God as Originator and Sustainer

God as sustainer and I had mentioned it is like saying, "can the Earth exist without the universe?" To further this inquiry:

To me God is casting a shadow. We can measure this shadow, see this shadow, measure its angel in relation to the sun and the sidewalk it sits on. We can experience this shadow. God casts this shadow. Without God, the shadow would not be there. If God moved, the shadow would move. If God vanished, the shadow would vanish. God casts this shadow and so in a sense God is this shadow. However, the shadow is not God. We can see this shadow and scientists can learn about it, however we cannot see God and measure God in the same scientific manner. God is everything, but everything is not God.

When the sun dies out and the sidewalk eventually erodes away, the shadow will cease to be as well. But God will still remain.

In this sense, the shadow is temporary, the shadow is not real, the shadow is an illusion of what really is. The energy that is forming this shadow is simply a reflection of the absolute energy which is God. Energy takes many forms. Sometimes it looks like a tree, sometimes like the sky, sometimes like an atom. But it is the most fundamental form of this energy which is real, which is spirit to me. All other forms of this energy are not eternal and therefore not real in a sense, because they fade away, they are always changing, they are not permanent. 

What is real is that which is permanent, eternal and everlasting. What is real is this spirit of God. The spiritual energy. 

This is how God is the sustainer to me. This is why the world/physical/material is an illusion. 

So, how is God the sustainer? Because without God breathing, everything would cease. 

Now, God as originator, to me, is like this:

God, the spirit, exists everywhere and every when and is in fact is No Thing. This is why the spirit to me is very much synonymous with nothing. Nothing does not really mean non existence. Non existence does not really exist. 

Science kinda shows this now as well, that true non existence does not exist. What nothing is is simply the place where No Thing exists. Nothing measurable, nothing physical, nothing material. But something is always happening with nothing. It is constantly moving in a sense. 

To me, this is the spirit, God. One might also think of this as another form of energy, where energy takes the form of No Thing, or nothing.  Energy can also take the form of something, or anything, and in fact seems to want to do that all the time. 

Now, before anything was, only Nothing was. Everywhere. Every when. I would say this nothing means where the spirit of God is, however one could look at it as simply meaning the absence of everything measurable that we would call things/physical/material. 

Now for myself, this No Thing, or Spirit, must close itself in order to allow something to be born. It becomes unstable and In doing so, the vacuum from which Big Bang arose was born.  The vacuum is a place devoid of everything. Then this No Thing began to expand, began to pop inside of this vacuum, or "breath" and everything started to take affect. The space-time began to expand and gravity took hold, pulling virtual particles out of the nothing and into the something so that they became real particles. 

As gravity began to do this, particles began to behave in their environment of space-time --conforming and fitting into their environment (fighting for survival in a sense--to persist to exist), because they could not return to the nothing since gravity holds them...and dark energy kept pulling the space time further and further  and as this took place the particles began to not only interact with their new environment, but with each other, establishing "forces' and eventually all this behavior would come to be called what we see as the natural laws. 

 So, how is God the originator? Because without God's closing and subsequent breath, nothing would  still exist. 

   

What is nature doing?

 

Something very interesting to me:

It seems like everything conforms in nature. We can see this in physics and biology, and the more it conforms, the more structurally complex it becomes and the less functionally powerful it becomes.


Example:

Biology: the single cell can be many things, but once it is part of the heart, it acts as part of the heart only.

Physics: Atoms can become many things, but once they become a molecule and then matter, they are more restricted.

Virtual particles pop in, but if the particle is a quark the majority of virtual particles that pop in are quarks, though some might be other things like gluons or photons. But this doesn't effect the quark since the majority keep it as is (my understanding may be missing some info here)

But my point is that it seems like even in the most fundamental forms of nature, nature is busy conforming and the more it does the more complex in structure it becomes and as it does this the more it losses functional power.

Just something I've been noticing in patterns. 

Nature and the Brain

We have seven sure intelligences according to Gardner. Mathematical, Spacial, Kinesthetic, Musical, Linguistic, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal. I'm an educator and so these intelligence's are taught to us as teachers to better educate our students. 

SO, it is interesting we can find all those SKILLS in nature as well.

Our brain came from nature, so it is a reflection of nature. It should be able to give us clues into what nature is.

Our brains are wired to perceived random and non random processes. It is not that one side is creative and the other is logical. Both sides can be either. This is shown in recent studies. The difference is in how they approach the problems and perceive the world.

We also know nature is both random and non random. We can see in genetics and in mathematics, in biology, and in physics that nature has random aspects but also non-random aspects too. It seems things go from random to non-random.

Nature is also very mathematical! Is this a coincidence? Of course not. Our brains came from nature so of course our brain would be perceiving what nature is!

Let us look at the seven main intelligences.

Nature is mathematical. Our brains are wired for maths. Nature has space and dimension. Our brains are wired for spacial intelligence. Nature has sounds and our brains our wired for music/sound and patterns. Nature moves and our brains our wired Kinesthetically.

