Riddle of the beginning solved without god?

[idav]

Please choose....I say Spirit first.

Apparently you have not considered the difference between chemistry and what you really are.

As for God...He was not born as we are.
His beginning would different than ours.

So...if substance first, then God would have to be born......?
Really?
And how would that happen?
So then....no God.
And nothing waiting for you when you die....except a box in the ground.

Do you expect...apparently so...a spiritually minded person will let go of faith?....just because you wave your finger in the air and pronounce the word of.....'science!'....

Science cannot regress to the singularity and answer the question... 'which came first?'.

There will no experiment, no equation, no photo, no fingerprint....
There will be no scientific proclamation of God.

You have to do that for yourself.

Spirit is substance IMO. Asking which came first assumes there is a difference, maybe the difference is the state of that substance or whatever you end up with when you break everything down.

 

[PolyHedral]

Please choose....I say Spirit first.

Apparently you have not considered the difference between chemistry and what you really are.

As for God...He was not born as we are.
His beginning would different than ours.

So...if substance first, then God would have to be born......?
Really?
And how would that happen?
So then....no God.
And nothing waiting for you when you die....except a box in the ground.

Do you expect...apparently so...a spiritually minded person will let go of faith?....just because you wave your finger in the air and pronounce the word of.....'science!'....

Science cannot regress to the singularity and answer the question... 'which came first?'.

There will no experiment, no equation, no photo, no fingerprint....
There will be no scientific proclamation of God.

You have to do that for yourself.

Math and computation have to precede both.

 

[shawn001]

Please choose....I say Spirit first.

Apparently you have not considered the difference between chemistry and what you really are.

As for God...He was not born as we are.
His beginning would different than ours.

So...if substance first, then God would have to be born......?
Really?
And how would that happen?
So then....no God.
And nothing waiting for you when you die....except a box in the ground.

Do you expect...apparently so...a spiritually minded person will let go of faith?....just because you wave your finger in the air and pronounce the word of.....'science!'....

Science cannot regress to the singularity and answer the question... 'which came first?'.

There will no experiment, no equation, no photo, no fingerprint....
There will be no scientific proclamation of God.

You have to do that for yourself.

"
Apparently you have not considered the difference between chemistry and what you really are."

Apparently, you don't understand biology. Your whole body works because of chemical and electrical signals. That makes you, YOU.

"
As for God...He was not born as we are.
His beginning would different than ours."

So now your aking nup God had a begining? Please show the evidence!


substance

NOUN:

1. 1. <LI type=a>That which has mass and occupies space; matter.
   2. A material of a particular kind or constitution.
2. 1. <LI type=a>Essential nature; essence.
   2. Gist; heart.
3. That which is solid and practical in character, quality, or importance: [SIZE=+0]a plan without substance.[/SIZE]
4. Density; body: [SIZE=+0]Air has little substance.[/SIZE]
5. Material possessions; goods; wealth: [SIZE=+0]a person of substance.[/SIZE]

substance - Dictionary definition and pronunciation - Yahoo! Education

"
Science cannot regress to the singularity and answer the question... 'which came first?'."

It might be able to very soon.

"
Do you expect...apparently so...a spiritually minded person will let go of faith?....just because you wave your finger in the air and pronounce the word of.....'science!'...."

First of all your on a computer saying this? Why don't you lve in a cave with no clean water or electricity?

Science has made me personally more spiritually minded. You also seem to think I am an atheist. But you would be wrong.


Your posts not only show little substance, but somehow you think your hypothesises are facts.

 

[shawn001]

Spirit is substance IMO. Asking which came first assumes there is a difference, maybe the difference is the state of that substance or whatever you end up with when you break everything down.

What substance is spirit? Or what substance we talking about here. The substance as in matter?

I think the term substance here is being used more as philosophy as in essence.

 

[idav]

What substance is spirit? Or what substance we talking about here. The substance as in matter?

I think the term substance here is being used more as philosophy as in essence.

When you take away all the material from the universe what are you left with? It isn't exactly nothing so it is something, which is the spirit that preceded substance as in matter. Just a different type of substance or a substance that is in a different state.

 

[Thief]

Spirit is substance IMO. Asking which came first assumes there is a difference, maybe the difference is the state of that substance or whatever you end up with when you break everything down.

The difference is between cause and effect.

If substance first ...then all spirit is a matter of chemistry...and terminal.

If spirit first...then the Spirit is the cause, and the universe...the effect.

 

[idav]

The difference is between cause and effect.

If substance first ...then all spirit is a matter of chemistry...and terminal.

If spirit first...then the Spirit is the cause, and the universe...the effect.

The idea that I've seen many go with is that there never was a no substance and that nothing is actually something. I get the same idea however I would define spirit as the originating substance which presides in and with all. Maybe I'll have a better idea if they ever find the infamous god particle.

 

[shawn001]

When you take away all the material from the universe what are you left with? It isn't exactly nothing so it is something, which is the spirit that preceded substance as in matter. Just a different type of substance or a substance that is in a different state.

This doesn't make sense in cosmology or astronomy or QM.

"which is the spirit that preceded substance as in matter"

Please define spirit and substance here. You can't just make things up.

 

[shawn001]

The difference is between cause and effect.

If substance first ...then all spirit is a matter of chemistry...and terminal.

If spirit first...then the Spirit is the cause, and the universe...the effect.

again you have no clue what your talking about.

possible cause, QM fluctutations, effect a universe is born.

 

[shawn001]

Both of you don't seem to get in totally empty space in a vacuum there are virtual particles popping in and out of existence.

Nor do I think you both understand the neutrons and protons that formed the first element hydrogen in the beginging of the big bang. Next was helium.

