Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I said:Nothingness does not exist, and that the Universe is eternal. The universe is not nothingness, and nothingness is not something.
Why is there something in the cosmos instead of nothingness?
If nothingness does not exist then it cannot be unstable. Do you follow what I mean? If it does not exist then it is neither stable nor unstable. You stated,
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
A true vacuum or nothingness would not have energy. It would be a lower state then the zero point state, and therefore be infinitely unstable. Therefore, nothingness will always erupt into something.
How can nothingness erupt into anything? Nothingness is just that: nothingness. There is nothing to erupt (no pun intended). Besides, if nothing could erupt that would presuppose that nothing has energy and energy is something. Does this make any sense to you?
Isn't it enlightening that gravity pulls objects toward the earth regardless of what anyone believes? Similarly, God has already revealed to humanity how this universe came into existence and yet we still say things like, "I believe...so on and so forth. But I do hear you and understand what you mean and where you are coming from.
Gravity has been proven though.
The Bible story of creation is not proven, nor does it contain anywhere the amount of evidence that gravity has. So you can't really compare the two JIA.
Again, I never said that any Bible story was proven (at least I don’t recall stating this). The Bible must be accepted by faith because there is no way for me to prove that all of the events and situations happened as recorded therein.
God only appears human to you because you, me, and the rest of humanity were created/made in God's image and likeness. God has given the human race many of His attributes i.e. free will, a rational mind, the ability to exercise dominion, etc. unlike the animal kingdom. God is not at all human. If God were human there never would have been these verses of Scripture:
God possesses anger, jealousy, rage, judgement, love, favoritism, bias, etc. He is very human according to the Bible. He acts like a human, a rather immature one at that..but that's another argument.
God, as written in the Bible, is very human. I didn't say he literally is a human, but his spirit is no different than that of a human's.
You are free to voice your opinion as you deem fit. Do you acknowledge the existence of spirit? It sounds like you do.
John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:17
For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through Him might be saved.
Why are you quoting those passages ? It has nothing to do with our conversation....
If God were not love then how do you explain the above Scriptures?
Humans are vindictive, selfish, money-loving, hateful, creatures. On the other hand, God is love. God didn't have to lift a finger to save wretched, ungrateful sinners like us from eternal damnation and yet He went out of His way to provide (not everyone will accept) salvation for the world (i.e. Asians Blacks, Hispanics, Natives, Whites, and everyone else). Many will reject God's gift of love wrapped up in the Person of Jesus.
If God was love he would not have:
-burnt down two cities killing men, women, and children
-produced the Great Flood which was mass genocide
-banished Adam and Eve to hard lives, because they broke one rule
-banishes those who do not believe in him to Hell
-ordered the torture of his own son, simply so he wouldn't torture everyone else
-kill the first born sons of Egypt
-send other plagues of starvation and illness upon Egypt
-burn a woman to ash because she looked back at her home city
and so on.
The God of the Bible is immature, and has killed more people than Hitler and Stalin combined. So please re-evaluate what you personify as love.
God is the Judge of all the earth—and the Creator of all flesh—yep, including you. As such, God reserves the right to terminate your life contract as it were at His discretion. In addition, God is Creator of the earth—according to the Scriptures—hence, He has the right to do with this planet whatever He wishes. Stop and think about: what do you own? Do you own a car, house, or watch? Let me stop here because I was about to use an analogy but it wouldn’t work because you are not God. God’s authority is different from human right or authority because of Who He is.
What do you claim that I claim? I don't know that I claim anything as such, but I do present what the Scriptures reveal.
You cannot claim a belief as fact. You referred to your last belief as a fact.
Thank God we (believers) are not responsible for proving that the Gospel or the Scriptures for that matter is true. That is not our department.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I said:Nothingness does not exist, and that the Universe is eternal. The universe is not nothingness, and nothingness is not something.
Why is there something in the cosmos instead of nothingness?
Because in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (according to the Scriptures).
Originally posted by Templares
Again another baseless assumption. Show credible evidence first - and it doesnt have to be through the naked eye - that supernatural spirits exist before using it as an explanation to something else. Youre explaining an unknown(Christian God) with an another unknown(spirit).Just admit that there is NO WAY TO PROVE THAT GOD EXISTS because he is just a make-believe, imaginary being.
