Home > Community Lounge > Religion and Spirituality > The Argument Against Creation

The Argument Against Creation

  1. "We [as humans] can decide to do something, we can wait for a certain time before acting, we can wonder about our future actions; but such possibilities cannot arise for [an eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent] God. In his case there is no gap between desire and action, nothing stands in the way of his activity; and yet we are told by al-Ghazali that God suddenly created the world. What differentiates one time from another for God? What could motivate him to create the world at one particular time as opposed to another? For us, different times are different because they have different qualitative aspects, yet before the creation of the world, when there was nothing around to characterize one time as distinct from another, there is nothing to characterize one time over another as the time for creation to take place."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averroes#cite_note-muslim_encyclopedia-63
     
  2. wtf...:D?
    So how 'bout those Eagles?
    You pop your head up and this is what you got?
    Get back down to the ET basement already.
     

  3. Wanna discuss Whitehead's Process and Reality?
     
  4. "The Argument Against Creation "

    God created and maintains everything. There is no argument at all.

    God knows the answer, of course. But nobody knows or understands how and why about everything including creation. Why would we think we should be able to know and understand everything?

    God is everything - including everything we know, we don't know yet (e.g. ET), and we can never know; everything we see, we can't see yet (e.g. dark energy/matter), and we can never see; everything we understand, we don't understand yet (e.g. avoiding wars), and we can never understand, etc, etc.

    Everything also includes what we call Creation, which is just one of God's mysteries!

    We shouldn't waste our time/ energy in certain things, as we should be doing so many other more meaningful and productive things.

    Some people including asylums are still homeless! That is the kind of practical issues people should spend time and energy in with priority.

    lol


    [​IMG]
     
  5. PS: If an ant says God makes ants in God's image, a tree would think that saying is a good humour. And an ET is just confused!
     
  6. upload_2018-1-24_11-22-28.jpeg
     
  7. your note states

    "This is not to say that Ibn Rushd denied the Creation; rather, he proposed an eternal creation. Oliver Leaman explains Ibn Rushd's argument as such:"

    conventional science states our universe had a beginning and time began after the big bang.
    that there was a big bang was pretty much confirmed by the finding of background radiation showing what the early universe was like.

    For scientists "before" the big bang is an unknown. Our science does not go back that far. At the moment our science began just after the big bang.

     
  8. Without existence, nothing , including creation, or God, can exist.
    It is because existence exists, creation exists. The all powerful God doesn't exist as it needs existence as predicate to exist before it can.
    :)
     



  9.  
  10. Without existence, who would be there to perceive reality or question this existence. So the only epistemic belief one can have is that they exist, everything else is as Kant said, as it appears to us rather than the reality.

    But then the question is, it appears to who, who is the perceiver and how is a distinct perceiver comes into being.The problem of first cause is unsolvable.
     
  11. We post. Therefore we exist.
     
  12. and i suddenly farted today so loud my cat woke up!
     
  13. There`s No time, no space, no place, etc.. for God.God is everything.

    The sensations.To experience sensations."God" itself is a static substance.Do you wanna be static forever??
     
  14. The real problem perhaps would be, after solving/ finding a solvable "foreseeable First cause", there should be always "another First cause that causes the currently already resolved First cause" to be resolved, whether it is a solvable or unsolvable one, simply a never-ending process!

    lol

     
  15. I am aware of the Spinozian argument, however, it's still a concept, a belief either speculated or transferred from others. How do you know your concept is true?
     
  16. Exactly, infinite regress, logic is collapsing there.
     
  17. For me it`s either a concept, but i know masters who experienced that(some traditions call it "samadhi" - death experience).Life, in other words, is experienced through you, but you think you are 'exGOPer'.But when you experience samadhi you`ll see the real guy behind the 'exGOPer'.And that guy is EVERYTHING - the field, the collective counsciousness, whatever you call it.No concepts, no me and you, no others.It`s quite a big surprise to find it out, they say.You also find out, that, you`ve always been, you are and you`ll always be.

    No reason to doubt them, as they say the same thing all the time.

    Creation also does not exist without you.What you see:world, universe, trees, balls..lol..., are also experienced, sensed, not visualized.
     
  18. I am aware of those concepts, Advaita Vedanta is one of the fields I researched. Shaivism also has similar concepts but I find tantra concepts rather unnecessary. The strange thing is that people who do experience such states actually call it the state of 'not knowing' because the 'seer' disappears so they do not even make the claim that they 'know' and they say that it is not an experience to be had. The state of samadhi would not lead to see any guy, it would lead me to a place where there is no 'I am' other than a mind in a body where the mind itself is unreal and it's all based on something that is unmanifested but eternal.

    Actually, one need not even go that way, one can actually contemplate this logically. A good place would be Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika which was kind of Wittgenstein's Tractatus but even better for it asked questions beyond cognition.

    And this can even be contemplated scientifically where in microscopic physics standard laws collapse and it's all mental from there. The sustenance of matter itself is based on perception.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/436029a
     
  19. Yeah, i mean "the real guy", by that i mean the real you, who`s always been.And yet they say they see the exGOPer, or the fordewind for a moment, laughing:"what the hell, it was not me, actually"...something along them lines.

