The Universe: Eternal or no?

[Gunny]

I like the stage reference. You also make a great point, the what does the universe exist in? Then what does that exist in as well? Bah! There you go making me think on that track. *shudder* okay ... as disturbing as the possibilities are to me, it's one topic which some writers have jumped on. My two favorites have very different theories, each have their own merit. One (Asimov) believed that the universe is actually part of an atom to another, then another, etc.. The other (Lovecraft) believed it is some alien experiment that was forgotten about and that the universe is actually just a zoo for some beings so different from us we can't even imagine them.

If you look, I mentioned something similar to Lovecraft earlier in the thread. All a creator really would have to be is something -- a life force --beyond Man's ability to comprehend with the ability to create life. That would be "God" to mortal man.

The worlds within worlds concept is a bit too fantastic for me. That is completely outside the realm of supportable theory, IMO.

 

[sky dancer]

You keep saying the universe is impermanent and this is where I disagree. It cannot be. I agree that everything within is. However, the universe cannot pass out of existence, then back into existence without a creator. Once it passes out of existence there is nothing. Nothing is absolute. Something (the universe) cannot come from nothing of its own volition.

Hmm. I'm gonna have to come back to this from another angle. Let me see if I can approach it in a different way.

All phenomena arise from ever-changing relationships with other phenomena, including the minds of the observers. I am concerned with HOW things exist, not IF and WHETHER things exist, or WHY things exist, such as God, the devil or the spaghetti monster made them.

1) The universe consists of myriads of particles in a constant state of movement.

(2) These particles form aggregates which hang together for a time and then disintegrate.

Nothing whatsoever remains identical from one moment to the next. All 'things' are impermanent, and so all things are in reality processes. Things do not stay the same from one millisecond to the next. Anything composed of atoms is composed of parts in a constant state of flux. Existence is merely impermanence viewed in slow-motion.

Because this is how the universe exists in continuous motion, we can say it is transient, not permanent.

We cannot say that we as human beings inherently exist;

(1) An inherently existing entity exists in splendid isolation without the need to reference any other entity. It is completely defined by its own nature.

(2) An inherently existing entity is uncaused.

(3) It is indestructible.

(4) It is eternal.

(5) It is unchanging when viewed externally.

(6) It cannot undergo any internal changes of state.

(7) It either has no constituent parts, or if it has parts those parts are inseparable.

(8) Consequently, nothing can be ejected or removed from it.

(9) Nothing can be added to it (this would change its definition).

(10) No change in external conditions (up to and including the destruction of the entire universe) can affect it.


God may be a candidate for an inherently existing entity, but if he were truly inherently-existent he could never undergo a change of state in response to external conditions (eg become angry at sinners/infidels and send plagues, pestilences, shaheeds etc to destroy them). Neither would it matter to him whether he was worshipped or not, for no external factor could in the slightest degree affect him.

Also, if God is omnipotent, he has the power to destroy everything, including himself. So even God must be empty of inherent existence because his continued existence is contingent on his not committing suicide.

 

[strollingbones]

where do things go when they go into a 'black hole'

 

[KittenKoder]

where do things go when they go into a 'black hole'

I suggest looking it up because it's REALLY complicated, but to simplify:

A black hole isn't a hole at all, it's a collection of REALLY dense matter than has a very strong gravitational pull. Everything that gets too close is mashed into this same dense ball of matter.

 

[strollingbones]

o i got the concept of the black hole....but i still dont think it just intensifies into this massive thing...that is thinking like magnets hitting magnets etc...but something else has to be happening in black holes....

 

[Gunny]

Hmm. I'm gonna have to come back to this from another angle. Let me see if I can approach it in a different way.

All phenomena arise from ever-changing relationships with other phenomena, including the minds of the observers. I am concerned with HOW things exist, not IF and WHETHER things exist, or WHY things exist, such as God, the devil or the spaghetti monster made them.

1) The universe consists of myriads of particles in a constant state of movement.

(2) These particles form aggregates which hang together for a time and then disintegrate.

