It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Where was God Before He Created the Universe?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by RUFFREADY
God was the beginning the first. When he said "let us create man in "our" image..." he wasn't really talking to anyone but the cosmos. (he was talking to the entire universe)

God being from a type 7 civilization. "This would be a God or a deity, able to create universes at will, using them as an energy source, and a large one at that. Type 7 though is well beyond the stage of understanding that humans can incur beyond a technological singularity."



Now you lost me. How could God be talking to the cosmos if the cosmos didn't even exist
Type 7? Care to explain the other 6. I've never heard of any of these.




posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 


The "Kardashev scale"


Type V, and beyond

Such hypothetical civilizations have either transcended their universe of origin or arose within a multiverse or other higher-order membrane of existence, and are capable of universe-scale manipulation of individual discrete universes from an external frame of reference. In fiction, their "god-like" artifacts or endowed abilities (such as monolith) find their way into the hands of relatively juvenile "Type 0" civilizations (such as humanity):


info on here (and more elsewhere) en.wikipedia.org...

good one I use www.weirdwarp.com...
edit on 16-7-2013 by RUFFREADY because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by RUFFREADY
 


Ok, thanks for the references. I'll take a peak that these. Once again, thanks for sharing



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker

Originally posted by RUFFREADY
God was the beginning the first. When he said "let us create man in "our" image..." he wasn't really talking to anyone but the cosmos. (he was talking to the entire universe)

God being from a type 7 civilization. "This would be a God or a deity, able to create universes at will, using them as an energy source, and a large one at that. Type 7 though is well beyond the stage of understanding that humans can incur beyond a technological singularity."



Now you lost me. How could God be talking to the cosmos if the cosmos didn't even exist
Type 7? Care to explain the other 6. I've never heard of any of these.


Thanks to the mention of a type 7 civilisation. I went off to do some research on this civilisation type hypotheses and found it very interesting. We are at the stage of around a 0.75 at this point by the scales calculation. It is one of those fascinating theories that could explain everything or just as likely be completely inaccurate. All in all well worth a look at.

This is one of the things I really like about ATS.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 12:21 AM
link   
God is space, we are time.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 02:01 AM
link   
God lives outside space and time.. This is what the Bible says. He is the beginning and the end, this means he is outside of time and somehow can see all of time at once, this is how we have prophecy. This is one of the main concepts of god. He is not living in the clouds or in space, he is outside of space/time. If he created the universe them he must have been outside of it to create it. The heavens are outside space/time, they could be different dimensions. You really need to study the original hebrew and Greek texts to get a greater understanding. Luckily some scholars have done this and there are many vids on youtube trying to explain this. It's massively interesting and fits in with the quantum theories on extra dimensions.

Good question but not too hard to answer, if he created the universe, he was outside of it.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 02:27 AM
link   
God doesn't exisit yet... The universe is going to be created by what you call God in the future using time travel



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Briles1207
There doesnt need to be a "before god"

Time is man-made. We assume everything has to have a beginning or end.

There may have not been a beginning, but that is too mind blowing to comprehend.


Briles



This is correct. Time is a measurement of physical movements; the movement of the Earth, for example. Here on Earth we have 24 hour days. But let's imagine that 500 years from now it is commonplace for human beings to be permanent residents of Mars. Our 24 hour days, 60 minute hours would be meaningless to them.

Now, the universe is populated by physical objects. But without those physical objects, ie before the creation of the universe, time either does not exist or is a measurement of something entirely different, perhaps event-based measurement.

"God", spirits, etc, are not physical beings, at least not in the way that we think of physical existence. Time from their point of view could be completely nonexistent, so the question of "Where was God before the Universe?" could be pointless, as our concept of time did not exist. There was no before or after, as everything is eternity.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

Look at the previous verse;
"The true light that enlightens every man was coming into the world"- John ch1 v9
The subject of the verb is the same in both verses. They are both talking about the LOGOS, as defined in vv1-5

It is also said that the LOGOS ",,,became flesh and dwelt among us"- John ch1 v14- (before he became flesh, he was not dwelling among us but only dwelling elsewhere)

Whatever your disparaging opinion of the "Creation" concept, it is what the Bible clearly teaches, and it is also the premise of the question being asked in this thread.




edit on 17-7-2013 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


Look at the previous verse;
"The true light that enlightens every man was coming into the world"- John ch1 v9
The subject of the verb is the same in both verses. They are both talking about the LOGOS, as defined in vv1-5
There is a well known problem with that verse where it can mean that it is the light to every man coming into the world, so that it is people coming into the world.

It is also said that the LOGOS ",,,became flesh and dwelt among us"- John ch1 v14- (before he became flesh, he was not dwelling among us but only dwelling elsewhere)
I don't think that "became flesh" is the correct translation.

Whatever your disparaging opinion of the "Creation" concept, it is what the Bible clearly teaches, and it is also the premise of the question being asked in this thread.
I have no idea what you mean by "disparaging opinion".
Creation is not detailed except by one character, The Lord, making Adam from the dirt.
edit on 17-7-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 


Have you ever heard of a multiverse? Our universe was create through a process called "The Big Bang". Which means that there was a space of sorts that our Universe was created in, which means that it is quite possible that there are more that just one "Ours" Universe within that space. Sooo.... Maybe he has always been busy creating Univereses.




posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

Scholarship in general thinks "became flesh" is the correct translation.
Evading the meaning of the Greek statement because it does not suit your purpose is not sound exegesis.

