienced directly, and not just conceptualized. They use the yardsticks of Reason, Logic, and Analysis to ascertain the nature of reality, when they should be using reality to ascertain the nature of their yardsticks. Then their yardsticks (or schtiks) will actually make 'sense', as they will then be seen and understood within the context of reality, and not the other way around. They want to 'explain' The Infinite with the finite; to encapsulate it within some concept, because that is what the mind is comfy with; it cannot conceive of a reality that does not include the machinations of itself. Therein lies the problem.

One might say that 'the finger pointing to the moon' is akin to the escaped prisoner in Plato's Cave informing the other prisoners of a glorious Sun just above and outside the cave entrance, but this 'informing', or 'pointing' makes no sense until they actually go topside to see for themselves. Instead, they just remain in subject/object split mode, continuing to intellectualize ABOUT what 'Sun' actually IS, convinced they've got hold of some 'truth'.

Yes gng, but they will not understand as they are still prisoners in the cave, and will take umbrage at it being pointed out. The glare of the 'light' creating the shadows is just too much..

 

[YmirGF]

See YmirGF, you too like gnostic lack the mental clarity to see the nuance involved in some of my posts, I do not describe the absolute reality beyond words, I explain that reality is on the other side of words and and descriptions. I offer you the 'finger pointing at the moon' and you think my 'finger' is meant to be the same as the moon. The nuance is that while I use words to explain that the reality that words are meant to represent is on the other side of the words, they are used only as an expedient for the purpose, for how else can the 'finger pointing at the moon' metaphor be conveyed. To realize that reality, one must cease thinking....no thoughts..no obscuration of what actually is!

One might ponder on the message a bit more when one continually flies the canard that others are misunderstanding the message. It's not our understanding that is off, rather, the messenger is simply not up to the job... ...unless we wish to lower the bar so that any Tom foolery can bound across.

 

[ChristineM]

You see, you continue to refuse to answer the question as you know I am right. Here it is again and I am asking you to please provide a simple yes or no? Do you think that my statement "There is no belief involved in stilling the mind..." is in direct response to and in the context of, your statement to me..."Your beliefs..."?

I have answer the question, i refuse to repeatedly answer it to massage your ego

 

[ChristineM]

You assume that the vacuum energy of the universe was created, and no one knows that.

I assume nothing

 

[gnostic]

If I say 'cup' and gnostic says 'saucer', because that is exactly what he did, is that a misunderstanding that needs correction, or not?

I have never used a saucer for myself, so bad analogy.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

One might ponder on the message a bit more when one continually flies the canard that other are misunderstanding the message. It's not our understanding that is off, rather, the messenger is simply not up to the job... ...unless we wish to lower the bar so that any Tom foolery can bound across.

Ok then, you claim I myself describe absolute reality, while at the same time tell others that reality can't be described. So now please quote my exact words where I describe reality?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I have answer the question, i refuse to repeatedly answer it to massage your ego

There you have it folks......I have not seen you answer it, a simple yes or no is all required, To refuse to do so is consistent with your never ending obfuscation to avoid being revealed as being wrong..