Simple Thought Experiment with a stunning premise!

by Terry 22 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • waton
    There was no "before" the universe, as there was no time and "before" is a product of a universe.

    Simon, ,many mainstream scientist disagree, time is not a by- product of existence of matter, as a first dimension it co-existed with uncreated energy. here is a recent pre Big Bang link:

    Johns Hopkins University. "Dark matter may be older than the Big Bang." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 7 August 2019. <>.
  • Terry

    I was hoping for a discussion of your ideas - all of you.
    I'm not trying to say THIS IS CORRECT.
    It is just a hypothetical exploration of "definition" rather than:

    "The sound of one hand clapping"

    By deconstructing our ideas we must break them down into the smallest parts, constituencies, essences. Aristotle : “the essence of a thing is what it is said to be in respect of itself”

    All definitions of GOD rely on a post-Creation setting. The only way to deconstruct the essence of GOD is to take that one step back BEFORE creation. At that point,
    Whatever GOD is - is in relation only to GOD.

    The Thought Experiment seeks the Axiomatic GOD rather than the "historical" GOD of the written word post creation.

    THINK of a number which does NOT exist. (Go ahead. I'll wait.)

    Even if you possess infinite wisdom and freedom your knowledge and unfettered-ness
    isn't sufficient to that task.
    That's not how thinking and numbers works.

    To understand ANYTHING we must first strip that object of every non-essential
    possible and leaving only its essential nature.

  • peacefulpete

    pp how do you know that?

    My first impulse was to say: In the beginning....

    If we postulate a something happening before the beginning it is no longer the beginning.

    But then to use Terry's logic experiment, lets assume this god never didn't create, we are then back to an eternal physical universe, then very thing creationists can't accept.

  • waton
    All definitions of GOD rely on a post-Creation setting.

    Terry, no, the definition of the deist creator is of an originator, that has not interfered, since the first, and final act of creation in his work. Most so-called gods, particularly wt's has been busy. Even I. Newton thought the Lord had to keep tinkering with our solar system.

    we are then back to an eternal physical universe, then very thing creationists can't accept.

    pp: well, we know from postulating back into time, that the universe is not eternal, just 13,8 billion years old, but that does not mean that energy in other forms than matter did not exist eternally, uncreated. with eternal time to exist in.

    just because we can not easily grasp that, only express it mathematically, does not mean it is not feasible.
    Imagine a creator that can set up energy, matter and laws* to allow the universe to evolve into the form we have today, and throw away the keys.

    * One theory has it, that even natural laws evolve to a point where the ones that work for the good are kept and survive until today. we with them.

  • Finkelstein

    God(s) the greatest answer to human ignorance .

  • joey jojo
    joey jojo

    There are a few different ways to define love. Another definition of love is 'willing servitude'.

    By loving us, does that mean that God serves us?

  • Finkelstein

    How can we hope to achieve a definition of god without mythological story telling to help us understand his actions and purpose. ?

    Meaning 0 X Infinity = 0

  • peacefulpete

    waton...trying to honor Terry's brilliant exercise, If we say God has never not been a creator, then creation is coeternal with god. Since God did not exist before his creation he then becomes inseparable from creation, he and creation are indistinguishable.

    This same god did not love prior to an other to express love for. therefore God needed someone to love quite literally.

  • Terry

    Like I said, these deconstructions are simply meant to put us in a "fresh" and novel spot
    as a promontory where we're out of our comfort zone of "knowing" the off-the-rack
    "knowledge" handed to us by our parents, religion, and experts.
    Our World View can be an EXAMINED view rather than a 'received' view.

    Words and Thinking are almost inextricably intertwined. We need to be extremely cautious about definitions, IMHO.

  • Finkelstein

    If a supernatural being created the universe it really is a sloppy careless creator.

    Without evidence we can only make up pseudo definitions through are own imagination and step out of intellectual honesty.

Share this