What existed before the Beginning

[truethat]

Tohu vavohu is a word that means CHAOS. It does not mean "NOTHING"

Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society
[NIV at IBS] [NIV at Zondervan] [Zondervan]

Genesis 1
The Beginning
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.


But the Hebrew translation uses


Beresh** - Genesis 1 - Beresh**h
Advanced Information

Verse English Translation Jewish Transliterated text Jewish Beresh** Hebrew text Jewish Beresh** Hebrew text

1:1 In the beginning God created heaven and earth
Beresh** bara Elohim et hashamayim ve'et ha'arets.

1:2 The earth was without form and empty, with darkness
on the face of the depths, but God's spirit moved on the water's surface.
[I]Veha'arets hayetah tohu vavohu vechoshech al-peney
tehom veruach Elohim merachefet al-peney hamayim.


1:3 God said, 'There shall be light,' and light came into existence. Vayomer Elohim yehi-or vayehi-or.

1:4 God saw that the light was good, and God divided between the light and the darkness.
Vayar Elohim et-ha'or ki-tov vayavdel Elohim beyn ha'or uveyn hachoshech.

1:5 God named the light 'Day,' and the darkness He named 'Night.' It was evening and it was morning, one day.
Vayikra Elohim la-or yom velachoshech kara laylahvayehi-erev vayehi-voker yom echad.

1:6 God said, 'There shall be a sky in the middle of the water, and it shall divide between water and water.'
Vayomer Elohim yehi rakia betoch hamayim vyhi
mavdil beyn mayim lamayim.





In discussing this is occurred to me that if what existed before the earth was formed was CHAOS then all of the evolution theories and the big bang theories actually support the biblical story. If God simply took the Chaos and made it into ORDER then that's entirely different than thinking he made everything from scratch.

Just curious what both believers and skeptics would make of this. The Christian Bible has changed the original

[l0rca]

It can definitely be twisted to fit the biblical story, by using logical fallacies like association by metaphor, semantic bait-and-switches, and a healthy dose of vaguely dismissing all the facts that do not fit.

[Fnord]

Q: What existed before the Beginning?

A1: Who cares?
A2: Why should it matter?
A3: Planet X.
A4: All of the above.
A5: None of the above.

[Jimbo07]

If God simply took the Chaos and made it into ORDER then that's entirely different than thinking he made everything from scratch.

Of course, we don't physically know what God may-or-may-not have done. If there is something beyond the Big Bang (in what sense, I don't know), it could perhaps be artistically labelled Chaos, because it wouldn't make sense it terms of everyday experience. Of course, this would be separate from the mathematical notion of chaos, but meh...

ETA: Fnord... your post seems almost... anti-scientific. Of course physicists care. There's no definitive consensus on what the 'Beginning' even means at this point! Some think that time has no defintion outside the Big Bang, but if there's anything to a cyclical universe, or brane theory, say...

[Gord_in_Toronto]

"What existed before the Beginning?"

Nobody knows. Deal with it as you will.

[Ichneumonwasp]

"What existed before the Beginning?"

Nobody knows. Deal with it as you will.

Sure we do. The phrase "existed before the beginning" is meaningless.

[Fnord]

This thread could just as well been entitled "How Many Angels Can Dance on the Head of a Pin?", since it is pure speculation about a condition or subject that can not be proven in the first place.

It's like Pres. Bush's brain -- no one has ever seen it, so it must not exist.

(Sorry! Couldn't resist that last one!)

[truethat]

interesting replies so far. I hope they keep coming.

[truethat]

This thread could just as well been entitled "How Many Angels Can Dance on the Head of a Pin?", since it is pure speculation about a condition or subject that can not be proven in the first place.

It's like Pres. Bush's brain -- no one has ever seen it, so it must not exist.

(Sorry! Couldn't resist that last one!)



What I find interesting is that you keep replying "who cares its just speculation!" Why does it bother you that other people might wish to discuss it?

[triadboy]

In discussing this is occurred to me that if what existed before the earth was formed was CHAOS then all of the evolution theories and the big bang theories actually support the biblical story. If God simply took the Chaos and made it into ORDER then that's entirely different than thinking he made everything from scratch.


The Jewish creation story was taken from the Babylonian creation story which was taken from the Sumarians.

There is no need for God. The universe is never-ending.

What happened before the Beginning? The Big Crunch. Before that? The Big Bang. Before that? The Big Crunch. Before that? The Big Bang ...and on and on until you hemorrhage.

