Which existed first "something" or "nothing"?

[Ben Dhyan]

No, I do not get it. And who knows if science will come to some other conclusion. I will wait rather than commit..

Mortals have a beginning, and an ending, and learn that the Earth and Sun had a beginning and will have an ending, and then learn that Galaxies have beginning and an ending and so...being only moderately evolved beyond the animal kingdom. arrogant mortals postulate that absolute Cosmic existence must also have a beginning..and hence a big bang.....rabbit out of a hat magic trick...lol...

Infinite eternal existence is all there ever was, is, or will be...why?....because it could not be any other way!!! Ask all your life...there is no other logical conclusion...

 

[Pudding]

Mortals have a beginning, and an ending, and learn that the Earth and Sun had a beginning and will have an ending, and then learn that Galaxies have beginning and an ending and so...being only moderately evolved beyond the animal kingdom. arrogant mortals postulate that absolute Cosmic existence must also have a beginning..and hence a big bang.....rabbit out of a hat magic trick...lol...

Does the theory of big bang deny there to be any possible situation like something may happen before big bang happens?

Does the theory of big bang promotes and confirms the idea that everything must comes from nothing?

Infinite eternal existence is all there ever was, is, or will be...why?....because it could not be any other way!!! Ask all your life...there is no other logical conclusion...

Why do you think your or others' theory of "Infinite eternal existence is all there ever was" is credible?
Why is it the most logical conclusion?
Why it could not be any other way?
Have you already proves that your theory to be 100% correct? Can you present your proof and explain it?
Have you already proves that every other theory which contradict with your theory to be 100% false? Can you present your proof and explain it?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Does the theory of big bang deny there to be any possible situation like something may happen before big bang happens?

Does the theory of big bang promotes and confirms the idea that everything must comes from nothing?


Why do you think the theory of "Infinite eternal existence is all there ever was" is credible?
Why is it the most logical conclusion?
Why it could not be any other way?
Have you already proves that your theory to be 100% correct?
Have you already proves that every other theory which contradict with your theory to be 100% false?

Depends who you listen to....if you believe that big bang theory allows an eternal universe....then we are in agreement..the universe is without beginning or end....only the manifestation is ever in transformation...

As to your other questions...this has already been explained. Read it and point out that which you don't understand....infinity and eternity are concepts abstracted from absolute reality....tell me how infinite space can be confined to a circumscribed finite volume...tell me how eternity can be confined to a finite segment of time with a beginning and an end? Iow, Cosmic absolute existence is infinite and eternal and couldn't be any other way...if you think otherwise...explain your understanding...

 

[Pudding]

Depends who you listen to....if you believe that big bang theory allows an eternal universe....then we are in agreement..the universe is without beginning or end....only the manifestation is ever in transformation...

My interpretation:
Big bang doesn't deny there to be any possible situation like something may happen before big bang happens, and don't promotes and confirms the idea that everything must comes from nothing.
Big bang is a theory that how the universe begin, it doesn't talking about whether there is something/nothing happens before it happens.

Though everyone may have different interpretation to the theory of big bang.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Religious_and_philosophical_interpretations
As a description of the origin of the universe, the Big Bang has significant bearing on religion and philosophy.[126][127] As a result, it has become one of the liveliest areas in the discourse between science and religion.[128] Some believe the Big Bang implies a creator,[129][130] and some see its mention in their holy books,[131] while others argue that Big Bang cosmology makes the notion of a creator superfluous.

Which interpretation is 100% factually correct? Maybe each to their own.
Can the different interpretation be debating by people? Sure.
Can anyone force everyone must accept their interpretation? Nope.
If agreement can't be achieve, then agree to disagree is a possible solution...

As to your other questions...this has already been explained. Read it and point out that which you don't understand....

Which posts answer questions (1) - (5) ?
(1) Why do you think the theory of "Infinite eternal existence is all there ever was" is credible?
(2) Why is it the most logical theory out of every theory?
(3) Why it could not be any other way?
(4) Have you already proves that your theory to be 100% correct? Can you present your proof and explain it?
(5) Have you already proves that every other theory which contradict with your theory to be 100% false? Can you present your proof and explain it?

infinity and eternity are concepts abstracted from absolute reality....tell me how infinite space can be confined to a circumscribed finite volume...tell me how eternity can be confined to a finite segment of time with a beginning and an end?

I made no such claims.
The things that i don't know of or have no evidence to support it, though it can remains a possible situation but i don't say it's factually true, i don't believe/think it's true until it have been substantiated.

Iow, Cosmic absolute existence is infinite and eternal and couldn't be any other way...

And which posts have present the evidence to support this claims that it's 100% factually correct?

 

[paarsurrey]

I mean just what I said, the bible, Christianity, was the basis of the modern moral civilization we know today- hardly a controversial observation !

It is hardly a consensus matter either:

"Islam was the religion of Arab townsmen. Led by Mohammad (d. c. 640, Hijira 622). They swept out of the Arabian peninsula.
Eventually took control of all North Africa, Egypt, Anatolia (under the Turks) and for a time Spain.
Islam also is an heir to Classical civilization. It also learnt maths from Mesopotamia, Philosophy from the Greeks and Monotheism from the Jews.
For almost a thousand years Muslims were by all objective standards more advanced than Western Europe."
http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/lect/mod02.html​

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I personally believe there was something to start the big bang. In what I believe, the big bang in itself was an entity that was sacrificed while it created the universe.
When you say the "ONE" are you disregarding any and all religions that worship multiple entities?

With great respect to the believers of all such religions, for sure.
P.S. Please present from any such religions a clear claim as I have mentioned in Post #347 below.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Which existed first, "something" or "nothing"?
Both is equally possible, but what is the true answer? I don't know the true answer.
Something may existed first in a mystery that i don't know of.
Nothing may existed first in a mystery that i don't know of.

Who is the ONE?
The ONE true [God/Creator] A/B/C/D/E...etc from religion A/B/C/D/E...etc?
God A/B/C/D/E...etc?
Creator A/B/C/D/E...etc?
Which one is the ONE from those A/B/C/D/E...etc?
I guess each to their own.

The ONE who claims it:
Al-Anbiya' Chapter 21 : Verse 31

Do not the disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were a closed-up mass, then We opened them out? And We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=21&verse=30
Regards

 

[snazzykyle]

Theism provides the most logical origin. This is a bold statement (pun ). In the beginning of our world, something came from nothing. The Big Bang is not logical because it argues that molecules came from nothing, that is magic. Theism argues that something came from a magical being outside of our world. It is logical that a magical being can do magic, not the opposite. Non-theists will dodge this argument and instead argue, "where did the magical being come from?" However, this is a poor question. Theism does not seek to define where the magical being came from because if it is magic, we cannot fully understand it. I challenge those who disagree with me to present their logic so that I can explore the debate more, I am interested in this topic.

 

[Pudding]

The ONE who claims it:
Al-Anbiya' Chapter 21 : Verse 31

Do not the disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were a closed-up mass, then We opened them out? And We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=21&verse=30
Regards

How do you know this scripture is 100% correct?

 

[paarsurrey]

How do you know this scripture is 100% correct?

Is science 100% correct?
Regards

 

[Saint_of_Me]

or none of them unless the ONE who created/evolved them communicates and informs us which one.
Topic open for Theists and Atheists alike.

Regards

Nothing existed before "something."

When the Big Bang occurred some 14 billion years ago, it was not only the beginning of the Universe, of all matter, but also the beginning of time itself.

This is a difficult concept for us to wrap our brains around, since we are used to thinking of "time" as a linear thing. A passage of events. Consisting of a past, a present, and a future.

But Einstein proved that it is really a physical entity! And it is part of the 'fabric" of Space. Hence, his "Space-Time Continuum."

So think of time itself as a part of the matter that was created with the Big Bang. So...before the BB: No time.

This is why we cannot explain what happened before the Big Bang. Because there was nothing to explain. But we have come close.Cosmologists and astro-physicists can now tell us the exact blow-by-blow description of what happened as far back as 10 ^-43 second after the big bang. So we're talk like a trillionth of a second!

That number would look like this, on a super-duper accurate stopwatch that began the exact nano-second at the Big Bang:

0.00000000000000000000000000000000043.

Not bad! LOL

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Nothing existed before "something."

When the Big Bang occurred some 14 billion years ago, it was not only the beginning of the Universe, of all matter, but also the beginning of time itself.

This is a difficult concept for us to wrap our brains around, since we are used to thinking of "time" as a linear thing. A passage of events. Consisting of a past, a present, and a future.

But Einstein proved that it is really a physical entity! And it is part of the 'fabric" of Space. Hence, his "Space-Time Continuum."

So think of time itself as a part of the matter that was created with the Big Bang. So...before the BB: No time.

This is why we cannot explain what happened before the Big Bang. Because there was nothing to explain. But we have come close.Cosmologists and astro-physicists can now tell us the exact blow-by-blow description of what happened as far back as 10 ^-43 second after the big bang. So we're talk like a trillionth of a second!

That number would look like this, on a super-duper accurate stopwatch that began the exact nano-second at the Big Bang:

0.00000000000000000000000000000000043.

Not bad! LOL

No time as we know it, that's not to say sequences of events could not occur in a different construct of time..

That would be like saying- we can't describe how a movie was made, because before the opening credits, there is no movie.

A movie that runs for two hours may well have been made in two months

Or a universe that runs for 14 billion years, may well have been made in 6 days...

 

[Emi]

With great respect to the believers of all such religions, for sure.
P.S. Please present from any such religions a clear claim as I have mentioned in Post #347 below.

Regards

If you don't mind me asking, what are you referring to in regards to any such religions?

 

[paarsurrey]

If you don't mind me asking, what are you referring to in regards to any such religions?

I respect their followers but cannot endorse their wrong religions.
Regards

 

[Ben Dhyan]

My interpretation:
Big bang doesn't deny there to be any possible situation like something may happen before big bang happens, and don't promotes and confirms the idea that everything must comes from nothing.
Big bang is a theory that how the universe begin, it doesn't talking about whether there is something/nothing happens before it happens.

Though everyone may have different interpretation to the theory of big bang.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang#Religious_and_philosophical_interpretations
As a description of the origin of the universe, the Big Bang has significant bearing on religion and philosophy.[126][127] As a result, it has become one of the liveliest areas in the discourse between science and religion.[128] Some believe the Big Bang implies a creator,[129][130] and some see its mention in their holy books,[131] while others argue that Big Bang cosmology makes the notion of a creator superfluous.

Which interpretation is 100% factually correct? Maybe each to their own.
Can the different interpretation be debating by people? Sure.
Can anyone force everyone must accept their interpretation? Nope.
If agreement can't be achieve, then agree to disagree is a possible solution...


Which posts answer questions (1) - (5) ?
(1) Why do you think the theory of "Infinite eternal existence is all there ever was" is credible?
(2) Why is it the most logical theory out of every theory?
(3) Why it could not be any other way?
(4) Have you already proves that your theory to be 100% correct? Can you present your proof and explain it?
(5) Have you already proves that every other theory which contradict with your theory to be 100% false? Can you present your proof and explain it?


I made no such claims.
The things that i don't know of or have no evidence to support it, though it can remains a possible situation but i don't say it's factually true, i don't believe/think it's true until it have been substantiated.


And which posts have present the evidence to support this claims that it's 100% factually correct?

Fine Pudding....it is clear to me that you do not understand what is being said to you even if I were to go to the trouble of endlessly pointing out the reasoning for an infinite eternal universe that is birthless and deathless....only the numerically infinite physical manifestations are subject to births and deaths.

Enjoy your material conceptualizations of the finite mortal mind....

 

[Emi]

I respect their followers but cannot endorse their wrong religions.
Regards

Their religions aren't wrong, they're just different. To others, your religion is wrong. I don't think anyone can have a wrong religion, since the very idea of it just sounds silly.

 

[gnostic]

A movie that runs for two hours may well have been made in two months

Or a universe that runs for 14 billion years, may well have been made in 6 days...

That's the sort of circular reasoning crap that I would expect from any creationist.

A movie made to run for two hours, is a two-hour movie, not two months. The production of the movie that took 2 months to make, is two months of movie production, not 2 hours.

A universe that 14 billion years old, is 14-billion year old, is not your silly 6 days.

 

[Pudding]

Fine Pudding....it is clear to me that you do not understand what is being said to you even if I were to go to the trouble of endlessly pointing out the reasoning for an infinite eternal universe that is birthless and deathless....only the numerically infinite physical manifestations are subject to births and deaths.

Enjoy your material conceptualizations of the finite mortal mind....

I see, you didn't answer my questions but straightly going to accuse me and predict that i can't understand what you're going to say, maybe you're a seer or base on some unknown reason?
Or maybe you've no argument or cannot answer my questions, in that case i've no problem with that too.

 

[Pudding]

Is science 100% correct?
Regards

My questions is inapropriate i think. I should have ask, why do you believe what the scripture say is true? How certain you believe it to be true? How does it answer the questions "Who is the ONE" ?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I see, you didn't answer my questions but straightly going to accuse me and predict that i can't understand what you're going to say, maybe you're a seer or base on some unknown reason?
Or maybe you've no argument or cannot answer my questions, in that case i've no problem with that too.

Please reread my comment....you will see clearly you do not understand what is being said to you...when I said that... it was not meant as a prediction, it was an observation based on your your mainly non-contextual responses. Ironically though, your mention of a prediction of being accused of not understanding what is being aid to you was self fulfilling prophecy....you really don't!