If God created the universe then who created God? If God doesn't exist then why does the universe exist?
>>76524652
wow really makes you think...
>>76524652
we did
http://multivax.com/last_question.html
>>76524652
Universe was always there brah
>>76525255
Doesn't explain why it exists in the first place.
>>76524652
Look at what leibniz thought of the binary system. It is no coincidence that every continuous while number is a prime or a compound number aside from 1 itself, which links the infinite to the whole. 1 and 0 are paradoxically the same truth.
>>76525364
The paradox is everywhere most people just can't see it... it's depressing.
>>76525353
Because it was there. Always and before. It's not that hard. It has always existed and always will
>If God doesn't exist then why does the universe exist?
I mean, it clearly exists. Whether God does or doesn't is in question, but not the universe.
>>76525543
>Because it was there.
In other words God... checkmate atheists.
>>76524652
because the universe is god and vice versa
>>76525364
Whole*
Also forgot to mention all primes can be described with binary, and so the infinite divine structure of the primes is described by the paradoxical nature of existence.
In other words we have a reality described by such truths as the continuous and discrete, timeless and animation, nothing and everything. These all are paradoxical dualities that we can neither prove or disprove, but just acknowledge they exist and are shortcomings for pinning our experience to logic.
Our existence is contingent and finite.
Everything has a beginning and an end.
But God is eternal. Eternity, by definition, cannot be contingent or finite, it simply is. God simply is,
and everything that ever was or will be in our measurable timeline is simply present to Him.
>>76525887
Umm not really. The universe has always existed. Always. There is no end or beggining. No creation or destruction. It's just here.
>>76524652
ipsum esse subsistens
simple as
The universe spun into existence so that I could sit here and shitpost. It's all for me. This is my kingdom, you just don't realize it yet because I'm a generous man and I share my throne.
>>76526014
This requires a great deal of faith since this cannot be proven. Stars and galaxies are birthed and die.
>>76524652
We say that God created us in his image. But in reality, we created God in our image.
>>76526155
It doesn't require any great deal of faith because equations tells us that
>>76524652
The question should be, if god created the universe than who created god?
If you conclude that god has always existed than why not skip a step and simply say that the universe always existed
i mean there was always something in some shape or form and that things simply grow out of it. I.e. humans grew out of the planet earth like apples grow from a tree which also grew on earth.
Believing in some man in the sky watching over you is a medieval fairy tale that deludes people into doing very strange things.
I like religion though (islam not included), it provides therapy for the masses, the large part of society is mediocre, avarage.
These people need structure, they aren't very strong willed most of the time and a lot of young adults fly off the rails early in life. Religion offers structure and a new hope for those who would otherwise just quit life.
for universe to be created it must had been inexistent, so how can inexistence exist?
>>76524974
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisyphus
wow really makes you think...
>>76524652
Noone. He is the uncaused cause
>>76526014
Source?
>>76526281
It is faith in mathematics and scientism.
I've not seen the big bang definitively disproven.
>>76526415
>Source?
Equations
>>76524652
The thing responsible for the existence universe has to be something that is not bound by the same rules as typical matter or else we would run into absurdities. You can call that thing God.
>>76525975
>Our existence is contingent and finite.
Ok, observable and true.
>Everything has a beginning and an end.
One could argue that based on the existing observations.
>But God is eternal. Eternity, by definition, cannot be contingent or finite, it simply is. God simply is,
and everything that ever was or will be in our measurable timeline is simply present to Him.
That's where you have to start pulling stuff out of your ass, which leads me to pic related.
>>76525975
Everything has a beginning and an end *within context of itself
This is like a recursive function. The recursion is atomic, but the arbitrary internal process is infinite.
>>76526308
Exactly.
>>76526155
They die and everything but the material is still there.
That's my point. The material that makes up the universe has always been around and always will be. It wasn't created and won't be destroyed. It's always been there and always will be.
Even atheist Big Bang people have the Big Bang but they can't explain where the material for the Big Bang came from same with theist and the material or whatever God came from.
My opinion is it's always been there and always will be. God or no god.
>>76526420
The big bang is fully predicted and explained by the equations
>>76524652
>why does the universe exist?