[Jimbo07]

What happened before the Beginning? The Big Crunch. Before that? The Big Bang. Before that? The Big Crunch. Before that? The Big Bang ...and on and on until you hemorrhage.

Well, now we know which cosmology you support without conclusive evidence... ;)

[truethat]

Well if all the creation stories were shared and passed down, it interests me that there might be in the human make up (Dawkins' memes) a yearning to either it having a residual memory of truth, or a transcendent symbolic meaning.

Curious though, why Christians changed the word to empty or nothing.

The idea that the Universe existed in Chaos and then order was established creates for me a very different kind of God theory.

[triadboy]

Well, now we know which cosmology you support without conclusive evidence... ;)

It's coming....give it time.

[Cello Man]

Asking what happened before the beginning is like asking what's north of the North Pole. Not to mention, if God made everything then who made God?

Infinite regression is the name of this game.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Sure we do. The phrase "existed before the beginning" is meaningless.

Well. That's one way of "dealing with it". :D

[truethat]

What's north of the North Pole is a wonderful example. Because as you continue to go North the paradigm shifts. Excellent.

[Ichneumonwasp]

Well if all the creation stories were shared and passed down, it interests me that there might be in the human make up (Dawkins' memes) a yearning to either it having a residual memory of truth, or a transcendent symbolic meaning.

Curious though, why Christians changed the word to empty or nothing.

The idea that the Universe existed in Chaos and then order was established creates for me a very different kind of God theory.

This is a translation. I'm not sure that it makes sense to say that Christians changed the word to "nothing", as though there is some conspiracy. Even in the context of the sentence there is clearly not "nothing" as reference is made to "the deep" which is similar to the Babylonian/Sumerian Tiamat. The "chaos" is basically the same idea as Tiamat (brackish waters as opposed to sweet waters) but without the divinity.

What I have seen some Christians do is take the first sentence "In the beginning God Created the heavens and the earth" out of context -- it's really a sort of preamble in the context of the story -- and use this as the statement about ex nihilo creation. The rest is supposed to be about how God created the heavens and the earth, so I at least think it is clear that the "in the beginning" is a preamble.

You are correct, though. The story as a whole is about creating order from chaos.

ETA
The "Chaos" in Hesiod's Theogony, for instance, is essentially "nothing" -- like a rent in the universal fabric (yes, even with the logical problem of how does one have a rent or tear unless there is something to be torn).

[fuelair]

Tohu vavohu is a word that means CHAOS. It does not mean "NOTHING"

Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society
[NIV at IBS] [International Bible Society] [NIV at Zondervan] [Zondervan]

Genesis 1
The Beginning
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.


But the Hebrew translation uses








In discussing this is occurred to me that if what existed before the earth was formed was CHAOS then all of the evolution theories and the big bang theories actually support the biblical story. If God simply took the Chaos and made it into ORDER then that's entirely different than thinking he made everything from scratch.

Just curious what both believers and skeptics would make of this. The Christian Bible has changed the original
But, even if it existed and did this, you have the minor quibble that is is clearly turning back to chaos (heat-death of the universe is coming soon to a universe near you)

[Marquis de Carabas]

In.

[Ichneumonwasp]

OK, you win.

[Fnord]

What I find interesting is that you keep replying "who cares its just speculation!" Why does it bother you that other people might wish to discuss it?

Bother? No ... Amuse? Certainly!

Speculating on the unprovable conditions of equally unprovable beings, places, and events is part and parcel of Fantasy, Religion, and Science Fiction. Entertaining or intriguing to be sure, but otherwise, what's the point?

[Mangafranga]

Before the Beginning there was logic. Then threads like this came along and went on for a really long time for they defied all logic by going on for ages but evincing no change.

[Upchurch]

What's north of the North Pole is a wonderful example. Because as you continue to go North the paradigm shifts. Excellent.
How, exactly, do you "continue to go North" once you are at the North Pole?

I don't think you understand what you are saying.

[Fnord]

[i]How[/I, exactly, do you "continue to go North" once you are at the North Pole?

I don't think you understand what you are saying.


Welcome to the realm of speculation and woo.

[Tristan Chi]

How, exactly, do you "continue to go North" once you are at the North Pole?

I don't think you understand what you are saying.

How do you think Amundsen beat Scott to the South Pole? He was already almost at the North Pole, remember...:p

[Ashles]

How, exactly, do you "continue to go North" once you are at the North Pole?

I don't think you understand what you are saying.

