In the beginning God or nothing?

Originally posted by black beetle
The "beginning" is the point singularity! I never offered an opinion regarding the situation "before" the point singularity because there is no "before" -and because even if there was, that hypothetical status it would be meaningless due to the fact that the products of its process changed not the status of our kosmos as we know it.

On the other hand ...[text shortened]... out the existence of a status of "beginning" other than the point singularity?
😵

The "beginning" is the point singularity!

Thank you. I tried to say that, but probably got it all bollixed up.

Originally posted by knightmeister
The only sticking point is the word "prior" which can be interpreted in many ways. I imagine that because we live in a time trapped universe we have very few if any relevant adjectives to describe a timeless existence. However, there is no logical reason to assume that such a state cannot exist just because our language is limited.

Can you suggest any way in which "prior" can be interpreted that does not include time? I don't see you using the word "after" instead. You do use the word "outside" but you then insist on giving it a direction ie "prior" or "before" the beginning of the universe. That means only one thing - an extension of the time dimension.
As I stated, the very definition of the word "time" requires that the statement "before time" is meaningless.
What does "longer than long" mean to you?

If a timeless existence is possible then it is an existence that is independent of the time dimension (and presumably the spacial dimensions as they are intricately linked to time). However that results in the said existence having no position on any known dimension and thus to give it a position 'prior' to time is contradictory. Further, any interaction with the universe would result in paradoxes. The universe is static from the point of view of an entity not bound by dimensions therefore interaction is impossible.

Originally posted by vistesd
[b]The "beginning" is the point singularity!

Thank you. I tried to say that, but probably got it all bollixed up.[/b]

Yes, The Point in the Circle crystallized😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Nope;

It seems to me that you keep up thinking at the best the newtonian way regarding matters that today they are approached either by relativity or by quantum mechanics. Relativity sees the universe as a series of events which they follow a specific process within time, and the subject is considered a secondary agent because it is supposed to be th ...[text shortened]... es who got a telephone from heaven and (their) "god" was on the line😵

Okay, you get everything from ... oh wait, we never got that far you
just say it was always here, but it was not eternal. Whatever you want
to believe it is up to you.
Kelly

Originally posted by black beetle
Yes, The Point in the Circle crystallized😵

Its is a circle alright!
Kelly

Originally posted by black beetle
We do not know where the singularity came from, the farest we can trace is the existence of the singularity. All we know is that our kosmos and its dimensions evolved from there.
Well?

😵

The fatest you can trace...you mean the fatest you think it went to
do you not?
Kelly

Originally posted by vistesd
Actually, we’re the same. If I were to ask you what God “generated itself” from—you would likely say: “Nothing. God always was.”

I am saying the same thing with regard to the totality: the all-of-all-of-all-of-it. I am not saying that it has always been as it is. It is that “as-it-isness” that had a beginning (at the singularity). I do not t ...[text shortened]... that it makes sense to say that there must have been a something before the first something![/b]

You seem to limit everything as being in the singularity for some
odd reason as if you know that were true, why is that?
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Okay, you get everything from ... oh wait, we never got that far you
just say it was always here, but it was not eternal. Whatever you want
to believe it is up to you.
Kelly

Some of us did get that far (I don't recall whether Black beetle did). We stated that not everything 'comes from' and that the universe may be one of those things that didn't. In my case it is not a belief but a hypothesis, and despite your ridiculing tone, you have not shown that it is in any way invalid, illogical or ridiculous.
You on the other hand have been no less vague. You have stated that the universe had a beginning, that it was 'created' but God, yet you won't define what the universe is, and don't specify whether the spacial dimensions continue beyond this 'beginning', though you do say that time does - which in my view would be a good enough reason for classifying the state prior to the 'beginning' as part of the universe. Worst of all you keep implying that a finite time dimension is illogical yet you do not give one single bit of an argument in that direction, you simply restate it over and over in the hope that it will become true.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Some of us did get that far (I don't recall whether Black beetle did). We stated that not everything 'comes from' and that the universe may be one of those things that didn't. In my case it is not a belief but a hypothesis, and despite your ridiculing tone, you have not shown that it is in any way invalid, illogical or ridiculous.
You on the other hand h ...[text shortened]... direction, you simply restate it over and over in the hope that it will become true.

I repeat it over and over, much like I get from you and others that
the singularity is the beginning without addressing where it came
from. Since the universe and all it in is supposed to be in the
singularity, it than is the universe, the only thing you have addressed
is that universe once looked like this, without addressing how it came
into being.

I'm sorry for my tone, that is my bad, it should not get as bad as
it has.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Okay, you get everything from ... oh wait, we never got that far you
just say it was always here, but it was not eternal. Whatever you want
to believe it is up to you.
Kelly

I just explained you that there is no such a thing as a "before the point singularity"😵

Originally posted by KellyJay
Its is a circle alright!
Kelly

Nope; it is the Longface crystallized, The Ancient of the Days crystallized😵

Originally posted by KellyJay
The fatest you can trace...you mean the fatest you think it went to
do you not?
Kelly

Nope;

I said we do not know where the singularity came from, the farest we can trace is the existence of the singularity. We have already traced it based on elements of reality, but you appear to ignore it😵

Originally posted by KellyJay
I repeat it over and over, much like I get from you and others that
the singularity is the beginning without addressing where it came
from. Since the universe and all it in is supposed to be in the
singularity, it than is the universe, the only thing you have addressed
is that universe once looked like this, without addressing how it came
into being.

I'm sorry for my tone, that is my bad, it should not get as bad as
it has.
Kelly

Since you appear to think that a singularity is "something that comes from somewhere" it is obvious to me that either intentionally or unintentionally you 're unable to offer a solid argument.
Therefore I have to ask you: how do you define "singularity"?
😵

Originally posted by black beetle
I just explained you that there is no such a thing as a "before the point singularity"😵

I know you say it, and I'm quite sure you believe it too.
Kelly

Originally posted by black beetle
Nope;

I said we do not know where the singularity came from, the farest we can trace is the existence of the singularity. We have already traced it based on elements of reality, but you appear to ignore it😵

I guess I don't have the eyes to see that you do.
Kelly