What evidence would you accept?

[Ahanu]

'Growing Block universe' says all three past, present and future exist simultaneously.

Based on what information?

Wikipedia says that, according to this theory, only the past and present exist: "The growing block universe, or the growing block view, is a theory of time arguing that the past and present both exist, while the future does not yet exist."

 

[Thomas]

@Thomas -
You cited the KJV -

I knew there was a risk in so doing, and while one can offer a reading in a broad, ecumenical manner, that's not what the text is actually saying, nor the audience it addresses.

In hindsight, I would haver done better to omit this altogether, and stick with my NT reference.

(On the up-side, I now have two online Hebrew sources, Chabad and Sepharia, to refer to, rather then my hitherto Blueletterbible. If you know a better resource for this gentile, let me know!)

 

[Ahanu]

Time (past, present and future) and space are illusions ('maya') in 'Absolute Truth' (Paramārthikā), but not in 'Pragmatic Truth' (Vyavahārikā - our perception). Brahman alone exists and is eternal, manifested or unmanifested.

Okay.

'Block universe' says existence in time is real.

Agreed.

'Growing Block universe'

The Growing Block Universe doesn't align with Einstein's theory of relativity, however.

Time is a real dimension in the Block Universe. Einstein's theory of relativity strongly points to the Block Universe. That's why many physicists conclude that all events across time must be real and that there is no universal now according to the physics.

My question is why do you reject the strong scientific indicator's that point in the direction of the Block Universe? I thought you leaned in the direction of science. I myself do not embrace the Block Universe (e.g., no real free will in this universe), but I do think it is an example of taking Einstein's theory of relativity to its natural conclusion, which, in my opinion, points to the supernatural world, the reality that exists outside the time and space that human consciousness perceives. I don't see how an atheist can conclude the supernatural world is superstition when the science points in that direction.

Within this world of thought, they (Blockians?) distinguish between physical time and manifest time. The latter is our own subjective experience of time flowing. It can be categorized as illusionary in nature. This is somewhat similar to the Advaita concept of maya (illusionary time) you shared. According to the Block Universe, the universe is like a vinyl record that already exists in its entirety. Every song is already there. It never changes. Our subjective experience is like the needle. Strangely physics can't find the needle, the universal now. In Advaita this analogy breaks down since the vinyl record itself is considered illusion.

Strange! That is, the conclusions from Einstein's theory of relativity are strange!

 

[Thomas]

We agree.

Well, I hope you'll forgive me if I reserve the right to wait and see evidence of a change of heart.

Now we have to all join in the promise of Zechariah 14:9

Or, if Christianity is one's vocation: "For which reason God also exalted him on high and graced him with the name that is above every name," Philippians 2:9.

If the Dao, then, of course, the opening lines of the first chapter say it all:
"The dao ('way') that can be named is not the eternal Dao.
The name that can be spoken is not the eternal Name"

And that first chapter from D.B. Hart's forthcoming translation:
"That Path that abides forever is not a path that can be walked upon,
That Name that abides forever is not a name that can be uttered:
When nameless, it is the pure origin of heaven and earth,
When named, it is the mother of all the myriad things.

Abandon thoughts and desires forever and you will be granted the vision of that mysterious essence,
Cling to thoughts and desires forever and you will see only the surfaces of things;

Both, however, issue from a single source,
Even if we speak as though they were wholly different.

All we can say of that One is that it is an abyss of mystery,
And even then a mystery that constantly deepens –
It is the gateway through which one passes into the essence of all things."

As ever, in the world of appearances, each to their own.

 

[Thomas]

– continuation –

There is some correspondence between your belief (as I understand it) and Buddhism, in that names can signify aspiration and spiritual identity.

A Dharma Name is acquired during Mahayana initiation or Theravada ordination, again representing aspirational qualities.

A Christian Confirmation Name serves a similar purpose.

I could be wrong.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..If the trait helps the organism survive long enough to pass on its genes..

From where did the mechanism of "genes" originate?

 

[muhammad_isa]

..are there women amongst the Messengers..?

