If there was nothing before God created the universe then how do you explain this?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
11,578
1,741
126
You are a collection of neurons all firing off in your brain. Add in sone social conditioning. That would be you. Those thoughts that you think are really your thoughts, are not your thoughts. They have been implanted by society, your realitives, and the school since day one. When you die, your thoughts will die with you. And, you'll forget everything and fade away. Nothing. No sound. No memories. Nothing.

That's why you should learn to detach.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,303
136
Almost invariably, all discussions about "what was before God?" or "what happened before the big bang?" are based upon fundamentally flawed notions regarding the nature of time. There is no before time. There doesn't need to be a before time.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126
Almost invariably, all discussions about "what was before God?" or "what happened before the big bang?" are based upon fundamentally flawed notions regarding the nature of time. There is no before time. There doesn't need to be a before time.
There literally can’t be - by definition.

It’s literally the same as saying “what happens in this universe that is outside of this universe.”
 
May 11, 2008
19,300
1,129
126
It is kind of dissapointing that people believe as they do because they expect to get a reward in the afterlife.
Nothing of being a good person while actually being alive because it is the good thing to do. No, because god is watching and you may be deprived of your ticket to heaven.
Or you think your doing gods bidding and are convinced to get a reward and expect to be rewarded.
Hurting other lifeforms in the process.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126
It is kind of dissapointing that people believe as they do because they expect to get a reward in the afterlife.
Nothing of being a good person while actually being alive because it is the good thing to do. No, because god is watching and you may be deprived of your ticket to heaven.
Or you think your doing gods bidding and are convinced to get a reward and expect to be rewarded.
Hurting other lifeforms in the process.
I'm not sure there's an after life, even if I knew for sure there wasn't, I wouldn't change a thing.

I'm thoroughly convinced that if there is an enernity, it exists in every moment. So I follow my path because it is what gives me the greatest care for others, and love for my self.

Simply said: I seek to be good and godly for its own sake.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: whm1974

J.Wilkins

Platinum Member
Jun 5, 2017
2,681
640
91
I'm not sure there's an after life, even if I knew for sure there wasn't, I wouldn't change a thing.

I'm thoroughly convinced that if there is an entirety, it exists in every moment. So I follow my path because it is what gives me the greatest care for others, and love for my self.

Simply said: I seek to be good and godly for its own sake.

Anyone should be able to respect that but to many people it's unacceptable and you have no concept of good and bad, only God does.

I agree with you though, we know what good and bad is inherently and it's only through outside means that we can give up our inherent knowledge.

It makes me a bit happy that there are people who put thought into this and decided to be good according to their own inherent knowledge of good and bad without considering ramifications that they cannot be sure are even possible.

Or, to simplify, being good for the sake of being good is what is good.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126
Anyone should be able to respect that but to many people it's unacceptable and you have no concept of good and bad, only God does.

I agree with you though, we know what good and bad is inherently and it's only through outside means that we can give up our inherent knowledge.

It makes me a bit happy that there are people who put thought into this and decided to be good according to their own inherent knowledge of good and bad without considering ramifications that they cannot be sure are even possible.

Or, to simplify, being good for the sake of being good is what is good.
Makes sense to me.

Now how can we keep this idea and the mouth breathers from taking my shit?
 

J.Wilkins

Platinum Member
Jun 5, 2017
2,681
640
91
Makes sense to me.

Now how can we keep this idea and the mouth breathers from taking my shit?

We can't. We can propose it as a philosophical suggestion and frame a logical argument around it if we want to but as an empiricist I would find it a waste of time.

We could show that empathy exists and is an inherent function of humans which we have done, we could argue that empathy IS an inherent sense of good as it is literally allowing us to understand pain that happens to others as if it was happening to ourselves.

We could then deduce that we are all inherently good AND bad but that we all know what is good and bad without any external source required.

Empirically evidenced and no one can dispute it outside of argumentum ad ignoratiam suggestions.

Unfortunately that is exactly what religion is all about. :(
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126
We can't. We can propose it as a philosophical suggestion and frame a logical argument around it if we want to but as an empiricist I would find it a waste of time.

