Where and when was God formed?

[mike89]

there are so many skeptics about how the universe was formed and resort to god.... he did it.... well where did he come from then? At some point in time he had to of been formed, so at whihc point in time and where was he "formed"?

[Queso]

so when humans suddenly do evolve concious (i believe this occured from our encounter with psychoactive entheogenic substances, psychedelics, etc.)

we questioned everything!!

we realized we were questioning everything!!

we wanted to express ourselves!! bbut we didnt know how!!

WE NEEDED ANSWERS!!!!!!!

 

and our primitive minds needed something to answer our questions.

back before science, we blamed god for everything.

language occured, evolved....yada yada

 

now that we have science, god is just something of our past that primitive brains still hold on to because they can't accept the truth that they have never been exposed to.

too much shade in a closed mind. :shrug:

[Southtown]

there are so many skeptics about how the universe was formed and resort to god.... he did it.... well where did he come from then? At some point in time he had to of been formed, so at whihc point in time and where was he "formed"?

First I would ask where the laws of physics came from, such as spacetime, and causality. A creator-god would precede these.

[kamil]

... well where did he come from then? At some point in time he had to of been formed

 

First of all, a time is an element of the universe, and because God created the Universe he couldnt have been in the Universe, so he wouldnt be at a point in space nor time.

[kamil]

 

now that we have science, god is just something of our past that primitive brains still hold on to because they can't accept the truth

 

Well God created the Universe and within the Universe are humans, which use scientific method to discover what God created. So teh two are not in contradiction. The Universe was created and whatever created it we will call God. Where not saying that God is this or that, we dont know his appearance, just his infinite ability.

[infamous]

there are so many skeptics about how the universe was formed and resort to god....he did it....

Some of us refer to this event as the Big Bang mike89.

 

well where did he come from then?

One might also ask; Where did the Big Bang come from? Do you have any ideas??

 

At some point in time he had to of been formed, so at whihc point in time and where was he "formed"?

Actually, before the Big Bang, theorists believe that space-time did not even exist. So without space, there is no where and without time, there is no point . My point being; God and the Big Bang have much in common.........................if you believe in the Big Bang.........I quess you are also allowed to believe in God.........Infy

[mike89]

thanks for the replys everyone.... the post was mainly wanting an answer from the people who believe in god. I personally do not, im just trying o understand how people CAN believe in God thats all. I also dont think "time" has always been, i think it was just given a name "time" and a measurment system to keep track of it. thanks again!

[Vending]

Just thought I would give my two cents :)

 

If there is a God, then by most definitions (i think) he is supernatural. By very definition, then, he is not governed by the natural laws as we understand them.

 

That is to say that there is no enherent contridiction with a supernatural being existing eternally or never being created. The porblem with idea arises when we try to fit a supernatural creature into natural contstraints. At least that is the argument I would forward :)

[TheBigDog]

You cannot know the origin of God without first defining the nature of God. Why does God need to be supernatural? Couldn't God exist, yet be wrongly credited with the creation of the universe?

 

Bill

[infamous]

You cannot know the origin of God without first defining the nature of God. Why does God need to be supernatural? Couldn't God exist, yet be wrongly credited with the creation of the universe?

 

Bill

Interesting thought webenton; I would like to hear a few more thoughts on this possiblity.

[HydrogenBond]

The problem with understanding God, is that God can only be explained in terms of what humans can understand. As an analogy, if one was giving a presentation about String Theory to a group of elementary students, who are just learning to add and subtract, the best one could do, without losing the audience, would be to overview the model in simply terms using analogies that the students are able to understand. This presentation could only reflect simple ideas about string theory but could not go into the details needed to prove the value of the theory.

 

It is very likely, that something/someone as omnipotent as God can not be exhautively defined to a human audience without losing the audience. Simple analogies to human behavior, personality and appearance gets the gist across. But too many believers assume that the gist is all the truth. Much of this gist was written for the ancient mind before modern science.

 

In many religions, it is believed that upon death, the mortal body remains and decays but the eternal soul goes to heaven and eternity. Personally, I do not see why the science community has a big problem with this. For example, science has posulated other dimensions within space/time. They have also postulated energy based references (leave the matter behind) as well as particles that appear to go faster than the speed of light and might disappear before they exist. These theories combined almost appear to say the same thing the ancients said about death, thousands of years ago.

 

In the beginning the spirit of God was brooding over the deep. This seems to indicate an empty universe. Let there be light. Energy appears within the empty universe. It also implies the spirit of God being different than energy, something that lasts eternity outside of space and time. Maybe physics can help build a bridge.

 

One of the primary tenents of religion is faith. We start with simple understanding and with faith are able to perceive that which is difficult to put into words. Maybe the intution from faith, with the humanistic starting point, gives one a perception toward more advanced understanding. This is true in science.