..not that I know of.
If you think about it, women were very vulnerable up until the advent of contraceptives..
..particularly the pill.
The world we live in today is descending into chaos .. traditions and norms often discarded.

..that has nothing to do with human equality .. women can be just as pious as men ..
..if not more so.

 

[Thomas]

or women... are there women amongst the Messengers - are there thought to be women Messengers?

There are female prophets in the NT. Anna in Luke 2. Philip's daughters in Acts. Others not named, but the assurance that men and women will prophecy, it being a charism of the Holy Spirit.

Mary Magdalene is 'the apostle to the apostles'

 

[Aupmanyav]

Based on what information?

Wikipedia says that, according to this theory, only the past and present exist: "The growing block universe, or the growing block view, is a theory of time arguing that the past and present both exist, while the future does not yet exist."

My fault. I accept that. Still very different from my 'Advaita' belief.

My question is why do you reject the strong scientific indicator's that point in the direction of the Block Universe?

What Einstein may have said does not automatically become the truth of science. And I have yet not gone into the question whether Einstein's concept of time is the same as of that of this philosophical claim of Block Universe. I do not go by philosophies.

 

[Aupmanyav]

continued from my previous post:
"Einstein said" is appeal to authority and is a fallacy.
How can anyone say that future exists? Who knows if the universe can fold up in a second or not? Einstein was wiser than to say such wild things.
Only philosophers do that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

From where did the mechanism of "genes" originate?

"Organic molecules are the building blocks of all living things, containing carbon and hydrogen, and include carbohydrates, lipids, proteins, and nucleic acids. These molecules play essential roles in various biological processes and are fundamental to life." DuckAssist
BCcampus frinton.com

 

[muhammad_isa]

There are female prophets in the NT..

..and of course, we have the recent Archbishop of Canterbury.

 

[muhammad_isa]

"Organic molecules are the building blocks of all living things.."

Yeah, and they combined in the manner they did, just "because they could".

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

Well, I hope you'll forgive me if I reserve the right to wait and see evidence of a change of heart.



Or, if Christianity is one's vocation: "For which reason God also exalted him on high and graced him with the name that is above every name," Philippians 2:9.

If the Dao, then, of course, the opening lines of the first chapter say it all:
"The dao ('way') that can be named is not the eternal Dao.
The name that can be spoken is not the eternal Name"

And that first chapter from D.B. Hart's forthcoming translation:
"That Path that abides forever is not a path that can be walked upon,
That Name that abides forever is not a name that can be uttered:
When nameless, it is the pure origin of heaven and earth,
When named, it is the mother of all the myriad things.

Abandon thoughts and desires forever and you will be granted the vision of that mysterious essence,
Cling to thoughts and desires forever and you will see only the surfaces of things;

Both, however, issue from a single source,
Even if we speak as though they were wholly different.

All we can say of that One is that it is an abyss of mystery,
And even then a mystery that constantly deepens –
It is the gateway through which one passes into the essence of all things."

As ever, in the world of appearances, each to their own.

My heart is attempting to show a common love of G-d found in all G-d given Faiths.

I see you have in this reply shown what the division is Thomas. The division does not originate in the "Word of God", it lays within our interpretations.

You Quote Philippians 2:9, The Mesage of Jesus also offered these passages;

Revelation 2:17
Revelation 3:12

Which reflects ancient promises given in
Isaiah 56:5
Isaiah 62:2
Isaiah 65:15

I would offer all "Names" are found in the "Glory of God". In the Glory of God I find the Names of Noah, Abraham, Krishna, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus Christ, Muhammad and the Bab to name a few.

All come from a single source, as does the "Glory of God", even if we speak as they were wholly different.

To quote from your post Thomas

"All we can say of that One is that it is an abyss of mystery,

And even then a mystery that constantly deepens –

It is the gateway through which one passes into the essence of all things.

As ever, in the world of appearances, each to their own."

Regards Tony

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yeah, and they combined in the manner they did, just "because they could".

They had to, because of their chemical and electrical properties.

 

[Aupmanyav]

All come from a single source, as does the "Glory of God", even if we speak as they were wholly different.

