Thief
Rogue Theologian
No 'thing' means exactly that.
Something from nothing?
Nay...I don't think so.
You would have to abandon science, logic, all forms of certainty.
Without cause and effect....no thing can be sure.
-
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!
What came before the Big Bang?
- Thread starter yoda89
- Start date
No 'thing' means exactly that.
Something from nothing?
Nay...I don't think so.
You would have to abandon science, logic, all forms of certainty.
Without cause and effect....no thing can be sure.
Amechania
Daimona of the Helpless
All forms of certainty are abandoned in a singularity.
gnostic
The Lost One
thief said:
If god is saying "I AM" then he could be saying anything.
It could be this god of yours is saying "I AM NOT REAL" or "I AM A FLASE GOD!" or "I AM YOUR TOOTH-FAIRY" or "I AM AN IGNORANT OAF OF A GOD, WHO DON'T KNOW A DAMN THING ABOUT SCIENCE!"
Does this "I AM" supposed to mean anything, other than your usual incoherent rants.
Last edited:
godnotgod
Thou art That
Actually, you're correct: nothing ever 'becomes' anything else. That is just an illusion.
It's more like the spirit manifests itself as the flesh. Therefore, the flesh IS the spirit, and the spirit IS the flesh.
They are one, but you see them as two and in opposition. That is the way man thinks, but not the way of the divine nature. Again, Thief, you are still attached to the dual world, and are not seeing the unity of all things.
Try again.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Again...Spirit is spirit....I think I've seen it written that way.
And 'nothing' cannot possess the power of creation.....so...'Something' did.
Something did.
I call that something.....God.
(and I don't mean 'you')
Thief
Rogue Theologian
I think therefore...I am.
Try it sometime.
That illusion of incoherency might leave you.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
godnotgod
Thou art That
You don't know what you mean! You continually contradict yourself, and don't even realize it. God cannot be encapsulated by any 'thing' or 'some-thing'; God is not an object, yet you paint him as one. You still fail to see the unity of what you call 'spirit' and 'matter'. You are still absorbed in the dual world, when the distinction between 'spirit' and 'matter' is a purely illusory one. In reality, no such distinction actually exists.
You're making things up, Thief.
Come now. Are you ready to leave that foolish toy world of yours, and take a giant step outside your mind?
godnotgod
Thou art That
godnotgod
Thou art That
OMG! What lunacy!
Back, Igor, Back!
So I suppose when you not-think, you not-are?
Poof!:nightcraw:
godnotgod
Thou art That
"Mirror, mirror,
on the wall,
whose the fairest of them all?
Why, Holy Science, of course!
How do I know?
'Cuz those dancing cave wall shadows of Holy Science in Plato's Cave tell me so!"
Thief
Rogue Theologian
godnotgod
Thou art That
godnotgod
Thou art That
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Ok...and so what?
godnotgod
Thou art That
Whaddya mean 'so what'?
Here is what you said, in conjunction with 'I Am':
'Before Abraham was, I Am',Originally Posted by Thief
I think therefore...I am.
spoken by Yeshu,
does not mean the same thing as:
'I think, therefore I am',
(Cogito ergo sum)
spoken by Rene Descartes
Descartes was deluded.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
No respect for previous speakers?
None the less....God said it.....He had a witness.
CAN I GET A WITNESS?!!!!!
godnotgod
Thou art That
Descartes was referring to his temporal existence as an ego in time and space;
Yeshu was referring to his eternal egoless being beyond time and space.
They're two completely different statements. You make them seem identical.