About what happened in the beginning. What happened in the beginning? About the new materialism made of naphthalene
They say that the task of man is to serve God. Who is speaking? And you can't remember all of them. Therefore, it is simple - they say.
And what is the task of God, did anyone tell you? And in general, what does God do for a person, provided that a person has done something for him? If not, we know what will happen, but in the opposite case? Although: even if a person is not grateful "for everything", is God really that touchy?
After reading spiritual literature, you will not find an explanation of why God is needed. There is a lot of talk about why he was once needed or why he will be needed, but not a word about what is the point of him now.
Each religion gives its own interpretation of "all that is" based on a simple thesis: God is incomprehensible to the weak human mind. You cannot fully understand it, and if so, then there is no need to worry.
As one familiar programmer said, God is a variable that is referred to when there is no exact data. Unknown value. Pandora's Box.
For most people, God plays the role of a "roof", which, if something happens, will "cover", "cover", "protect".
For example, do you know why you need to take care of parents and children? This is what God ordered, and if you do not obey, it will be bad for you.
Do you know why you have to be patient? Because God put up with it and told you to. Compared to his worldly sorrow, all your suffering in life is a mere trifle. Be patient, my child ...
We, modern people, in our world outlook have gone far from the ancients, but we inherited part of their culture. God, for example, that is, the attitude, the variable that many rules of our life refer to. From such references, this variable becomes something that really exists, you just cannot touch it. So you don't need to feel. You believe and that's it. And if you don’t believe it, he will get angry. (Elegantly, agree, explained).
The myth created by the ancients still lives on in the form in which they created it. The form is like this - there is someone somewhere who controls everything. You have to be good, and then he will help. You have this myth in your "head" too. Not as bright as a hundred years ago, when churches were built in hundreds, but still there.
Mythological consciousness, that is, thinking that operates with ideas about God, Hell and Paradise, is inherent in most, if not all, modern people. And here we come to a very simple idea: if there is something, then it is necessary for some reason. Right? What is unnecessary would have disappeared long ago. An example of this is the gods of Ancient Greece. There are no those who need them, so what? Where is Zeus? Where is Aphrodite? What are they doing now, I wonder?
So describe your god as if you were describing a person. Tell us about his character. How he treats you. What do you need to do to earn his favor. In general, figure out how your personal relationship with God works.
Here are some questions to help you:
1. What is my God like? How do I imagine it?
2. What does it do for me?
3. Why does he do this?
4. Why does he do this?
5. What am I doing for him?
6. What do I do to make him treat me better?
7. How do I know how he treats me?
8. How do I know if I am living the right way or not from his point of view?
9. What in our interaction gives me strength? How do I become stronger when I have a god?
10. How does this bond invalidate me? Why do I become weaker when I have a god?
If God is removed, who will judge man? And let him judge and punish himself. That's the whole solution.
God will not come to the "final judgment", and do not hope for this meeting (by the way, the "more terrible" the court, the more you depend on all kinds of "intermediaries": priests, pastors and other benefactors who have caught you hooked ...) ... You will judge and punish yourself. We punish ourselves and judge ourselves every day. It turns out that there is no need to do the Last Judgment at any particular moment. He is always there. And there is no God on it, but its function is performed.
And here another conclusion suggests itself, if something (someone) performs his functions, then he is God? It is necessary to find something (that) that (who) performs his functions. This will be God.
Is the hint clear? Not yet?
There are two ways to become a god:
1. Become an immortal work of art. It doesn't matter which one. (The path of art).
2. Become a rule of life for many people. (The path is ideological).
God is an idea that directs interacting ideas from a certain level of the system (or the whole system). However, if there is no system, there will be no god.
So WHAT was in the beginning: god or system (universe, microbes, man)?
The question "How did the world come about?" worries a person from the very dawn of civilization. Did the world have a beginning or is it beginningless (exists forever)? If the world had a beginning, then where did it come from? And how did that "something" come from, from which the world appeared? Finally, did the world come about by chance, or does it have a reason?