According to 'Advaita' Hinduism, even dog's poo comes from the same source.

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

According to 'Advaita' Hinduism, even dog's poo comes from the same source.

Sure does. It also performs its purpose as designed. Everything has meaning and purpose.

Regards Tony

 

[Ahanu]

"Eko sad, dwiteeyo nasti" (What exists is one, there is no second)

Bahá’u’lláh calls this same viewpoint Existential Oneness (tawhíd-i wujúdí). At the level of the Divine Essence, there is no Messenger, no Maiden, no observer, and no observed. God is alone and sanctified above all plurality.

If human beings were capable of living purely as the Absolute, no Messengers or stories would be needed, but we are not. The human brain cannot conceptualize the Absolute. After all, we are finite beings in space and time. If we try to emulate it, we end up staring into a void, so basically we need a translation. Our experience of the Absolute must be mediated through “stories” as a result of our being human.

As long as you and I are typing on this forum, we are living in the Pragmatic Reality (Vyavahārikā). In this human reality, dismissing Messengers and moral teachings as scams is a category error. We need the Messenger in the Vyavahārikā to translate the Hidden Treasure.

You asked: Whom would Brahman observe and for what reason? The answer is in this tradition:

“I was a Hidden Treasure and loved to be known; therefore I created the creation that I might be known.”

 

[Aupmanyav]

God is alone and sanctified above all plurality.

If human beings were capable of living purely as the Absolute, no Messengers or stories would be needed, but we are not. The human brain cannot conceptualize the Absolute. After all, we are finite beings in space and time. If we try to emulate it, we end up staring into a void, so basically we need a translation. Our experience of the Absolute must be mediated through “stories” as a result of our being human.

As long as you and I are typing on this forum, we are living in the Pragmatic Reality (Vyavahārikā). In this human reality, dismissing Messengers and moral teachings as scams is a category error. We need the Messenger in the Vyavahārikā to translate the Hidden Treasure.

You asked: Whom would Brahman observe and for what reason? The answer is in this tradition:
“I was a Hidden Treasure and loved to be known; therefore I created the creation that I might be known.”

Mark your words. You believe in plurality above which is your God.
'Adviata' Hinduism does not accept plurality other than as an illusion.
"A noble and learned brahmin, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater, a wise person sees them as equal" Gita 5.18
Human beings are human beings. Why do you see them as something special. Some will be good, some will be bad. The coming of the so-called prophets/sons/messengers/manifesttions/Mahdis/Imams has not changed this.
Human brain can visualize the absolute. But our minds are so filled with sticky garbage that we are not able to realize that.
Oh, teachings! We have a saying in Hindi, "Par upadesha kushal bahutere" (There are many adepts at advising others). That is the easiest thing to do.
Unless you give evidence for them (that there is a God and that he is sending them here), why should God, soul and messengers be accepted?
That is not what 'Advaita' says. It denies creation as illusion. Brahman does not do anything other than exist, it has no need to do anything.

 

[Thomas]

My heart is attempting to show a common love of G-d found in all G-d given Faiths.

No doubt, but it appears your issue is not with believers, but what they believe, in that a belief is any faith other than your own is misplaced, that those faiths are to some degree deficient or indeed defective.

I see you have in this reply shown what the division is Thomas.

And by so doing I hope you see the error.

You Quote Philippians 2:9, The Mesage of Jesus also offered these passages ...

I could list a host of references – but that's not the point, is it?

I would offer all "Names" are found in the "Glory of God"....

And I think that "Glory' has a far broader context than you seem to allow.

All come from a single source, as does the "Glory of God", even if we speak as they were wholly different.

So does that not speak to you of the error of supercessionism?

To quote from your post Thomas
"All we can say of that One is that it is an abyss of mystery,
And even then a mystery that constantly deepens –
It is the gateway through which one passes into the essence of all things.
As ever, in the world of appearances, each to their own."

Yes!

So now do you see why your view that other traditions are in some manner defective, deficient or incomplete; that your Tradition surpasses and/or supersedes all others, is an error?