Who Created God? Understanding the Universe's Self-Awareness

[Iacchus32]

So, how do we in fact get something from nothing, when in fact nothing is all there is? ... Nay, nor even the slightest potential for something. Wouldn't there at least have to be some sort of basic structure or matrix already there? If so, then how did that get there? Sounds to me like we're speaking about some basic structure which has always been, indeed, a highly intelligent structure. Which is to say, how else could it not be intelligent if, in fact it was the basis for all there is?

Hey, did you know that consciousness is merely the end-result of that which is highly structured? Think about it. How could we possibly do anything, let alone think, without a tremendous amount of structure in our lives? Whereas if these immutable laws that govern this structure have always been, what might it possibly suggest? That the Universe has always been self-aware, and was designed specifically as an outcropping of this?

Well, that certainly dispells any need to ask who created God now doesn't it?

 

[Royce]

Iacchus32,
It is my understanding that without matter, the material universe, there is no time or space; therefore, it is not appropriate or meaningful to speak of begining, end, before or after. Temporal words or thoughts have no meaning or reference where time does not exist. This of course is totally foriegn to us temporal beings who can think only sequentially and in cause then effect mode. To us if something exists now it must have had a beginning, a cause and eventually an end. We find it difficult if not impossible to wrap our mind around and accept the idea that something can have always been and always will be, without beginning and without end.
While our material universe may have had a beginning and thus an end the beginning includes the beginning of time and space along with matter; it does not logically or necessarily follow the the creator and master must therefor have a beginning and end.
Of course, as you suggest, it is not absolutely known nor is it necessary that the universe itself has a beginning or end. The so called Big Band Theory is only speculation, a hypothasis at best and should not be rightfully termed a theory. It is simply one philosophy that is currently widely accepted. Issac Asimov thought that possibly the universe was pulsating rather than expanding from a singularity forever or eventually fall back into the Big Crunch.

 

[olde drunk]

sadly, it is an intuitive knowing that there is more to existence than just our physical existence that breeds 'ideas' about a god. this inner awareness can not be proven. ergo, no scientific acceptance.

with QT we are glimpsing how our consciousness can reach out and can both effect our reality and affect our reailty (we create and change our reality). once we get a good handle on how this occurs, we will no longer need the olde, traditional myths about a god and all the biblical stories.

i agree that the universe is more a state of consciousness (awareness - being) as opposed to just physical matter. it seems that 'energy' would be the our true essence and who the hell knows what the real 'god' will prove to be.

love&peace,
olde drunk

 

[pocebokli]

in my theory, god is merely a trick performed by our sub-consciousness in order to convince us that there CAN be god - *that is the ultimate and prime goal of mankind, our final destination*. think about it, GOD's ultimate power as described is the sum of our potential and our wishes, instincts.

"once we get a good handle on how this occurs, we will no longer need the olde, traditional myths about a god and all the biblical stories."

exactley. we won't NEED them anymore indeed, our CONSCIOUSNESS will slowly take over as we develop or evolve ourselves even further towards our goal. we won't need a commitional belief in a greater being, it will be kicked out by belief in our growing capabilities.

it is like with imagination and creativity.

 

[pocebokli]

so we will create god. or better, since god is timeless, we are already creating it and it is already created.

 

[pocebokli]

hey, i think i just proved the existence of god:-)))))

 

[pawanmakadia]

Why didn't we find answer related to the existence and creation of god?..
One reason i feel is that perhaps we never asked right questions?
We do agree that, in Science we can never find right answers unless we ask right questions?
So to understand Existence of god ( unsolved mystery of world) i think we should change the approach of questioning or observing the phenomena.
Reasoning and Imagination are inappropriate tool to prove or disapprove the existence of god/divine/super natural powers.

 

[Rader]

"I am", is a truth.
What "I am" is part of all there is.
Lack of a part would mean non-esxistnece for the whole.
Hence creation is a transmutation of its parts.

Nothing created God. God is the alfa y omega.
Everything that exists always existed.
Creation transmutes transformation.
Change changes the changed.

Who created God is untenable.
Ubiquitous has no place.
Hence is everywhere.
Therefore "I am".

 

[DM]

In my theory, god is merely a trick performed by our sub-consciousness in order to convince us that there CAN be god - *that is the ultimate and prime goal of mankind, our final destination*. think about it, GOD's ultimate power as described is the sum of our potential and our wishes, instincts.

Not neccessarily a trick performed by our sub-conciousness. What if religion and therefore God was created by humans as a law? this gives you moral values to think.

The world as it's known as would be total chaos if there weren't any laws. A powerful law is religion, by no means I'm saying I believe in it, but think about it.

Believing in God, just like the majority of our worldwide population does, prevents total chaos. More crimes would be commited if God wasn't suggested.