Creation is specified in the opening verse of Genesis.
It is also in the statement that "everything that was made" was made through the LOGOS.
(Which means, of course, that the LOGOS himself cannot be included within the category "everything that was made", because the LOGOS could not be made "through" himself.
In the same way that a pipe cannot travel through itself.)
Perhaps I should point out that leaving out portions of the Bible because they don't suit your purpose is not sound exegesis either.




edit on 17-7-2013 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Xquizit
 


I don't hold of the view of the big bang, but the idea that God could be out there creating billions of universes is interesting. Good thought.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 

In the same way that a pipe cannot travel through itself.
That's twice that you said that, without explaining how it applies.
I guess your answer to the question in the tread title is, 'the same place where He is now'.
Disagreeing with a translation is not "evading" it.
edit on 17-7-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

I thought the image was transparent enough, but it applies in this way.
A pipe cannot travel through itself.
Therefore the pipe itself cannot be included in the category "everything that travels through this pipe".

Similarly, the LOGOS cannot be made "through himself".
But we are told that "everything that was made" was made through [DIA] the LOGOS.
Therefore the LOGOS cannot be included in the category "everything that was made".
In other words, the LOGOS was not created.

It applies in exactly the same way when then the statement is that "God created everything that was created".
By the same logical necessity, the God who created could not be included in the category "every thing that was created".

If you don't believe that God was the Creator of all things, that's your privilege, but it puts you out of harmony with the teaching of the Bible.






edit on 17-7-2013 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


I think you are going off on a big tangent over my saying that God is in the universe, plus being judgmental, it seems to me, against someone who does not agree with you though you have nothing to back it up.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 02:11 PM
link   
'God' is simply the term for what ancient civilizations called Extraterrestrials.

The gods who created us (check Gen 1-27) were astronauts from a different planet, most likely a Type 2 civilization, possibly a Type 1, (where we will be shortly)

So the only kind of 'god' that has the technology to create universes is a Tpye 4 and beyond, meaning he/she lives in a parallel universe.
edit on 17-7-2013 by ButterCookie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

Let's just do a recap of the story so far;
Stage 1) The OP asked a question, based on the premise that God created the world.
Stage 2) I offered an answer, based on the premise that God created the world.
Stage 3) You criticised my proposed answer as invalid, based on the premise that God and the world are the same thing (that is, denying the premise that God created the world)
Stage 4) I now press the point that the premise "God created the world" is Biblical, which means that in Biblical teaching God and the world are not the same thing (and therefore my original proposed answer is not invalid after all).

That is not going off on a tangent.
That is keeping the eye firmly on the issue which set off this argument in the first place, the issue which you chose when you criticised my own suggested answer.
Did God create the world, or did he not?



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 

You criticised my proposed answer as invalid, based on the premise that God and the world are the same thing (that is, denying the premise that God created the world)
I don't know where you got that from.
I was criticizing your workaround to ignore the definition of a universe (which is everything that exists).
You were trying to substitute another term, creation, then proceeded to knock my own claim using your own made-up definition.
To me, saying God is not included in the universe (which you claim) is the same as saying He does not exist.
Obviously the creator and the creation are separate things, but it does not argue that the creator can not exist in the universe.
Regardless of whether the universe is created or not does not preclude the existence in it of the creator, nor does the timing of the creation bear any significance other than that the state of there not existing a universe is pretty much irrevocably negated, along with whatever state God existed in before the universe did come into existence.
This is to me a logical reason to assume that seeing how there is no longer anywhere outside the universe to exist in, using the normal definition of a universe, God now exists in the universe.

The thread was about where God was before He created the universe, and my answer was that it was someplace (not actually a "place" but a mode of existence) which no longer "exists", though technically it didn't really exist in the first place but only the entities really existed, but yet to be true "beings" according to the classical definition of a being (which requires a place to "be" in).
edit on 17-7-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 

It was obvious enough from the thread title phrase "he created the universe" that the OP was not using the word "universe" in your definition- what I might call the "inclusive" definition, because it includes God.
The statement "God created the universe" necessarily distinguishes "God" from "universe", and therefore uses a "narrow" definition, NOT including God.
I gave my answer according to this narrow definition, because I knew that was what the OP was talking about.

Seeing your reply, I guessed that it was probably not very productive to try to argue you out of your dogmatic belief that your "inclusive" definition was the only legitimate usage.
Instead, at a very early stage in the discussion, I proposed dropping the word "universe" altogether, and using any word you fancied, as long as it denoted WHAT THE OP WAS TALKING ABOUT, that is the creation, that which God created.
If your definition of "universe" is the only legitimate one, then the OP was using the wrong word, because he meant something different. I suppose that makes him a very naughty boy.

Having established that point, surely we can get on to discussing WHAT THE OP ACTUALLY MEANT- that is the creation which God created, whatever by-our-lady word we use to describe it.
The intended question is "Where was God before he created what he created?"
In terms of that question, I believe my answer was a legitimate possibility.









edit on 17-7-2013 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join