The nature of the universe is to exist. That's like asking "Why does a thing that exists exist?". A thing that exists can't not exist
>>76524652
>If God created the universe then who created God?
The universe is god experiencing its self, hard to explain other than it comes from that which is nameless or formless and is the real anon
>If God doesn't exist then why does the universe exist?
Something must always exist otherwise you wouldn't even be able to ask that.
>>76526436
Quantum Theory says Time isn't relative... We don't know shit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_mathematics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics
>>76525975
>Our existence is contingent and finite.
>Everything has a beginning and an end.
Philosophers are still operating on such a basic framework?
>>76526466
Very well. It all comes down to opinions based on faith.
>>76526436
Elaborate
>>76524652
cuz the only explanation is that God always existed, he is infinite omnipresent and all that stuff.
>>76526155
the universe is just a limited empty space that is expanding(its imagined to be spherical)
even when all stars and galaxies die, the universe will be still here.
>>76526609
>Quantum Theory says Time isn't relative
Nope, the relativity of time is in fact the reason quantum entanglement doesn't imply retrocasualty. Please, read more before spouting nonsense.
>>76524652
We created God.
The universe created us.
The multiverse created our universe.
The omniverse created the multiverse in which our universe is.
And so on.
We - our universe - are not even 0.00000000001% the size of an electron when put in that perspective.
And now imagine all the possibilities of civilisations rising and falling with intelligence superior to ours, on planets superior to our own.
And they fall.
Yet we, inferiors, are standing tall in a harsh environment with harsh history.
That's beautiful. To survive.
I think... I think I need a sip of vodka...
>>76526483
>equations
Like I said quantum theory and general relativity go together like water and oil.
>>76526679
you just described the universe but also personificated it to feel a connection to it
>>76526301
>If you conclude that god has always existed than why not skip a step and simply say that the universe always existed
This depends on your definition of universe. Still, attributing these kind of "powers" to the universe itself is called pantheism.
>>76526795
Well said.
>>76526783
Theism does not require personal deities.
>>76526619
Not really.
Both sides believe in creation of the universe either God or Big Bang
Both sides cannot answer where the material for both came from
Because they can't. Meaning the universe has always been here.
There was no creation of the universe. It simply has always existed
>>76524652
The multiverse is a bunch of self fulfilling stories and imaginations come to life. In one universe someone imagines a universe created by a god. that universe comes into being. In that same universe with god, someone imagines a universe coming into being without a god and that first universe come into being. Both universes creating the other, and many more
>>76524652
well, for some people god's universe.
Something like universe with conscious
>>76526420
>math is hard for me and makes my head hurt
stop
>>76526783
Not true. He's stating the obvious paradox of the idea of a God. Therefore god has no logical pinning to JUST our reality and experience. He would have infinite many experiences up to the whole of himself as 1 thus also completing his destruction as nothing.
>>76526947
it does cater to the need for personal connection. plus religion is very egocentric, for example thoughts like "god made the universe for humans" etc
makes people with shit lives feel like they somehow matter
>>76526947
all theism is based on personification, the difference in some personifications is that it completely removes any direct similarities with human but its still a person
>>76525026
(((Asimov)))
>>76526713
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics" Richard Feynman
>>76524652
You can't create something that already is.
>>76526783
the universe is inside God, and it was created by him
>>76524652
No one. He is the uncreated, the unmoved mover. Jesus man, read Aquinas.
>>76527163
True, but that's not necessary.
>>76527183
This is false. Theism only means there exists at least one weird supernatural being.
>>76527575
and what property does this "being" has?
>>76526949
But there is evidence that the universe expanded from a singularity and is continuing to expand, while we don't know how it came to be in the first place that doesn't really work with the idea that the universe has always existed.
>>76527462
Yes you can, but in doing so, you have admitted there was nothing first, which is just another category of everything. This is a form of relativistic information and a paradox is an infinite information generator.
>>76526735
b-but muh M-theory
>>76527699
Where did the singularity come from?
All that energy?
The universe in one form or another has always existed.
Where in Romeo and Juliet is Shakespeare mentioned?
A creator is not bound to or by their creation.