--------------

so we will create god. or better, since god is timeless, we are already creating it and it is already created.

I don't fully understand your point.

-------------

Why didn't we find answer related to the existence and creation of god?..
One reason i feel is that perhaps we never asked right questions?

I disagree. There are many reasons to not finding answers related to the existence and creation of God.

For instance, one of the possible reasons for not finding any answers is because God doesn't even exist.

--------------

Reasoning and Imagination are inappropriate tool to prove or disapprove the existence of god/divine/super natural powers.

What kind of tools are we suppose to use?

Religion?

Religion = Faith = no evidence for the existence of any religious moves and therefore God(s)

 

[selfAdjoint]

How about this. Many people are not comfortable without some kind of "Big Brother" in their lives. Some surrogate parents who will not go away and die like their physical parents, but stay with them all their lives, and be with them at death, rewarding them (somehow) when they are good and punishing them (somehow) when they're bad. Look around at the religionists you know. They are happy and comfortable because they have this idea in their heads, and they don't see how anyone can be happy and comfortable, let alone moral, without that idea in his head.

 

[Rader]

It is my understanding that without matter, the material universe, there is no time or space; therefore, it is not appropriate or meaningful to speak of begining, end, before or after.

How do we make that assumption, if everything thing that preceeds, is of the same essence? Time and space would be eternal. Why would matter, put a existential limit on time and space? I am interested to know why we come to the same conclusion for different reasons.

Temporal words or thoughts have no meaning or reference where time does not exist.

If we assume this, then where and why would time, get the idea to move in a direction, towards natural perfection?

While our material universe may have had a beginning and thus an end the beginning includes the beginning of time and space along with matter; it does not logically or necessarily follow the the creator and master must therefor have a beginning and end.

Then you would assume that the Creator was not of the same essence as its creation?

 

[Iacchus32]

"I am", is a truth.
What "I am" is part of all there is.
Lack of a part would mean non-esxistnece for the whole.
Hence creation is a transmutation of its parts.

Nothing created God. God is the alfa y omega.
Everything that exists always existed.
Creation transmutes transformation.
Change changes the changed.

Who created God is untenable.
Ubiquitous has no place.
Hence is everywhere.
Therefore "I am".

Might I suggest that God exists in the immaterial structure of thought, you know "ere" the Big Bang, from which the potential of everything has always existed?

 

[Rader]

Might I suggest that God exists in the immaterial structure of thought, you know "ere" the Big Bang, from which the potential of everything has always existed?

If so do you know of a son that was not of the father?

 

[Iacchus32]

If so do you know of a son that was not of the father?

We are all sons of the Father so to speak. I am not sure what you mean?

 

[DM]

They are happy and comfortable because they have this idea in their heads, and they don't see how anyone can be happy and comfortable, let alone moral, without that idea in his head.

They don't even consider, let alone act, of God being a moral law. They just practise their religion and claim that everyone around them who do not have faith in a God are unhappy.

I'm a christian. I believe in God but always saw the scientific way. I accept it and will always believe it.

To me, when people say, who created God? my answer is scientific; The big bang.

But it is at this point where things get really rusty because nor I and nor anybody else in this world will ever know whether men kind had powers that science has the power to provide or not.

If the universe is infinite, so is everything. Just like succeeding, failing also counts as an infinite part of everything.

Science tells you that. I in this case don't believe it.

The universe is not infinite, for it an explosion created it, more or less like a gigantic bomb. It doesn't matter how big the bomb is, there will always be the core and the end of that bomb.

Scientists claim that the sun is just a star. Fair enough, but what if the sun is the actual core of the big bang?

There's more meaning than a simple star...

 

[Philocrat]

So, how do we in fact get something from nothing, when in fact nothing is all there is? ... Nay, nor even the slightest potential for something. Wouldn't there at least have to be some sort of basic structure or matrix already there? If so, then how did that get there? Sounds to me like we're speaking about some basic structure which has always been, indeed, a highly intelligent structure. Which is to say, how else could it not be intelligent if, in fact it was the basis for all there is?

I have gone down on record for consistently maintaining that, eternally, there is no relation that can be found between what constitutes the general term 'SOMETHING' and what constitutes the general term 'NOTHING'. If both exist, and can be proven so, then one must have always been without the other. If this is true, it is impossible to derive one from the other.
I continue to maintain that:

'Nothing', if it exists at all, cannot give rise to 'Something'

'Something' remains what it has always been - 'Something' - and it can never decline into 'Nothing'

'Something', if change is part of its nature or 'metaform', always changes from one thing to another, and never to 'Nothing'

Hey, did you know that consciousness is merely the end-result of that which is highly structured? Think about it. How could we possibly do anything, let alone think, without a tremendous amount of structure in our lives? Whereas if these immutable laws that govern this structure have always been, what might it possibly suggest? That the Universe has always been self-aware, and was designed specifically as an outcropping of this?

