What came before the Big Bang?

[Enai de a lukal]

That part was correct.
Heaven decides the continuance.

No. Biology does. (the lack of continuance, that is) Trust me- I like it no more than you; the finality of life is hardly a pleasant thing. But telling ourselves silly lies to give us peace of mind doesn't seem like the best, most reasonable and mature way to deal with it.

 

[gnostic]

Going to survive your last breath?......doesn't look that way with such denial in hand.

Denying what?

That we are born, we live, and then we die?

I'm certainly not denying that. When I die, then I'll die. I can't change, and I don't want to change that.

The difference between you and I is that I'm not concern with the afterlife. In fact I'm indifferent to the hereafter. Why be obssessed with the afterlife (if such a life exist) that you would forget to LIVE in this lifetime?

 

[Thief]

Denying what?

That we are born, we live, and then we die?

I'm certainly not denying that. When I die, then I'll die. I can't change, and I don't want to change that.

The difference between you and I is that I'm not concern with the afterlife. In fact I'm indifferent to the hereafter. Why be obssessed with the afterlife (if such a life exist) that you would forget to LIVE in this lifetime?

I drink every drink...breath every breathe....as it is written.

 

[Thief]

No. Biology does. (the lack of continuance, that is) Trust me- I like it no more than you; the finality of life is hardly a pleasant thing. But telling ourselves silly lies to give us peace of mind doesn't seem like the best, most reasonable and mature way to deal with it.

Maturity is the part that counts.
Eternal life given to the unworthy?...I think not.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

Eternal life given to the unworthy?...I think not.

And if worth is determined by how gullible we are, how easily we are willing to suspend our (God-given) critical and rational faculties to believe something simply because it comforts us, then count me out anyways- save me a cozy spot next to the sulphorous pit; I don't want any part of a deity who decides one's place in the afterlife on such a basis in the first place (such a deity is not worthy of worship, much less the pleasure of being in my awesome presence).

Of course, since the afterlife is simply wishful thinking, this isn't something any of us need to worry overmuch about in the first place.

 

[godnotgod]

'Your' definitions?

No. There are several accepted definitions, and I am using one of them, which is that the Absolute is such that there is no 'other' to which it can be compared, and, in this case, the Absolute is the universe, which is Everything, and being Everything, there is no other 'thing' to which it can be compared.

Nothing Greater than 'You'?
Assuming 'your' intellect as greater is an error.

I would assume Something Greater with greater confidence.

I never said there wasn't something greater, and the definition I have provided tells you that there is, and that is the universe, which contains both you and I, and is inside us both.

Someone had to be First.

That would be God.

That is just your belief, and has no basis in fact. Besides, as I have pointed out, the issue at hand is not about God; it is about whether the universe is the Absolute or not. You keep trying to derail the discussion with talk about God, which has nothing to do with the Big Bang, at least not as approachable fact. We cannot discuss the attributes of an imaginary object of your personal belief.

 

[godnotgod]

In Vivikenanda's statement, the Absolute is seen as the universe through the conceptual filters of Time, Space, and Causation.

Since the Absolute is not in Time, it cannot be changing. Change takes place only in Time.

 

[Thief]

No. There are several accepted definitions, and I am using one of them, which is that the Absolute is such that there is no 'other' to which it can be compared, and, in this case, the Absolute is the universe, which is Everything, and being Everything, there is no other 'thing' to which it can be compared.

That would be God.

I never said there wasn't something greater, and the definition I have provided tells you that there is, and that is the universe, which contains both you and I, and is inside us both.

No One Greater?...no One at the top of the line?

That is just your belief, and has no basis in fact. Besides, as I have pointed out, the issue at hand is not about God; it is about whether the universe is the Absolute or not. You keep trying to derail the discussion with talk about God, which has nothing to do with the Big Bang, at least not as approachable fact. We cannot discuss the attributes of an imaginary object of your personal belief.

God has everything to do with the big bang.
Creator and His creation.
Cause and the effect.

Imaginary?....I think not.
Someone had to be First. (logic)

The universe is the effect of a Cause (science should insist in support of cause and effect)

Nothing moves without Something to move it. (laws of motion)

 

[Thief]

And if worth is determined by how gullible we are, how easily we are willing to suspend our (God-given) critical and rational faculties to believe something simply because it comforts us, then count me out anyways- save me a cozy spot next to the sulphorous pit; I don't want any part of a deity who decides one's place in the afterlife on such a basis in the first place (such a deity is not worthy of worship, much less the pleasure of being in my awesome presence).

Of course, since the afterlife is simply wishful thinking, this isn't something any of us need to worry overmuch about in the first place.

Lack of an afterlife leaves the existence of Man as a mystery without resolve.
7billion people and not one will survive the last breath?
Not one chance in 7billion?

 

[Enai de a lukal]

Lack of an afterlife leaves the existence of Man as a mystery without resolve.

Not obviously, no. The presence of an afterlife, given everything we know about biology, the human brain and cognition, and so on, would be the real headscratcher. Given that, for instance, everything we had hitherto associated with functions of a soul turn out to be functions of the brain (memory, personality, etc.), what exactly would be left to partake in an afterlife anyways? And in what sense would it be "you? (given that it would not have your memories, your personality, your sense of being yourself, the ability to think/feel/reason, etc, these being functions of the brain)

7billion people and not one will survive the last breath?
Not one chance in 7billion?

Since "surviving the last breath" is a contradiction, no, there's no chance; if you survive it, it cannot have been your last breath. For it to be your last breath, you have to not survive it. Pretty simple.