Yes I was wondering that.
Maybe he thinks that if you write "the paradigm shifts" then you can precede this with any old nonsense and sound clever.
I wonder if he will discover that this is not the case.

[RenaissanceBiker]

Asking what happened before the beginning is like asking what's north of the North Pole.

That is my usual reply when I am asked "What happened before the Big Bang?" When someone asks me about the purpose of the universe or some other mystical nonsense. I say, "If there is such a thing I don't know what it is, and neither do you or anyone else. If someone tells you they do, they are either delusional or lying."

[Jimbo07]

"If there is such a thing I don't know what it is, and neither do you or anyone else. If someone tells you they do, they are either delusional or lying."

... or are theoretical physicists/mathematicians and the math would hurt your noodle caboodle...

[triadboy]

Well, now we know which cosmology you support without conclusive evidence... ;)

I think an ever-expanding, ever-contracting universe is the most elegant answer.

[Mobyseven]

Bwahahahahahahahahaha!

I nearly just spit my breakfast all over the screen - am I the only one who noticed that the Hebrew title of Genesis ('Bereshit') gets caught by the autocensor?

That's bizarre...

[Jimbo07]

How about the style of Karate, Shito-Ryu?

ETA: Hey it worked! I've been caught on that before... I must admit that I'm pleasantly surprised.

[TuftedPuffin]

Look, this passage is useful, because it points out the fact that Christians don't have an answer for "how does something come out of nothing" either.

It's just that they have a much, much faster, much, much more unrealistic process of evolution.

[Civilized Worm]

If there was something before it then it wasn't that beginning. (Or at least not the very beginning)

[Fnord]

Biblical: "In the Beginning" definately implies that there is nothing that came before. At least, nothing of any significance. So why delve into it?

Scientific: The time before the "Big Bang" and shortly thereafter are not definable, or not easily so, either. Again, why delve into a realm of inquiry when the only thing that can come out of it are more questions?

Maybe it's all about funding...

[Darth Rotor]

The universe is never-ending.

What happened before the Beginning? The Big Crunch. Before that? The Big Bang. Before that? The Big Crunch. Before that? The Big Bang ...and on and on until you hemorrhage.

Perhaps, but with all those crunches, you may have the six pack abs on the cosmic level.

This is a good thing. :cool:

DR

[Darth Rotor]

How, exactly, do you "continue to go North" once you are at the North Pole?

I don't think you understand what you are saying.
I beg to disagree. ;)

If you put your rocketship on the North Pole, and launch it toward the North Star (Pole Star) you could keep going north for some years, providing you had sufficient thrust to escape earth's gravity. You would continue north until either your navigation system dropped synch and you lost the ability to maintain interstellar course toward the North Star (Polaris), you ran out of fuel, had a mid space collision, or reached the North Star and plunged into its center in a gravity induced acceleration of glorious self immolation.

The lack of imagination 'round this sub forum is reason enough to avoid it.

DR

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I beg to disagree. ;)

If you put your rocketship on the North Pole, and launch it toward the North Star (Pole Star) you could keep going north for some years, providing you had sufficient thrust to escape earth's gravity. You would continue north until either your navigation system dropped synch and you lost the ability to maintain interstellar course toward the North Star (Polaris), you ran out of fuel, had a mid space collision, or reached the North Star and plunged into its center in a gravity induced acceleration of glorious self immolation.

The lack of imagination 'round this sub forum is reason enough to avoid it.

DR

Sure. That's fine for you three dimensional thinkers but what about the rest of us? :o

[Fnord]

Sure. That's fine for you three dimensional thinkers but what about the rest of us? :o

The line for Flat-Earthers forms to the left. :p

[kurious_kathy]

In discussing this is occurred to me that if what existed before the earth was formed was CHAOS then all of the evolution theories and the big bang theories actually support the biblical story. If God simply took the Chaos and made it into ORDER then that's entirely different than thinking he made everything from scratch.

Oh poppycock. In the beginning God. He is the only one who existed before anyone or anything. Remember man is the most valuable of all Gods creation becasue we were made in his image.

Sorry but there is just no way God would have used apes to design men, he made us from scratch. The theory of evolution is chaos, and I really wish that theory of was never invented let alone taught in our schools. I don't look or act like a monkey, do you?

[Cleon]

Oh poppycock. In the beginning God. He is the only one who existed before anyone or anything.

Man, he must've been bored.

[Darth Rotor]

Man, he must've been bored.
(1) This might explain the why of Creation, since it led in time to the Marx Brothers. (2) And when He saw the Marx Brothers, He knew that this was good. (3) And it was good.