I think you should look at the Compositional or Informational Theory of Consciousness' for an alternative account. Defend it or deny it!

Well, that certainly dispells any need to ask who created God now doesn't it?

The PRIME MOVER thesis argues that God created Himself/Herself/Itself! Look it up and defend it or deny it!

 

[Philocrat]

But one fundamental Question remains, and it is the benchmark for every theory that makes claims in this very department:

Can anything, regardless of how many times it can change, take a final unchangeable form?

Or equivalently:

Can a Physical thing, regardless of how many times it is able to change, finally survive physical destruction?

Answering this question would be the highest point in the human intellectual pursuit.

 

[cyfin]

You can not get something out of nothing. Cause and Effect cannot be applied to God. God is outside of time.

In our lives, we observe time. Since we are subject to Cause and Effect, we can trace things back to a Prime Mover, the first effect without a cause. We cannot say that God created time because he is outside of time. The only solution I can think of is that we are an aspect of God. We exsist as part of Him/It and never change. We cannot prove that we change. We only think we remember the past, are in the present, and therefore must have a future. As best as I can figure, we only exsist in the present and exsist thinking there is a past when there is not. For example, a man who is 90 thinks he has had 90 years of experience, when he only exsists as a 90 year old with 90 years worth of knowledge put inside him. I think Descartes had a similar theory. But in all, its kindof depressing thinking that all my past life is a lie. I could have sworn I actually wrote this post and not just had the experience of writing it planted in my head as I click submit

 

[DM]

We cannot say that God created time because he is outside of time. The only solution I can think of is that we are an aspect of God. We exsist as part of Him/It and never change. We cannot prove that we change.

I like your theory.

Could you expand it?

I agree, God is out of time but doesn't mean he's just a story.

The best solution I can think of is God being created after time, when all explosions occurred and we know it as the universe.

 

[Rader]

But one fundamental Question remains, and it is the benchmark for every theory that makes claims in this very department:

Can anything, regardless of how many times it can change, take a final unchangeable form?

Or equivalently:

Can a Physical thing, regardless of how many times it is able to change, finally survive physical destruction?

Answering this question would be the highest point in the human intellectual pursuit.

Answer 01=Only if all forms might be in the image and likeness of the final unchangeable form.

Answer 02=All physical forms are of the same essence. We now know that all forms reduce down to relationships. Nothing is ever created or destroyed just transmuted.

 

[Iacchus32]

But one fundamental Question remains, and it is the benchmark for every theory that makes claims in this very department:

Can anything, regardless of how many times it can change, take a final unchangeable form?

How so? And what if it contained the potential for everything?

 

[Rader]

We are all sons of the Father so to speak. I am not sure what you mean?

What i mean is, there is no proof and a lot of evidence that there is no real separation between God and what exists. Everything transmutes nothing is created or destroyed. What exists came forth from that what already was.

 

[Philocrat]

If nothing changes, why does it appear as if things are changing? Or if they do really change, would they ever take final unchanging forms?

 

[Iacchus32]

Without change, no-thing is realized. And, if no-thing is realized there would be no-thing. :rofl:

 

[Rader]

If nothing changes, why does it appear as if things are changing? Or if they do really change, would they ever take final unchanging forms?

According to the following definitions of words through language, the description of reality as we now know it today, may be as follows.

Nothing is was or will be either created or destroyed. One single essence may be all there is. Substance does not constitute all there is to reality. Although forms of substance change so do thoughts, which do not appear to have substance. There is therefore a constant transmutation between essence and substance, which makes the world appear the way it does.

Form=The body or outward appearance of a shape and structure of an object.

Change=To give a completely different form or appearance to; transform.

Transmute= To change from one form, nature, substance, or state into another; transform.

Substance=That which has mass and occupies space; matter.

Essence=The intrinsic or indispensable properties that serve to characterize or identify something.

Creation=The fact or state of having been created.

Destruction=The condition of having been destroyed.

In answer to your question. Things change because I experience it. The Essence appears to be experiencing through substance. Transmutation of nature appears to be a ongoing process, with a purpose.
If we look at the linear evolution of nature it appears to be heading towards natural perfection.

 

[fizzzzzzzzzzzy]

God doesn't have a creator. God having a creator would make God not God God had a creator God wouldn't have a God

 

[XMLT]

God exits by himself. And this is a mystery that no one on Earth can explain or understand it fully. I myself don't think we should try to explore this mystery since it's so far beyond our knowledge.

XMLT

 

[dekoi]

Could no one realize the simple nature of this question?


The main statement to be analyzed is:
Everything which has a beginning has a cause.

However,

God has no beginning nor an end.

