Is it difficult for you to accept that others see truth in a different way then you self?

[PruePhillip]

1is a problem given the various ways the universe can be sent to ve inflating and the data of the cmb

2 is pretty certain, that is what all the hypothesis regarding how the universe began use as a base.

m theory is an attempt to unify superstring theory. That is the particle physics end.

Before the next question is even seriously thought of the current question needs to be answered and that answer understood

Sure, it's all super interesting.
This string theory - sure has been ridiculed for lack of evidence.
Even in recent weeks some of the variations of the theory have
been discredited by cosmology.

People get it in their heads that things in "nothing" of the vacuum
of space (read space-time) is the same as the "nothing" before
and outside the Big Bang. This is a fallacy.

 

[Spice]

Very interesting thread!

It goes to Paul's "milk" and "meat", or Jesus's explanation as to why he spoke in parables -- for those who have eyes to see or ears to hear -- when we're ready our understanding takes a step up the staircase leading to the whole truth.

Each individual is on his/her own step, with some being helped up by religions, and some being held back by their respective religions. But mankind as a whole is moving along from landing to landing. We'll get there!

I also see the science vs. religion tug-of-war in the same light. Today it's pretty much accepted that homo sapiens came out of the African Sahara when it was a lush rainforest. And archeologists have given evidence of an "exodus" out of Africa by the Red Sea, so why couldn't the oral traditions of the people of Mesopotamia that became the Hebrew Torah/Christian Old Testament be a true account of our beginnings as comprehended thousands of years ago? We're the Nephilim Neanderthals? Was the story of the great flood the tale passed down to explain what happened to these other people? And so forth . . .

Sorry I kind of got sidetracked here, but it still goes back to what we, as individuals and collectively, are able to comprehend about our existence. Each person and each generation progresses at their own pace.

 

[PruePhillip]

Very interesting thread!

It goes to Paul's "milk" and "meat", or Jesus's explanation as to why he spoke in parables -- for those who have eyes to see or ears to hear -- when we're ready our understanding takes a step up the staircase leading to the whole truth.

Each individual is on his/her own step, with some being helped up by religions, and some being held back by their respective religions. But mankind as a whole is moving along from landing to landing. We'll get there!

I also see the science vs. religion tug-of-war in the same light. Today it's pretty much accepted that homo sapiens came out of the African Sahara when it was a lush rainforest. And archeologists have given evidence of an "exodus" out of Africa by the Red Sea, so why couldn't the oral traditions of the people of Mesopotamia that became the Hebrew Torah/Christian Old Testament be a true account of our beginnings as comprehended thousands of years ago? We're the Nephilim Neanderthals? Was the story of the great flood the tale passed down to explain what happened to these other people? And so forth . . .

Sorry I kind of got sidetracked here, but it still goes back to what we, as individuals and collectively, are able to comprehend about our existence. Each person and each generation progresses at their own pace.

As much as I support your values I wish to add - there's no evidence for any Red Sea Exodus.
The Hebrews went north, not East.
But if people tell you "There is no evidence for the Jews being slaves in Egypt" you simply
reply, "There's no evidence for the Jews being in Canaan all that time either."

 

[Spice]

I'm not speaking of Hebrews leaving slavery by way of the Red Sea, but rather a "story" passed down, very allegorically, of MAN coming out of Africa, crossing the Red Sea, actually by way of a land bridge that existed connecting what is now Arabia to Africa, and not 3500 years ago, but more like 100,000 years ago.
My point being the story, and others of religious texts, developed out of truth not understood by the generations that passed them down, but yet they are born of truths!
And for the African exodus of man, check out Smithsonian Magazine back issues -- 2008 IIRC, or PBS documentaries.
Good stuff!!!

 

[ChristineM]

Sure, it's all super interesting.
This string theory - sure has been ridiculed for lack of evidence.
Even in recent weeks some of the variations of the theory have
been discredited by cosmology.

People get it in their heads that things in "nothing" of the vacuum
of space (read space-time) is the same as the "nothing" before
and outside the Big Bang. This is a fallacy.

No they don't, people misunderstand or misrepresent people who they are not qualified to do so. Read the full text of link i gave, it seems you have read the synopsis only.

A virtual vacuum bubble in the quantum realm has nothing to do with space time

 

[PruePhillip]

No they don't, people misunderstand or misrepresent people who they are not qualified to do so. Read the full text of link i gave, it seems you have read the synopsis only.

A virtual vacuum bubble in the quantum realm has nothing to do with space time

The
1 - vacuum
2 - bubble
3 - quantum

are all within space, aka space-time, universe, cosmos, nature etc..
Quantum and quantum physical laws which govern this weird world
all we created in the Big Bang.

 

[ChristineM]

The
1 - vacuum
2 - bubble
3 - quantum

are all within space, aka space-time, universe, cosmos, nature etc..
Quantum and quantum physical laws which govern this weird world
all we created in the Big Bang.

The laws of this universe coalesced after the BB between 10e-43 and 10e-24 of a second after.

It there was a quantum state or multiverse prior to our BB it is unknown what laws applied, if any.

So to make your claims that must be as you decree it is is fallacy

 

[PruePhillip]

The laws of this universe coalesced after the BB between 10e-43 and 10e-24 of a second after.