DR

[joobz]

Oh poppycock. In the beginning God. He is the only one who existed before anyone or anything. Remember man is the most valuable of all Gods creation becasue we were made in his image.

Sorry but there is just no way God would have used apes to design men, he made us from scratch. The theory of evolution is chaos, and I really wish that theory of was never invented let alone taught in our schools. I don't look or act like a monkey, do you?
Oh Poppycock. Your're just making stuff up. Where's your evidence.

[Foster Zygote]

I don't look or act like a monkey, do you?
Of course not. We humans look and act like apes.

[truethat]

Wow

I'm really surprised at the inability of people to have a philosophical conversation in the Religion and Philosophy forum.

[Cleon]

(1) This might explain the why of Creation, since it led in time to the Marx Brothers. (2) And when He saw the Marx Brothers, He knew that this was good. (3) And it was good.


Preach it, brother! Amen! Hallelujah!

[Cleon]

Wow

I'm really surprised at the inability of people to have a philosophical conversation in the Religion and Philosophy forum.

Well, your OP is a non-starter, to be quite frank.

Is it possible to believe in God--even Judaism, Christianity, or Islam--and still accept scientific findings such as the Big Bang, evolution, gravity, and so on? Of course it is--billions of people do so, including yours truly. I don't think you need to cherry-pick the original Hebrew to justify such a system of belief.

Atheists aren't going to care, as they don't believe in the Bible's divinity to begin with.

Likewise, a young-earth creationist like kathy is not going to care about such an interpretation (as she as already pointed out). She is committed to her interpretation of the Christian Bible, and presenting an alternate interpretation is simply not going to change her mind. Fundamentalism is like that.

So what, then, would be the purpose of that sort of reinterpretation of Genesis?

[truethat]

For the sake of academic exploration of other people's views. I have to say I'm really shocked at the level of ignorance on this site so far.

It seems its not possible for people to simply have a discussion for the sake of having a discussion.

And since this is a FORUM for that, well that's pretty sad.

[Cleon]

For the sake of academic exploration of other people's views. I have to say I'm really shocked at the level of ignorance on this site so far.

It seems its not possible for people to simply have a discussion for the sake of having a discussion.

And since this is a FORUM for that, well that's pretty sad.

Well, that's very condescending of you.

If you're going to complain about lack of discussion, you'd be doing yourself a favor by actually addressing some of the points that were made.

[triadboy]

Oh poppycock. In the beginning God. He is the only one who existed before anyone or anything. Remember man is the most valuable of all Gods creation becasue we were made in his image.

Sorry but there is just no way God would have used apes to design men, he made us from scratch. The theory of evolution is chaos, and I really wish that theory of was never invented let alone taught in our schools. I don't look or act like a monkey, do you?

I've never seen you, but you probably don't look like a monkey.

[truethat]

Well, that's very condescending of you.

If you're going to complain about lack of discussion, you'd be doing yourself a favor by actually addressing some of the points that were made.

I'm honestly not trying to be condescending. I'm just shocked. Look at the posts in this thread?

The site promotes itself as being

"a place to discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly and lively way"

But I haven't seen any of that here, aside from a few people.

I'm sure the points made are interesting to someone but I rather thought that people would be able to simply have an academic discussion.

Odd.

[Z]

Well, the problem is, that academically, there can't be anything before the beginning. Nothing at all. That's what The Beginning implies. So the question is a non-starter.

[truethat]

Only if you are unable to think outside a single paradigm. The point being, that the beginning of all that God supposedly created, is not the same thing as the very beginning.

I really don't see what is so difficult to understand about the question.

There is a difference in suggesting that God created everything from the beginning and saying that God ORDERED everything that existed and brought about life as we know it. Thus THE BEGINNING of life as we know it, is not the same thing as the beginning of everything.

I'm sorry but this a very basic simple idea and I'm really pretty shocked at how confused everyone seems to be by it.

[joobz]

Only if you are unable to think outside a single paradigm. The point being, that the beginning of all that God supposedly created, is not the same thing as the very beginning.

I really don't see what is so difficult to understand about the question.

There is a difference in suggesting that God created everything from the beginning and saying that God ORDERED everything that existed and brought about life as we know it. Thus THE BEGINNING of life as we know it, is not the same thing as the beginning of everything.

I'm sorry but this a very basic simple idea and I'm really pretty shocked at how confused everyone seems to be by it.
what's the smell of harmony? change your paradigm and answer the question!

