Why is there anything? (Introduction)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Tuesday, April 03, 2012, 11:50 (4595 days ago) @ David Turell

David,
> > A mind... IS something. A universal mind *is* something. So, either you agree with Blackmore that mind is a delusion, or a mind *is* something. You can't have this both ways.
> 
> I don't have it both ways. You know my feeling about Blakemore, intellectually dishonest from my reading of her book, Dying to Live.
> > -You do have it both ways. If the universe starts as a "thought" from God as you're suggesting, but you're also saying the universe starts from "void," then you're directly stating that thought, therefore mind is "void," is nonexistant. -> > [EDITED]
> > The corollary is then, you can shift the question from "What created the Universe?" to "What created God? All the same argumentative absurdities still apply.
> 
> No, God is eternal. God is energy as a mind. Energy is eternal. 
> -dhw already wrote what I would have written for a response. -> 
> > 
> > 1) The traditional Judeo-Christian notion that God is a completely separate and transcendent existence that is entirely separate from the universe. This rejects panentheism by definition. 
> 
> As I wrote elsewhere on this site, I can make up my own theology, all religions do. My God is both within and without the unvierse and by definition that is panentheism.
> > -I'm showing you that your position is neither internally consistent nor logical. You can keep believing it, but it isn't going to help. Throw me a bone here. You've agreed consistently that I understand your reasoning, yet you insist I'm getting it wrong. The key difference as I understand it, is that we seem to have radically different views on the notion of "nonexistence." -> > 2) If the universe *is* existence, then the universe includes God. God is not separate from the universe, God is *part of* the universe. This encompasses both panentheism AND Vedic notions of God. (Pantheism.)
> 
> Yes!!! 
> > 
> > In the case of panentheism, you try to state that the universe exists *within* God. Here's the problem. If mind exists, mind is also part of the universe. So the boundary between a universal mind and the universe is false, because they both exist. (The universe is all *existence.*) To me, this argues that panentheism is a false notion. 
> 
> It is a screwed up argument. We exist in the mind of God. Why do you think quantum mechanics and theory is like it is?-Red herring. 
Where does my argument go astray? -> > 
> > So in this case, being "outside" the universe means... entering nonexistence. "outside" the universe literally means passing into complete nonexistence, literally, beyond God.
> 
> Yes!!!
> > 
> > [FURTHER EDIT]
> > 
> > So now we have the question: "Why something rather than nothing?" This is a question that only has any meaning, if you follow the Judeo-Christian notion of God. 
> 
> you can see I don't.
> 
> > Otherwise, our only choices are existence, or nonexistence. In panentheism [and pantheism], our universe is as old as God, because in both cases... God is the universe. Same for pantheism. Only in the Judeo-Christian notion do you gain a cosmogony where that question is valid. That's the only one that can truly start with "void" and end with "something."
> 
> Again yes. One asks the question and answers with my theology. Religions are human inventions, not a God-given requirement. I try not to give God a anthropomorphic personality. He is a person like no other person, per Adler.-But you're giving God an extra layer that isn't necessary. All is God, God is All. There is no separateness, there is only existence. Since God and universe are synonymous, the question "why is there something rather than nothing" still applies, yet is wholly irrelevant because "nonexistence" simply isn't an option. It never was.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"