The beauty of the world and the truth about creation
Something can only become from something else
Creation can only come from destruction
Before something there must have been nothing: the greatest and most taken for granted fallacy that society, culture, tradition, civilisation, all cults basically, have taken from the Bible, which we no longer believe to be fact but only myth, and have implanted in us, indoctrinated in us, this belief that shapes all our other beliefs: we must believe in some form of beginning, some idea of creation, in order to say or mean anything. That we still hold true and dear to us the idea of creation ex nihilo (from nothing to something) accordingly as the bible dictates, is astounding: this is why we cannot explain creation: because we believe there had to have been a creation, something from nothing. Now, Creationists believe that the world was created by God 6000 years ago in 7 days. Many also believe that God, here deemed that which we cannot know, created the universe at the beginning of time, allowing for evolution: a good answer that is not really an answer. Aristotle said, as does Heidegger, that the universe has always already been here, that there was no creation ex nihilo but that there was always something: this, I would like to take further by saying that there does not need to have been nothing before something, but that what may have been, surely something, need not have been by any means large. The smallest atom could have always been, but then you ask "where did that atom come from?" and I can only reply that it did not have to come from anywhere, which seems like a cop out, so long as you still proscribe to creation ex nihilo. This shows that we can never answer this question so long as we believe something must have come from nothing. Nevertheless we can put forward theories the best of which attests to the fallacy of creation ex nihilo: the most popular theory is of the Big Bang whereby the reaction of certain molecules (in the nothing), the origin of which we can never know, after becoming so compressed reacted creating space ever expanding. But this still attests to my thesis that nothing doesn't have to come before something, something could just always be there. Then the tragic truth must come out: for anything to be created something must be destroyed: to build a house the previous building standing on the spot must be demolished; destruction and creation go together: even if destruction means simply destroying the previous form of something by shaping it into a sword, for instance. For me to create something novel, this theory for instance, I had to destroy the previous theory: something can only become from nothing. Now something can only become from something else: you cannot make nothing into a spoon or a guitar, something must have always been for a greater something to have become from it. The destruction of atoms was necessary for the creation of the universe: something was already there. Perhaps the prior nothing in which these atoms subsisted is preserved outside the bounds of the ever expanding. But there were always atoms, there was always already something, that had to have been destroyed for the universe to be created.
Creation can only come from destruction
Before something there must have been nothing: the greatest and most taken for granted fallacy that society, culture, tradition, civilisation, all cults basically, have taken from the Bible, which we no longer believe to be fact but only myth, and have implanted in us, indoctrinated in us, this belief that shapes all our other beliefs: we must believe in some form of beginning, some idea of creation, in order to say or mean anything. That we still hold true and dear to us the idea of creation ex nihilo (from nothing to something) accordingly as the bible dictates, is astounding: this is why we cannot explain creation: because we believe there had to have been a creation, something from nothing. Now, Creationists believe that the world was created by God 6000 years ago in 7 days. Many also believe that God, here deemed that which we cannot know, created the universe at the beginning of time, allowing for evolution: a good answer that is not really an answer. Aristotle said, as does Heidegger, that the universe has always already been here, that there was no creation ex nihilo but that there was always something: this, I would like to take further by saying that there does not need to have been nothing before something, but that what may have been, surely something, need not have been by any means large. The smallest atom could have always been, but then you ask "where did that atom come from?" and I can only reply that it did not have to come from anywhere, which seems like a cop out, so long as you still proscribe to creation ex nihilo. This shows that we can never answer this question so long as we believe something must have come from nothing. Nevertheless we can put forward theories the best of which attests to the fallacy of creation ex nihilo: the most popular theory is of the Big Bang whereby the reaction of certain molecules (in the nothing), the origin of which we can never know, after becoming so compressed reacted creating space ever expanding. But this still attests to my thesis that nothing doesn't have to come before something, something could just always be there. Then the tragic truth must come out: for anything to be created something must be destroyed: to build a house the previous building standing on the spot must be demolished; destruction and creation go together: even if destruction means simply destroying the previous form of something by shaping it into a sword, for instance. For me to create something novel, this theory for instance, I had to destroy the previous theory: something can only become from nothing. Now something can only become from something else: you cannot make nothing into a spoon or a guitar, something must have always been for a greater something to have become from it. The destruction of atoms was necessary for the creation of the universe: something was already there. Perhaps the prior nothing in which these atoms subsisted is preserved outside the bounds of the ever expanding. But there were always atoms, there was always already something, that had to have been destroyed for the universe to be created.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home