>>76527272
This sort of acknowledgement is not without precedent.
"For if you have been able to comprehend what you would say, it is not God; if you have been able to comprehend it, you have comprehended something else instead of God. If you have been able to comprehend Him as you think, by so thinking you have deceived yourself. This then is not God, if you have comprehended it; but if it be God, you have not comprehended it. How therefore would you speak of that which you can not comprehend?"
-- St. Augustine, Sermon 2 on the New Testament
>>76526727
how about a sip of bleach
![maxresdefault[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/VfwSoe6.jpg "maxresdefault[1].jpg")
God(The self) decided to play a game/dream an adventure,
but there is nothing outside of god, and nothing that god does not know,
so in order to play his game, he played it with himself (this becomes the game of yin/yang, good/evil, positive/negative, matter/energy, material/immaterial, faith/reason all dualism and language), and in order to get really into the game/dream he made himself forget that he was god so that he could be anxious or fearful about if he would win his games
there is nothing else but god(The self) and you are his game/dream
>>76527647
None, really, but that would be an innocuous being. The common trend is for people to think of it as being able to cause phenomena which cannot be explained using a materialistic framework.
>>76527946
>Where did the singularity come from?
>All that energy?
I don't know, I don't see how this means the universe has always existed. If that is the case the universe would be in a static state, but it expanded from a singularity about 14 billion years ago. If the universe had existed for infinite time this doesn't make any sense.
>>76528182
>innocuous being
those are qualities of a person, its still a personification
>>76526527
>Something must always exist otherwise you wouldn't even be able to ask that.
>tfw Kek is real
PRAISE KEK
>>76526014
In other words- God.
Checkmate, fedoras.
>>76528293
> the universe has always existed. If that is the case the universe would be in a static state
neither yes or no
>but it expanded from a singularity about 14 billion years ago
This sentence is an image in your mind, when you think of it, you think of it now
when you think of the past, you think of it now
when you think of the future, you think of it it now
the only moment that exists is the now, and it is eternal and has always existed
>>76528626
>In other words- God.
Which one? Why even a personified god, why not something monistic like Taoism?
>>76528787
This guy gets it
>>76525543
Define always
>>76528626
That's not the definition of the Christian God though, you've just called the universe God.
>>76528787
Spot on
>>76528124
This is the general idea of what I believe to be true.
>people in this thread unironically believe the universe wasn't created
>it was "just there"
>>76529704
>he believes his magical daddy wasn't created
>it was "just there"
I'll just leave this here
https://plus.maths.org/content/omega-and-why-maths-has-no-toes
>>76528303
How come?
>>76530203
A being is by definition a person
>>76524652
What is there to lose in believing in God? No afterlife when you would have had the same result as an Athiest.
>>76530091
>>76529131
This is same fag. Phone changed ip.
Oh, it is an atheist thread and a thread of religious people opinionating themselves, I have this funky idea where we disregard anything said about spirituality in a world of very untrustworthy and lying people and we say the following: Save me Satan.
And from now on, we fight for Satan to the end.
Trust me in this one, the gang of atheist parachristian muslimhindu group who dindu nuffins will come claim your soul for the actual devil
Do it; Save me Satan.
>>76530441
If your belief results in you worshiping God all day only for it to turn out there's no God you might feel you've wasted your only life.
>>76530512
Agnostics don't deny possibility but can still constrain those possibilities with empirical evidence based on other truths.
>>76524652
Nothing saw it's reflection and gave birth to 10,000 things.
It's an impossibility for nothing to exist. If only for a fraction of a instant. The instant there was not, there was. Before time left, before cause and effect. It was Eternal because nothing never was.
>>76530441
I don't chose to believe or not. If I could believe it and be sincere I'd go for it.
For all I know, every single person, animal, plant down to every single microorganism are really all part of the universe but it's observing itself so in a sense we technically are all a sientity experiencing itself billions of time through everyone and everything kinda like how every single living cell is part of a body
>>76531585
DUDE
>>76531054
>It's an impossibility for nothing to exist.
But the universe is full of nothing, the vast majority of what we see is empty space.