[TuftedPuffin]

I'm honestly not trying to be condescending. I'm just shocked. Look at the posts in this thread?

The site promotes itself as being

"a place to discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly and lively way"

But I haven't seen any of that here, aside from a few people.

I'm sure the points made are interesting to someone but I rather thought that people would be able to simply have an academic discussion.

Odd.

This is the Religion and Philosophy forum. Your argument should go in the Semantics forum, as you are arguing about what particular words in a book might mean. It's just not a philosophical quandary.

Also, Religion and Philosophy tends to mean people defending their own beliefs, rather than hypotheticals. Not saying this is good, but it's how it works.

[Mangafranga]

This is the Religion and Philosophy forum. Your argument should go in the Semantics forum, as you are arguing about what particular words in a book might mean. It's just not a philosophical quandary.Philosophy had the linguistic turn, and I imagine religion has quite a bit of problem with words too (you know, as they rely so much on religious texts). All hail semantics. Also, Religion and Philosophy tends to mean people defending their own beliefs, rather than hypotheticals. Not saying this is good, but it's how it works.This might hold for the religious, I doubt it holds for the philosophers.

[kurious_kathy]

I've never seen you, but you probably don't look like a monkey.
Gee thanks. I can assure you I'm your typical Calif. girl. Or shall I say lady. If you ever looked at my one page testimony website there is a picture of me with my hubby. Here... http://www.savedbyloveministries.org/ that's if you want to double check.

[SomeGuy]

Only if you are unable to think outside a single paradigm. The point being, that the beginning of all that God supposedly created, is not the same thing as the very beginning.

I really don't see what is so difficult to understand about the question.

There is a difference in suggesting that God created everything from the beginning and saying that God ORDERED everything that existed and brought about life as we know it. Thus THE BEGINNING of life as we know it, is not the same thing as the beginning of everything.

I'm sorry but this a very basic simple idea and I'm really pretty shocked at how confused everyone seems to be by it.

As Cleon has allready answered way more eloquently than I could hope to do.

The beginng of all that god has supposedly created is the very beginning for those of us, like yours truly, that are atheistic.

For other more fundamentalistic believers, like the young earth believer and the intelligent designer advocates, it's totally uninteresting as well, because they have no interest in combining the bible with what in their eyes are falsehoods namely: the big bang and evolution.

Others like Cleon and probably yourself, moderate christians if you will, are allready combining their belief with what science tells us. Ussually this is done through by not believing every word in the bible literally, but instead seeing it as a guide book on how to serve god and live morally.

You are really only preaching to this last group, and telling them that they should do some sort of pedantic cherry picking between english and hebrew passages (presumably, whichever fits best at a given situation) and as Cleon has allready said (if I understood him correctly) there isn't much point to that, as they allready combine their faith with the current state of science succesfully.

[quixotecoyote]

What comes before the thing that came before everything?
What is higher than the highest thing possible?
What is bigger than the biggest thing possible?
What is outside the boundaries of a boundless universe?
What is redder than the reddest red?
What is more trollish than the trolliest troll?
What is sillier than the silliest sop?
What is more massive than the most massive object?
What comes after the last thing ever?
What is more superlative?

[articulett]

nothing.

[RenaissanceBiker]

I beg to disagree. ;)

If you put your rocketship on the North Pole, and launch it toward the North Star (Pole Star) you could keep going north for some years, providing you had sufficient thrust to escape earth's gravity. You would continue north until either your navigation system dropped synch and you lost the ability to maintain interstellar course toward the North Star (Polaris), you ran out of fuel, had a mid space collision, or reached the North Star and plunged into its center in a gravity induced acceleration of glorious self immolation.

The lack of imagination 'round this sub forum is reason enough to avoid it.

DR

You are incorrect, sir. In a spherical coordinate system you are simply travelling up along the pole. You are not travelling North or South. If you vary from the pole along your path it must be South. To return to the polar path you must go North. If you overshoot you go South. Keep going up all you want.

The lack of reason 'round this sub forum is reason enough to remain.

[l0rca]

Wow

I'm really surprised at the inability of people to have a philosophical conversation in the Religion and Philosophy forum.

You won't be surprised for very long.

[RenaissanceBiker]

Wow

I'm really surprised at the inability of people to have a philosophical conversation in the Religion and Philosophy forum.

Science has reduced philosophy to the analysis of language.

[athon]

Oh poppycock. In the beginning God. He is the only one who existed before anyone or anything. Remember man is the most valuable of all Gods creation becasue we were made in his image.

