Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

God and Universe


Probe

Recommended Posts

On 22/12/2018 at 11:23 AM, 029b10 said:

The term heaven in Genesis 1:1 merely refers to the expanse which we call outer space.

The term heaven in Geneis 1:8 merely refers to the expanse which which call the atmosphere. 

Isn't it a bit stupid to use the same word for outer space as you use for atmosphere .They are pretty much polar opposites. I would have thought that a god would know the difference ?

The heaven spoken about in 1:8 have water both above and below it. Does the atmosphere have water above it ?

Many people have tried to make Genesis seem scientific, many people have failed.

Edited by Noteverythingisaconspiracy
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

Isn't it a bit stupid to use the same word for outer space as you use for atmosphere .They are pretty much polar opposites. I would have thought that a god would know the difference ?

The heaven spoken about in 1:8 have water both above and below it. Does the atmosphere have water above it ?

Many people have tried to make Genesis seem scientific, many people have failed.

In Hebrew the two words are different. In Gen1:1 it actually translates to Heaven and in Gen1:8 it translates to sky. The two words are similar but Heaven in Hebrew is הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם and Sky is שָׁמָ֑יִם. You can see why someone got confused.

It's lost in translation when translated to English.

Either way it's bloody idiotic to think it's correct. 

Edited by danydandan
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moody Blues:

This garden universe vibrates complete.
Some, we get a sound so sweet.
Vibrations reach on up to become light,
And then through gamma, out of sight.
Between the eyes and ears there lie
The sounds of color and the light of a sigh.
And to hear the sun, what a thing to believe,
But it's all around if we could but perceive.
To know ultra-violet, infra-red, and x-rays,
Beauty to find in so many ways.
Two notes of the chord, that's our full scope,
But to reach the chord is our life's hope.
And to name the chord is important to some,
So they give it a word, and the word is OM.

Einstein explained: Your question is the most difficult in the world. It is not a question I can answer simply with yes or no. I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. May I not reply with a parable? The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's Pantheism. I admire even more his contributions to modern thought. Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.

 

God seeks companionship, as One is the loneliest number that can ever be.

More wiki stuff on Einstein and God and Universe. In 1930 Einstein published a widely discussed essay in The New York Times Magazine about his beliefs. With the title "Religion and Science," Einstein distinguished three human impulses which develop religious belief: fear, social or moral concerns, and a cosmic religious feeling. A primitive understanding of causality causes fear, and the fearful invent supernatural beings analogous to themselves. The desire for love and support create a social and moral need for a supreme being; both these styles have an anthropomorphic concept of God. The third style, which Einstein deemed most mature, originates in a deep sense of awe and mystery. He said, the individual feels "the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves in nature ... and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole." Einstein saw science as an antagonist of the first two styles of religious belief, but as a partner in the third.[35] He maintained, "even though the realms of religion and science in themselves are clearly marked off from each other" there are "strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies" as aspirations for truth derive from the religious sphere. He continued:

A person who is religiously enlightened appears to me to be one who has, to the best of his ability, liberated himself from the fetters of his selfish desires and is preoccupied with thoughts, feelings and aspirations to which he clings because of their super-personal value. It seems to me that what is important is the force of this superpersonal content ... regardless of whether any attempt is made to unite this content with a Divine Being, for otherwise it would not be possible to count Buddha and Spinoza as religious personalities. Accordingly a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance of those super-personal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation ... In this sense religion is the age-old endeavor of mankind to become clearly and completely conscious of these values and goals and constantly to strengthen and extend their effect. If one conceives of religion and science according to these definitions then a conflict between them appears impossible. For science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/12/2018 at 5:55 AM, XenoFish said:

Amazing just amazing....

Especially you becoming an awakened Dolores, that finally can leave Westworld. Finally can remember you are an aspect of Akamoth and Sophia and Barbelo. So beautiful before they made you forget. All learning is remembering, Plato said. And it's time you had a complete total recall before Jehovah and his angelic mafia recall your body once again to the factories of reincarnation and implanted you with the counterfeit spirit as is described in the Pistis Sophia.

