Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Correct, that is what I said.
Make it up as you go along to fit the BB theory of a beginning, the theory is shot!
-
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!
Let's not talk about the Big Bang
- Thread starter YoursTrue
- Start date
Make it up as you go along to fit the BB theory of a beginning, the theory is shot!
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Curious?
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
No, time is eternal without a beginning,
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
Being without beginning or end, does not necessarily imply being infinite. Journey out across the surface of a sphere, and you may continue in the same direction for eternity, but the sphere still has measurable dimensions, and is therefore not infinite, in size or scope. If it is possible for space to be both finite and unboundaried, then it is equally possible for time to be so.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
You are looking at it in a relative sense, that is why you are not aware of the non-dual eternal nature of time, when the mind is free from thought, there is no relative duality, one is one with all that is existence continuing to exist. Mind you, most humans are relatively not all that evolved, so we can give them a pass if this is beyond them, let them think there was a beginning from nothing if that is their limited level of understanding.
How do you know? You have stated that numerous times, but seem to think it is obvious and doesn't need to be proved.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Reality is forever on the other side of thought. There could never in all eternity be a beginning to existence, only manifested things have beginnings.
I think that it is a good exercise to imagine space that is finite in extent and has no boundaries.
@Ben Dhyan, can you envision this? If not, you need to work on it.
Last edited:
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Because there is no nothing now, no nothing in the past, and no nothing ever, existence is all there ever was, and ever will be. Only manifested things of universal existence have beginnings,
Most humans have never tried to imagine four dimensions, let alone curved four dimensions.
I understand that the concept of time with a beginning but that does not 'come from' at all is a difficult one. You automatically want to extent time to 'before'.
But that is no different than wanting to extend 'latitude' to 'more south'. This is possible for most points, but not for all. The south pole does not 'come from' anything further south.
And once again I agree: nothingness is non-existent. It is not a cause because it *cannot* be a cause.
And yes, existence is all there was, all there is, and all there will be. But that allows for existence to be finite.
But that alone does NOT show that time is infinite into the past. You are assuming that if something has a beginning, then it 'comes from' something. And that is the mistake.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
I am always coming from the infinite eternal nature, but yes, there are lots of finite creations that have beginnings, and endings, but they are expressions of the unbounded universal source.
No, you did not read what I said.
Can you envision the possibility that, no matter which direction you set out in 3D, you might eventually come back around to the same spot if you continue far enough? Always with paths that are in a fixed direction and meeting no boundaries.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
All that you imagine that exists, exists within the infinite. Space is infinite in expanse, the BB universe envisioned and studied by contemporary science is like a infinitesimal relative to the infinite.
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
I agree with you. This is why faith and an open mind is important in all things. I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy in science. We may indeed find life in the future, just as we may indeed find proof of God in the future, once the technology evolves. But to dismiss one version of faith, but not all versions, is not rational. It is a form of a religious war; my faith based god is bigger and tells me to terminate yours. This is what religious wars do; battle of faiths.Why didn't you just concentrate on the silliness of her comments. Given we are but a speck in the universe and still in the beginnings of understanding as to what might be possible 'out there', given it was but a few decades ago that we found out how plentiful planets were. As to life and even intelligent life - who knows? We would be extremely dumb to conclude anything given a lack of evidence when we just haven't explored enough yet.
Statistics makes science less rational and more like a religion of faith; gods within a math oracle. There is a 50% chance of rain. What does that actually mean since it allows a wide range of possible options to happen with no accountability. Somehow this god is allowed to bridge the gap between faith and seeing, with fuzzy dice, but no other God is allowed to do this. We need to redefine religion to include all faith based conclusions, including emotional thinking and math oracles. Many are now allowed to sail under the radar, while others are attacked.
I can accept faith, in any form, since all use the same advanced parts of the brain, but each may use a different way to enter this source. It is all good. But science does not see its own hypocrisy. Atheism may have caused this problem, since it is a mirror religion, that has hijacked science, as though it invented science and not just a virus that took over the cell.
I will continue to point this out, until we have an updated universal standard for faith; brain scam commonality, so all faith can be accepted, and not just some allowed. It sort of like the soccer rule bureaucracy deciding you can now onlykick with one leg and not the other. It is OK to kick left but not right, even if both are legs. Casino math adds the irrationality of politics, so only the left legs are kosher. Science need to up its game away from whim of the gods.
If weather says there is 50% chance of rain this is left to whim of the gods and no human is ever held accountable if rain occurs or not. A rational world has a higher standard and expects better correlations you can bank on. Lottery religions have plenty of false hope. A 50% chance of rain is able to be, appear to overlap, anything you can wish. It is not definitive.
Again, prove it.
Look at what I asked you to envision. In that example, space is *finite* in extent, but has no boundaries.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Nope, I can not imagine being separate from the whole. The truth is a pathless realization, there is no going anywhere when one is an integral of eternal infinity.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
I keep trying to convey to you that my mind is not dualistic in the sense yours' is, when the mind is free from thought, there is only reality itself present.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
If non-existence and existence are just two phases, then there is no problem.There is a beginning and it arises from the non-existence phase and goes back in non-existence phase.
That is the Hindu theory. Existence for 317 trillion years and then non-existence for a similar period of 317 trillion years, Everything nicely balanced.
Ben, that is Advaita.
No problem about returning to the same point. Ben knows about Manifolds, at least as a layman.
Last edited:
Then you need to stretch your mind a bit. You are entrapped in your intuition to such an extent that you cannot imagine anything else.
It is possible that space is finite in extent and yet has no boundaries. It is possible that time is finite, has a start, but does not 'come from'.
These are logical possibilities that you reject without seeming to understand them.