Therefore, God -- without a beginning -- has no cause.

 

[vlamir]

...The only solution I can think of is that we are an aspect of God. We exsist as part of Him/It and never change. We cannot prove that we change. ...

It proves, that the problem has no decision.
Shouldn’t one tiny part of God is capable to cognize God - infinity?
Other aspect will be, that “tiny part of God”, which tries to find out secret of God, actually wants to find out secret of his omnipotence.
Shouldn’t God can allow such fault, so as this “vile tiny part” in the image of people, could seize his force?
Existence of human civilization speaks, that the life in the universe is continuous, but her forms are changeable.
Therefore, the question passes into a practical plane – how a lot of time God gives for our form of life?

 

[Preator Fenix]

If indeed there is a God, then I agree that "he/she/?" may or maynot have beginning or end. It all depends on what "god" is made of. If is physical and material in nature ( albeit in some utterly complex and impssibly hard to understand way ) then "he/she/?" has a most definite start and end. If "god" is "made" off the same "stuff" as say gravity or time,... well that opens the possiblity of no start or end.

In both cases I am hard pressed to see a way said entity can somehow manage selforgizned beavihor to the level of somehow having human like neural networks and consentquently uncannanly human like thoughts and emotions like "love" "hate" "imagination".

 

[reena]

Consciousness is awareness of the Self: Who an I, What am I? Where was I during sleep? Why did I regain the same world awareness after sleep etc.
Why do I perceive and differently than others, why I am more lovung , more peaceful and happier than others etc
Finally, what is the cause of my existence, where was I before I took this body, where will I go after I leave the body etc.
Eventough I have the same physical constituents what makes me different and so on.

 

[vlamir]

Albert Einstein: "God does not play dice"

To deny words by Einstein it is possible by one way only – to prove that the God does not exist.
In the age of 11 years I have been sent to special school. It was half the militarian, half the craft. In the first day our group of beginners have been led in the big educational building. In a hall of this building, on walls, the big portraits of members of the government (approximately 20 portraits) were hung. We went along walls and with curiosity examined portraits. In front of one of portraits I was stiffened. All has shuddered inside me. I was the child and consequently did not know, who is represented on this portrait. The name – Beria for me spoke nothing.
After many years I have learned, that it is that executioner, who made bereave of lives of my relatives and have deprived with the normal childhood millions other boys.
I want to ask, who and how have transferred to me the truth then through a canvas with painted physiognomy of this executioner?

Therefore, I think – the God exists also Einstein of the rights.

 

[Fredrick]

God does not play dice

Albert Einstein: "God does not play dice"

To deny words by Einstein it is possible by one way only – to prove that the God does not exist.

Ever since I first heard that Albert Einstein said that god does not play dice, I have thought a little bit less about our wonderful scientist. To state that god does not play dice requires that the speaker knows god fully; otherwise the speaker cannot make a statement which portrays certainty about some'one' else. No matter how highly I regard Einstein, I never thought he would make such statement that would make him claim that he fully knows god. Shows that he was human after all.

 

[reena]

Material Universe is just a projection of our mind. Mind is a depository of thoughts. Thoughts are what make the universe happen. All creation has its origin in thought. Thought is ever changing and all that comes out of thought is bound by the law of time, space and causation. As some one rightly pointed out God is a trick played by the mind. In fact each one of us is potentially God and God there is only one. What appears to be many is only a delusion like the many rising and disappearing waves in an ocean. God- we all are covering the vast ocean of conciousness, without beginning or end. Unbound by the laws of time, space and causation which have beginning and end. Only by crossing the boundaries of time , space and causation can we realize that we are GOD.

 

[vlamir]

Absolutely truly, Reena!
God is placed inside us.
Recently I wrote the big and rigid poem, which is to the devoted tragical events in Russia in 1917. As an epigraph of my poem, I used the poem "Prediction" by Lermontov.
I have decided to finish my poem with words from Alexander Pushkin's letter to his uncle in 1816. These words: "God grant, with mercy of the sky, the mind revived in Russia … ".
But I did not remember the name of the letter. Therefore, I looked through tables of contents of all of six volume of works by A. Pushkin. But I did not find this letter.
Then again I have taken in hands the first volum and have opened it at random.
At once, in open page, I have seen this letter by A. Pushkin. It begins with words: "Christ has arisen! Alumnus by Feb! …"
Now I should tell, that it not a miracle and not concurrence.
I have in house many books, both art, and scientific, but I badly remember – where necessary citations are located. God very much frequently helps me to find instantly the helpful information.
God also has helped me to glance inside of my consciousness, and I have seen, how elementary cells of human mind work.
http://www.sinor.ru/~polytron/index.html
I am astonished with, how many full fools among representatives of the exact sciences, who do not understand, that the God is placed inside us!