Nothing whatsoever remains identical from one moment to the next. All 'things' are impermanent, and so all things are in reality processes. Things do not stay the same from one millisecond to the next. Anything composed of atoms is composed of parts in a constant state of flux. Existence is merely impermanence viewed in slow-motion.

Because this is how the universe exists in continuous motion, we can say it is transient, not permanent.

We cannot say that we as human beings inherently exist;

(1) An inherently existing entity exists in splendid isolation without the need to reference any other entity. It is completely defined by its own nature.

(2) An inherently existing entity is uncaused.

(3) It is indestructible.

(4) It is eternal.

(5) It is unchanging when viewed externally.

(6) It cannot undergo any internal changes of state.

(7) It either has no constituent parts, or if it has parts those parts are inseparable.

(8) Consequently, nothing can be ejected or removed from it.

(9) Nothing can be added to it (this would change its definition).

(10) No change in external conditions (up to and including the destruction of the entire universe) can affect it.


God may be a candidate for an inherently existing entity, but if he were truly inherently-existent he could never undergo a change of state in response to external conditions (eg become angry at sinners/infidels and send plagues, pestilences, shaheeds etc to destroy them). Neither would it matter to him whether he was worshipped or not, for no external factor could in the slightest degree affect him.

Also, if God is omnipotent, he has the power to destroy everything, including himself. So even God must be empty of inherent existence because his continued existence is contingent on his not committing suicide.

Obviously, I need another avenue of apporach as well. In your #1 above, you say "the universe consists of ..." The implication that universe is the playing field is clear.

IF the universe is infinite, it cannot, in and of itself, be transient. There is nothing else. The universe cannot go outside itself in order to be transient if it is all.

All matter and energy WITHIN the universe is transient.

You are projecting onto "God" using logic limitted by your intellectual capability. I don't know the answer to "What exactly is God?" "God" can be anything beyond Man's intellectual capability to understand and possessing the technology to create life.

In your transient universe, everything is in a constant state of change. Yet, we remain a constant. By accident or design? It is not logical, IMO, to assume that in complete chaos, something as orderly as life on Earth, and Man's self-awareness is mere happenstance.

Your last statement about God is circular logic. God may or may not have the ability to destroy himself. If he is above all the other emotions you say he is, then certainly he would be above whatever emotion leads to suicide?

Man ascribes to "God" certain man-like qualities that IMO, are NOT representative of a benevolent and loving God. In that regard, we are in agreement.

Even if we take the Holy Bible at its stated word -- that it is the Word of God as told to Man -- Man STILL wrote the Bible and I learned real quick in 4 years of journalism that if you give Man a pen, he's editorializing. And if you give government a God, they are going to ensure that history records that God is on their side.

In that regard, I don't agree with the strict teachings of Christianity that the Bible is THE unquestionable word.

 

[Gunny]

o i got the concept of the black hole....but i still dont think it just intensifies into this massive thing...that is thinking like magnets hitting magnets etc...but something else has to be happening in black holes....

Within the context of this conversation, it is energy and matter WITHIN the universe. Other than that, it is what it is. A vortex that disentegrates matter that is sucked into it.

Nobody I know of has come out the other side to let us know what the end result is.

 

[Steerpike]

Within the context of this conversation, it is energy and matter WITHIN the universe. Other than that, it is what it is. A vortex that disentegrates matter that is sucked into it.

Nobody I know of has come out the other side to let us know what the end result is.

A black hole isn't really a 'hole,' so I don't think there is anyway of passing through one and coming out the other side. A black hole is an object.

 

[Care4all]

Obviously, I need another avenue of apporach as well. In your #1 above, you say "the universe consists of ..." The implication that universe is the playing field is clear.

IF the universe is infinite, it cannot, in and of itself, be transient. There is nothing else. The universe cannot go outside itself in order to be transient if it is all.

All matter and energy WITHIN the universe is transient.

You are projecting onto "God" using logic limitted by your intellectual capability. I don't know the answer to "What exactly is God?" "God" can be anything beyond Man's intellectual capability to understand and possessing the technology to create life.

In your transient universe, everything is in a constant state of change. Yet, we remain a constant. By accident or design? It is not logical, IMO, to assume that in complete chaos, something as orderly as life on Earth, and Man's self-awareness is mere happenstance.