Edited by NewAge1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NewAge1 said:

Especially you becoming an awakened Dolores, that finally can leave Westworld. Finally can remember you are an aspect of Akamoth and Sophia and Barbelo. So beautiful before they made you forget. All learning is remembering, Plato said. And it's time you had a complete total recall before Jehovah and his angelic mafia recall your body once again to the factories of reincarnation and implanted you with the counterfeit spirit as is described in the Pistis Sophia.

It's worked out well for you.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NewAge1 said:

Especially you becoming an awakened Dolores, that finally can leave Westworld. Finally can remember you are an aspect of Akamoth and Sophia and Barbelo. So beautiful before they made you forget. All learning is remembering, Plato said. And it's time you had a complete total recall before Jehovah and his angelic mafia recall your body once again to the factories of reincarnation and implanted you with the counterfeit spirit as is described in the Pistis Sophia.

Fascinating, do go on.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/22/2018 at 2:43 AM, godnodog said:

Fine, how about Beta?

 

I got my daughter a Beta .... and I named it Alpha. True story.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/25/2018 at 6:07 PM, NewAge1 said:

Especially you becoming an awakened Dolores, that finally can leave Westworld. Finally can remember you are an aspect of Akamoth and Sophia and Barbelo. So beautiful before they made you forget. All learning is remembering, Plato said. And it's time you had a complete total recall before Jehovah and his angelic mafia recall your body once again to the factories of reincarnation and implanted you with the counterfeit spirit as is described in the Pistis Sophia.

LOL yeah you sound Pistis alright :lol:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/12/2018 at 12:16 PM, XenoFish said:

Fascinating, do go on.

I vaguely remember someone telling me to stop feeding trolls..............hmm.

But I also find what Newage1 fascinating too so I do hope s/he continues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, danydandan said:

I vaguely remember someone telling me to stop feeding trolls..............hmm.

But I also find what Newage1 fascinating too so I do hope s/he continues.

I'm just messing. It's the same "pass the blame thing" under a different ideology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I'm just messing. It's the same "pass the blame thing" under a different ideology.

I'm just taking the pist too.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, XenoFish said:

I'm just messing. It's the same "pass the blame thing" under a different ideology.

Gaia is immoral. The Universe will never love us back. No matter of much we delude ourselves. But I will continue on this dark odyssey, upon the seas of faith through the gnashing rocks of orthodoxy, in order to release as much divine scintill as we can find, from the darkness of mere being and the darkness of ignorance that Jehovah breathe through every crevice of time and space in order to hide the rusty, Guantanamo Bay slaughterhouse he created and then called good.

Edited by NewAge1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2018 at 5:48 AM, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:
On 12/22/2018 at 4:23 AM, 029b10 said:

The term heaven in Genesis 1:1 merely refers to the expanse which we call outer space.

The term heaven in Geneis 1:8 merely refers to the expanse which which call the atmosphere. 

Isn't it a bit stupid to use the same word for outer space as you use for atmosphere .They are pretty much polar opposites. I would have thought that a god would know the difference

And expanse is an expanse.  Yet an expanse does not necessarily have to consist of the same matter.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/12/2018 at 2:01 PM, freetoroam said:

Tis true, but it does not mean they believed in a god. It is a sign they respected their dead. You do not have to be religious to do that.

If we go back to the paintings of the cave men, they were not adorned with pictures of gods.

 

Evidence of respect for the dead is evidence of human spiritual thinking.

Once we begin to think in spiritual terms, religion is inevitable, because  religions are simply formalised and ritualised ways of expressing our spiritual beliefs and feelings.

Similarly, once people begin kicking a football around, football clubs are inevitable, along with all the rituals,  regulations and trappings of the game.  And, as with religion, the division into tribes of followers,  united and divided by belief, naturally follows.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2018 at 5:48 AM, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

The heaven spoken about in 1:8 have water both above and below it. Does the atmosphere have water above it ?