Sorry but there is just no way God would have used apes to design men, he made us from scratch. The theory of evolution is chaos, and I really wish that theory of was never invented let alone taught in our schools. I don't look or act like a monkey, do you?

Why do faither disagreements sound to me like when comic geeks debate whether one super hero would kick another super hero's butt? The very fact it's all based on made-up stuff and is impossible to resolve considering all fantasy is essentially made equal by the power of speculation doesn't enter their minds.

Athon

[Z]

Only if you are unable to think outside a single paradigm. The point being, that the beginning of all that God supposedly created, is not the same thing as the very beginning.

I really don't see what is so difficult to understand about the question.

There is a difference in suggesting that God created everything from the beginning and saying that God ORDERED everything that existed and brought about life as we know it. Thus THE BEGINNING of life as we know it, is not the same thing as the beginning of everything.

I'm sorry but this a very basic simple idea and I'm really pretty shocked at how confused everyone seems to be by it.


Oh... well, first you have to show us proof that God even exists, for the question to have meaning. Otherwise, it's still a moot point, like asking 'What existed before the Great Turtle puked up the universe?'

[Marquis de Carabas]

'What existed before the Great Turtle puked up the universe?'
Nausea.

[Fnord]

What comes before the thing that came before everything?
What is higher than the highest thing possible?
What is bigger than the biggest thing possible?
What is outside the boundaries of a boundless universe?
What is redder than the reddest red?
What is more trollish than the trolliest troll?
What is sillier than the silliest sop?
What is more massive than the most massive object?
What comes after the last thing ever?
What is more superlative?

Ooo ... brain hurt ... owie ... need lie-down ...

:hit:

[uruk]

Well if all the creation stories were shared and passed down, it interests me that there might be in the human make up (Dawkins' memes) a yearning to either it having a residual memory of truth, or a transcendent symbolic meaning.
I think people feel there has to be a beginning or a "before the beginning" because the concept falls into what we feel is common sense. We had a begining therefore the universe had to also have a begining. And if there is a start to something there has to be a time before the start.
It sounds logical.

Unfortunately, we have found that the universe does always follow what we think is common sense or logical. The quantum world is a bizzare world indeed.
The univers may not have had a beigining in the sense of what we think of as a begining.

Quote: Cello Man:
Asking what happened before the beginning is like asking what's north of the North Pole.
A vector that is 90 degrees perpendicular to the geometeric anomoly. Also known as "up" or "away from the surface".

[Darth Rotor]

I've never seen you, but you probably don't look like a monkey.
Alternative uses for pillowcases, for fifty, Alex. :cool:

DR

[Darth Rotor]

You are incorrect, sir. In a spherical coordinate system you are simply travelling up along the pole. You are not travelling North or South. If you vary from the pole along your path it must be South. To return to the polar path you must go North. If you overshoot you go South. Keep going up all you want.

The lack of reason 'round this sub forum is reason enough to remain.
Not quite, but I catch your drift.

The direction from the Earth to Polaris is by definition "North," see celestial navigation for a reference. While constrained to earth, North is confined to those directions that have their terminus in the Pole. Beyond Earth, that terminus is Polaris. Put in more detail, when you reach the limit of north on the planet, which is the North Pole by convention, the only way to keep going in a direction that can be called "North" is to travel from the North Pole to Polaris. Upon arrival, you have run out of possible paths to a point of North. Of course, having reached it, physically, one will be melted down, rendering further travel in any direction moot.

Shall we continue playing with our poles? :boggled:

DR

[uruk]

What comes before the thing that came before everything? The thing that came before everything. Known as the pre-everything or the supra-everything which not a subset of the "everything"
What is higher than the highest thing possible?The thing which sits upon the the highest thing possible; which is probably my car keys. I can't seem to find them anywhere.
What is bigger than the biggest thing possible? The thing that ate the biggest thing possible.
What is outside the boundaries of a boundless universe?The only parking space left available to you at the mall during the christmas shopping season.
What is redder than the reddest red?The red light you get stuck at at an intersection when you have to go to the bathroom.
What is more trollish than the trolliest troll?Me
What is sillier than the silliest sop? See abouve
What is more massive than the most massive object? See the thing that ate the biggest thing possible
What comes after the last thing ever? The thing you should have written down or remembered before you left
What is more superlative? The word superlative itself.

[Civilized Worm]

Oh poppycock. In the beginning God. He is the only one who existed before anyone or anything. Remember man is the most valuable of all Gods creation becasue we were made in his image.