[TheBigDog]

Bravo HB.

[TheBigDog]

Interesting thought webenton; I would like to hear a few more thoughts on this possiblity.

Indy, I will try to do the topic justice. I have been struggling with how to best convey this thought. This gets a little long. Please le me know what you think.

 

We are going to look together at the universe through the eyes of a objective observer. This is only an intellectual exercise. Please do not look at it as a statement of facts that cannot be proven. I am looking for plausablility only. Here we go...

 

A group of scientists are seeking to perform a series of experiments. They are trying to recreate in the laboratory the creation of life on earth.

 

They find a suitable planet, but it needs modifications to apply the experiment. It is a rocky, molten, barren world. None of the most needed elements of life can exist there. The only correct thing is the distance from the central star.

 

They decide that the planet's orbit and spin are not entirely correct for the experiment. In the far reaches of the system they gently nudge a large body. It is not a great force, just very well calculated. As it falls into the grip of the central star's gravity it begins to accelerate inward toward its target. When it collides with the planet there is a mighty collision. The planet's axis is tilted, and its speed of rotation altered as a large mass is separated from it that becomes the moon. This will be needed to provide tides to the oceans - preventing them from becoming too static.

 

There is no water on the planet, so they go out to the outermost reaches of the systm and find frozen water and minerals under the slightest influence of the sun. With careful calculation they gently nudge these peices so they will collide with the planet far to the center, each providing a supply of water and other rare elements and minerals randomly across the surface of the world. Eventually enough water, nitrogen and oxygen is sent to the surface to create liquid oceans and atmosphere critical for the experiment.

 

There is great debate among the otherwise patient scientists about how long to wait to see if life begins "on its own" or if they should plant some of the required building blocks on the planet that now has a young and very energetic atmosphere. Eventually there is evidence of basic life. Observations continue to see how evolution progresses. And debate among the scientists rages over how long to let evolution happen "of its own accord"

 

When life eventually organizes into something that can understand the principles of the scientists, the beings on the planet develop the notion of a "God: Creator of the Universe". Their notion of a God that created the universe is wrong, but do they not have a creator "God" in the form of the scientists? They would not exist without them, yet the scientists are not supernatural.

 

Bill

[questor]

it would seem to me that if something created the universe there would be no other force more powerful. it doesn't matter what you call it, or whether you believe in it. if it exists, then IT is!

[coldcreation]

it would seem to me that if something created the universe there would be no other force more powerful. it doesn't matter what you call it, or whether you believe in it. if it exists, then IT is!

 

Hmmm, happy new year,

 

IT seems to me that gravity is the force that opperates (Rules) on the large scale. So, IT would be likely the IT, gravity, is He. Recall the spirit of gravity, from Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

 

BUT, and that's a Big But, gravity, on the small scale seems irrelevant. Now, If He is opperational on the large scale, why has He abandonned, say us, on the small. Isn't He supposed to be omnipresent? Actually gravity is almost everywhere so I'm barking up the wrong tree.

 

Food for thought.

 

As far as where and when IT was formed. If He is Gravity, or some other Force, Power, or what have you, then He should always have been here.

 

Those who know my mind state, know that Coldcreation is inclined, i.e., has tendencies to believe that the universe is infinite in all directions, both spatially and temporally. Meaning: the universe was not created at any given time or place, IT has, in effect, always been. This apriori provides glimps of hope for those illuminated, like Her Questor, or HydrogenB.

 

Had the universe began at t = 0, contrary to what writes Sir Hawking et al, there may have been a creator, but HE was not always present. True no one knows what happened before t = 0, but it is thought that there was no space and no time, no gravity or other force, power or HE.

 

The Pope in 1952 then erroneously accepted the bb theory as supporting St Augustines Fiat Lux, when the only tenable hypothesis for HIS existence is in an eternal universe. Why because He too is thought to be eternal. I think that one (the universe) cannot Be without the other (IT).

 

cc

 

PS. If no one responds to what I just wrote, that's ok, I'm getting used to IT.

[TheBigDog]

Hmmm, happy new year,

 

yada yada yada...

 

PS. If no one responds to what I just wrote, that's ok, I'm getting used to IT.

 

Happy New Year CC. Within the yadas was indeed a tasty bit of mind food to begin the new year. I am right with you on the universe being eternal. Gravity as the form of God? Hmmm...

 

Bill

[TheBigDog]

it would seem to me that if something created the universe there would be no other force more powerful. it doesn't matter what you call it, or whether you believe in it. if it exists, then IT is!

Based upon that as a guiding priciple, would it be fair to say that if we discover some thing or things, that if removed, would make the universe cease to exist, they would be definable as God? They must be causes, not effects. Is it possible to determine such a thing?

 

Is mass the cause of gravity, with gravity being the effect of mass? Or does gravity exist independent of mass?

 

Bill