Your last statement about God is circular logic. God may or may not have the ability to destroy himself. If he is above all the other emotions you say he is, then certainly he would be above whatever emotion leads to suicide?

Man ascribes to "God" certain man-like qualities that IMO, are NOT representative of a benevolent and loving God. In that regard, we are in agreement.

Even if we take the Holy Bible at its stated word -- that it is the Word of God as told to Man -- Man STILL wrote the Bible and I learned real quick in 4 years of journalism that if you give Man a pen, he's editorializing. And if you give government a God, they are going to ensure that history records that God is on their side.

In that regard, I don't agree with the strict teachings of Christianity that the Bible is THE unquestionable word.

The Bible itself gives WARNING about changing one word of it and what will happen to those that do leave out or add to the Bible....

These warnings were not there by happenstance imho....

In other words, God, being Omni past, present, future, was well aware that His inspired Word would be messed with, by man. Otherwise, there would be no need for such a warning...again, imo....so, i guess I am agreeing with you.

Care

 

[Care4all]

Buddhism is very interesting to me....moreso, than many other religions that differ with my own!

There are some theories that during the years that Christ has no history writen about him in the Bible, that Jesus traveled to Asia with his uncle and spent some time in Asia...

(please don't ask me to prove such, i just remember reading it somewehere, some time ago!)

 

[RodISHI]

Buddhism is very interesting to me....moreso, than many other religions that differ with my own!

There are some theories that during the years that Christ has no history writen about him in the Bible, that Jesus traveled to Asia with his uncle and spent some time in Asia...

(please don't ask me to prove such, i just remember reading it somewehere, some time ago!)

There are records of some dynasty rulers talking to God. Records have been found in China that have the Lion, the Light and the Lamb. I'll try to remember where I was reading those records (It has been more than a few years back) and see if I can find them online. If I can find them online I'll put a link in.

A history writer wrote referring to God's Chinese Son

This is a forum in China where they discuss faith. You may need a languag pack to read the posts. Very good conversation in this particular string about the divisions in the America's and Europe over religion. http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/redirect.php?gid=2&fid=13&tid=545622&goto=nextnewset

Traditionsanother link to give some insight.

 

[Care4all]

You know, Science has proven or taken as truth, that the Universe is expanding....i don't know where that fits in to eternal?

And then the theory of parallel universes/M/string theory.

I am with Ret gny sarg on this, when it comes to the Bible....it states that God created the Heavens and the Earth and gathered all the waters within it and put them on Earth, and the Bible also stated that the heavens and the stars within such, were infinite...uncountable, while men on Earth actually thought they knew the "number" of stars in the sky and gave them a "number" in count....but it doesn't say the term Universe, (I don't think?)....and in the very last book of the Bible it states that God created a new Heaven and a new Earth as well....

I don't know where any of that fits in to this equation!

care

 

[Amanda]

You know, Science has proven or taken as truth, that the Universe is expanding....i don't know where that fits in to eternal?

And then the theory of parallel universes/M/string theory.

I am with Ret gny sarg on this, when it comes to the Bible....it states that God created the Heavens and the Earth and gathered all the waters within it and put them on Earth, and the Bible also stated that the heavens and the stars within such, were infinite...uncountable, while men on Earth actually thought they knew the "number" of stars in the sky and gave them a "number" in count....but it doesn't say the term Universe, (I don't think?)....and in the very last book of the Bible it states that God created a new Heaven and a new Earth as well....

I don't know where any of that fits in to this equation!

care

I'm good with the biblical explanation. I don't think we need any more understanding of the universe for most of our lives. Maybe someone trying to launch a rocket into space needs to know more, but not 99.9% of the people.

 

[Truthspeaker]

The elements of the universe are eternal. They cannot be created or destroyed, only moved and rearranged. it is hard for our finite minds to comprehend that such things have always been. When we think of something being created we think of something being made out of thin air when in reality it is an arrangement of physical and spiritual matter. And although we do not see it, spirit is still matter but can only be detected by spiritual means.
In the end, we will all see that it is matter. Just a more pure version of it.