Sorry but there is just no way God would have used apes to design men, he made us from scratch. The theory of evolution is chaos, and I really wish that theory of was never invented let alone taught in our schools. I don't look or act like a monkey, do you?


Who are you to question god's methods? They say he works in "mysterious ways", why can't that include evolution?

By the way, we do look and act like monkeys in many ways. We also share most of our DNA with them.

[Elind]

What I find interesting is that you keep replying "who cares its just speculation!" Why does it bother you that other people might wish to discuss it?

OK. There was/is no beginning. Is that any more or less odd than considering what was "before"? What we see had a beginning as far as we can tell, just like you did.

What were you before you were conceived/born/developed a personality?

[Bob Klase]

Remember man is the most valuable of all Gods creation

Which doesn't say much for the rest of creation.

[strathmeyer]

"What existed before the Beginning?"

Nobody knows. Deal with it as you will.

Actually, we do know; you're just misusing the word "beginning".

[Mercutio]

I prefer all the stuff that happened after the beginning. That stuff comes with the distinct advantage of observability.

[Mangafranga]

I prefer all the stuff that happened after the beginning. That stuff comes with the distinct advantage of observability.Wrong sub-forum.

[joobz]

What comes before the thing that came before everything?
What is higher than the highest thing possible?
What is bigger than the biggest thing possible?
What is outside the boundaries of a boundless universe?
What is redder than the reddest red?
What is more trollish than the trolliest troll?
What is sillier than the silliest sop?
What is more massive than the most massive object?
What comes after the last thing ever?
What is more superlative?
tapioca...... maybe?

[PBTree]

All of this god evidence comes from the bible. A book. Lets be serious, anyone could have written the darn thing, so just because it has the occasional begets and begats in it, doesn't make it true. There are lots of books around that have deities in them, they can't all be true or we would be overrun with gods.

A small hypothetical. What would the believers be saying now, if the bible hadn't been found (or wherever it came from). What would they be saying if there hadn't been this book of unintelligible words. Would they all be on the side of big bangers? Would they care one way or the other?

[Mashuna]

A small hypothetical. What would the believers be saying now, if the bible hadn't been found (or wherever it came from). What would they be saying if there hadn't been this book of unintelligible words. Would they all be on the side of big bangers? Would they care one way or the other?

Do the big bangers come with mash and gravy? Count me in!

[RenaissanceBiker]

Must ... resist ... Big ... Bangers ... joke.

[Mangafranga]

Must ... resist ... Big ... Bangers ... joke.So you aren't serious about resisting those big bangers, then?

[uruk]

Remember man is the most valuable of all Gods creation becasue we were made in his image. There must have been a smudge on the divine xerox copier because something got screwed up along the way. I'd hate to think that god is as self-centered, vengefull and blood thirsty as we are....... Oh wait.

Sorry but there is just no way God would have used apes to design men, he made us from scratch. Then he made us from the ape's left overs 'cause we are pretty darn close. Geneticaly speaking.
]

[sphenisc]

Not quite, but I catch your drift.

The direction from the Earth to Polaris is by definition "North," ...

No, this is merely a coincidental fact, not part of the definition of "North".

[RenaissanceBiker]

I have seen definitions of North that refer to the direction along the axis. I think the most common measurement of North is an angle between 0 and 90 degrees. That's why I qualified my statement with "in a spherical coordinate system." If you use DR's definition, you must use a cylindrical or rectangular coordinate system.

I prefer the spherical coordinate system for use in the immediate vicinity of the Earth. I think it is the system implied by the metaphor comparing 4 dimensional Space-Time and the Big Bang to North on a globe.

[Jimbo07]

Then he made us from the ape's left overs 'cause we are pretty darn close. Geneticaly speaking.
]

Actually, we're pretty close in gross physical appearance...

... you'd have to have your head pretty far up your a... uh... in the sand, to be able to deny this.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Actually, we do know; you're just misusing the word "beginning".

So? Are you going to tell me? :confused:

[PBTree]

No, this is merely a coincidental fact, not part of the definition of "North".

But wouldn't that only be until you left the earthly realms, then it wouldn't really be any direction. And I think looking back at earth wouldn't help because the earth would have moved and your north wouldn't be where it was before.

Up and down is just as confusing.

Isn't up really 'away from' and down really 'toward'. I mean if an antipodeal counterpart was looking straight down through earth at me pointing 'up', would I also be pointing 'down' to him?

I'm getting a headache.

