• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How long was a day when the universe began

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Virtually all of them. Just do an internet search for drawing big bang universe future and u get this:
View attachment 72265
--which shows the time axis from left to right and the extent of the universe in compressed to 2 dimensions translated on the pic in and out of pic. OK, sounds convoluted but it's standard.

All the universe --all space and time-- are inside the boundary before us. we're looking from outside space and time --just like God.

By looking at this pic you're assuming God's POV.

It's a convenient fiction to help the layperson get an idea of what is going on.

But it is NOT a reference frame: all reference frames are *within* the universe.

Nobody claims there is an 'outside of the universe'. In fact, that is usually considered to be self-contradictory.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
There’s a philosophical point here, in that when we try to envisage anything in it’s entirety, we try to do so from an objective, if imaginary perspective. But there is no view from everywhere, every view is from somewhere; therefore if an objective view of the universe is possible, it must by definition be a God’s eye view.

Only in a very abstract sense and not assuming some actual entity that has that viewpoint.

An external view of the universe is at best a convenient fiction to help lay people get a feel for the model. Sort of like the image of an atom with electrons in orbits.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Only in a very abstract sense and not assuming some actual entity that has that viewpoint.

An external view of the universe is at best a convenient fiction to help lay people get a feel for the model. Sort of like the image of an atom with electrons in orbits.


Of course. But if the ultimate aspiration of physics is a complete description of the universe as it supposedly exists, irrespective of any act of observation (paraphrasing Einstein), then it must aspire to the viewpoint of that entity. Regardless of whether that entity exists. Which is presumably why Stephen Hawking, atheist that he professed himself to be, wrote about 'knowing the mind of God'.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
the best way for us to lead worthwhile lives, is though God’s direction.

Disagree. Of course, you may be defining the worth of a life by the degree to which it conforms to your religion. I've tried both - life from withing religion in which I tried to conform to its rules, and life as an irreligious humanist. Time to given to religion was useful to teach me about what believers believe and how they come to those beliefs, but the actual things they believe due to their faith aren't meaningful to an unbeliever. Reading the Bible and is helpful on RF when debating believers, but the content has had no innate value to me since I left religion. Time spent praying accomplished nothing of value, and time spent in churches left me with nothing of value except a familiarity of what goes on there.

The Christian moral code, which is a received morality from an ancient culture, is of no value to a humanist, who gets his moral direction from the intuitions of his conscience. This is why humanist routinely reject the Christian position on slavery, women, homosexuals, and unbelievers. How do they know to do that? They use reason applied to conscience. My conscience tells me that slavery is immoral, women equal, and that neither atheism nor homosexuality are immoral, and I follow it, not the book.

In short, I feel that I've lived a much more worthwhile life outside of religion than by following "God's direction" both to me and those I touch. I consider the kind of posting I do here more worthwhile than that of those admonishing others to get more deeply into religion, but then, as I suggested, perhaps we don't value the same things.

even atheists can find their way to spiritual guidance, even if they don’t call it that.

Humanists, like the pagans and Dharmics, are directly connected to reality, which they experience as sacred. The pagans and Dharmics name gods to serve as symbols of nature and the human condition, but because their attention hasn't been redirected to an alleged phantom spirit living outside of nature that threatens them and gives them orders, they can have authentic spiritual experiences, which have nothing to do with spirits.

How is it possible to have a spiritual relationship with nature when one is taught that matter is base, that the world is to be avoided, that the wisdom of the secular world is foolisness, the flesh is base and defiles the spirit injected into it, and the mind is the devil's playground and its cognitive dissonance at hearing religious dogma is not to be trusted, either. Such people live life like they are at a bus stop waiting to whisked off to something better, their main concern being not missing the bus. Explain how that kind of life is either more worthwhile or spiritual. Where is the spirituality in the following comment, which a humanist finds repulsive and causes him to want this religion to melt away even faster:

"We don't have to protect the environment, the Second Coming is at hand" - James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under Reagan (note his position and responsibilities)

we as lifeforms don't really know by which purpose we are here

Why assume we have a purpose? Most things don't. They have causes, but purpose requires intent.

It is just a bit odd, that lifeform seems so eager to survive or procreate when there doesn't seem to be a greater known purpose for it.

This problem, like dozens of others, evaporates away when you remove the theism. This is exactly what we would expect in a godless universe capable of producing life and mind. Such a creature will arise if it can, and be selected for when it does.

The Bible describes Jehovah as "the happy God"

Have you seen the Old Testament? Dawkins, every Abrahamic theists least favorite neoatheist and best-selling author, says, "The god of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." This is based on the stories in it. I've seen them too. The "happy God" has children dashed upon the rocks, slain if they're firstborn, and torn apart by bears for calling somebody bald. How is that the happy God?

The Bible says God is love

I know what love is, and it's not a god or a person at all, and certainly not that one.

based on the Bible, we can conclude that God wanted intelligent beings like himself, to be able to enjoy life... like himself, which he freely gave as a gift, out of love.

Disagree. Regarding a free gift given out of love, nothing comes without strings attached to it for that deity, and the intelligent ones will be cast aside if their intelligence extends to not believing things with insufficient supporting evidence. This god wanted to collect those that would believe in its existence based in faith (presumably to praise and obey it for eternity) and discard the rest.