When we look at a particle spinning beautifully it has a kind of kinesthetic intelligence. When we see a dancer circle beautifully she exemplifies this same ability. Particles are also always moving. Movement is essential for nature to function.

When we look at how the universe is arranged we can sum it up mathematically and then we also have people who are mathematically gifted.

When we look at nature we see a universe of space and dimensions and everything around us occupies space and dimension and there are people who are very specially inclined and who can visualize spaces inside their mind perfectly.

When we look at nature we can hear sounds permeating from objects hitting each other or from the friction of something or spin of something and there are also people who are musically inclined to hear patterns of sounds well.

Is it any wonder that our human intelligence also posses these qualities?

What about linguistic, interpersonal and interpersonal qualities of nature?

We can see linguistics on a fundamental level in nature too when we look at the communication of bacteria or when we put a heartbeat next to another heartbeat and they conform to each other or how we have a quark and the majority of virtual particles that pop in are quarks (though some might be photons or gluons). There seems to be a communication on a fundamental level.

While humans use language, we can see all of nature has a basic form of communication from physics to genetics and chemistry.

We can see interpersonal skills in nature when we look at physics and particles having to interact with fields and when we look into genetics and see how the interactions have to interact with each other. Nature does have many inter-relationships on a fundamental level.

Humans have relationships with the outside world, and nature fundamentally has interactions with other parts of nature all the time.

Even with interpersonal skills we see in nature that genes duplicate themselves and even with virtual particles, because the majority of virtual particles pop in according to whatever is there -it seems it conforms-- there is a kind of duplication there as well.

While humans might have a good interaction with themselves, nature also fundamentally keeps a good relationship with itself by duplicating itself.


So, I just thought these correlations were interesting and wanted to share them.

It is also interesting that all animals have various intelligences and all these intelligences are reflections of what nature is as well, in my opinion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ingrid-newkirk/one-of-many-animals_b_1836537.html



The next question is Memory. We see memory is our conscious minds, in the conscious minds of animals and even of bacteria. We find memory in cellular memory in the duplication of DNA/RNA. Do particles, electrons, and virtual particles possess a certain memory as well?

Does memory exist on a fundamental level? This is important because how are our experiences retained if a Spirit exists? Memory or experience, if retained, on a particle level would be a very interesting finding. 


Further, when we reach the most fundamental form of energy that we are aware of today which are virtual particles, we find probability equations. Perhaps not actual space or time or a physical things, But a probability.

It is kind of like an idea in a mind. I have an idea and it has a probability of coming to fruition or not, of surviving or not. Perhaps when we say the Mind of God, it is a lot like the probability distribution of the virtual particle in some ways. I would say not in all ways, but in some ways.

Side Note:

Mathematics is ahead of science, because science is limited by what we can see, hear, taste, touch, smell —basically measure and so science is limited by our own consciousness, our own minds.

BUT Maths is not. Maths is not limited by experience or experiment which are limited by our own conscious experience and ability to measure.

MATHS shows us what reality is though we cannot use an experiment to show us this is a fact. But the maths must come back to us time and time again as yielding us the correct results, then we rely on them. In this sense, maths does it job for showing virtual particles exist; however briefly, out of the nothingness, the void.

In this sense, we can understand everything better when we realize maths is like our own intuitions. Our correct intuitions can tell us a reality. Someone I loved has just been hurt, killed. This guy or this situation feels really bad. Or I completely saw that coming. While we may not be able to justify our intuition with a real experiment or scientific method…our intuitions can very well be right —showing us an aspect of reality beyond physical measurable means.

So, should it surprise us that maths do the same thing?

Some aspect of reality simply cannot be measured by observation or justified by science. Some aspects of reality simply have to be derived in other ways, 

Is science all knowing?

Our consciousness is invisible, it is immaterial and certainly we can study it and are getting somewhere. In my view, the spirit is linked to this.

I find it ridiculous that people think science shows there is no evidence of God and therefore there is not one.

Firstly, science to me reveals more about an all pervading, all knowing, illimitable, infinite, (spirit) the more I learn. The spirit aspect is which is not seen by science, but everything we learn about electrons, and virtual particles tells us all kinds of amazing things nature can do which we never would have imagined. Things like timeless electrons, 'knowing' electrons, infinite virtual particles/energy, illimitable virtual particle/energy.

I'm going to reduce this 'God' word to the spirit, since that is the word that makes most sense to me, not God.

Einstein did not agree with religions of the day, but he did say his religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable, infinite spirit. Spirit being the key word here.

Religions don't have a perfect model of the spirit, true! But science doesn't have a perfect model of nature either! One addresses spiritual while the other the natural. Neither have models that fit perfectly to what the reality of nature and the spirit are. The both ask different questions.

