This is another point of common confusion today, due to limited “definitions” on the parts of theists and atheists alike.
People assume creation happened once.
The Theists credit God to have created everything in the universe once, in some instances god may be creating things now, but in general, God creates withing the universe based on the limited view of what we consider the physical universe.
The Atheists say creation never occurred. But, many seem to accept a beginning point to the universe as in the big-bang theory, assuming that a big-bang started the universe, this one point preceded everything there is… it created matter and time, but itself (the big-bang) was not created or preceded by anything. Do you see the conflict in this argument? Is this much better than what Theists believe? really? not that different if you ask me.
The Classical Pantheist says creation is ALWAYS occurring, as our Omniverse is constantly creating, in our universe perhaps, perhaps creating other universes, perhaps creating new laws of physics in other existences! we simply do not know.
.
Both Atheists and Theists, once they understand the concept of an Omniverse, will see things very differently:
The Theist will see how an Omniverse is eternal (was never created) and they will see it as the creator. They will see, by definition, an external, creator god that preceded the Omniverses is simply not possible;
.
Christians will finally have an answer when their children ask them “who created god?”
they might say
“everything is god and god is everything and everything has always been there”
.
The Atheist will see the Omniverse as being in constant “creation”, that we are interconnected with and live within (and are a part of) this process, they will use science to explore more of this eternal infinite existence, and rather than deny things to exist unless proven. They might keep an open mind and agree that we do not know everything about existence; perhaps agree that it might be arrogant to deny somethings’ existence just because we currently do not know they exists.
They will finally get a “permission slip”, by redefining the universe as the Omniverse, to explore their own inner world, the mysteries that abound inside them and outside, their life experiences will become lined with spirituality and appreciation, much more awe and appreciation. In other words, more joy.
Atheists will no longer need to come up with new labels such as Scientific Pantheism or Naturalistic Pantheism or Spiritual Atheist only to allow themselves to be both “skeptical and scientific” while being “spiritual”. Classical Pantheists are enjoy being both!
They also might see humans as part of this creator force, as we are a part of the Omniverse, which is always changing and creating.. in various ways, as humans we also create, to add to “all there is”. We are a part of this creation process as we are endowed with enough intelligence to be creators in this Omniverse. To take it one step further one might see art, music, ideas, emotions, thoughts, and even imagination as actual creations.
Like I said earlier, the concept of “creation” is currently defined very narrowly and largely influenced by the Abrahamic definition of creation.
.
Atheists and scientists should reconsider their view of the universe. They must know the difference between “our universe” and that of the Omniverse. This is not mystical theory, this is based on science, philosophy of science and theoretical physics.
.
All-famous physicists such as Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose have discussed how an Ominiverse contains many universes that fork and combine, which could be visualized as more of a system of roads and pathways. They also suggested bubbles of universes, and multiple localized big-bangs. This is active creation in an Omniverse so large (infinite) and eternal that we cannot (have not yet) understood it.
This is how the Ominiverse, itself was never created but is constantly in the process of creation.
in love
A related article: But Who Created the Universe?
|
Ads Google decided were appropriate for this page -:: Shows "relevant" ads from those who have $ to advertise ::- |
Thanks for your patronage. |
July 5th, 2011 at 6:04 am
[...] A related article: What About Creation? [...]
July 5th, 2011 at 11:39 am
>many seem to accept a beginning point to the universe as in the big-bang theory, assuming that a big-bang started the universe, this one point preceded everything there is… it created matter and time, but itself (the big-bang) was not created or preceded by anything. Do you see the conflict in this argument?
As I understand, the Big Bang was the explosion into existence of space-time. To say that it was or was not preceded by anything is to contradict the theory, because “precede” is a concept of time which only makes sense after the existence of space-time.
>They will finally get a “permission slip”, by redefining the universe as the Omniverse, to explore their own inner world, the mysteries that abound inside them and outside, their life experiences will become lined with spirituality and appreciation, much more awe and appreciation. In other words, more joy.
I’m afraid this is quite offensive and downright insulting. There is absolutely nothing preventing atheists from exploring their inner worlds, nor from appreciating their life experiences, or experiencing awe or joy.
July 8th, 2011 at 7:00 pm
Thanks again for your comment. You make good arguments.
On the Big Bang, I agree with you, the theory presumes “the big bang started time and space itself.” Thus, there was no “outside of” or “before” this big bang , no dimensions, no other universes, no other big bangs.. only one big bang one time/space, one universe. Yet, theoretical physics entertain ideas of multiple big bangs, multiple physical universes, not to mention the possibility of non-time, non-space, non-material existences out there.. These are better captured with a word such as Omniverse that is more inclusive than a universe which might be local, physical or one of many.
I was an atheist and I do respect all atheists highly. From my own experiences, the atheists I met were not spiritual, they did not even entertain the idea of spirituality.
Having said that, I agree, there is nothing stopping any human being from experiencing their inner world, outer world, spirituality, mystery, stillness, wholeness, holiness or awareness. I should reword that paragraph. I am not out to insult people, this is not my intention or goal. Thanks for alerting me to this.
July 18th, 2011 at 4:31 am
>the atheists I met were not spiritual, they did not even entertain the idea of spirituality.
I can imagine that. Did you get the sense that they were reacting against “spirit” and all the supernatural notions that word implies, or that they were really not interested in spirituality itself, including all the notions of personal growth and self-development implied by that word in modern usage?