I'm a bit confused by the believers who say that without such a belief, life has no meaning or purpose. What would be a less meaningful existence than that? The angels that allegedly rebelled and were cast out of heaven to troll mankind saw it firsthand. As far as I know, none have expressed regret about that choice since. How does a believer reconcile that with his ideas that heaven is paradise? I'm pretty sure that if I found myself trapped in an eternal celestial prayer circle, I'd be looking for the back door as well.

Procreation serves the purpose of producing children to...as God said, fill the earth. Note. Fill... not overflow.

Somebody should probably tell that to the American Christians, who want to force unwanted births.
 

Pete in Panama

Active Member
It's a convenient fiction to help the layperson get an idea of what is going on.

But it is NOT a reference frame: all reference frames are *within* the universe.

Nobody claims there is an 'outside of the universe'. In fact, that is usually considered to be self-contradictory.
No, it is not. They are taking the comoving frame. It is *within* the universe, not outside of it.
It appears that you have a TRUTH to which there is nothing I could possibly add. Of course I also understand that things are often not what they first appear to be, but for the time being I'll work w/ what I got now.

Cheers
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Don't you pray for guidance, and occasionally feel you have received an answer to a perplexing problem?
Yes, of course I pray for guidance, but I don't pray to a rock, or to wood, or... you understand what I mean.

Deuteronomy 4:28 - Warning Against Idolatry
That too, is worship, isn't it?
Nor do I think that the answer came out of thin air.

The answer comes from either what I had read before, in God's word, or from a fellow believer, who uses God's word, or from an article written by persons who are following the direction provided in God's word.
That's when I know, it came from God.
It's guidance from God on how to apply the counsel, he provided.

If I feel I got an answer, and it's not from those sources, I know I doing what Proverbs 3:5 encourages against... the later part that is. It reads...
Trust in Jehovah with all your heart,
And do not rely* on your own understanding.

I think it is commendable when a person recognizes that there is a God, but for a person to pray, and don't know who they are praying to, or if that god (or gods) is really the hearer of prayer, they need help in getting to know the true God. The same would be true for those who are praying, and feel that their prayers are being heard, isn't that so?

For example, do you believe God knows what you need? Do you believe God wants to fulfill your needs... not your wants, your needs:)?
There are billions of persons with similar needs... many of whom are lacking in a very terrible way.
We can think of the people in Turkey and Syria, and of course other parts of the world.
Many of them pray, don't they, but their lives are shattered.

What would God do for such persons?
Whisper in their ear, that he is the true God?
Give them a miraculous sign?
What do you think?
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
It has nothing to do with wanting or not wanting God, it is about whether there is good reason to believe in him or not, and atheists don't think there is good enough evidence.


Well his terms sucks for a lot of people you know, so what about them? :)
What does "a lot of people" have to do with living forever?
 

Audie

Veteran Member
There’s a philosophical point here, in that when we try to envisage anything in it’s entirety, we try to do so from an objective, if imaginary perspective. But there is no view from everywhere, every view is from somewhere; therefore if an objective view of the universe is possible, it must by definition be a God’s eye view.
As if anyone can even detect “ god” still less know his “ pov”.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Have you seen the Old Testament? Dawkins, every Abrahamic theists least favorite neoatheist and best-selling author, says, "The god of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." This is based on the stories in it. I've seen them too. The "happy God" has children dashed upon the rocks, slain if they're firstborn, and torn apart by bears for calling somebody bald. How is that the happy God?
If for some reason I hated you, what do you think I would say about you :) especially if influenced by your worst enemies?
Because people may hate you, that doesn't make you bad, does it. Nor does it make any lie they tell, truth, does it.
Isn't that what jealousy does... cause one to lie on and hate on the one they are jealous of.

I know what love is, and it's not a god or a person at all, and certainly not that one.
Then you must know everything, and those who disagree with you... nothing. :)

Somebody should probably tell that to the American Christians, who want to force unwanted births.
The Chinese don't seem to have a problem with that.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
It appears that you have a TRUTH to which there is nothing I could possibly add. Of course I also understand that things are often not what they first appear to be, but for the time being I'll work w/ what I got now.

Cheers

No, I am simply saying that your interpretation of a picture in a popularized account isn't accurate. The notion of a reference frame is very specific. And, because of their definition, they only exist for observers in the universe.

the problems come when others *think* they have the TRUTH and seek to twist the discoveries of science to fit their ideas. This thread is rife with examples.

For example, our lack of understanding of the mechanisms and timing of galaxy formation has almost no bearing on Big Bang cosmology, in spite of the attempts of some to misread popular accounts as saying so.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
It doesn't it was primarily in regards to "enjoying life" under God's terms. A lot of people do not live enjoyable lives.
They are not under God's terms. They choose their own terms to live by.
Everyone living under God's - Jehovah God, that is - terms are happy.
It's like filling a bag full of holes to do otherwise.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Of course. But if the ultimate aspiration of physics is a complete description of the universe as it supposedly exists, irrespective of any act of observation (paraphrasing Einstein), then it must aspire to the viewpoint of that entity. Regardless of whether that entity exists. Which is presumably why Stephen Hawking, atheist that he professed himself to be, wrote about 'knowing the mind of God'.