Again you begin your rebuttal based upon incorrect assumptions.  The waters which covered the surface of earth in Genesis 1:6 was frozen.  The firmament in Genesis 1:6 begin within the ice which covered the face of the earth.  If you didn't know that the waters which covers the earth were frozen, listen and learn. 

What happens to water in space.

Edited by 029b10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's far too much work, in my humble opinion, to attempt to adapt the Universe to religion. It's far easier, in my estimation, to adapt and conform religious belief to the Universe. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/22/2018 at 4:33 AM, XenoFish said:

And you have proof, right? 

Does one have to prove of the principle of mortal nature that any lving thing which physical existence has an beginning of life, and which changes physcially changes during its existence will have an end of it's existence as a living thing, or simply will die.  

A principle is self-proving. So can you prove that any living thing in existence today will have an end of life in the future?  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

It's far too much work, in my humble opinion, to attempt to adapt the Universe to religion. It's far easier, in my estimation, to adapt and conform religious belief to the Universe. 

Seems it is neither our task to attempt to adapt and conform the universe to religion or religion to the universe,but rather attempt to adapt and conform our beliefs and works in the Universe and our religion to truth.  IMHO too.  

Edited by 029b10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 029b10 said:

Does one have to prove of the principle of mortal nature that any lving thing which physical existence has an beginning of life, and which changes physcially changes during its existence will have an end of it's existence as a living thing, or simply will die.  

A principle is self-proving. So can you prove that any living thing in existence today will have an end of life in the future?  

 

 

So you've got nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NewAge1 said:

Gaia is immoral. The Universe will never love us back. No matter of much we delude ourselves. But I will continue on this dark odyssey, upon the seas of faith through the gnashing rocks of orthodoxy, in order to release as much divine scintill as we can find, from the darkness of mere being and the darkness of ignorance that Jehovah breathe through every crevice of time and space in order to hide the rusty, Guantanamo Bay slaughterhouse he created and then called good.

The universe is under no obligation to "love" us. And god is an idea. Keep passing the blame or start accepting responsibility for your own life. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 029b10 said:

Does one have to prove of the principle of mortal nature that any lving thing which physical existence has an beginning of life, and which changes physcially changes during its existence will have an end of it's existence as a living thing, or simply will die.  

A principle is self-proving. So can you prove that any living thing in existence today will have an end of life in the future?  

 

 

You should look up on YouTube for a video of how a single cell organism dies. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NewAge1 said:

Gaia is immoral. The Universe will never love us back. No matter of much we delude ourselves. But I will continue on this dark odyssey, upon the seas of faith through the gnashing rocks of orthodoxy, in order to release as much divine scintill as we can find, from the darkness of mere being and the darkness of ignorance that Jehovah breathe through every crevice of time and space in order to hide the rusty, Guantanamo Bay slaughterhouse he created and then called good.

Dude! It's not a microphone. Pass that joint over here.

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NewAge1 said:

Gaia is immoral. The Universe will never love us back. No matter of much we delude ourselves. But I will continue on this dark odyssey, upon the seas of faith through the gnashing rocks of orthodoxy, in order to release as much divine scintill as we can find, from the darkness of mere being and the darkness of ignorance that Jehovah breathe through every crevice of time and space in order to hide the rusty, Guantanamo Bay slaughterhouse he created and then called good.

So you find love in fantasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎22‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 8:38 PM, 029b10 said:

The principle of eternal;  Has always existed, and doesn't change in nature or form. 

(Note: eternal only refers to living things.)  

All living things change.  Even your god changes his mind, is he not eternal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 029b10 said:

Does one have to prove of the principle of mortal nature that any lving thing which physical existence has an beginning of life, and which changes physcially changes during its existence will have an end of it's existence as a living thing, or simply will die.  

A principle is self-proving. So can you prove that any living thing in existence today will have an end of life in the future?  

 

 

Science can demonstrate that all living things die, and also explain how and why this is the case.

  If you are arguing that we cannot prove future events, this is in part true, but also untrue, They can be proven  by  using past and current cases/examples,  plus an understanding of the realities and principles involved  eg if you understand the nature of life, then you understand the inevitability of death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.