Quote
Again. I quote.
The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago.
Here he is talking of present universe after big bang. Not the universe before singularity.
It’s an all too common mistake of mixing up the (apparently possible) infinitely divisible nature of time and space with the events and objects which occur or exist within it.
1 Like
or outside time and before space
1 Like
You maDe this common mistake?
Your hand controls the brush, muscles contract in your hand which is caused by nerve signals from your brain, which is caused by something else and then something else… and some have proposed locating this action of thought or intention to act with regard to subatomic phenomena. I’m doubtful of this and simply locate it in the body even if it’s difficult (if not impossible) to empirically determine.
I was saying people sometimes confuse the events with the time in which they occur. One response would be to say events do not actually occur and are like the infinitely divisible nature of time. But this does indeed go against the experience of causing an action.
Your quote:
If time itself had a beginning, ‘before’ that is an oxymoron.
2 Likes
@bharatjj @MarkD I agree about experience God. Maybe that’s a better word to use instead of see. At times I do see light. However it’s the feeding from light that is feeling God.
However what is experiencing?
Maybe I taken experiencing as feeding and light as what?
Example: when I see light in people radiate outward that’s me observing, however that’s not personally experiencing God., where as when I’m drinking from light then I’m personally experiencing God. If I only see light - I would be missing out.
I need to drink from light for me to personally experience God then God flows and takes care of that spiritual need
Is that God on the dissection table to examine, yes.
- They would be Theopanies and no less physical, i.e. in space and time, than the humans following them or, shoe-less, in their presence, which raises a question: who can prove that they never occurred to any human ancestor including the first or subsequent, before, say, Adam and Eve.
1 Like
Sorry Terry, I can’t speak to that and I’m afraid it throws me off for the remainder of the comment.
1 Like
- Rather than start a new thread, I decided to post this here, in an existing thread.
- One of my favorite pieces of artwork was drawn/painted by Charles Bragg. He titled it “The Sixth Day”.
- The most obvious reference that “inspired” the picture was, of course, Genesis 1:27: “So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”
- Thinking about the picture and some things that have been bandied about in this forum, it occurred to me that the painting could be a metaphor for some of the variations of “God” and “Creator”, for example:
- Someone could look at the painting, armed with nothing more than the terms: “God” “Humanity” and “Creator”, and ask:
- In the painting, which is the Creator? The Human or God? Which is “the Puppet” God or Humanity?
- Moreover, if God is “The Creator”, will all “puppets” be saved? But if God is “the Puppet”, what does “saved” even mean?
- Someone could look at the painting, armed with nothing more than the terms: “God” “Humanity” and “Creator”, and ask:
- Hmmm? it’s time for lunch.
2 Likes
Amazing piece of art indeed. Had a look at other paintings too, really good if one happens to enjoy satire.
This is why the painting is soo good, one could interpret it as they wish, there’s no one correct answer. Even outside of theology, one can interpret it as an artist creating artwork ‘in their image’ so to speak, as it is universally acknowledged fact that artists always leave a piece of themselves in their creations, be it a painting, sculpture or a book.
Terry, this question really does need its own thread, not that it would be enough to solve it 
But you know, some artists try to salvage their work when things go wrong, others recycle materials, then there are those who just bin it when things go wrong…
That old argument of “Man created God” again, is it?lol
If it’s true, which I don’t believe it is (I don’t think you can prove it either way, you either believe this or that), then I don’t see how God could exist, although logically it wouldn’t invalidate it. Then I suppose “saved” wouldn’t mean a lot, certainly not in any religious sense.
2 Likes
And then there’s the question: Does the puppet evolve with the Creator, or does the Creator evolve with the Puppet? And the question: Which came first? The puppet or the Creator?
2 Likes
“Bin there, bin that” ?
Can’t both be true?
As Christians we must assume the Creator
1 Like
If we say that Spirit came first; then how did Spirit create matter? If we say that matter came first, then how did matter create spirit? Neither science or experience says either is possible.
The only solution is that all matter has in-built Spirit. Both evolve together in mutual interaction. Ant the Collective Spirit is named God.
Genesis 1:1 must be understood as the Collective Spirit prompting its consituent parts to evolve. There can be no creation ex-nihilo.
I like the suggestion that quantum mechanics might be hinting that the fundamental reality of the universe is information. The mind of the infinite transcendent God who exists fits that quite nicely. And Jesus is the Logos, the Word of God,
…for whom and by whom all things exist.
Hebrews 2:10
He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
John 1:2-3
I think all you have is conjecture and speculation, based on materialistic presumptions that gives rise to the vapid and ephemeral mist of some kind of panentheism.
2 Likes
Not even that, the source of everything is a “universal consciousness” that creates matter and spirit and makes and is made by everything.
2 Likes
I still can’t get past the experience of causing an action.
1 Like