How I think mass forms

[dlamberth]

Zen can take a hike.

Yet when you go into nothingness your visiting Zen.

The object is the universe.

The source is God.

And it's the Source that we need to be looking towards if the desire is there to know God more fully.

If so, He didn't tell us what it is.

For those who have a deeper interest in knowing God more fully, we were told the direction to look, which is through Love.

No, it didn't.

God spoke creation into existence.

It's Love that God's voice rode as He spoke creation into existence.

You're making God out to be some sort of catalyst between love and the universe.

I think you got it backwards. The catalyst for Creation to happen is Love. You said so yourself. It's an area we agree upon if I recall.

In the way it keeps a persons eyes on God, I think it's worthwhile to be exploring that Love.

But it's wrong.

So Love is wrong?

Don't go assuming there's more in a safe than what the safe keeper tells you is in there.

Well, the idea of looking at God for some is an assumption. For others God is a reality. Cracking open the safe goes a long way towards the reality of God in ones life. And the way to open the safe is through Love. That's not wrong at all.

You can assume it holds a gun, a book, shoes, anything.

The safe keeper knows, but you don't.

The trick is to not assume anything and be Zen like.

Is there a desire to know God more deeply? Don't you even want a peek into the safe to see what's there? Or are you content to continually stare at the outer door and be happy with that. Many are like that. Personally, I like peeking into the safe to see what's there.

 

[partinobodycular]

God spoke creation into existence.

What do you mean when you say that God "spoke" reality into existence?

Does God have a mouth?

 

[AV1611VET]

Is there a desire to know God more deeply? Don't you even want a peek into the safe to see what's there? Or are you content to continually stare at the outer door and be happy with that. Many are like that. Personally, I like peeking into the safe to see what's there.

It's not a safe you're peeking into.

It's Pandora's Box.

 

[AV1611VET]

What do you mean when you say that God "spoke" reality into existence?

Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Ten times in Genesis 1, the Bible says: AND GOD SAID ...

Does God have a mouth?

Isaiah 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.

 

[dlamberth]

It's not a safe you're peeking into.

The safe image was of your choosing. And I think your example was a good one when looking for an opening to the reality of God. Some choose to peek inside while others are stuck staring at the door.

It's Pandora's Box.

Which is also opened via God's Love, if one chooses to follow it.

Are you afraid of God and of looking at the source of Divine Love?

 

[partinobodycular]

Isaiah 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.

So God does have a mouth. Interesting. Does He also have arms, and legs, and eyes? If so then it would seem as if the classic depiction of God as an old man with a grey beard may well be correct.

Forgive me if I find this to be a bit naive, and your literal interpretation of the bible to be illogical.

 

[AV1611VET]

So God does have a mouth. Interesting. Does He also have arms, and legs, and eyes?

Fingers too.

Exodus 31:18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

 

[Larniavc]

From the very beginning, the start of the universe, there was a collection, of energy only, a kind of sun, but since energy weighs something, it collapsed under its own weight, that's why we have gravity too, because we have a kind of momentum from the collapse, you can't make something out of nothing, so we needed this collapse to have gravity at all, and energy went in orbits, so when this collection of energy, started to cool down a little bit, it became different types of petrified energy, what we call mass today, iron, stone, and so on, that is why if mass is not fed with a constant flow of energy from suns, that it becomes petrified only over time,

quite special really, suddenly there was a collection of energy just, in an infinite, empty space, it's gravity, too, that makes us have life, because it works a bit like a will, it pushes forward, so if you have a planet then, with warm water, and a stable environment, over time, this energy will push forward and sprout into plants, after plants comes more advanced life, such as animals, and humans, so everywhere in the universe where there is warm water and a stable environment, then life will sprout, plants have souls too, the roots themselves, same with trees too, but it is primarily this "will" that makes it sprout,

that brings me to then, why aren't we just brain dead, wandering around, not self-aware? Yeah, I think this energy is alive a little, it's not just flames, the whole foundation of everything that exists is that it's alive, was there a god who made this collection of energy to begin with? Well, a being like that would have to have created himself then, but maybe that's what makes a god special too, that he just creates himself out of nothing

None of that is making any sense. What evidence do you base these ideas on? They seem little more than assumptions.

 

[Larniavc]

The Webb telescope can see stars where they were 13.7 billion years ago, which is very close (99% of the way) to when the big bang happened 13.8 billion years ago. The problem for the big bang theory, which depends on everything being in a tiny single space 13.8 billion years ago, is that the Webb telescope can see stars in every direction that are each 13.7 billion light years away from earth. See the problem? Stars were not all really close together 13.7 billion years ago. It won't be long before we have telescopes that can see stars 13.8, or 14.0, or even 20.0 billion light years away. I guess they'll need to update their theories on the when the big bang occurred.

There's another thing to consider. How is it possible that physical space can extend out infinitely in every direction? An even harder question is, how can it stop? What would be on the other side? There are no answers to these questions outside of an all-powerful wonderfully brilliant God.

