godnotgod
Thou art That
OK. Actually, I have a topic on the subject if you wish to take a look, here:
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...s/145549-redemption-through-divine-blood.html
-
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
OK. Actually, I have a topic on the subject if you wish to take a look, here:
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...s/145549-redemption-through-divine-blood.html
Alt Thinker
Older than the hills
Big Bang theory has many variants but it does appear that the universe as we know it had a beginning and that it evolved from some form of condensed state.
Positing a conscious volitional entity raises serious issues including:
@ The only forms of consciousness and volition we know of are strongly tied to physical processes.
@ The superior being is generally taken to be timeless, furthering diminishing the link to known forms of consciousness and volition.
@ If it is not timeless it must change to create the universe at some point, contrary to the usually ascribed attribute of changelessness
@ There is no explanation of why the superior being exists or why it has its particular (quasi-human like) qualities
@ There is no explanation for why the universe is the way it is. Fine tuned for life? On the contrary, the universe is almost entirely inhospitable to life except under extraordinarily rare circumstances.
The multiverse is an interesting possibility. It could explain why the universe is the way it is. We quite naturally observe a universe that can sustain life. Considering the improbability of such a remarkable thing as life, we would expect that in the typical life-sustaining universe it would be a rare side-effect. Just like in this one.
But the question still remains, why would the multiverse exist?
Why should anything exist, including a superior being? There would seem to be some principle of existential imperative. Something must be. There is a necessary being that cannot not be.
At this point we might play a little word game to reveal another possibility.
That which cannot not be, must be.
This contains a double negative: cannot not be
If we eliminate the double negative we get:
That which can be, must be.
Might it be that the existential imperative is simply this: that all logical possibilities are in fact realized? This would justify an infinite multiverse, embodying all logically possible universes. It wold explain why we see this very arbitrary universe. It would answer the age-old question “Why is there something instead of nothing” as well as the corollary question “Why is there this particular something instead of some other something”. It would also eliminate the problems that arise in the concept of a quasi-human superior being.
Last edited:
John Martin
Active Member
Thank you so much. I shall look into it.
The big bang theiry: possible
multiverse theory: possible
something else: possible
at the moment I'm resting on the idea that all this could just be an experiment by some sophisticated civilisation, We've built a device that crashes particles together at almost the speed of light in search for the answer. We are capable of creating primitive forms of artificial evolution and artificial intelligence. So there's no reason not to believe or to consider that we our self's are artificial, just a simulation, Just a advanced complicated version of sims
there's even a computer virus that uses a primitive form of artificial evolution, it was written by SPTH spth.virii.lu if a virus writer can do it, then..... ?this can go on and on and on, who created our creators and who created the creators creator creators creator? who created their universe? their version of god?
edit: i sometimes wish I was capable of just believing in god and leaving it there with no questions.. it would be a lot easier on my mind!
Last edited:
Thief
Rogue Theologian
John Martin
Active Member
One reason could be that the scientists tell us that this universe is expanding. it means it has a beginning and so it may also have an end. So anything that has a beginning and an end cannot be called, 'Always existed'.
It may be better to say that the energy before big bang always existed because it comes directly from God as God's radiance. But we cannot say that the universe as it is now was always there.
God always existed because God does not evolve. It is beyond time and space. No beginning and no end.
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Actually that's not true. We tend to say X has a beginning because we draw a line somewhere and say "See, a beginning". Same with an end. The reality is that somethings were there before the "beginning" and after the "end", at least as far as we can tell.
No matter how we look at it, something of some type always had to exist but probably was ever-changing.
That's just the big bang theory, there's many others that religion blows off and puts god in it's place.. but then so would I if I was religious.
William Marques
Member
When we explore what came after or before, we're related to the time and time exists in the physical layer. In the God dimension there is no limitation of time, everything can exist and not exist if...
If spirit can do it, if existence can do it. How does spirit fit in the standard model? Its
No not really. Its moving isnt it?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Time does not exist at all.
It is not a force or a substance.
It is a cognitive device created by Man to serve Man.
A means of measurement only.
A quotient found on a chalkboard and nowhere else.
ForHisGlory
New Member
False dichotomy. You cant define spirit?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
The part of you that posted the above.
If you can't sense this......then you are dead.
If you are dead....some kind of mindless zombie has possessed you.
Are you really going to tell me.....you don't exist?
And you think it's all chemistry?
So if it is definable it is chemistry? You can't define spirit?
Spirit is something. If not doesn't matter if its alive or dead, it would be no thing.
Matter is animate, thats enough for me to say it isn't dead. Matter isn't retarded either or else how do you figure it can get from a "dead" planet to an alive one? Which means it was never dead.
Your semantical arguments aren't getting you anywhere that way. Not even is matter "mindless", energy from the singularity, the building blocks of matter, is omnipresent, and is omniscient due to its omnipresence.
godnotgod
Thou art That
Memory is nothing more than traces of the dead past. Spirit is alive in the here and now, so it cannot be memory. Spirit has no history; no memory. It is not of Time or Space. It is, therefore, Unborn and Deathless. It is also self-less, so when your body-form dies, it remains as it was before your birth. It equates to Universal Consciousness.
So what does spirit have to do with the BB?
The BB also is not of Time or Space. It is manifested Universal Conscioiusness.
Now you see it...
Now you don't.
It's Beginingless and eternally cyclical.