Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A whole reality exists outside the boundaries of language.  Maybe words, rather than defining, are instead, confining?  :huh:

Image may contain: text

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget metaphor how about; "God is the Universe."  We are not created in the Universe's image like some carbon copy; we are the image of the universe.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Del


I am not certain how your two statements are different.


In the picture Cynique posted, it infers that the Universe CREATED us to be an image or reflection of Itself.

But Troy is inferring that there was no act of creation but that we simply ARE the image of the Universe Itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pioneer can you explain how something created to be an image. Is different than image. 

You are still a representation of the universe. 

Thanks for the clarification Pioneer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since there are millions of us, we can't all be the universe.  We can be the spawns of the universe; each of us a miniature one unto ourselves.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Troy that's why I thanked him . Although i don't see that as very different. In terms of the end product. 

Well we could exist in our galaxy. And share the universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there are billions of use Cynique and I think are all part of the universe, not a reflection of it, not a product of it we are it.  The distinguishing ourselves as individual apart from the whole is how we perceive reality, but I'd don't that is the way it is.

 

Del keep in mind just because Pioneer clarified my statement does not mean that he did it correctly--surely you must know this :lol:  I needed to confirm that for you.  The distinction I made was important because it explains the different between my statement and Cyniques last one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  We could all be particles of the big bang, and each particle could be a miniature universe; a microcosm.  Just like we are star children, because we are made up of the same elements as stars are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The meme in this post, which is only a speculation, conveys with illustrations that humans have physical counterparts of the universe. Which would further suggests that we are replicas of it.  Everybody has their own theory and when it comes to the truth, who knows? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's to say there is only ONE Universe.
Perhaps there are multiple.....parallel....Universes.


 

 

 

Troy

So you're basically saying that I clarified the TEXT of your post but not the INTENT?




Cynique


and when it comes to the truth, who knows?


The One Who created the Universe(s).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1Who says the universe was created by a someone? Apparently your mind can't conceive that this wasn't the case.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cynique

 

Who says the universe was created by a someone?
 

Your common sense SHOULD say it.

First of all, the fact that the Universe EXISTS is proof that Someone must have brought it into existence.

Second of all, there is so much order and intricate detail in the Universe that clearly an Intelligence was involved.



 

Apparently your mind can't conceive that this wasn't the case.


That's because my mind operates on LOGIC, not peer pressure from White influence.
When you think for YOURSELF instead of letting White people tell you what to think.....you'll automatically conclude that a Higher Power than man must have created and designed this planet and Universe.

Black people didn't question the existence of The Supreme Being who not only created but intelligently designed the Universe UNTIL contact with White people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1 Like i said, you can't wrap your finite mind around the idea that the universe created itself.  And that voids everything else you said as far as I'm concerned. I prefer uncommon sense when i ponder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

First of all, the fact that the Universe EXISTS is proof that Someone must have brought it into existence.

 

What?!  @Pioneer1 that statement is illogical. If it is true then who created the "Someone" that brought the universe into existence? As you can see you can infinitely regress and get nowhere with this.  

 

"Creation" is just our limited way of understand the order of things. It is based upon the passage of time which is how we perceive the universe, but time may not be the true nature of the universe. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cynique

Like i said, you can't wrap your finite mind around the idea that the universe created itself


Ofcourse I can't "wrap my mind" around it....because my mind is firm and STABLE.

But someone with a weak and flabby mind can "wrap" their mind around anything because it's easily mansplain manipulated like silly putty.....lol.

People who are weak minded and easily influenced are liable to believe ANY silly concept that is introduced to them without matching it with common sense.



I prefer uncommon sense when i ponder.


You're not alone.
There are schizophrenics who share the same preferences!

 

 

 


Troy

 

If it is true then who created the "Someone" that brought the universe into existence?


Who said That Someone had to be created?
Perhaps They were ALWAYS in existence, having no need to be brought INTO existence.