But hydrogen and helium alone can't produce carbon based life forms.


It wasn't until the first massive stars formed in the early universe and went super nova was carbon, oxygen, gold, calcium, all the heavy elements that make up stars planets and life. The process is called nucleosynthesis and is where all the heavy elements come from.

 

[idav]

This doesn't make sense in cosmology or astronomy or QM.

"which is the spirit that preceded substance as in matter"

Please define spirit and substance here. You can't just make things up.

What preceded substance is what is left when you take away all the matter from the universe. Quantum weirdness is pretty much what you would be left with, things that act like particles and waves, so isn't really a substance either. This substance is within and part of all matter which is pretty much space, space being one of the ingredients for cooking up a universe other than matter and energy.

 

[idav]

Both of you don't seem to get in totally empty space in a vacuum there are virtual particles popping in and out of existence.

Nor do I think you both understand the neutrons and protons that formed the first element hydrogen in the beginging of the big bang. Next was helium.

But hydrogen and helium alone can't produce carbon based life forms.


It wasn't until the first massive stars formed in the early universe and went super nova was carbon, oxygen, gold, calcium, all the heavy elements that make up stars planets and life. The process is called nucleosynthesis and is where all the heavy elements come from.

I know these things.

 

[shawn001]

I know these things.

I know, which is why I am wondering why your using the words substance and spirit?

Substance is matter, yes? Uness your using it philosophically. That makes a big difference. Then its idealogy.

"Spirit" isn't a term used in any part of actual astronomy or cosmology. It too is idealogy.

We talking actual science here or Pseudoscience?

 

[idav]

I know, which is why I am wondering why your using the words substance and spirit?

Substance is matter, yes? Uness your using it philosophically. That makes a big difference. Then its idealogy.

"Spirit" isn't a term used in any part of actual astronomy or cosmology. It too is idealogy.

We talking actual science here or Pseudoscience?

Spirit is a not a scientific word but presented a definition I would use. There are a couple of things I would consider spirit but there are more scientific ways of presenting. My main point is that it's is all really substance. Spirit is substance IMO so in other words anything anyone thinks is spirit is really just substance that they can't see. I'm naturalistic when it comes to cosmology or theology.

 

[Thief]

Spirit is a not a scientific word but presented a definition I would use. There are a couple of things I would consider spirit but there are more scientific ways of presenting. My main point is that it's is all really substance. Spirit is substance IMO so in other words anything anyone thinks is spirit is really just substance that they can't see. I'm naturalistic when it comes to cosmology or theology.

You seem the only hope in this thread.

Creating the universe is one thing.
Standing alone....as the First....is another.
Someone had to be First.

Spirit would be that item to which substance responds.

At some point, you have to separate the two....spirit or substance.

Even if you consider only the energetic....pure energy....
Can it be guided?.....by will?....by spirit?
If not...spiritual life is not a possibility.

It seems no one here is thinking of God as ...thought and feeling.
Someone had to be First.
If He lacks the ability to 'form' His will....He is not the creator.

If He cannot 'form' His will....
Then the life we know is terminal....and hopeless.

 

[Quiddity]

It's hard to take this serious.

 

[McBell]

It's hard to take this serious.

Especially when the favourite mantra is "Faith requires no proof"

 

[idav]

Spirit would be that item to which substance responds.

According to future physics, substance is what it comes from and spirit a projection. Though these things haven't been discovered yet and some resort to particles popping in and out of existence at the quantum level.

At some point, you have to separate the two....spirit or substance.

I don't agree. It is all one and the same.

Even if you consider only the energetic....pure energy....
Can it be guided?.....by will?....by spirit?
If not...spiritual life is not a possibility.

The tao isn't about guidance and will. It is about effortless action. Knowing without having to think because you are one with everything. All just is.

It seems no one here is thinking of God as ...thought and feeling.
Someone had to be First.
If He lacks the ability to 'form' His will....He is not the creator.

We think because we have to. God doesn't need will, we do.

If He cannot 'form' His will....
Then the life we know is terminal....and hopeless.

The limitless power that all of this comes from is far from hopeless.

 

[shawn001]

According to future physics, substance is what it comes from and spirit a projection. Though these things haven't been discovered yet and some resort to particles popping in and out of existence at the quantum level.

I don't agree. It is all one and the same.

The tao isn't about guidance and will. It is about effortless action. Knowing without having to think because you are one with everything. All just is.


We think because we have to. God doesn't need will, we do.

The limitless power that all of this comes from is far from hopeless.

"some resort to particles popping in and out of existence at the quantum level."

QM, is the most successful theory in all of science and Virtual particles popping in and out of existence at the quantum level" has been observed and is a known fact, its not resorting too. Its a scientifc explanation.

"According to future physics, substance is what it comes from and spirit a projection"

What? There is a future physics that uses the terms spirit and philosophically "substance."

Are you talking about the holographic universe theory here?

What substance? Matter? Which has mass and energy?

the rest of your post is idealogy and personal belief.

What god do you believe in or any one in particular?

 

[idav]

QM, is the most successful theory in all of science and Virtual particles popping in and out of existence at the quantum level" has been observed and is a known fact, its not resorting too. Its a scientifc explanation.

They are close right? Have they found that god particle? They need to.

What? There is a future physics that uses the terms spirit and philosophically "substance."

I mean what we don't know. We are always on the brink. We will answer the questions eventually.

Are you talking about the holographic universe theory here?

I'm talking about what data is. A projection of something material.

the rest of your post is idealogy and personal belief.

It's philosophy that relates to science. Language gets the point across as best as possible and some metaphors never hurt.

What god do you believe in or any one in particular?

Naturalistic pantheist. Other types of pantheists can have a different take on "spirit" and turns into semantics.