Many philosophers have taken on how existence happened as a series of causal events. But what about where God came from...

Many philosophers have taken on how existence happened as a series of causal events. But what about where God came from? How did God come about? Or, if you are an atheist and only believe in the big bang....where did that stuff that caused the big bang come from? The idea that "something came out of nothing" sounds incredibly absurd. But so does "there was always universal stuff eternal".

When I think about either of these, my conclusion is "existence is a paradox" or "we will never know these answers". Any philosopher or writer in general write about this topic?

Did God make us so he wouldn't be alone any more? Just as we look into the chaotic void of existence, deep space, wondering why we exist. Does he do the same...the highest God, with no God above him?

Other urls found in this thread:

theonion.com/worlds-top-scientists-ponder-what-if-the-whole-univers-1819565229
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

the hermit hath not his lantern. harrumph.

you say they sound incredibly absurd, but honestly either option is equally valid due to the limitations of our perceptions. man based logic is as flawed as any of our other creations, and all conclusions proffered therefore must be taken with precious grains of salt. even with careful consideration, you will likely never know what place to rest your beliefs.

in terms of god's lonesomeness, it wouldn't be surprising. though i doubt many of us make great company. perhaps there is some other motive, or perhaps none at all.

God is the abyss of no-thingness “where” all being is born through the intellect-soul

you need to practice quantum thought. the law of non-contradiction is both valid and invalid simultaneously. it is really the only barrier to human logic that is really fucking difficult to get past. it's a bit like crossing your eyes on purpose and trying to go about your daily life. you get used to it though. the impetus of truth begins to dissolve and you finally start to understand what those buddhist shitheads were yapping about.

so far all the answers we have amount to the universe/god have always existed

there are some meme scientists like Lawrence M. Krauss that wrote a book "A Universe from Nothing" that have a thesis that the universe can originate from "nothing". But of course this is a trick, he defines "nothing" as a quantum void, which is not a real void, but it's a kind a substance with properties and fluctuations from which matter and universes may appear, so it's still an eternal substance from which the universe originates

what is kind of tricky is that our time originated on the big bang, so even if that eternal quantum void exists, it can't fluctuate with time, it's out of time and precedes time, so it would have to fluctuate in a different dimension or time than ours

Krauss's "nothing" was very interesting, i've watched his lecture on it a few times, that bothered me as well, but then i realized it's just a goalpost moving another step back. it's the other side of the god of the gaps coin.

I suppose we will never truly know, but speculation is limitless.
My theory is that the scale of the universe eventually reaches a certain point where things of massively huge or small size will resemble those of the other extreme. Not the best way to put it, I know, but think of the Whos on the dandelion in Horton Hears a Who, but on far grander scale. To me the large, loosely spongy arrangement of the macrouniverse suggests we could be nothing more than specks on particles forming atoms in compounds, of which form larger and more complex things such as "microbes" (macrobes?).
If this is true, it means the time we (or the known universe) have existed would only constitute a fraction of a fraction of a negative power of a moment. It would also defer the synthesis of our known universe to a presumed natural phenomenon of the macrouniverse, something like a large scale chemical reaction. It would certainly help to explain the expansion of the universe to some extent

>babby's first travel through the mental microscope

theonion.com/worlds-top-scientists-ponder-what-if-the-whole-univers-1819565229

desu I’ve had similar thoughts when I was younger except the whole universe was an atom that was a part of the exact same universe ad infintum
Kind of like eternal return but a much more useless concept

Time is a human perception imo desu senpai

literally Men in Black

right, zebras definitely don't experience time or anything. christ.

I know, aren’t zebras neat?

is this that 18 year old girlposter again? jetlag eh?

their stripes are protoplasmic arrays they use to collapse the waveform function and thus ascend the speed of light through quantum entanglement and supercoiled strings.

Where did you get this information?
Are you a jew?

the truth might upset you. suffice to say i like my scotch. the cheap kind.

See they'll say God is the ultimate principle and that you're a brainlet for asking this question. The problem is by the same reasoning there's no reason to say that the universe itself isn't the ultimate or that the reality of our God is also apprehended by a metagod. Its all a bit academic ultimately.

If there is a “metagod” that would literally just be God.

holy. you just made me blow my mind nut.

>haha i lik adum sundler moobie

Behave in this world and God will tell you all about it in the next.

at least adam sandler can get a cogent point across.

I don't know, its one thing if you wanted to say "well I think that idea is retarded" but to say the post wasn't even intelligible so much as to glean any kind of basic meaning from it, then you're just damaging your own credibility. In fact I'm so sure you understood exactly what I was saying that I wont even insult your intelligence by trying to explain it.

no, the really sad part is that the whole of the message was patently juvenile, and i had honestly assumed that you were trying to convey something of greater significance, giving you the benefit of the doubt, but poking you a little in the ribs for such a poor show of it, but no, you got all butthurt. it was just bad, all right?

The dishonesty continues. You did exactly none of that. You read my post, it didn't align with your dogma and you had a knee jerk reaction. That's all that happened. Don't make a meal out of this thing.

no, dude, it was written badly, didn't express its point well at all, and held no argument that wasn't already addressed similarly earlier in the thread. parsing through it was unpleasant and unenlightening. let's just let this pass. it's over now. move on.

I'm not the one trying to say it was supposed to be profound in the first place. I have no idea what texts your pretending to read these days but nothing of the sort has even been broached in this very brief thread.

how about we do a little experiment, and you go ahead and insult my intelligence by explaining exactly what you meant in the simplest terms possible, and we'll see what you come up with, okay?

all energy (hence matter) in the previous universe was condensed into the most efficient, compact form possible over an inconceivably terrifying period of time at which point it reached some kind of unfathomable reaction resulting in our universe, which will presumably repeat this act into eternity

>The problem is by the same reasoning
Not at all! The Universe did seemingly have a cause.

>reads Infinity and the Mind ONCE

What is God? Who are you?

You need to question your assumptions about what these things are.

God by definition does not need to have come about.
Summa Theologica is the work you're looking for