A spirit perhaps that pervades everything before and after the material or perhaps a spirit that is an echo of natural conscious energies itself.

When did science become all knowing? Further when did we?

What makes us think science shows everything about nature? Aren't there possible aspects of nature that science will never be able to know or delve into? What if the spirit is not supernatural, but that nature is simply another aspect of this pervading spirit?

If what is the most simple, most basic, most fundamental is in fact a spiritual energy and from that all material things came to be then the nature we are studying is simply a result of this spiritual aspect. In fact there could be other aspects of the spirit in which we are not privy to in studying just science, but only the natural.

By usual definition there is the spirit and there is the natural.  Science is talking about the material nature, not the immaterial aspect of nature which is spirit. Science doesn't see the immaterial or the spirit. But the spirit has been experienced by the immaterial consciousness.

Our consciousness is in fact immaterial. Our thoughts and emotions are immaterial.

Some say consciousness might be an illusion. I say the material is the illusion, the grand delusion. The whole material experience is a temporary fake. The only thing real is the immaterial.

God has to do something to exist? God is immaterial and basic just like our consciousness is both immaterial and basic.

What you believe has partly to do with where you were born? Many people change faiths as they grow up, and  people come to faiths because of their life experiences. But it doesn't matter what faith you are, because none of the models are perfect models of the spirit! They are all attempts like science has models to attempt to qualify the natural.

The point is in investigating it and learning it and figuring it out yourself.

Complexity and God

Complexity vs Simplicity: 
Explain what electrons do? they seem timeless and all knowing of what other electrons are, and What do virtual particles do? they seem to pop from nothing and have higher energy levels then in our existence of many somethings, and what does Energy do? Perhaps itself is infinite and illimitable? In fact, these are very powerful things and illimitable seemingly and maybe infinite. 

But they are not complex. 

This is the point of simplicity which I think Rowan is trying to explain. 
Before we knew of these things we might think something that is infinite, illimitable, knowing, timeless ---must be complex, but in fact it is very simple, very fundamental aspects of nature. 

The point is God is akin to this. It is the very basic. God is the all pervading fabric -not the structures that come to be out of the material in complexity; therefore limitless forms. BUT- out of the material complex structure we can find the consciousness which is a return to the limitless, boundless, infinite, illimitable God.  

Why does God have to be supernatural? What if nature is simply an aspect of God? What if the Spirit is an aspect of the consciousness which is the result of the brain and evolution which was inevitable?


What if God doesn't twiddle the knobs and is not complex. God is simple, the simplest form. Not bound by space-time and structure. I guess Rowan and the Agnostic have similar ideas.

The function of something does not have to have complex structure to function powerfully. We know this because of our understanding of nature now and so we know that it is in fact possible for something to be all powerful, illimitable, infinite and yet very simple- not complex.


There is the material and there is the immaterial. The immaterial (GodSpirit) gave rise to the material and the material gave rise to the immaterial (consciousness/soul/spirit). 

Is God Supernatural?

Why does God have to be supernatural? What if nature is simply an aspect of God? What if the Spirit is an aspect of the consciousness which is the result of the brain and evolution which was inevitable from the creation point of everything from nothing?


It seems likely that life would have evolved eventually in this universe and this universe would have been born eventually and something would have happened eventually from nothing and so we would be a by product eventually...so if a God exists, then in creating this it would mean we were bound to happen. 

I agree with Rowan in that design is always a bad word because we associate it with our own designs and it depends on your intentions and purposes from where you are judging. My perfect design could be your total mess and vice versus. Further design implies interruptions and my view is 'God' would not have interfered at all. God closed. The immaterial closed and this is how the material formed in my view. 

Intelligence is also a bad word choice because how intelligent is this God? On what scale? 

How did God get there from nothing? I think nothing and everything are the same things, but just in different forms. 

Consciousness and brain, Soul and Spirit

One of the best conversations. I agree consciousness emerges from brains, but what is this energy? Thought energy? Emotion energy? How powerful is it? Is it possible that this energy is so high that after the brain shuts off it flickers, lingers? Does nature leave behind Natural Echoes of Energy? or Natural Echoes of Consciousness? 

Does Conscious Energy have any links to Quantum Energies?

Apes do a lot of self reflective consciousness too, not just humans. Apes can play pretend, and dolphins are self conscious. Animals are capable of this on some level. However I would say all animals have a consciousness and all animals have a soul, because the consciousness is the immaterial life- the soul and spirit is an immaterial life- an energy that is immaterial.
So, the question resides in energy which is of an immaterial existence and does this retain memory/experience/life?

But humans have a spirt. They are both immaterial as conscious energy is I would say, but the spirit is a horizontal path where the soul is a vertical path. 

The question is does this soul and spirit exist after the material brain shuts off, meaning is there an immaterial life that is created from the material life that persists in the immaterial after the material has ended. That is what interests me.

The immaterial exist because of the material...it birthed it in a way. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EjO-7Wynd0