>>76531585
*Are all a single entity
>>76531640
WEED
>>76530512
>>76524652
I'm with you, OP. GOD in the biblical sense doesn't exist. However the immeasurable course of cause and effect, calculated down to the smallest integer. Nothing is by chance if the future can be calculated. So if by instinct alone, or objectively. The Universe is alive.
>>76531054 (cont.)
He's for himself
like the bible says so
>>76531653
Wrong, it's full of a measurable distance. That isn't the same thing as nothing. Nothing can only exist as an absolute. So while things things exist Nothing absolutely can not.
Does gender apply only to God or is it something he basically bestowed among humanity and beasts?
>>76530391
Not necessarily, it could be an animal. But if you are not comfortable calling it a being, call it a thing. It's indifferent.
>>76528624
PRAISE KEK
>>76532103
Depend on flavor of faith you have.
In Christianity you can make a point how Man was made in His image, and Woman was made later.
>>76531999
What is the smallest measurable distance?
>>76532178
animals are also persons albeit less intelligent
if you define a god as a non-being or non-person then you might as well call a black hole "a being"
>>76532103
Organisms developed this as a method to reproduce
Self producing organisms aren't very succesful and do not produce stronger offspring at the same rate
Evolutions trick of growing faster, stronger, better basically.
>>76532298
it's an infinite decrement never touching the parallel integer.
>>76532298
1.616199(97)×10−35 metres.
Big Bang Theory: In the beginning there was nothing. Then it exploded.
>>76532754
Nope, that's not it.
>>76532578
OK and then why do we have this minimum distance? Hint: heisenberg. To get to 0, you need infinite energy. Again biting at the heels of paradox.
>>76532556
Yes, again you're speaking in terms of paradox.
>>76532754
>exploded
No
it is human logic
something has to start somewhere and somebody has to be the cause of it.
maybe it is just not comprehendable for us in our current form.
>>76531653
>the universe is full of nothing, the vast majority of what we see is empty space.
Even "empty" space has loads of stuff in it.
Constantly matter and anti-matter appear and then cancel each-other out again.
>>76532319
We are arguing semantics at this point. It does not matter if we call it a being or a thing because there is nothing material that is comparable to it.
Easy. Everything came out of nothing and everything happend for no reason at all, it just happened. If you believe something else you are a backwards idiot who has no place in today's society.
>>76533144
>maybe it is just not comprehendable for us in our current form.
Scientists have only started to understand the universe in the past 100 years or so.
Give them a few more centuries.
>>76524652
wow, I'm a #Shill4Hill now
>>76533271
if the only property you can assign to it is "non-material" then its just a negation, so basically dualistic thinking
>>76524652
I've read the Bible for research purposes and it says God was always there.
>>76524652
>implying God is subject to time
>>76524652
The word existed, and always has.
>>76524652
Before the universe was created there was no time to be passed, so technically the universe has always and will always be around, as time will stop if the universe ever collapses.
This also means that at the death of a universe guarantees the start of a new one, which due to the lack of time, both happens the instant after one collapses, but also and infinite amount of time after, as the concept of time passing doesn't exist between universes.
The multiverse is actually just the exact same universe on different cycles that produce slight differences.
I personally believe that some god somewhere set up this self-sustaining universe cycle, but that's just me.
>>76533281
More importantly, we can all think what we want and the only time we'll be criticized is when wet try to force it upon others, but, since we should all agree that we can never explain any fantasy since we don't have the lexicon to complete any fantasy, no one should attempt to criticize these ideas.
All ideas open to criticism must be constrained with to the material reality. Good news is that the material reality also contains infinite truths and so our existence is complexity within order.
>>76533516
This will depend on your definition of universe. If you define it as the spacetime and everything inside it, then you have to define God outside of this. If you say that the universe encompasses everything that exists, existed or will exist, then God is part of the universe and the universe would have to be eternal, as God is eternal. In this sense, God does not create the universe, but parts of it, as God is the essence of the universe.
>>76525364
>>76525534
Sorry brahs, I don't get it. Care to elaborate or even better to tell me in which books leibiniz talked about this paradox? I love maths philosophy and I'd like to read this
It's so fucking pathetic how you guys just come up with definitions for "God" and use those definitions - that you or other people before you just came up with - as proof for everything you're assuming.
