That's what it says. As it was not in existence at one time, it could not have created itself so an All Knowing an eternal and All Powerful Being must have created existence. That is of course, God.
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A Universe from Nothing?
- Thread starter Tomorrows_Child
- Start date
That's what it says. As it was not in existence at one time, it could not have created itself so an All Knowing an eternal and All Powerful Being must have created existence. That is of course, God.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Existence did not have to create itself as it is eternal. To say existence could not create itself is plain silly....existence is eternal and thus never had a beginning.
Do believe the state of absolute nothing is possible?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
do you believe the ability to say ....I AM!.....is a mystery?
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Of course...IAM is a mystery to the human mind....but there are certain principles at work in the cosmos that can be known....one of them is that existence itself eternal....not so the individual manifestations.
Do you believe that absolute nothing can ever exist?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
only if God fails to say....I AM!
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Haha....and that ain't ever going to happen...
I do not believe that absolute nothing can exist.
Except in the empty minds of some politicians and some religious zealots that
murder people in the name of some "god".
Is there any particular reason why "A Universe From Nothing" is a better question than "A God With No Moral Discernment"?
I don't think so. Quite on the contrary, actually.
While many people swear to find the former unthinkable, that is IMO the result of some combination of cultural indoctrination and genuine idiosyncrasy. Logically, there is no reason to either assume that there ever was "nothing", nor to presume a creator.
By contrast, the later is inherently self-defeating.
I don't think so. Quite on the contrary, actually.
While many people swear to find the former unthinkable, that is IMO the result of some combination of cultural indoctrination and genuine idiosyncrasy. Logically, there is no reason to either assume that there ever was "nothing", nor to presume a creator.
By contrast, the later is inherently self-defeating.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
The question..."A God With No Moral Discernment"? ...is just so anthropogenic in its projecting of the dualistic perceptions of the human mind to God.. God is ONE and complementary opposite concepts like morality and immorality are beyond non-duality...
Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.
So how then did existence put in place the processes that govern it?
There is no doubt that initially there was a single origin of existence and the universe. I'm saying that there is a God because existence could not have ever created itself because it would have had to do so from non existence which is impossible.
God always existed so He could have created any existence or ended any existence while there still being Him alone. But existence could never have come into existence unless there was a God because existence cannot create but simply follows laws and processes.
Last edited:
Nope. Morality is sentience-genic, not anthropogenic.
Now, the idea of a revealed religion, that is anthropogenic.
The idea of a God comes from Teachers like Buddha, Christ, Muhammad, Krishna and Baha'u'llah Who all claimed there is a Creator. We are free to accept or deny what They claim but we are not free to defy breathing, eating, sleeping or death.
The fact we did not and cannot create ourselves or anything is proof that the creator is Another than us or anything in existence and existence as compared to the Creator is non existence as it is basically a powerless delusional existence really a servant of its Maker.
We have a delusional freedom in that we can deny God's existence but while at the same time being subject to all His laws whether we like it or not.
We are all God's servants and had no choice in our being born or dying. Mentally we can pretend there's no God but physically our bodies obey to the letter the laws placed upon them by God and not you nor I can deviate a hairs breadth from those laws.
Buddha specifically warned against wasting time with that idea, you know.
Which idea is that? If you mean about God then Buddha taught about God. He was sent by God.
Uh, no, you are entirely wrong.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
There is no existence except for God......the essential unity that underlies existence is the one God.. God is omnipresent and infinite as is existence...it only the human mind that perceives the apparent attributes and aspects of what is really one as the many...
Not according to Buddha. There is ample evidence and proof He taught about God.
1. The Five Disappearances of His true Dhamma- His original Dhamma would be corrupted over time with man made ideas.
2. A counterfeit Dhamma would replace His Original one lost during the Five Disappearances (the counterfeit Dhamma is the one that denies there is a God)
3. A new Buddha would arise teaching the SAME truths Buddha originally taught.
4. Buddha said that His Dispensation would last 5,000 years but because women entered monastic life that it would only last half that time which is 2,500 years.
He even mentioned the name of the future Buddha as AmitAbha a derivative of Baha which refers to Baha'u'llah. Baha'u'llah means Glory of God. Buddha spoke of the great King of Glory as also in the Bible.
Baha'u'llah taught the oneness of God. Baha'u'llah, the return of Buddha did teach as prophesied what the original Buddha taught that there is a God but that teaching was gradually lost over time.
All these things are in the Buddhist scriptures. So the future Buddha would confirm what the original teachings of Buddha were which Buddha Himself said would be lost and replaced with a counterfeit Dhamma. Then the only way of knowing what Buddha actually taught is from the future Buddha which we say has come and is Baha'u'llah.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
So you are a sentient being but not human being? It is you who are projecting the concept of morality or lack thereof on God...yes?
How can you know that?
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
You better do that. Cosmology has moved from being philosophy to being science.
Believers, thump your books a little quieter. You know that we do not take them as evidence.
Last edited:
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Amitabha is a later Mahayana idea which came up with the Second Buddhist Council. Hinayana does not accept Amitabha. As for Baha'u'llah, establishing one's own religion is like establishing a business*. It takes care of the person's future generations. Two generations of Baha'u'llah benefited by that till it went dry.
Edit: * Where you are either the God Himself, Son, Manifestation, Mahdi or Prophet.
Last edited: