• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

[MEGA] God

Status
Not open for further replies.
The link to the thread is evident in the 2nd line of punkt's post.
Click to expand...
i still don't see but i probably just don't get what you mean.

But if God is the universe, certainly he couldn't have created himself, right?
Click to expand...
for me the universe is the universe, point. no need to add the notion of "god" in the equation
but here's my view on the universe creating itself

The fact is we have imperfect senses, we hardly know what's going on in the room next door to us. We make mistakes, and we're prone to illusion.
How can some guy understand or realise what the absolute truth is without receiving knowledge from a higher source??
Click to expand...
ayahuasca makes your senses better ;)
 
God = Everything...in my beliefs...
I do believe in higher powers, however, that may or may not have humanoid characteristics..but I think of these more as "the gods" or "angels" as opposed to god almighty..which I think of as the universal life force. Just how I personally see things..
 
The only god there is, is in my member name on the left

Bear witness to Allah, gave birth to all
For Allah was all, and therefore, life itself
And the universe gave birth to man
The universe was man, and man was the universe
And the universe was always existed
And existance was life
And life is Allah
And Allah had no beginning because he is, what always was
Rakim Allah, peace
Now who is God?
 
Sometimes the dead & bloated corpse of a whale will "explode" due to the pressure of decomposition gasses within the body cavities... what if you applied the same thing on a universal level (all matter in the universe is nothing but chunks of the dead carcass of a being that you call "god")?
 
^^ yeah we could exist in the intestinal tracks of some kind of massive massive scavenger creature, that is in its own world microscopic. You never know.
 
God = the universe = everything

the universe always existed, why do we all assume that it needed to be created.?

nothingness is a concept

if the universe was created then it was created now b/c now is all there is. (when you were born.... It was right now)



conceptually.... if there was nothing before the universe, then there wasn't anything before existence... thus it always existed.. i see no problems here

the universe is an ongoing, in the moment, wiggle of motion. It is all there is. Sounds like God to me, that is if there is such a thing as God in the first place.
 
if there was nothing before the universe, then there wasn't anything before existence... thus it always existed.. i see no problems here
Click to expand...
that's a play on words, not a demonstration
 
could you define nothing for me?

could you show it to me?

can nothingness really exist in the material world?

no... by definition .... it is that which does not exist

exerything that is is and is a part of the universe... and here we are... in the universe.... so where is this nothing you keep talking about?
 
could you define nothing for me?
by definition .... it is that which does not exist
Click to expand...
this sounds like a definition by the negative and seems shaky to me
nothing is the absence of anything
where there is not anything, there is nothing

it's not correct to say "if there was nothing before the universe, then there wasn't anything before existence"
the universe doesn't have exclusive rights in existence
nothingness can very well have existed outside of space time before the universe was created
also (since i proposed nothingness, but you don't seem to favour that idea), other things could have existed before the universe : a singularity for instance, and other universes before, mathematical truths, maybe even immaterial things such as the concept of souls that we have

so really, "if there was nothing before the universe, then there wasn't anything before existence... thus it always existed" may be a nice play on words, but it doesn't actually demonstrate what it stands for

could you show it to me?
can nothingness really exist in the material world?
Click to expand...
if we're talking matter: everywhere
in the very screen you're looking at
knowing that the diameter of the atom of hydrogen for instance is 100.000 bigger than its nucleus (and without forgetting the subtleties of the wave like behaviour of electrons and the exchange of photons and heavy gauge bosons between electrons and the nucleus) we could approximate (if all atoms had the same ratio as hydrogen atoms) that around 99.9999999999992% of matter is actually empty space between nucleus and electrons

to go further, build a waveproof box. seal it in a perfect vaccum created in a laboratory, or in outer space, and you won't even have waves to trouble the many small areas of nothingness with just a few hydrogen atoms left floating in between

also, the universe outside of the observable universe could very well include an infinite amount of nothingness

so where is this nothing you keep talking about?
Click to expand...
you sound angry. what exactly have i done to you?
where do i keep talking about this nothing? i only mentioned it once, and in another thread
 
Last edited:
this sounds like a definition by the negative and seems shaky to me
nothing is the absence of anything
where there is not anything, there is nothing

it's not correct to say "if there was nothing before the universe, then there wasn't anything before existence"
the universe doesn't have exclusive rights in existence
nothingness can very well have existed outside of space time before the universe was created
also (since i proposed nothingness, but you don't seem to favour that idea), other things could have existed before the universe : a singularity for instance, and other universes before, mathematical truths, maybe even immaterial things such as the concept of souls that we have

so really, "if there was nothing before the universe, then there wasn't anything before existence... thus it always existed" may be a nice play on words, but it doesn't actually demonstrate what it stands for
Click to expand...

my point is that nothingness is by definition not a thing... (unlike your other examples) it is a self inploding concept. suppose there was nothing before the universe.... well as there was no universe at that time, and you are a part of the universe, why would you concern yourself with it? to me it seems like confrontiong an imaginary concept. (IMHO one that was born out of binary thinking)



if we're talking matter: everywhere
in the very screen you're looking at
knowing that the diameter of the atom of hydrogen for instance is 100.000 bigger than its nucleus (and without forgetting the subtleties of the wave like behaviour of electrons and the exchange of photons and heavy gauge bosons between electrons and the nucleus) we could approximate (if all atoms had the same ratio as hydrogen atoms) that around 99.9999999999992% of matter is actually empty space between nucleus and electrons

to go further, build a waveproof box. seal it in a perfect vaccum created in a laboratory, or in outer space, and you won't even have waves to trouble the many small areas of nothingness with just a few hydrogen atoms left floating in between

also, the universe outside of the observable universe could very well include an infinite amount of nothingness
Click to expand...

I know very little about the very atomized weastern aproach to phisics, nor any physics for that matter, so i won't pretend to. I'm interested in any books or websites you could recomend that deal with physics and nothingness.

My only defence to that would be.... I am a philosophical materialist. meaning i believe that all that is real/ reality is made up of only the things that can be experienced by the sences and only when they are experienced by the sences. (If you showed me an apple and then hid it in the closet, i would tell you that the apple no longer existed, .... atleast in that moment and from my perspective.)

so I would say that all this jargon about atoms is simply that... jargon. It is a string of catagories and symbols. But again i don't know much about the science and am just guessing.


<<<so where is this nothing you keep talking about? >>>

you sound angry. what exactly have i done to you?
where do i keep talking about this nothing? i only mentioned it once, and in another thread
Click to expand...
I was refering to the general direction of the thread (and of most western philosophers these days). It was not directed to you.
I'd like to keep this discussion as amicable as possible as i have been stuck on this taoist philosophy for quite a bit. I am one who enjoys the journy, not the end.... so I would greatly aprechiate it if you could open my eyes a bit wider.
 
there was a spell there where I saw nothingness and everything as supports of each other rather than opposites... perheps you could use that as a launching point for your next post.... whatever it is, I am looking forward to it
 
There is no way to conceptualize the beginning of the universe, without using a reference point outside of the universe. You need this "outside" reference point because a reference inside the universe would not allow you to witness the absolute time flow of the universe. This is similar to you not being able to tell motion without a separate space reference as a basis of comparison to allow you to say you're moving. But using a reference outside the universe means that you can not use the concept of time because time exist due to the existence of the universe.

Therefore, you can say that the universe has no beginning and that the universe has always existed.
 
My question to that is..... Why do you think most people assume that there was nothingness before the universe? Do you think it has to do with religious influence or binary thinking in general? or something else? just a philosophical fad?

I just don't understand why people (who are a part of the universe) insist on something existing outside of it. especially those who believe the universe is infinite. how could anything exist outside of infinity?


as for the space in between the electrons and nucleus of an atom... can you see, hear, smell, taste or feel it?

I'm willing to conceed that there may be material holes strung in our universe... but outside or before?... how could one exist without the other?
 
This topic really interests me as it probably does most people who do not accept the traditional idea of god. I believe in science because they back up what they are saying with evidence, unlike most religions. I saw a show about the universe and its possible origins. The answer i like best is that it is cyclical and has been and will always be, but it goes through these cycles. For example maybe the big bang was not the origin of the universe but rather the start to the current cycle we are in. Also it is interesting how when you look at molecules and atoms they resemble solar systems. And if u look at the particles making up atoms, same thing so it most likely goes on like that infinately in both directions.......or maybe not
 
I asked someone this today or somewhat of a modified version and I was saying how the universe is constantly expanding but what left me confused was what exactly is it expanding into. I said matter b/c I mean isn't that what everything is compromised of? But what made matter? or is that an entire nother question/thread?
 
kidfrolf said:
Also it is interesting how when you look at molecules and atoms they resemble solar systems. And if u look at the particles making up atoms, same thing so it most likely goes on like that infinately in both directions.......or maybe not
Click to expand...
"in order to understand the deepest metaphysical truths, all you need to know is this... every inside has an outside, and every outside has an inside." - watts
 
To my knowledege, its never been shown that time is linear and constant, so the estimate of the age of the universe of around 18 billions years is not totally accurate. For all practical purposes, time is linear and constant. But when you start going back in time to near the beginning of the universe, this may not be so. Scientists can not talk about the inception of the universe itself, only the forces at work the mere split seconds after its inception. I'm guessing that this is because time behaves asymtotically, and at present time its pretty much linear. With this notion, the universe is much older than 18 billion years and may actually be infinitely old which means that it has always existed.

This topic really interests me cus I'm a science and scifi geek.=D
 
Judas said:
To my knowledege, its never been shown that time is linear and constant
Click to expand...
Time isn't. It's rate of passage (though such a term has a very odd meaning) depends on your position within a gravitational field and your velocity.

If you're moving quickly around large dense objects like neutron stars or black holes, then time is heavily non-linear!

The age of the universie 12~14 billion years I think. 18 is a bit too high.
 
In the beginninmg there was ONLY GOD and the word was with god, this is how the bible starts(i think) so therefore everything that came after that must have been created from god. So that would mean that all matter is pieces of god, no? This would explain the often stated maxim "god is everywhere".
This then makes god the universal consciousness. Therefore we are of god, part of god etcetera.
zophen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top