    You cannot contemplate this logically, as there`s no wordly word to explain that.Everything you try to explain - is immediatly a concept.Samadhi state has no concepts.
     
  20. Remarkably, science or at least some physicists are coming to the same conclusion

    http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038/436029a
     
  21. I'm not so sure. Quantum events occur all the time naturally and spontaneously without cause.
     
  22. Alain Aspect's experiments confirmed it though

    "Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.

    Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light. Since traveling faster than the speed of light is tantamount to breaking the time barrier, this daunting prospect has caused some physicists to try to come up with elaborate ways to explain away Aspect's findings. But it has inspired others to offer even more radical explanations.

    University of London physicist David Bohm, for example, believes Aspect's findings imply that objective reality does not exist, that despite its apparent solidity the universe is at heart a phantasm, a gigantic and splendidly detailed hologram."

    http://www.southerncrossreview.org/9/hologram.htm
     
  23. My guess since recently has been thinking that when the scientists later find out more about dark energy/matter, many of the existing theories would have to be modified, as well as many new theories would be explored later.

    The Stoicism physics is just funny. It for long long time ago says everything is materialistic. That means light, quantum communication, and whatever else, are all transmitting and communicating signal through various forms of matter.

    imo, it would be not impossible that the speed of light could be possibly slower, far far slower, than quantum communication through dark matter which occupies almost the whole universe.

     
  24. Since I was young, I was very curious about how come the vacuum universe can support the heavy weight of our Earth in the space which is vacuum? It's simply illogical, and impossible!

    Now I think it is highly possibly that the dark matter actually supports our Earth in the space.

    And my guess also is the dark matter should have a form of Dark Mass in order to support the heavy weight of our Earth.

    The way to measure Dark Mass would be completely different than the conventional way to measure conventional weight/mass.

    lol

    PS: Perhaps the UFO already knows how to fly faster than light through flying via dark matter.
     
  25. No one will ever figure how the Earth is hanging in space.I can only tell you that it hangs by the same principles as you draw the hanging Earth on paper.Its a kind of magic.The Earth does not exists, acrually, it`s cartoonish.So it can hang, rotate and do other cartoonish tricks.
     
  26. We used to think the planets we can see are the main object of interest! No More!!!

    Now that we know the unseen planets will be the main object of interest in the space/universe.


     
  27. Hungry ghosts, animals, human beings, and devas,
    According to their different perceptions
    Perceive the same thing differently.
    One should admit that their referent (yi; artha) is not a substantial reality (chen-shih, dravya).

    In regard to phenomena of the past and future,
    As in dream images or mirror reflections,
    Although the object-support (alambana) is not real,
    Still the marks of objects of cognition (visaya-lakshanas) are posited

    http://www.bdkamerica.org/system/fi...heHeartSutra_2001.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=471
     
  28. if the view that light is emitted from a source goes through the eye and is perceived is wrong...

    and the answer is quantum mechanical...
    what is light?

    I have been intrigued by the idea is that the universe is a hologram and light is what brings it to life for us.

    here was exgoper article. the quote is from the last column.


    http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038/436029a[/QUOTE]
     
  29. That is a good point.

    I'm just unsure, but my interpretation according to Stoic physics would be: "The quantum movement by itself is a Cause, representing the ongoing change of the state of Matter."


     
  30. The flaw in your thought process is that you presume time exists independently of god or creation, as a fabric onto which creation was imposed and then recorded.
     
  31. And you know this how?
     
  32.  
  33. It'd be also possible that the quantum movement we an see is actually the particles are moved/ pushed/ impacted by dark energy which has continuous movement with much much faster speed than light speed.

    As it'd be possible that the whole universe would be 100% dark energy, anything including light and human life-cycle that we can see is just a sort of simulation models that are projected in the space/ universe of dark energy.

    As all things (including light) being simulation models that we can see are just outliers in the universe, existing only temporarily with limited life-/time-span.

    Completely contrary to the convention that the things we can see are normal, other things we cannot see are outliers.

    I doubt it. I'd think that it'd be possible when transmitting information through using dark energy/matter.

     
  34. Another view to look at the issue is, imo:

    There might be a set of several first causes that are interacting internally with each other including many many feedback loops to be appearing as One first cause externally.

    Why the number of first cause must be just One, instead of Many?

    lol

    Furthermore, is it possible after the very First first-cause for creation, there would be potentially a Future first-cause for elimination/ destruction Suddenly or eternally expanding forever indefinitely, rather than gradually diminishing/ dying Naturally over time according to conventional scientific thinking?

    lol

    How do we know there will be No any Future first-cause???

    Or even a Huge Big Bang to be happened in the future, that can be much much bigger than the (theoretically-)known Big Bang?

     
  35. [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  36. Nice pics.
     
  37. God is everything.Time included.
     
  38. In which case you must believe that God is up your arse!
     
  39. i`d fuck your and your moms arse real quick faggot!fuck you!
     
  40. I've an idea this conversation might soon lead to some bad language. I can see it coming.
     


  41.