What to say when somebody asks about the big bang

[Arkilogue]

One way or another it will demand all of me. Pardon if I linger a bit where I still have a quiet and uneventful life. I like it the way it is....but all things change.

[Thumpalumpacus]

That's one hell of a god who made us then, don't you think? Almost makes you think he prefers us dumb, wouldn't you say? All of us except you, right?

Better get cracking on your "logic" and hypothesis, there -- time's running out.

Still waiting for something more than gobbledygook here. I'm already havig a salad with my dinner -- chicken leg-quarters smoked over pecan, rice, and yes, a nice salad.

You salad of verbiage is not necessary, and sure not conducive to insight.

My understanding of the GOD who made us is that we/universes are the result of a self expression of that GOD and there is nothing that can stop the precipitous fulfillment of that Word. In my model we are all doomed to perfection and eternal life.  You might not prefer that hypothetical option either. I have exactly the same inherent capacities as everyone else.  I have simple developed and specialized differently...largely due to environmental pressure of the current world state of strife and suffering being a religious mess.

The way I convey might not resonate with you but it does with others...so I am here learning new tongues and thank you for the reflections. If you have any specific questions or places you want clarification or to take me to task, I welcome it.

Hell, I'm still waiting for your coherent definition of "god." By which I mean a definition shorn of buzzwords, a definition that actually describes the thing. You may or may not be able to describe this god-thingy even though you have faith in him/her/it, but that does me little good when you can't even tell me what we're talking about without importing fatuous assumptions ("the god who made us", for instance).

And then you introduce this crap about the Word. Which word? English has about three-quarters-of-a-million of those thingies, and you'll have to pick one or three or seven or two-hundred-forty-four. What is this word of which you speak? And why is it so vague that you must type so many more words simply to explain it?

As for "specializing differently" ... we're all special. We all get a trophy. It's called a headstone.

If you claim special knowledge, you should display it.

[Arkilogue]

Hell, I'm still waiting for your coherent definition of "god." By which I mean a definition shorn of buzzwords, a definition that actually describes the thing. You may or may not be able to describe this god-thingy even though you have faith in him/her/it, but that does me little good when you can't even tell me what we're talking about without importing fatuous assumptions ("the god who made us", for instance).

And then you introduce this crap about the Word. Which word? English has about three-quarters-of-a-million of those thingies, and you'll have to pick one or three or seven or two-hundred-forty-four. What is this word of which you speak? And why is it so vague that you must type so many more words simply to explain it?

As for "specializing differently" ... we're all special. We all get a trophy. It's called a headstone.

If you claim special knowledge, you should display it.

I have defined "GOD" repeatedly, several times, exactly the same way. An extant infinite absolute. A field of mass/matter that has no border and takes up all available space (saturate). What we have in the universe is voided space and matter in the form of atoms with mass that occupies 0.0000000000001% of the space of the atom and most of the total mass of the atom is in annihilating virtual particles.

You know exactly what "word" I am talking about, don't play dumb. Two places in major world wide religion that link the "word" (vibrational expression of an idea) to God: "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God and the Word was with God." - Bible. "I am the Eternal...I am that which create the Word...I am the Word" Egyptian book of Coming Forth by Day.

The Word was "GOD". It was a self expression of observed self existence "I am that I am" "I am that which Is", "My name is Forever". It is also a pro-creative act by a living being because vibration creates form and space and life begets life. That is the symmetry break/quantum fluctuation that creates a finite God (manifestation of self expressive Oneness aka the "only begotten son"/God the Son/Word) and the space required to separate it from the original infinite.

Now that's all well and good for subjective consciousness but what about objective existence? What are the only objective spatial relationships that can be described of a substance that takes up all space forever? What are it's relativistic equalities? Will you/can you (yes you can) look through "GOD's" eyes with me?

[Thumpalumpacus]

I have defined "GOD" repeatedly, several times, exactly the same way. An extant infinite absolute. A field of mass/matter that has no border and takes up all available space (saturate). What we have in the universe is voided space and matter in the form of atoms with mass that occupies 0.0000000000001% of the space of the atom and most of the total mass of the atom is in annihilating virtual particles.

So, your god is 99.9999999+% nothingness. What is the difference between your god and simple reality in the miniscule remainder? Can you actually speak to that?