The answers to these questions are directly related both to the sciences about the Universe (primarily, physics and cosmology), and to religion and theology. The final answers to these questions have not yet been found (except for the conditional answer about the beginning of time given by the singularity theorem). But people, for some unknown reason, choose this or that answer, and believe that it is the truth. For example, Christians believe that the world (including the primary matter from which it was created) had a beginning, and this beginning was laid by God as the cause of the world (the so-called dogma of the creation of the world by God); materialists, on the other hand, agreeing with the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus, believe that something material (sometimes calling it "nothing", always meaning "something" by this) existed eternally, and that our Universe arose by chance (spontaneously / spontaneously / without cause) from this eternally existing something).
Materialism's Attacks on the Biblical Creation Revelation
There is a continuous struggle between these worldviews, with materialists usually attacking. Recently, the attacks of materialism on the Divine Revelation about the creation of the world have intensified: several books have appeared trying to undermine the reliability of the biblical account of the origin of the universe, recorded three millennia ago in the opening verses of the first book of the Bible - the Book of Genesis. Recently published books include The Grand Design (2010) by British cosmologist Stephen Hawking and A Universe from Nothing (2012) by American astrophysicist Lawrence Krauss.
The most important goal of the attacks of the "new materialists" - Stephen Hawking and Lawrence Krauss - is, like the ancient materialists, the basic truth of the Christian faith - the truth of the existence of God, as well as the dogma of the primacy and creation of the world by God from nothing, which is inextricably linked with it, hidden in the initial Bible verse: "In the beginning God created [out of nothing] the heavens and the earth." In particular, the entire book of Dr. Krauss is aimed at refuting the dogma of the creation of the world by God. Materialist atheists vigorously attack this very dogma, because it is inextricably linked with the truth of the existence of God: by destroying it, atheists hope to refute the existence of God. The essence of the attacks boils down to replacing the Christian belief in the Creation of the world by God with a materialistic belief in the accidental (unreasonable) emergence of the world from eternally existing matter (sometimes calling it "nothing", behind which the materialists actually hide an eternally existing "something"). Moreover, an important fact remains “behind the scenes” - Hawking and Krauss, as well as other atheist scientists, referring to science, groundlessly claim that “science has proved that there is no God,” essentially basing this statement on hypotheses that go beyond the natural limits of science.
A little about matter
When discussing the beginning of the world (Universe), it is necessary to define the concept of matter. The term matter (from Lat. Materia, "substance") refers to all physical objects in the Universe, as opposed to non-physical (spiritual). Matter is displayed by our sensations, existing independently of them (objectively). Although not all material objects are visible to the naked eye (for example, atoms).
Physicists divide all matter in the Universe into the following main types: matter, fields, physical vacuum and objects of obscure physical nature (dark energy and dark matter). The substance, basically, consists of the following "building blocks": electrons (elementary particle of matter), protons and neutrons. At the beginning of the universe, electrons, protons and neutrons were free, but now they exist bound together in particles called "atoms." It is in terms of atoms that modern chemistry operates. Fields (classical) include electromagnetic and gravitational fields. The physical vacuum is not a simple void, as you might think from its name, but contains a certain amount of energy. It is a substance devoid of real particles of matter, as well as electromagnetic and other classical fields, and is the most fundamental form of matter, similar to the immaterial foremother of ancient philosophical teachings.
Materialism as a denial of non-material reality
Materialism in its essence is a philosophical opinion (faith), closely related to science. However, it should not be equated with science. The basic principle of materialism is that there is nothing but matter (neither God, nor the spiritual world of angels ("heavens"), nor the human soul), and that everything in the world should be the result of the laws of physics and chance. Ironically, it was the latest discoveries in physics and cosmology (including the Borde-Gut-Vilenkin singularity theorem) that undermined this principle. The singularity theorem mathematically precisely proves the existence of the beginning of time ("before" which there was no time at all), in essence, confirming one of the basic truths of Christianity - the truth of the origin of the world. This and other scientific discoveries gave rise to doubt that matter is the only reality.
The origin of the world according to ancient materialism: instead of God - a case
Let's explore the ancient Greek roots of materialism. The ancient Greeks tried to find in the created world around them both the primary reality and the Divine. This admiration for matter (Nature) was completely formed in ancient materialism, which completely rejected the idea of the spiritual principle.