>>76534588
Leibniz did not record his ideas in books but Gregory chaitin talks about it on youtube a lot.
https://youtu.be/naZHlXgeXkc
>>76534617
We're talking about logic.
>>76524652
Nobody knows.
>>76534212
the idea of "god" in that equation doesn't change a bit your knowledge of the universe. its simply a personification of the universe or existence as a whole
>>76535215
You keep on insisting on the personification. Yes, most religious people do it but not all of them. It is not a requirement to be a theist. Most religious scientists, in fact, don't think of a personal God, but on the type of God I'm talking about.
It's possible that God can interact with the universe (defined as the spacetime with everything inside it) or not after it has been created. If it can't (or doesn't want to), then, yes, the idea of God I'm presenting does not change anything about our knowledge of the universe.
>>76535215
The equation's logic must be defined before the equation can have meaning.
The word is weightless and has no mass but undeniably exists. The word has always existed, think about it. It has what could be called a spiritual existence. The creator has such a spiritual existence. The word cannot be greater than the creator. Therefore the creator necessarilly exists.
>>76536708
You could have 10 identical universes created by 10 different gods. Likewise, you cannot have 10 identical universes created by 20 different gods. An example of logically constrained infinite possibility.
>>76537032
There was a very first word. The very first word was with the very first creator.
>>76536123
my point is theism is by definition a personification. yes some religions ascribe very primal characteristics to their god like jealousy or rage but even your version has characteristics like "creating" "motivation" "self-awareness" which are all based on the concept of a person which you only know from yourself and other humans and you apply it in a cosmic level
>>76532298
The Planck length is the scale at which classical ideas about gravity and space-time cease to be valid, and quantum effects dominate. This is the �quantum of length�, the smallest measurement of length with any meaning. And roughly equal to 1.6 x 10-35 m or about 10-20 times the size of a proton.
In other words we will never be able to prove it even if it was decided upon what it is
>>76525353
God doesn't need to be created. God is the root, if we examine anything and go down the line of cause and effect we end up at a root, God is this root.
The Universe did not always exist. Things exist because God created them.
>>76537260
All words are translated through the one. This goes back to >>76525364 highlighting a distinction between 0, 1,and all primes. Any whole number is some combination of primes. The commonality of all unique, infinite, primes is their reducible duality to 1, which is the paradoxical juxtaposition of 0.
>>76537828
Something had to of created god
he didn't just always exist you fuckwit
but even if you found out, then you'd need to find out who created whatever created god
same shit with believing in the big bang. what existed before the big bang to create the big bang, and so forth.
shits endless
>>76526281
Lmao quantum equations also say there are infinite Universe. They literally say there are infinite number of X out there.... but you can't see them, test them or verify them. But see this equation goyim. It proves it. You know Kaku said he had an equation which proved God and people flipped. But saying you have an equation the proves infinite universes and everyone nods their head.
>>76537828
god is not the root, the root is the god. You concluded that existence must have a root and then you personified "root" and renamed it god
>>76526308
It doesn't. What kind of question is this.
>>76533224
It is the formless which creates form
>>76538307
Your first sentence is incoherent babble and contradicts itself.
>>76538129
>turtles all the way down
>>76537908
>All words are translated through the one.
"One" being a word, was not the first word. This word came later. There was a time when "one" didn't exist.
>>76538129
Yeah... if you want to go down the illogical path of infinite regression.
You still end up at the question of what came first? And it's still not the right questions. God never "came" into being. God always existed. You would need another God to make God in the first place anyway, if you wish to follow this line of thinking, you must accept there is a God. Several at that. Luckily we know infinite regression isn't possible. God is first and was always there. No one made God, God was not created.
>>76538495
it wasn't meant to be taken literally, it was to describe the order of your thinking that made you conclude god is the root. first came the conclusion that there must be a root or source of the universe and then you personified that into god
>>76538727
It sounds like you're just taking whatever the first cause was and then calling it God.
>>76538495
This. Paradox and contradiction are often confused and is, for example, why idiots cling to "aha, you can't prove a negative!" which is laughable considering proof by contradiction is 1 of the most widely used proof strategies in mathematics.