It there was a quantum state or multiverse prior to our BB it is unknown what laws applied, if any.

So to make your claims that must be as you decree it is is fallacy

Agree. Prior to the Big Bang (BB) I am sure there would have been other systems at work.
For instance, the BB could have formed as a result of what is called M-theory hyper space
membranes, or other colliding universes, or the collapse and rebound of a previous universe
etc..
But ULTIMATELY, way back when... at the v.e.r.y... b.e.g.i.n.n.i.n.g. of it all there was
1 - something outside of nature which caused it all
2 - there never was a beginning - it was eternal.

I seriously cannot think of any other option.

 

[ChristineM]

Agree. Prior to the Big Bang (BB) I am sure there would have been other systems at work.
For instance, the BB could have formed as a result of what is called M-theory hyper space
membranes, or other colliding universes, or the collapse and rebound of a previous universe
etc..
But ULTIMATELY, way back when... at the v.e.r.y... b.e.g.i.n.n.i.n.g. of it all there was
1 - something outside of nature which caused it all
2 - there never was a beginning - it was eternal.

I seriously cannot think of any other option.

1 no
2 possible

 

[PruePhillip]

1 no
2 possible

The 'universe' is everything there is. That includes the physical laws,
the energy, space etc.. Before the universe there was, by definition,
no physical laws and nothing for them to act upon.
So you are left with this quandary - how did it start without any
mechanism? The universe cannot create itself.

 

[ChristineM]

The 'universe' is everything there is. That includes the physical laws,
the energy, space etc.. Before the universe there was, by definition,
no physical laws and nothing for them to act upon.
So you are left with this quandary - how did it start without any
mechanism? The universe cannot create itself.

Only by commonly accepted definition. More and more cosmologists are of the belief that the definition is wrong

Professor Andrei Linde has calculated that a possible 10^10^16 universes can exist that are within human understand and a further 10^10^45 that are beyond human comprehension

As previously stated, the laws governing this universe resolved some time after the bb.

You may find this interesting

Some of the ideas that have been pondered by the cosmologists at the perimeter institute.

Perimeter Institute |

Its 10 years old now so ideas have moved forward and Its an hour long.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Often it can be seen that someone from a certain religion says something that triggers some other person who follows a different religion, and yes that is a normal reaction because we are all different.

But a question that comes to mind is: Does it really matter what others believe? Is it not most important to yourself that you are able to follow the religious/spiritual teaching you have chosen to follow?
If someone from a certain religion says something you disagree with because the teaching you study your self say something different? Does it really mean you have to argue toward the other person as if he/she is dumb?
What if both teachings are correct, but thought in different ways because they are meant only for those who chose to follow it?

From Judaism's perspective, we don't proselytize. We hope that non-Jews will embrace ethical monotheism.

But to be fair, Christianity believes that the fate of your eternal soul depends on what you believe. It is therefore an act of caring on their part that they share their beliefs with us with the hopes of persuading us. I don't have problems with this as I shine it on. I only get perturbed when I explain that I am a Jew and uninterested and they continue to push it, which rarely, rarely happens.

To be honest, it has been many years since a Christian has attempted to proselytize me and it was very nice JW's that came to my door and politely left.

 

[GardenLady]

Hmm. Should have read more pages before replying; I'll go back and read.

 

[Muffled]

I believe people who think they have a truth different from me do not really have the truth.

 

[Muffled]

Claims of truth based on sloppy logic and willful ignorance irritate the hell out of me.

I believe what irritates me are the people who keep repeating an unproven statement as though it were the truth and the statement proves itself.

 

[Muffled]

I am happy with the idea of religious truth, in the same way that I think there must be an objective physical world for science to model. What I am not happy with is religious claims to dogmatic knowledge of whatever that truth may be, just as I regard the models of science as only humanity's current best approximations to the actual physical world.

I believe dogma can be truth but I don't believe the fact that it is dogma guarantees that it is.

 

[paarsurrey]

Often it can be seen that someone from a certain religion says something that triggers some other person who follows a different religion, and yes that is a normal reaction because we are all different.

But a question that comes to mind is: Does it really matter what others believe? Is it not most important to yourself that you are able to follow the religious/spiritual teaching you have chosen to follow?
If someone from a certain religion says something you disagree with because the teaching you study your self say something different? Does it really mean you have to argue toward the other person as if he/she is dumb?
What if both teachings are correct, but thought in different ways because they are meant only for those who chose to follow it?

It , as I understand, is an isolationist approach. Human beings are social. A moderate approach is natural. Right,please?

Regards

 

[Spirit of Light]

It , as I understand, is an isolationist approach. Human beings are social. A moderate approach is natural. Right,please?

Regards

In what way do you feel it is isolating to ask if the belief is personal and not something that others should care too much to make a critique of?
And to be honest, i am not a very social person in real life.

 

[paarsurrey]

Claims of truth based on sloppy logic and willful ignorance irritate the hell out of me.

Please let us have one's truthful approach. Right,please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

In what way do you feel it is isolating to ask if the belief is personal and not something that others should care too much to make a critique of?
And to be honest, i am not a very social person in real life.

Humans beings are social, there is no harm if they exchange their views with reasons and peaceful dialogue and try to reach Truth together without harming one another physically, that is the correct approach. Right, please?

Regards