We could show that empathy exists and is an inherent function of humans which we have done, we could argue that empathy IS an inherent sense of good as it is literally allowing us to understand pain that happens to others as if it was happening to ourselves.

We could then deduce that we are all inherently good AND bad but that we all know what is good and bad without any external source required.

Empirically evidenced and no one can dispute it outside of argumentum ad ignoratiam suggestions.

Unfortunately that is exactly what religion is all about. :(
So what process turns moral compas us away from ethical true north?

What’s your field?
 

J.Wilkins

Platinum Member
Jun 5, 2017
2,681
640
91
So what process turns moral compas us away from ethical true north?

What’s your field?

Mainly imprints (through drugs or behaviour challenges (religious/ideological teachings force behaviour challenges which inevitably alters imprint) or environmental factors which pretty much falls into the same category as drugs) which occur in several ways, both by electrochemical changes and by epigenetic changes which result in physical differences in brain structure. Some areas grow bigger and neural interaction can be increased or reduced.

I'm a molecular biologist and a biochemist, my field is pretty much everything in between. I mainly design studies and attempt to counteract abnormal genetic or harmful genetic expression in three stages, chemical, epigenetic (which is chemical but where a drug is a general means of delivering chemicals an epigenetic acetylation of a gene can mean cellular delivery or targeted delivery basically, we turn genes on or off) and genetic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr. Zaus

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
If you dont like the Bible maybe consider the tale of Gilgamesh as told by the Sumerians and written in the first language cuneiform or Sumerian. They had their own system of Gods and claimed much of what they knew was taught to them by their Gods or beings from an extra-terrestrial location called the Anunnaki, or shining ones or fallen ones.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,981
3,318
126
I'm not sure there's an after life, even if I knew for sure there wasn't, I wouldn't change a thing.

I'm thoroughly convinced that if there is an enernity, it exists in every moment. So I follow my path because it is what gives me the greatest care for others, and love for my self.

Simply said: I seek to be good and godly for its own sake.
How noble of you!!
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,570
96
We can't. We can propose it as a philosophical suggestion and frame a logical argument around it if we want to but as an empiricist I would find it a waste of time.

We could show that empathy exists and is an inherent function of humans which we have done, we could argue that empathy IS an inherent sense of good as it is literally allowing us to understand pain that happens to others as if it was happening to ourselves.

We could then deduce that we are all inherently good AND bad but that we all know what is good and bad without any external source required.

Empirically evidenced and no one can dispute it outside of argumentum ad ignoratiam suggestions.

Unfortunately that is exactly what religion is all about. :(
Well I myself go with using empathy and considering wither or not my actions and behavior is either beneficial or harmful to myself and others.
 

Caveman

Platinum Member
Nov 18, 1999
2,525
33
91
The text doesn't say that, it says in Genesis 1:

" In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

So in the beginning there was God and God created everything.

And it is entirely un-equivocal in John 1:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made."

Consider there are three beginnings here: the one in John 1:1 that defines the alpha (an infinite time ago) and a second in Genesis 1:1 that describes a creation of the earth. Then, a 3rd beginning in Genesis 1:2 that was a REcreation (as the Hebrew defines) which has happened in "recent" history (~6000 years ago). Science corroborates what the bible indicates: that the earth came into existence at some point in between (currently thought to be ~4.5B years ago).
 
Last edited:

Caveman

Platinum Member
Nov 18, 1999
2,525
33
91
Job is older. And John, like Genesis, starts with creation.

The John 1:1 reference is one of several references in the bible that are understood to be at some infinite point in the past or said another way "what has always been, without beginning"... Both Genesis and Job would be infinitely more recent references.
 
Last edited:

Caveman

Platinum Member
Nov 18, 1999
2,525
33
91
If god were smart, he would've made a much more convincing argument by sharing knowledge which could only be obtained through divinity.

A very interesting observation... Perhaps He chooses who and when to share that knowledge and it is not yet the best time for you to know based on His plan...?