>>76538788
Yes. Because a divine being with unlimited power is the only thing we can think of it Which would be capable of creating everything
>>76538890
No, I am saying whatever was responsible for causing the first cause and subsequently all other causes is God, as an eternal being is the only thing capable of doing so.
>>76538914
which would would only make sense if you assume that existence can't be uncreated. you concluded that existence can't be uncreated so you simply transferred the "uncreated" property to something else and called it god
>>76539065
>causing the first cause
That doesn't make any sense, a first cause obviously can't have a cause.
>>76524652
Infinite regression!
my man
tl;dr you can answer a question up to the limit of your knowledge. What can answer all questions? Something that has all/infinite knowledge. What can encapsulate infinity? Its end. What is the end of infinity. A paradox commonly anthropomorphized as God for the 'tards.
>>76539163
Existence can stop existing. Creation could technically be uncreated. God could do that.
>>76539227
Great. Now apply that to God. God now doesn't need to be created based on what you just said.
>>76539603
Okay, but again you seem to have just called the thing that started it all God, but besides that we don't know anything about it. How do you know it's some sort of intelligent being? Why call it God?
>>76539227
The perception of there being a random in this universe we are experiencing NOW is a false one, although there could be infinite possible NOWs there is only this one we are experiencing now because at some point we made the decision to experience it. So god is essentially who resides behind the thinker, or the person.
>>76540076
We can call it whatever we want as long as we are not making illogical conclusions.
>>76540076
Because intelligence is reflected through creation.
Look at humans. We create things. We design things. But we still need the basic working materials God made. Even if you look at something like ants. Ants are incredible creatures.
Why call anything anything? Because of the qualities we have decided it possesses or what we think it would need to possess to fit what we think it must possess to be called "x". What would you call a being with unlimited power and knowledge of all things?
God is the only thing which comes to mind.
>>76540705
complexity is simplicity plus time. there is nothing in existence that needs a pre-existing intelligence to make sense
>>76524652
It doesnt matter
Life is a relatively short comedy that in the end means nothing.
>>76540838
Complexity is uniqueness. Infinty is constrained by unity.
>>76524652
I'm Christian.
I also work as a microbiologist in a hospital, my job is infection control.
My wife is a doctor - a pediatric anesthesiologist. She puts babies to sleep for operations and makes sure kids don't suffer pain if they need surgery. Her job is very complicated.
I make sure that my area of responsibility is infection free. I spend a lot of time looking down a microscope, writing reports and giving advice based upon my research. There are lots of bugs - systems that we can't see. Some are good, some will kill.
Christianity is not opposed to science. It is part of God's creation.
Your argument is circular. God has always existed. Without beginning nor end.
>>76540705
>What would you call a being with unlimited power and knowledge of all things?
But you see you're already attributing properties to this thing we don't actually know anything about, it could just be some sort of unthinking force that doesn't actually have any knowledge.
>>76540969
god argument is a tautology with circular logic
>what created everything?
>define god as something that created everything
you basically answer your own question by renaming the question into a singular word with a persona
>>76540838
Yes there are. Things that exist go through means to reach ends. But they don't do this on their own Accord as they don't possess consciousness, at least not the level we do.
>>76524652
God has always existed outside the boundaries of time.
There is a reason He is called the Ancient of Days.
>>76541117
You just made your own attributes after telling me I can't because we don't know. Hypocrisy.
I give those attributes based upon the Bible. If we just want to talk about God though in a general sense.... you've made it impossible. Because you want us to only make deductions on things we have perceived.
God is not of this world. But I would like to talk more about God with you. If you have a particular question to ask I will try to answer.
>>76541492
He said "could be". That's not an assertion of God's attributes but an assertion of our ignorance.
>>76525353
This question will never be answered to you in this dimension/reality.
You are a spiritual ghost made of God, when you die you dont die, you just get separated from this earth and your current body.
The real you, your ghost, your spirit, does not cease to exist.
>>76525364
There is a state where neither 1 nor 0 exist. For 1 or 0 to exist they have to be observed. Without observation it neither "is" nor "isn't". This state of existence has an existence of itself..