Yes, metaphors abound.

I would point out that the goal of a description irrespective of observation runs headlong into quantum physics. When it comes to that subject, Einstein was demonstrably wrong (the EPR thought experiment can be done as a real experiment and the results were counter to Einstein's intuition).
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
What does "a lot of people" have to do with living forever?

I would say 'a lot of people' because Matthew 20:28 says Jesus' ransom covers MANY and does Not say all.
So, 'many' (a lot of people) can live forever on Earth under Christ's one-thousand year reign over Earth
- 1 Corinthians 15:24-26
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
It doesn't it was primarily in regards to "enjoying life" under God's terms. A lot of people do not live enjoyable lives.
To me it is Not just 'God's terms' but the benefits to come because of living under God's terms.
Jesus will bring ' healing ' to earth's nations according to Revelation 22:2.
Healing to the point as Isaiah wrote that No one will say, " I am sick....." - Isaiah 33:24
Even 'enemy death ' will be No more on Earth - 1 Corinthians 15:26; Isaiah 25:8
That means people will be enjoying the REAL life -> everlasting life on a beautiful paradisical Earth.
An Earth as described in Isaiah 35th chapter.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
As if anyone can even detect “ god” still less know his “ pov”.
Detect God in nature: With design there is a designer, with a designer there is a mind, with a mind there is a person.
God's "pov" is written out for everyone between the pages of Genesis through Revelation.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
As a human I know my place exists in order.

No machine no science is exact. The man of machine god is the only liar in legal that practices his non abiding order.

And he applies his practice as an attack theme of non human biological naturalness..order.

Pretence my mind my thoughts will know everything about anything.

As if he is standing in darkness in space looking at alighted bodies.

Thinking how just darkness was once just all that he is was.

As in order he lives in the light as a man human.

So you wonder about his mind state and why he only wants darkness.

As he theories how I can obtain a non light body.

Said from his human owned mind body thoughts.

Then you do a conscious review.

We live in day light and night time darkness.

His living conditions is recorded alive in two varying concepts our heavens.

As he is living as conscious man by the light conditions only.

So you make his science man's mind a conscious review knowing how dangerous his living thought concepts are.

As life is in the light as is consciousness. His ideals in thin king as if he is a God looking in darkness at anything... proves his mind in life isn't aligned to conscious life.

As consciousness is only expressed inside of a water oxygenated alighted above heavens.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Detect God in nature: With design there is a designer, with a designer there is a mind, with a mind there is a person.
God's "pov" is written out for everyone between the pages of Genesis through Revelation.
So you say.
As for “genesis”, little to none of it is true.
So- no.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Men say oohhh look at the pretty chemical colours meaning present reacted already.

Water clear..oxygen clear what we as biology live inside of. Dusts minerals in water our living percentage what's not water or oxygen in biology.

Minerals created as God bodies types of any one substance men say is a God as a man.

Only stated by earth scientists to scientists who pretended once it hadn't existed when it was existing.

God argument was science on earth legal and illegal thinking.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
To me it is Not just 'God's terms' but the benefits to come because of living under God's terms.
Jesus will bring ' healing ' to earth's nations according to Revelation 22:2.
Healing to the point as Isaiah wrote that No one will say, " I am sick....." - Isaiah 33:24
Even 'enemy death ' will be No more on Earth - 1 Corinthians 15:26; Isaiah 25:8
That means people will be enjoying the REAL life -> everlasting life on a beautiful paradisical Earth.
An Earth as described in Isaiah 35th chapter.
Electricity ends position electricity its highest healed earth moment says science. Is I want it. I want to invent it in free energy terms myself.

Free energy he says it's highest form.

Electricity didn't invent biology. It ends as just electricity.

Men think I want a constant replaced reacted body as calculus forces two ends to energy. For a man to get it. I want electricity.

For a machine non existing.
For a machine not reacting. No machine in electricity only thesis.

Thoughts of a scientist my machine mass sits in darkness yet it's cold and came from alight mass.

I want life for machines.

He theoried old science says they must have had resources to operate machines first.

The information said storage batteries clay pots first. Vats second science.

As an acidic type of energy storage supply.

For reactive machine science the machine has to be reactive alive...it came alive to function. Used battery powers.

Men quote I stopped paths in reactive energetic conversions to get what I want out of earths mass fused.

Which is his machine body.

Thesis says circuit thought about into mass machine body first to use its source ....then out of mass itself cold machine to inside the machine. Machines blow up...a collapsing causation.

Above theme to fall a collapsing activation says mind.

So pressures using Angles built temples and pyramid as above head scenario fell down collapsed pressures. So did the heavens above.

The teaching isn't about healing.

As ice came to earth first it snap froze stopped spirit gas CH methane exploding collapsing earths mass. Spirit body was leaving earths body.

Said science.

Saved healed God earth mass in fake terms earths mass the ice saviour. Saviour terms are not phi and not Jesus.
 
Top