You seem to ignore what is already known about cosmology. For example you ask how can space extend infinitely in every direction but give no reason as to why it can’t.

 

[partinobodycular]

Let's say, just for the sake of argument right now, that Thomas Aquinas' view is correct.

If that is true -- that God created the universe, not from nothing, but from potentiality.

If that's the case, I submit that that potentiality is LOVE, not PRIME MATTER.

God is love.

But this would actually serve to support the idea that God and physic's quantum fields are one and the same thing. With "love' simply being an overwhelming inclination toward a particular outcome.

Those quantum fields may actually be God, and what you're referring to when you say that the act of creation was an act of love is the fact that those fields have as part of their very nature an intrinsic and inevitable inclination toward giving rise to you, me, and everything else. It's possible that the creative force behind the existence of reality is quantum fields, it's possible that they're conscious, and it's possible that men have simply taken the perfectly natural and deified it as a God.

Science's quantum fields, philosophy's first cause, and theism's God, may all be one and the same thing. You may think that such an idea is blasphemous, I on the other hand believe that it's rather beautiful... that science might actually have glimpsed the hand of God.

As long as you repent.

All that I've done is diligently seek to uncover the truth, without bias or preconceptions. In so doing I've often been compelled to take the position of the Tenth Man, whom when those around them are convinced that something is impossible takes it upon themselves to consider the possibility that it may actually be true. If this leads me to question the status quo then so be it. But I will not repent for questioning what I've been told, even if it's purported to have come from the mouth of God Himself. I was born with the capacity to question, I will not repent for having used it. If I have erred, it's in not having used it enough.

 

[AV1611VET]

All that I've done is diligently seek to uncover the truth, without bias or preconceptions.

Ya -- and I'm Genghis Khan.

If you're "diligently seeking to uncover the truth," why would you consider a literal interpretation 'illogical'?

Or is literalism anathema to you, as it is to academia, which considers Genesis 1 illogical (among other things)?

 

[partinobodycular]

If you're "diligently seeking to uncover the truth," why would you consider a literal interpretation 'illogical'?

Because the contradictions, paradoxes, and inconsistencies that a literal interpretation creates are simply too numerous to disregard.

I'll give you an example.

1 Timothy 6:10​

“For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”

Now if you can explain to me how the love of money is the root of infanticide caused by postpartum depression then perhaps I might be convinced to reconsider your position. However you'd have a lot more hurdles to overcome before I'd even begin to reconsider.

 

[AV1611VET]

Because the contradictions, paradoxes, and inconsistencies that a literal interpretation creates are simply too numerous to disregard.

I'll give you an example.

Let me get this straight.

Genesis 1 is illogical because you see a problem with the "love of money" passage in 1 Timothy?

ETA:

For our edification -- from Adam Clarke's Commentary:

Perhaps it would be better to translate pantwn twn kakwn, of all these evils; i.e. the evils enumerated above; for it cannot be true that the love of money is the root of all evil, it certainly was not the root whence the transgression of Adam sprang, but it is the root whence all the evils mentioned in the preceding verse spring. This text has been often very incautiously quoted; for how often do we hear," The Scripture says, Money is the root of all evil!" No, the Scripture says no such thing. Money is the root of no evil, nor is it an evil of any kind; but the love of it is the root of all the evils mentioned here.

 

[partinobodycular]

Genesis 1 is illogical because you see a problem with the "love of money" passage in 1 Timothy?

Of course not. But it's your contention that all of it is to be taken literally. In which case combining 1 Timothy 6:10 and KJV Only becomes a real problem.

So would you prefer a different translation?

 

[AV1611VET]

Of course not. But it's your contention that all of it is to be taken literally. In which case combining 1 Timothy 6:10 and KJV Only becomes a real problem.

So would you prefer a different translation?

No.

Albeit, I can pwn cosmic evolution with ANY translation.

Mainly because they mention Earth before the sun, angiosperms before the sun, and whales before land animals.

So, according to ANY translation, biological evolution is so wrong, it's not even right.

And as per the topic of this thread, I'll also take any translation and show mass didn't form.

 

[JohnEmmett]

But it's your contention that all of it is to be taken literally.

It’s a guidebook

 

[JohnEmmett]

Zen can take a hike.

Its potential is greater than those who simply believe in god

 

[AV1611VET]

Its potential is greater than those who simply believe in god.

It might be good for motorcycle maintenance, but not as a mode of worship.

Yes, Zen means "mediatate."

And yes, God wants us to meditate on His word.

But Zen meditation would be the equivalent of Nadab & Abihu in Leviticus 10.

In short, it's God's way or the highway.

 

[JohnEmmett]

In short, it's God's way or the highway.

Heaven is lasting, but temporary…


Higher heavens last relatively more

 

[AV1611VET]

Heaven is lasting, but temporary…

Higher heavens last relatively more.

Which two are you talking about?

There are three of them mentioned in Genesis 1.