>>76541723
It wouldn't be God then.
>>76541492
>You just made your own attributes
I said it could be that as an example, I was trying to say that the first cause could be something different to what you said it is.
>I give those attributes based upon the Bible.
Why did you do that?
>>76541723
Also since we are talking about God as in a being which created everything, a non thinking being that possess no knowledge can't fit the bill so I really don't see that point.
If you can't think you can never produce an action.
>>76526014
Source nigkike?
>>76524652
If the big bang created the universe, then what created the big bang?
>>76542170
Time didn't exist before the big bang.
>>76542034
Because Christ was a real person who was crucified, and in my opinion, what he said was absolute truth as he was God in the flesh. Even if you don't want to believe this, I don't think anyone can honestly deny the wisdom of his words either.
>>76541738
I agree with the essence of this metaphor, but I think it is more general than this. The idea of dimension only exists in context, such as a 3 d universe described by a 2d holographic substrate. The ultimate substrate is paradox and the interfaces of such which seem to be sources or sinks for possibility.
It truly doesn't matter. The only God we know to be true is Kek.
>>76542290
jesus morals are basically stoicism. jesus or new testament didn't offer anything new or profound at all
>>76542290
>what he said was absolute truth as he was God in the flesh.
Could you tell me what convinced you of this exactly?
>>76524652
God can exist without an independent creator. If God is an atheist alien and created our universe. And a creator is considered a God. Then the atheist alien is our God.
>>76541738
I see you.
>>76524652
God is the unconditioned ground of being and thus uncreated. The universe exists and is eternally sustained by His constant act of creation.
>>76541871
That state is continuity which I alluded is unified through the primes. Take any number in between 1 and 0 and you will have a new number entirely definable with a sequence of 1s and 0s and which also is a compound prime.
>>76524974
>One must imagine Wojak happy.
Makes you think. Camus had dank memes.
>>76542623
What is the Sermon on the Mount.
>>76542624
Jesus himself of course.
First, Jesus claimed to be the unique Son of God. As a result, the Jewish leaders tried to kill Him because in “calling God his own Father, [Jesus was] making himself equal with God” (John5:18). In John8:58 Jesus went so far as to use the very words by which God revealed Himself to Moses from the burning bush (Exod.3:14). To the Jews this was the epitome of blasphemy, for they knew that in doing so Jesus was clearly claiming to be God. On yet another occasion, Jesus explicitly told the Jews: “‘I and the Father are one.’ Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, ‘I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?’ ‘We are not stoning you for any of these,’ replied the Jews, ‘but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God’” (John10:30–33).
>>76524652
The universe is this plain if existence, but there are other planes.
Thats like living in a computer and thinking that outside of the computer there is absolute nothingness so the inventor of the computer needs to have been created by a force within the computer.
Nigga anything is possible outside of this universe's limits, and science cannot give any insight to this because science is limited to the confines of only what this universe's empirical information can be observed by humanity from one single limited point in the universe or limited trajectories sent out from that single point.
>>76524652
>thinking the Great Arquitect of the Universe must work in terms of space-time and causality when he created all of that in the first place
top kek
what comes before 0?
>-1
what comes before the timescale?
>
>>76543445
-1 is just a sign in front of a whole number and obeys truths defined by arithmetic axioms. Negatives can be represented in binary too.
>>76541871
This state you talk of has been prove many times by science but is essentially ignored. It in fact hints at reality being nothing more than a computer game, it may even explain why we sometimes have deja vu were we temporarily have to reload a saved state where we left off from from the world server or shard
>>76532103
Divine Feminine and Masculine. But that's descibing aspects of God using human descriptives. The Map is not the Territory.
>>76524652
Cheese pizza runs fast under the bridge
>>76532103
Masculinity and femininity are essences of reality. It is a more basic truth than human existence, logically, but itself is a microcosm of infinite possibility.
>>76544006
really makes you think..
>>76524652
Nobody knows and nobody will ever know
fuck off now
>>76544006
Computer game. God .. Shadows on a cave ..
The only reason 1 of them is proven through science as reality is the explanation comes down to one of numbers. I think the important take away is that numbers are the fabric of experience.