 

[sky dancer]

Buddhism is very interesting to me....moreso, than many other religions that differ with my own!

There are some theories that during the years that Christ has no history writen about him in the Bible, that Jesus traveled to Asia with his uncle and spent some time in Asia...

(please don't ask me to prove such, i just remember reading it somewehere, some time ago!)

Some say that when Jesus 'wandered in the desert' for three years, he wandered to India and he studied meditation with Buddhist masters.

There is speculation that Christ's body disappearing--aka his resurrection--is a phenomena called rainbow body which Buddhist saints achieve. The body literally dissolves into light after dying. To this day, highly accomplished Buddhist masters achieve this evidence of enlightenment; the rainbow body.


Of course, this kind of story rankles fundamentalist Christians, who consider it blasphemy.

 

[Amanda]

Some say that when Jesus 'wandered in the desert' for three years, he wandered to India and he studied meditation with Buddhist masters.

There is speculation that Christ's body disappearing--aka his resurrection--is a phenomena called rainbow body which Buddhist saints achieve. The body literally dissolves into light after dying. To this day, highly accomplished Buddhist masters achieve this evidence of enlightenment; the rainbow body.


Of course, this kind of story rankles fundamentalist Christians, who consider it blasphemy.

You might enjoy Christopher Moore's book "Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff" I found it really funny and interesting. Some Christians would be appalled by it.

 

[Abelian Sea]

Waking reality and dream reality are essentially the same.

If you say so. That statement doesn't comport with my experiences/observations, though.

The most immediately relevant difference I've noticed between them is one of consequences. In a dream, it doesn't really matter what you do or don't do. It doesn't effect anyone else, and its effect on the dream itself is rather random and blurred away quickly. In waking reality, what you do does have an impact on other people's personal realities, and has lasting, detectable, and often predictable effects on the world.

I suppose you could see the effects of your actions on the two realities as being merely different in degree; in one the effects are shorter-lived and less predictable, in the other longer- and more, so there is little in the way of "essential" difference. In this one sense I could see the waking world being a "slow dream."

But when it comes to other people, the difference is stark and telling. In a dream you cannot have an impact on another person. In waking reality you generally cannot avoid effecting other people. This, along with the longevity and continuity of consequences in waking reality, suggests that waking reality is far more of a "real world" than dream reality. Our actions matter in the waking world; they bring happiness and misery to other experience-having beings.

Other differences I've noticed between the two kinds of reality (from the way they play on the senses to the ways in which one can cheat laws of motion) all also seem to support the notion that waking reality is real place that we inhabit and dreams are short delusions that inhabit us.

Perhaps there are just things I'm ignorant of, but this issue began to seriously concern me when I was four years old and currently my conclusion is that waking reality and dream reality are not essentially the same.

 

[Gunny]

A black hole isn't really a 'hole,' so I don't think there is anyway of passing through one and coming out the other side. A black hole is an object.

Cool with me.

 

[Gunny]

You know, Science has proven or taken as truth, that the Universe is expanding....i don't know where that fits in to eternal?

And then the theory of parallel universes/M/string theory.

I am with Ret gny sarg on this, when it comes to the Bible....it states that God created the Heavens and the Earth and gathered all the waters within it and put them on Earth, and the Bible also stated that the heavens and the stars within such, were infinite...uncountable, while men on Earth actually thought they knew the "number" of stars in the sky and gave them a "number" in count....but it doesn't say the term Universe, (I don't think?)....and in the very last book of the Bible it states that God created a new Heaven and a new Earth as well....

I don't know where any of that fits in to this equation!

care

Science theorizes the universe is expanding. In order to come to this conclusion one would need at least a center; which, science does not have. All science can say with certainty is that it appears the universe is expanding based on observation from Earth.

If it is expanding, WHAT is it expanding into?

 

[KittenKoder]

Science theorizes the universe is expanding. In order to come to this conclusion one would need at least a center; which, science does not have. All science can say with certainty is that it appears the universe is expanding based on observation from Earth.

If it is expanding, WHAT is it expanding into?

Good point, and the real flaw with the 'big bang' theory. Moving, yes the universe is constantly moving, expanding ... from where?