 

"Creation" is just our limited way of understand the order of things. It is based upon the passage of time which is how we perceive the universe, but time may not be the true nature of the universe.


The popularity of "creationism" has less to do with perception and passage of time and more to do with an innate feeling in most human beings that force them to acknowledge that there is a Grand Power that produced and organized the natural wonders that they see in the universe.

Nature has a way of HUMBLING human beings who become too arrogant and think they know everything.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant believe this but I am going to disagree with you Troy.

  On 20/11/2017 at 10:43 AM,Pioneer1 said:

First of all, the fact that the Universe EXISTS is proof that Someone must have brought it into existence.

 

What?!  @Pioneer1 that statement is illogical. If it is true then who created the "Someone" that 

 

Troy you are confusing truth and validity. Pioneer made a conclusion or rather an inference that follows his statement. 

 

I don't know if Pioneer said this or not. So if I  am repeating your statement my apologies Pioneer. 

if something is created then it has a creator. 

You could argue whether the Universe was created.  You could also argue that nature isn't manufactured in a factory. However something created ipso facto has a creator.  

That's definitional. 

Troy if you are going to use Mathematics,  Philosophy or Logic.  You may want to be a bit more rigorous in how you frame your argument. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 @Pioneer1 "Stable" mind as in a stagnant mentality? In other words, you  don't think outside the box, because you are trapped in the box of your dull mindset, void of an imagination.  You don't know the origin of the universe. All you are doing is parroting the intelligent design theory, taking the easy way out. And your reference to schizophrenia has nothing to do with "uncommon" (rare) sense.  I'm neither hearing voices in my head nor suffering from paranoia.  Those traits apply to somebody like you who listens to the voices inside your head filling you with a consuming suspicion of THE WHITE MAN plotting against you - as you hover there, bug-eyed, shuffling from foot-to-foot, waving the American flag.  

 

BTW, Del.  A creator is not synonymous with being a person.  Gravity can create a black hole. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL! @Delano I would think less of you if you would not to disagree with me simply because it puts you into the same camp as Pioneer.

 

So I'll ask you the same question Del.  If the universe has a creator, is it logical reasonable to assume that the creator of the universe must also have a creator?  If yes why.  If not why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are mixing belief and logic. 

Troy it is both reasonable and logical to assume either position. They are both valid arguments. However neither is provable. 

 

My position is that numbers were created not discovered.  Which would make all mathematically based or proved science a belief system.

i used to believe we had free will. Now i think it operates maybe 25% of the time or less. And only in situations where a real choice exists. 

This is due to some things i have found in the psychic realm.

 

My current belief is that we are following a script.  Which means we don't have free will. However we wrote the script.  Since we are here to learn. 

 

The easiest way of seeing this is look at both your frustrations and what gives you the most joy. Since they are probably the same, just poles apart.

So we are gods. And we are all connected. The sum total of all positive expression would be a Creator. And the counterbalancing force of negativity is the destroyer.  And the individual sustains both those energies internally.  

Brahma The Creator 

Shiva The Destroyer 

Vishnu The Sustainer.

Yes but i have a real difficulty agreeing with Pioneer. For a whole hosts of reasons.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Delano said:

I don't know if Pioneer said this or not. So if I  am repeating your statement my apologies Pioneer. 

if something is created then it has a creator

I was confused about who was saying what in this sentence.  :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pioneer says someone, which was implies a person. However I don't see the creator as a person. Although that is a reasonable assumption for Pioneer to make.  at least it is from my perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. You don't think that the creator is a person but you agree with Pioneer's assumption that the creator is a person because it is a reasonable one from your perspective.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont agree with his conclusion that its a person. yet i think it is a reasonable and logical conclusion. based on his analogy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Ofcourse it's my opinion.......
But my opinion is valid UNTIL PROVEN otherwise.

 

When I say Someone I mean a Being, The Supreme (most powerful) Being.

But NOT a "person", as in a "human" being.

I believe that the Universe was created by Supreme Intelligence and is being maintained by that same Supreme Intelligence.