>>76541219
Faith in God cannot have a scientific basis.
Using science to prove or disprove God is futile.
OK. Let's delve a bit deeper into the philosophy of science:
for a hypothesis to be 'scientific', then it MUST be falsifiable. This is the basis of science.
For example, I can make a statement claiming that "ducks can float". If I observe only ONE duck that can't float, then my statement is disproven. Falsifiability is the foundation of science. An approximation to the truth.
Religion is different. It is based not upon observation, but faith. Comparing the two is like comparing apples to oranges.
I could go on, but comparing science to religion is pointless.
Anyway, peace to you.
>>76524652
That is beyond us. Let us work our way up there first.
>>76544531
>>76545016
>>76543055
>>76541871
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT-_uCLwKhQ
>>76524652
God God made God, it's as simple as that
>>76545081
>science
>an approximation to the truth
Quite presumptuous there aren't we?
>>76524652
Asking this is just another, tired form of mental masturbation.
Why don't you go do some calculus or something useful?
>>76545450
It is. We usually, (if not always) must be wrong a thousand times before we stumble on the right answer. Science itself is not truth, it is a method of acquiring truth.
>>76525543
why tho?
>>76524652
Universe always existed, it was never created.
>>76545684
>Science [...] is a method of acquiring truth.
Only if you believe it actually does it
Science is just a method of disproving itself ad infinitum
>>76524652
God is usually defined as having the quality of being "uncaused", so nothing would have "created" God.
"The universe" could exist for any reason.
>>76545450
Truth is objective, but experience is more than just truth, and context creates subjectivity to interact with objectivity. We get constrained free will from this.
>>76545450
All theories are just that: theories.
Theory of evolution, theory of relativity etc.
They work really well, and help us to understand the world we live in.
Newtonian gravitational theory helped put a man on the Moon. It doesn't mean it's true.
The nature of solid objects and consciousness is still on the fringe of science.
Biocentrism holds that our conscious awareness actually creates a universe, merely by thinking about it. So we create our reality. It's fascinating stuff, and decks my brain.
It's like stating "everything is real" but/and "nothing is real". Without contradiction.
The mirror can gather dust
Therefore it must be cleaned
We practice to cleanse it
There is no mirror to be found
Therefore nothing to be cleaned
There is nothing that needs be done.
>>76546856
I am now a #cruzmissle
>>76547054
>It doesn't mean it's true.
See
>>76546856
An approximation is just elimination of subjectivity. Within context of space trajectories, the truths of relativity are built in or hidden.
>>76547054
You have your faith in God so...
I don't know why you're bothering to know what He'd know purely through your own means and thinking
>>76525975
our incarnations are finite, but the spirit is eternal. You only know what you learn during this life time.
(source: Drugs)
you are not supposed to be answered everything. instead, focus on what religious conduct can be beneficial to our society. this is the extent of what the idea of god can do for us. the open mysteries are going to be left open and we are going to be fine with it.
>>76526483
And yet Stephen Hawking said before big bang time did not exist. If time did not exist how could the big bang ever happen?
>>76547967
Then the obvious conclusion is the Stephen Hawking must be wrong
>>76548186
>is *that
Even in complete randomness a consciousness that's self-sustaining could eventually form
>>76548641
If a thousand monkeys pounded away on a thousand typewriters for eternity eventually they're produce the Encyclopedia Britannica
>>76548878
Topkek
>>76528124
I'm putting an end too this game!
>>76530927
not possible for you would never know that you had wasted your life his point remains flawless.
>>76548641
that's bullshit. consciousness doesn't emerge from complexity. It's a wrong path of thinking.
>>76548641
>>76548878
Possibility and probability are not synonyms.
>>76550932
Complexity is an idea of abstract uniqueness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Element_distinctness_problem
>>76550873
>you would never know
No but if you think that you will be wasting your life by being religious then it might concern you.
>>76551618
All the same praise kek.
God doesn't exist, and we don't know why the universe exists. Is that so damn hard to understand? The fuck do you need to know why it happened. Eat your McDonalds, jerk off, and waste time on the internet like you always do, OP. As if having some magic sky father would give your life more meaning you fucking maniac.