[RenaissanceBiker]

In a spherical coordinate system, any position is described by two angles (latitude and longitude) and a radius. Up is considered away from the center of the sphere (along the increasing radius). Down is considered towards it (along the decreasing radius). Two people on opposite sides would both point down to each other.

[Molinaro]

Well if all the creation stories were shared and passed down, it interests me that there might be in the human make up (Dawkins' memes) a yearning to either it having a residual memory of truth, or a transcendent symbolic meaning.

Curious though, why Christians changed the word to empty or nothing.

The idea that the Universe existed in Chaos and then order was established creates for me a very different kind of God theory.

I think it's more likely that people like to make up stories because it's easier than actualy putting in the work required to learn facts.

[Mercutio]

So, wait a minute... If I am in some other part of our galaxy, "North" is still defined by the location of Polaris?

I missed that in school. Gotta learn to stay awake.

[RenaissanceBiker]

Merc, that then also becomes a spherical coordinate system where "North" means "Down."

[the PC apeman]

So if I was at the South Pole of Earth, the only way to go directly North would be to start digging, swim a bit, and then dig some more?

[patrick767]

Oh poppycock. In the beginning God. He is the only one who existed before anyone or anything. Remember man is the most valuable of all Gods creation becasue we were made in his image.

Sorry but there is just no way God would have used apes to design men, he made us from scratch. The theory of evolution is chaos, and I really wish that theory of was never invented let alone taught in our schools. I don't look or act like a monkey, do you?

Evidence? You are posting on a forum dedicated to skepticism, but you state things as though they are blanket truth with no evidence for your claims. Where's your evidence that a deity exists? How about evidence that he/she/it is the Christian God? Evidence that He looks like us? Evidence that man was "made from scratch", especially given existing genetic evidence that puts us very close to apes?

You offer nothing and don't appear to ever seriously question your own claims. Your own holy book says, "Question everything. Keep what is good." 1st Thessalonians 5:21

[RenaissanceBiker]

So if I was at the South Pole of Earth, the only way to go directly North would be to start digging, swim a bit, and then dig some more?

In a rectangular or cylindrical coordinate system, yes. In a spherical coordinate system that is one of two ways to go somewhere and not go North at all.

[Bob Klase]

The direction from the Earth to Polaris is by definition "North," see celestial navigation for a reference. While constrained to earth, North is confined to those directions that have their terminus in the Pole. Beyond Earth, that terminus is Polaris. Put in more detail, when you reach the limit of north on the planet, which is the North Pole by convention, the only way to keep going in a direction that can be called "North" is to travel from the North Pole to Polaris.

Are we talking about true north? Magnetic north? Grid north?

[Bob Klase]

Oh poppycock. In the beginning God. He is the only one who existed before anyone or anything. Remember man is the most valuable of all Gods creation becasue we were made in his image.

As you asked in another thread, "Prove that you were around thousands of years ago to know that."

[The Atheist]

...Because as you continue to go North the paradigm shifts. Excellent.

Only if you are unable to think outside a single paradigm...

Buzzzzzzzzzz (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2929472#post2929472)

[truethat]

Its a word. Deal with it. More of the dumbing down of the general public because we are too lazy to deal with language and what it means. :rolleyes:

[Wowbagger]

if what existed before the earth was formed was CHAOS then all of the evolution theories and the big bang theories actually support the biblical story. Evolution is a process by which changes occur in life forms over time. From the scientific standpoint, it does not imply any such concepts as "order" or "chaos". How does evolution support the biblical story? (Other than to demonstrate how humans changed the text and interpretation of the Bible over time.)

Since we are not sure what the "initial condition" was like, "before*" the Big Bang, I find it rather presumptuous on your part to claim that it can be described as "chaos", and that it therefore supports the Bible. Do you have any further basis for this claim, other than semantics and Argument from Scripture?

(*Yes, I know there is really no such time as "before" the Big Bang.)

[triadboy]

(*Yes, I know there is really no such time as "before" the Big Bang.)


If we live in an ever-expanding, ever-collapsing universe - then there is time before the Big Bang.

[Dancing David]

Not
Limit
Light

?

[Jimbo07]

If we live in an ever-expanding, ever-collapsing universe - then there is time before the Big Bang.

If...

[triadboy]

Originally Posted by triadboy
If we live in an ever-expanding, ever-collapsing universe - then there is time before the Big Bang.

If...

...I mean 'when'.

[Jimbo07]

No. You meant 'if.'

At least, you couldn't sensibly have meant anything else.

;)

[triadboy]

While