No, I meant empirically.
Originally posted by Da Pittman
No this is your assumption but this goes against what you have said before and you are now contradicting yourself again.You could also say that nature is governed by some lady with twigs in her hair and both statements have the same amount of validity.
No, this is my belief--not assumption--there is a difference.
No, that would be an assumption because I would not be basing it on anything.
Originally posted by JesusIsAliveIt is based on stories passed down from generation to generation so yes it is the same and yes you are still contradicting your self yet again.
No, this is my [B]belief--not assumption--there is a difference.No, that would be an assumption because I would not be basing it on anything. [/B]
The other problem is that you do not take it as your belief but to be the truth so there you are justified to judge and condemned other people. If you truly felt that it was just a belief you would also have the notion that you could be wrong but you do not.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That has no meaning. It is no different then saying that nothingness is unstable.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I said:Nothingness does not exist, and that the Universe is eternal. The universe is not nothingness, and nothingness is not something.
Why is there something in the cosmos instead of nothingness?
If nothingness does not exist then it cannot be unstable. Do you follow what I mean? If it does not exist then it is neither stable nor unstable. You stated,
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I said:Nothingness does not exist, and that the Universe is eternal. The universe is not nothingness, and nothingness is not something.
Why is there something in the cosmos instead of nothingness?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
A true vacuum or nothingness would not have energy. It would be a lower state then the zero point state, and therefore be infinitely unstable. Therefore, nothingness will always erupt into something.
How can nothingness erupt into anything? Nothingness is just that: nothingness. There is nothing to erupt (no pun intended). Besides, if nothingness could erupt that would presuppose that nothing has energy and energy is something. Does this make any sense to you?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
If nothingness does not exist then it cannot be unstable. Do you follow what I mean? If it does not exist then it is neither stable nor unstable. You stated,How can nothingness erupt into anything? Nothingness is just that: nothingness. There is nothing to erupt (no pun intended). Besides, if nothingness could erupt that would presuppose that nothing has energy and energy is something. Does this make any sense to you?
Prove to me that nothingness is stable.
It does make sense, but you are thinking 3 dimensionally. You have to think 4 dimensionally.
The edge of the cosmos is not in the direction of the past. The past goes on for eternity.
What is outside of the universe (including heaven and god)?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Prove to me that nothingness is stable.It does make sense, but you are thinking 3 dimensionally.
uhhhhh, 11 dimensionally, you mean. [/dadudemonpontification]
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What is outside of the universe (including heaven and god)?
It is believed that you will end up on the other side of our Universe if you traveled to one end of the Universe. I can't remember where I read that and I am too lazy to look up a reference.
Originally posted by dadudemon
uhhhhh, 11 dimensionally, you mean. [/dadudemonpontification]It is believed that you will end up on the other side of our Universe if you traveled to one end of the Universe. I can't remember where I read that and I am too lazy to look up a reference.
Yes, you are talking about the Omniverse. I see the Omniverse as "foam". Each bubble is a 4 dimensional universe. Our three dimensional universe is the skin of a 4 dimensional sphere ~ 49 billion light years in diameter (I don't have any idea why 49 billion, I think it should have been 42, but I digress). In higher dimensions there would be thousands of these universes.
Now, what is beyond the Omniverse?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Yes, you are talking about the Omniverse. I see the Omniverse as "foam". Each bubble is a 4 dimensional universe. Our three dimensional universe is the skin of a 4 dimensional sphere ~ 49 billion light years in diameter (I don't have any idea why 49 billion, I think it should have been 42, but I digress). In higher dimensions there would be thousands of these universes.Now, what is beyond the Omniverse?
LOL at the "42" reference. That is definitely a nerd thing.
And to the rest of your statement, I was not talking about the Omniverse or the Multiverse, I was simply talking about our universe simply being 11 dimensional. It would have with the point you were trying to make because the uncertainty principle(and a bajillion other bazaar other aspects of the universe) becomes a much bigger player in "something from nothing" lending merit to your "nothingness is unstable".