 

[godnotgod]

Lack of an afterlife leaves the existence of Man as a mystery without resolve.
7billion people and not one will survive the last breath?
Not one chance in 7billion?

Nope. Not a single chance. Why? Because those characters have already been acted out. They're done, and they should be happy they had a prime time and happy it's now over, just as each unique snowflake has it's place in the Sun, and then is gone forever. That's the beauty of it. It's not about what happens after that, it's about what is happening right now, and if you don't live it fully now, you would'nt fully live it then anyway. So stop your whining and get with the program because it all comes to an end very soon. But this eternal Present Moment never ends.

No two ocean waves are exactly alike. They all emerge from the formless ocean, break for a brief moment, then return to the formless ocean. Both wave and ocean are made of the same substance: water. The ocean is there before the wave, and after the wave. In the same manner, your form emerges from the universe, and returns to it. Both you and universe are of the same substance: consciousness. The conscious universe was there before your form,and after your form is no more. At no time have you ever been separated from the universe, so in actuality, you can't return to it. You never left. There is no birth; there is no death. There is only now.

All this world is filled with coming and going*;
show me the path where there is no coming and going.
Zen

*birth and death.

 

[godnotgod]

God has everything to do with the big bang.
Creator and His creation.
Cause and the effect.

Imaginary?....I think not.
Someone had to be First. (logic)

The universe is the effect of a Cause (science should insist in support of cause and effect)

Nothing moves without Something to move it. (laws of motion)

1st observer: 'flag is moving'
2nd observer: 'wind is moving'
3rd observer: 'flag and wind both moving'
passerby: 'all wrong! your MINDS are moving!'

That a God caused the Big Bang is just your BELIEF. It has no basis IN FACT. The real question is not whether there is a God, but why you believe it.

 

[Thief]

1st observer: 'flag is moving'
2nd observer: 'wind is moving'
3rd observer: 'flag and wind both moving'
passerby: 'all wrong! your MINDS are moving!'

That a God caused the Big Bang is just your BELIEF. It has no basis IN FACT. The real question is not whether there is a God, but why you believe it.

Cause and effect.
God is the Cause and the universe is the effect.

 

[godnotgod]

Cause and effect.
God is the Cause and the universe is the effect.

That's just circular reasoning.

The split between 'God' and 'universe' exists only in your mind, and so causation only seems real. Causation requires change, but change can take place only in Time, which does not exist.

 

[Thief]

That's just circular reasoning.

The split between 'God' and 'universe' exists only in your mind, and so causation only seems real. Causation requires change, but change can take place only in Time, which does not exist.

Talk about circular....

and I have no problem knowing Spirit as opposed to substance.
Hence I spend no time kneeling before statues

 

[godnotgod]

Talk about circular....

and I have no problem knowing Spirit as opposed to substance.
Hence I spend no time kneeling before statues

I cannot discuss any further your belief that a God created the universe. It is only your personal belief that you put forth as Absolute Truth. Not everyone agrees with that. It's just something you hold as true in your own mind, and not necessarily universally true.

No one is saying you're wrong, but no one, including yourself, can demonstrate your position to be true either. All you can continue to do is to assert your belief that it is so. So we'll just have to leave it at that. OK?

 

[Thief]

I cannot discuss any further your belief that a God created the universe. It is only your personal belief that you put forth as Absolute Truth. Not everyone agrees with that. It's just something you hold as true in your own mind, and not necessarily universally true.

No one is saying you're wrong, but no one, including yourself, can demonstrate your position to be true either. All you can continue to do is to assert your belief that it is so. So we'll just have to leave it at that. OK?

I prefer to acknowledge Something Greater and call Him...God.
I prefer to admit Someone had to be First in mind and heart.
I prefer the axiom of science of cause and effect.
The universe is the effect...God is the Cause.

You can call it 'my' belief if that makes 'you' feel better.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

I prefer to acknowledge Something Greater and call Him...God.
I prefer to admit Someone had to be First in mind and heart.
I prefer the axiom of science of cause and effect.

Preference, not rational inference.

You can call it 'my' belief if that makes 'you' feel better.

It often makes people feel better to call things what they are- and so we'll call your belief "your belief". Glad we got that figured out.

 

[Slapstick]

Preference, not rational inference.


It often makes people feel better to call things what they are- and so we'll call your belief "your belief". Glad we got that figured out.

Me too. It took 104 pages of this thread to accomplish that, but at least we know it can be done.

 

[godnotgod]

I prefer to acknowledge Something Greater and call Him...God.
I prefer to admit Someone had to be First in mind and heart.
I prefer the axiom of science of cause and effect.
The universe is the effect...God is the Cause.

You can call it 'my' belief if that makes 'you' feel better.

It doesn't make me feel any better or worse. It's just a belief regardless of how I feel about it. However, please understand that when you say 'God is the cause; the universe is the effect', you are splitting reality in two, where there is no such division in truth. That split exists ONLY in your mind.

You look at the world and assume it must have come into being by a hand greater than yourself. Fine. But if it is a 'creation', you have yet to explain the origin of the original material from which it was created. Theology hasn't done it; Science hasn't done it. And that's because it is not real. The only scenario that adequately explains what the world is, is that it is an illusion. Then we have no problem 'explaining' the origin of the 'material', simply because the material isn't material. And what do we find when we look inside this mateiral? Over 99% empty space! And the 'matter' we DO find eludes us. It behaves more like a wave than a particle. Add to this the paradox of Quantum Mechanics, and 'matter' appears more an illusion than ever.