You know exactly what "word" I am talking about, don't play dumb. Two places in major world wide religion that link the "word" (vibrational expression of an idea) to God: "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God and the Word was with God." - Bible. "I am the Eternal...I am that which create the Word...I am the Word" Egyptian book of Coming Forth by Day.

I'm not playing dumb; I'm challenging you to go beyond woospeak. No need to get sore about it; if my replies bother you, hey, let me know, I'll shut up. But myself, it seems to me that you're caught between deism and Christianity, and don't really like being asked to peg out your tent.

The Word was "GOD". It was a self expression of observed self existence "I am that I am" "I am that which Is", "My name is Forever".  It is also a pro-creative act by a living being because vibration creates form and space and life begets life. That is the symmetry break/quantum fluctuation that creates a finite God (manifestation of self expressive Oneness aka the "only begotten son"/God the Son/Word) and the space required to separate it from the original infinite.

See, when you start talking about symmetry break/quantum fluctuation that creates a finite God etc , my bullshit-detector starts klanging; such verbiage is in my experience a sign of someone pontificating for impression rather than expression. Big words don't impress me. Nebulous connections and stream-of-thought poesy is likewise unremarkable.

I'm actually asking you that since you have insight into the nature of this god you percieve, perhaps you could lay out your perceptions ... without the high-falutin' bullshit, preferably.

I'm a dumbass. Keep this shit simple, Swami.

Now that's all well and good for subjective consciousness but what about objective existence? What are the only objective spatial relationships that can be described of a substance that takes up all space forever? What are it's relativistic equalities? Will you/can you (yes you can) look through "GOD's" eyes with me?

I'll take a vinaigrette, thanks.

[Whateverist]

"What to say when somebody asks about the big bang "

I tell them my sex life is none of their business...

Beccs is back.  Let the partying begin.

[Arkilogue]

So, your god is 99.9999999+% nothingness.  What is the difference between your god and simple reality in the miniscule remainder? Can you actually speak to that?

No, as I've said repeatedly, GOD is 100% occupation of space by substance and that is the condition of reality/existence/cosmos outside the spatial border of the voided universe. The universe is like a void/vacuum bubble in the middle of an ocean with no top bottom or sides. The difference is that the stuff of the universe is defined by empty space and finite surface borders. There are neither in GOD....like an ocean with no top, bpttom or sides. Extant Infinity.

I'm not playing dumb; I'm challenging you to go beyond woospeak. No need to get sore about it; if my replies bother you, hey, let me know, I'll shut up. But myself, it seems to me that you're caught between deism and Christianity, and don't really like being asked to peg out your tent.

You are more than welcome to take me to task any way you please. I'll do the same.
"The Word" is far older than Christianity.

See, when you start talking about symmetry break/quantum fluctuation that creates a finite God etc , my bullshit-detector starts klanging; such verbiage is in my experience a sign of someone pontificating for impression rather than expression. Big words don't impress me. Nebulous connections and stream-of-thought poesy is likewise unremarkable.

I'm actually asking you that since you have insight into the nature of this god you percieve, perhaps you could lay out your perceptions ... without the high-falutin' bullshit, preferably.

I'm a dumbass. Keep this shit simple, Swami.

Fair enough.

My perceptions of a pre-inflation, extant (substantive) infinite (God prior to creation) are these:

It is One and there is no zero, no "nothing" anywhere.
It is infinite in expanse and omnipresent as total occupation of that space by substance.

It surrounds itself equally in all directions, it is at the center of itself everywhere, and it exists as a field of matter in equilibrium with no higher or lower areas of excitation/energy. A true zero gravity state.

The only mode of travel possible for any vibration/energy though the substance is straightly like a planar compression wavefront through a block of steel. All directions of travel are open, none are preferred.

There is no preferred orientation: no up, down, left, right, out, or in, they all arrive at the same place with no differentiation from the place you left to get there.

There is no curvature.
There is no form.
There is no movement/change of the substance to indicate passage of time.


Those are some of the main qualities I perceive.

[Thumpalumpacus]

yaddayaddalanguageyaddayadda

[Alex K]

There are brief moments when I think I can make sense of a bit, and then the next sentence comes and it's all out the window.

[bennyboy]

Free association, meet spirituality. Spirituality, meet free association.

[LadyForCamus]

Sorry, see bold corrections.

Oh, thank you, that clears it up, lol.