Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[Ben Dhyan]

So how you think as per reason determines what is independent of your thinking?
Well, I stopped using reason like that even when I was an atheist.

I am not talking about thinking, BB is thinking. Eternal existence is what it is, the universe exists, why does anyone think it needs to have a beginning?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I am not talking about thinking, BB is thinking. Eternal existence is what it is, the universe exists, why does anyone think it needs to have a beginning?

It don't know if the universe has a beginning or not. So I don't claim to know one way or another.
As for external existence that is an complex compound idea in your mind, but you treat it as if it is independent of your mind,

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It don't know if the universe has a beginning or not. So I don't claim to know one way or another.
As for external existence that is an complex compound idea in your mind, but you treat it as if it is independent of your mind,

It is not an idea, and idea would be anything other than eternal existence. Of course all material things are temporary, that's a given, they are created.

 

[exchemist]

More false claims. And still no answer to a reasonable question. It is almost as if you have no clue about physics at all.

Well I did say that electrical engineers often seem to be the worst!

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It is not an idea, and idea would be if anything other than eternal existence. Of course all material things are temporary, that's a given, they are created.

Yeah, you just point to it as you can see it.
So how do you see eternal and how do you see existence?
You are doing philosophy in the end.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Like space-time, eternal-existence. eternal and existence are two aspects of the one universe.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Like space-time, eternal-existence. eternal and existence are two aspects of the one universe.

Yeah, you don't get that those are concepts in thinking, just as any claim about what the universe is.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yeah, you don't get that those are concepts in thinking, just as any claim about what the universe is.

It requires thinking, ie., conceptualization, to convey it to another, but in itself there is no thinking required.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It requires thinking to convey it to another, but in itself there is no thinking required.

So just tell me what it looks like?

 

[Subduction Zone]

It requires thinking, ie., conceptualization, to convey it to another, but in itself there is no thinking required.

Unfortunately it does not require a thorough understanding of physics. There are all sorts of EE's out there. Those that do not understand physics are often not much more than glorified electricians.

 

[Subduction Zone]

School is for children, so they grow up to live in human society to be productive, school is all about theory. You will never really find out what and who you are in the context of existence from purely textbook theory, subjective experience is a great teacher.

Subjective work is nice, but it has limitations. And those that only have practical experience usually lack a deeper understanding. Look how you failed here. You merely quoted parts of an article out of context that you did not understand. My questions that you ran away from were formed to help you to understand how you got the wrong answer.

It does no good to know that you are wrong. You cannot learn from that. You have to learn how and why you were wrong. What is weird to me is that you don't mind being wrong if you can pretend that other people are wrong too.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So just tell me what it looks like?

When the mind is not engaged in thought, it is in sync with the timeless cosmos, it is called Dhyan or still mind meditation. Obviously since it is not a conceptualization, it can't be 'given' to another, it is a subjective experience. Not a personal experience though, the thinker is the person.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Unfortunately it does not require a thorough understanding of physics. There are all sorts of EE's out there. Those that do not understand physics are often not much more than glorified electricians.

Oh how could you be so cruel. But seriously, are you still at school?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

When the mind is not engaged in thought, it is in sync with the timeless cosmos, it is called Dhyan or still mind meditation. Obviously since it is not a conceptualization, it can't be 'given' to another, it is a subjective experience. Not a personal experience though, the thinker is the person.

Never mind.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Subjective work is nice, but it has limitations. And those that only have practical experience usually lack a deeper understanding. Look how you failed here. You merely quoted parts of an article out of context that you did not understand. My questions that you ran away from were formed to help you to understand how you got the wrong answer.

It does no good to know that you are wrong. You cannot learn from that. You have to learn how and why you were wrong. What is weird to me is that you don't mind being wrong if you can pretend that other people are wrong too.

I love it how you try to always turn a losing position into an embarrassment for youself. One wonders what causes you to do that.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Never mind.

Sure.

 

[metis]

God is not separate from the universe, God is omnipresent imho. To suggest that God is not universally omnipresent, is to believe the universe has no God presence. God therefore would not only be not omnipresent, but also not omnipotent or omniscient because the universe is a God exclusion zone.

Did you actually read what I wrote? Maybe try again.

 

[metis]

Ok you agree that God's spirit is within humans, but not within the rest of the universe?

No, and how could one possibly know that? Seems to me that the universe must reflect God in some ways.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No, and how could one possibly know that? Seems to me that the universe must reflect God in some ways.

The material universe is a 100% expression of God. The only creation that ever happens is material, ie., galaxies, stars, planets, people, flowers, rocks, these are the only things that have beginnings and endings, but these beginnings and endings have been happening eternally. But the universe itself had no beginning, it is everything in existence, only the created things have beginnings and endings, and the universe is not a creation.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Did you actually read what I wrote? Maybe try again.

Yes, but for some reason I understood that you conflated God creating the temporary existing material things that made up the eternal universe with the eternal universe itself. Why else would you believe the universe had a beginning?