Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[shunyadragon]

Yes, that a Creator had to be existing before the universe began makes sense. To me. Obviously not to you or Stephen Hawking. And others.

Actually as a Baha'i our physical existence is eternally Created by the 'Source' some call God. Analogy would be as long as the sun (God) exists the shadow (Our physical existence) exists.

Except for the fact that Stephan Hawking is atheist/agnostic. His science concerning the nature of our physical existence is right on.

 

[YoursTrue]

Actually as a Baha'i our physical existence is eternally Created by the 'Source' some call God. Analogy would be as long as the sun (God) exists the shadow (OurI physical existence) exists.

Except for the fact that Stephan Hawking is atheist/agnostic. His science concerning the nature of our physical existence is right on.

I do not agree. I have been reading one of his books and find his theories are not rational. While not wild, and while he thinks and believes they are based on valid concepts as to the emergence of the universe as apparently you do also, I disagree. But that's me now. I see theories such as Hawking in a different light now than when I was a student and atheist. But again -- that's me. And some others. That you and I and S. Hawking disagree on primary causes no longer appears irrational. In other words, there are to be different opinions, and that's how it is. I base mine on logic, I have a feeling you think you do also. We differ. You think and believe you're right, and I think and believe (1) there is a God, and (2) the Bible is God's word to mankind. Have a good one.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

That depends which religion, church, sect or division there of. It pretty much STOP those that make the clam refer to those that don believe as they Do. For example: The Roman Church (RCC) claims they are the only true Church, with exceptions of a few close churches that are given special dispensation, and all others have "mainly lost there way," and as the true 'Mother Church' desires all to return to the 'True Church' for the complete saving grace of God.

Human religious institutions are what they are of this world, the truth is not of this world. 'Truth' in this context is that which the source of all that is, the underlying unity of the universe.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are in denial. there is such a thing as redshift light that has nothing to do with doppler redshirt, and Polymath did positively say that if the universe/existence did not exist, there would be no existence, it is in the record.
So here is your opportunity to accept or deny.
Is there a redshift of light due to a cause other than doppler?
If the universe did not exist, would there be existence or no existence?

First off what you got wrong about Polymath's claim was that it was not saying that the universe came from nothing. That was your misunderstanding.

Second there can be other sources of red shift, for example the light from a rapidly receding space ship would be red shifted, but we were talking about the CBR. That is well explained by the Big Bang Theory, in fact it is also some of the strongest evidence for the theory. Theories explain evidence. Didn't you totally disqualify yourself from this discussion by claiming that there was no evidence for the Big Bang? Your inability to own up to your rather obvious errors is why you are on the list of people that have lost the right to demand evidence.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So... "it always was or it came to be"

You're going with always was?

Yes, absolutely. But please note thar every galaxy, star, planet, human, etc., has a beginning, and if the universe that science turns out to the equivalent of a galaxy in this universe, then that too, has an ending.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do not agree. I have been reading one of his books and find his theories are not rational. While not wild, and while he thinks and believes they are based on valid concepts as to the emergence of the universe as apparently you do also, I disagree. But that's me now. I see theories such as Hawking in a different light now than when I was a student and atheist. But again -- that's me. And some others. That you and I and S. Hawking disagree on primary causes no longer appears irrational. In other words, there are to be different opinions, and that's how it is. I base mine on logic, I have a feeling you think you do also. We differ. You think and believe you're right, and I think and believe (1) there is a God, and (2) the Bible is God's word to mankind. Have a good one.

Why are Hawking's theories irrational? What on Earth makes you think that you are qualified to make such a claim? You seem to think that others insult you at times and yet what you dish out is ten times worse than what is aimed your way.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Question: when a person becomes one with God, who is more powerful? the person or God? Kindly explain your viewpoint.

One is not two, that is silly!

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It's an expression, the holy scriptures say that two persons who are married are one.

Marriage is a physical arrangement, union with God is a spiritual union.

 

[YoursTrue]

One is not two, that is silly!

Well, it's getting late, but Jesus did say that the Father is greater than he is. Therefore I figure the Father is greater than Jesus is. Perhaps we can discuss more about this another time, as a human, getting a little tired. Which reminds me, God does not sleep. Take care.

 

[shunyadragon]

Human religious institutions are what they are of this world, the truth is not of this world. 'Truth' in this context is that which the source of all that is, the underlying unity of the universe.

Actually I agree, religions and their institutions are temporal and transitory in history, and yes, from the human perspective none of them in and of themselves do not represent 'Truth.'

I believe in a Universalism (not UU) philosophy perspective and believe in the human spiritual evolution where nothing is necessary and everything is impermanent.

 

[YoursTrue]

Marriage is a physical arrangement, union with God is a spiritual union.

I understand. Neverthess, my mind and body need sleep. Later, hopefully, I would like to discuss this if possible. Take care.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

There was a beginning to the universe. God has no beginning.
Psalm 90:2 "Before the mountains were brought forth, Or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, Even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God."

The earth and the world is not the universe.

 

[YoursTrue]

Human religious institutions are what they are of this world, the truth is not of this world. 'Truth' in this context is that which the source of all that is, the underlying unity of the universe.

There is a Creator of the universe. Jesus said he is the Truth. The Way. And the Life.
John 14:6 - “Jesus said to him: ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

 

[Ben Dhyan]

First off what you got wrong about Polymath's claim was that it was not saying that the universe came from nothing. That was your misunderstanding.

Second there can be other sources of red shift, for example the light from a rapidly receding space ship would be red shifted, but we were talking about the CBR. That is well explained by the Big Bang Theory, in fact it is also some of the strongest evidence for the theory. Theories explain evidence. Didn't you totally disqualify yourself from this discussion by claiming that there was no evidence for the Big Bang? Your inability to own up to your rather obvious errors is why you are on the list of people that have lost the right to demand evidence.

You are obfuscating.

Polymath confirmed that he said what I said he said,

There is form of redshift other than doppler.

Now please apologize and just cease your incessant misinformation.

 

[YoursTrue]

The earth and the world is not the universe.

Didn't say they were, that is basically correct.
"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Genesis 1:1

 

[Ben Dhyan]

There is a Creator of the universe. Jesus said he is the Truth. The Way. And the Life.
John 14:6 - “Jesus said to him: ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Yes, the conceptualization is meant to convey the way to God, anyone can believe, praise it, repeat it, but that means nothing unless there is actual realization of what are conceptual teachings. When there is union with Christ, there is union with God, are you prepared to sacrifice your ego self in order to be one with Christ/God? Sacrifice is essential to be raised to a higher state.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Didn't say they were, that is basically correct.
"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Genesis 1:1

Yes, that is not the universe.

 

[We Never Know]

Yes, absolutely. But please note thar every galaxy, star, planet, human, etc., has a beginning, and if the universe that science turns out to the equivalent of a galaxy in this universe, then that too, has an ending.

Always was... So no BB needed and no god needed.... It always was

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Always was... So no BB needed and no god needed.... It always was

Absolute reality is what it is, and if any sentient beings and cultures whose evolutionary state of communication is conceptual, ie, giving names to represent things, give it the name Universe, or God, or Cosmos, so be it.
Universal consciousness, Cosmic consciousness, God consciousness.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are obfuscating.

Polymath confirmed that he said what I said he said,

There is form of redshift other than doppler.

Now please apologize and just cease your incessant misinformation.

You really have a tendency to misunderstand what other people write.