If anyone can prove OTHERWISE.....let him/her produce actual PROOF (not paragraph after paragraph of jaw jacking that leads to more questions and no answers...lol.).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1 where do you think "The Supreme (most powerful) Being" came from? How did they come into existence?

 

For now your opinion is just an opinion.  We can argue where it is valid or not.  Because while you demand proof to the contrary, your position can not be proven either.  I'm arguing the position is also unreasonable.  If something can not be proven to be true, or is it reasonable or logical then it can not be valid.

 

For example your opinion about multiple human races is not valid because it is have been proven to be factually inaccurate.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Troy read this since you are  confusing a valid and true conclusion. 

 

Premise: all horses are brown

Premise: X is a horse

Conclusion: from premise 1 and 2 follows that X is brown

However, suppose that X in fact isn't brown, but white (meaning that either X isn't a horse - premise 2 is false -, or not all horses are brown - premise 1 is false).

The reasoning leading to the conclusion is logically valid, it's a valid reasoning, but the conclusion is not true, because we started with false premises

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Delano we are differing on the definition of the word "valid."  The definition says based upon logic or fact.  So technically you are right.  But this is a technically, and at this point unnecessary, as I have already reworded my question (which @Pioneer1 continues to dodge).

 

Pioneer makes declarative statements on premises that are either;

  1. patently false (which I assert is illogical, or just dumb, as in the case of multiple races), or
  2. which can not be proven to be true (as in the case with there being a creator (implying an very powerful sentient entity) of the universe.

Now all I've done is ask @Pioneer1 to respond to a question which I think will expose a flaw in his reasoning (perhaps that is why he is dodging it), and you are bogging this down in technicalities. 

 

As far as you send question about how an opinion can be invalid, I already answered that question.

 

Is anything still unclear? 

 

Del, do your think there was a creator of the universe Del?  If not, why not. If so, why?

 

val·id
ˈvaləd/
adjective
  1. (of an argument or point) having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent.
    "a valid criticism"
    synonyms: well founded, sound, reasonable, rational, logical, justifiable, defensible, viable, bona fide;More

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an open mind. And i like to ponder.  My mantra is: i don't know. So  i don't agree or disagree with Pioneer. And I don't think his opinion is illogical or invalid or unreasonable. He is, after all, voicing what the intelligent design community believes and this school of thought includes reputable scientists and philosophers.   There is order to our universe. The sun comes up every day.  The moon goes through phases.  It can be predicted when stars will line up in certain configurations.  The seasons change on schedule.  This  can be called proof;  but it's a proof that others obviously don't accept because it conflicts with their beliefs.     

 

I am also intrigued by the question posed asking who created the intelligent entity who created the universe. This could be responded to by saying  that just because our minds are not advanced enough to comprehend the answer, doesn't mean that there isn't an answer.    :huh:

 

I never tire of considering the suggestion that our existence is just a blink of the eye of someone who is to us what we are to fruit flies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an open mind and like to ponder too, but if someone said the world was flat, or that Black people were genetically inferior to white people I'd have to disagree with them. All of this stuff has been proven not to be true.

 

The miniscule minority of scientists who understand how the universe works but still believe in intelligent design are a very odd bunch.  Look, you can find "scientists" who believe anything. Putting these wingnuts on par with the vast majority of the rest of the scientific community does it a disservice.  That is like saying all Black people have a higher propensity for criminality because so many of us are imprisoned.

 

Of course there is an answer to how the universe was created, but no one knows it.  Physicist have figured out a lot in the last 100 years, but they don't know what happen at the big bang, what goes on inside a black hole, what dark matter and dark energy are, they can ponder, come up with different theories, and maybe at some point before the universe dies, they'll figure it out.

 

I just listened to a lecture given by a quantum physicist who was describing field theory. I'll try to describe it a nutshell, and I'm sure I'll butcher the proper definition so forgive me: a particle is actually everywhere, but snaps into a known position when we observe it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×