Democritus
According to legend, the Greek Leucippus is considered the father of ancient materialism. But due to the lack of reliable information about him, the teaching of materialism is associated with the student of Leucippus - Democritus (460-370 BC). He tried to find in everything purely natural causes of phenomena, which was reflected in his teaching about the foundations of the universe. Democritus adhered to the principle of the preservation of being ("nothing arises from nothing"), formulated by the Greek Melissus of Samos in the 5th century BC. According to Democritus, the world was a void in which myriads of atoms rush aimlessly; mixing, they completely randomly form bodies (it is this idea that will become the starting point of the cosmogony of Epicurus).
Democritus believed that chance is the lord and king of the Universe, and Fate (Fate) is the "Power that creates the world." The founder of materialism believed not only in fate, but also in the gods to whom he prayed, and also recognized magic and sorcery. So, ancient materialism at its core represented the ancient pagan belief in Destiny.
Epicurus
The successor of ancient materialism was the Greek Epicurus (341 - 271 BC), who became acquainted with the teachings of Democritus in his early youth. It is possible to understand the teachings of Epicurus only by taking into account the feeling of fear that possessed the philosopher in the early years of his life: fear of death and fear of the unknown. It seemed to him that Epicurus found liberation from his fears in the teachings of Democritus. He did not become a member of the school of atomists-materialists (most likely, because of her teacher - in his words, he was "a bad person and did such things through which wisdom cannot be achieved"), but he mastered the metaphysics of materialism: being an atomist, he did not recognized nothing purely spiritual (following Democritus, Epicurus even considered the nature of the gods to be material). Epicurus believed neither in the meaningfulness of the world, nor in the ultimate Truth.
According to Epicurean physics (originating in the physics of Democritus), many worlds in the Universe are eternally born (from a cluster of atoms) and disintegrate, and this process is carried out spontaneously (by itself) and without the intervention of any higher powers (God):
“What the Universe is now, so it has been forever and will forever be ... for [apart from the Universe] there is nothing into which it will change [meaning that apart from material objects, nothing - neither the soul, nor the spiritual world, nor God the Spirit - exists]] ".
Epicurus also put forward the materialistic principle of self-organization of matter:
"The emergence [of the world] occurs when the seeds necessary for this flow out from any world, or between worlds, or several worlds."
These ideas of Epicurus (about the eternal existence of matter, as well as the spontaneous birth of many worlds and their self-organization) served as the starting point for the hypotheses of the emergence of a world without the action of God, put forward by modern materialists (including Stephen Hawking and Lawrence Krauss).
The origin of the world according to Plato: creatio ex material
Unlike Democritus and Epicurus, the ancient Greek philosopher Plato believed in the existence of an immaterial God, in many ways similar to God Yahweh. Moreover, Plato's explanation of the origin of the world (in the cosmogonic treatise Timaeus, c. 360 BC) can be considered as revealing the meaning of Genesis 1: 2 (“And the earth was formless and empty ...”). The central metaphysical theme of Platonism is the doctrine of ideas (forms) and of God as the source of these ideas. However, although God is recognized as the cause of all existing things, in Platonism, in contrast to the Christian dogma of the creation of matter by God from nothing, the idea of the pre-eternal existence (uncreation) of matter is accepted, and God is considered not as the Creator, but as a Craftsman (Builder) who does not create matter. , but only forming from eternally existing matter all objects in the Universe. Indeed, Plato does not explain the origin of primary matter (chaos), but accepts its primordial existence as an axiom.
In Timaeus, Plato explains the origin of the Cosmos (the word itself comes from the ancient Greek “beauty, order”) as the work of God the Builder, Who brought everything from “disorder” to “order”:
“Having wished everything was good, [...], the Demiurge (Builder) took care of all the visible things that were […] in disorderly motion: he brought them out of disorder into order.”
When Plato speaks of "things in disorderly motion", he means the elements of the world (earth, water, air and fire), which all taken together mean primary matter (fundamental principles), from which everything in the world was formed by God the Demiurge:
“The elements existed isolated in space even before the time came to build the universe out of them. Then they did not yet possess either intelligence or measure; fire and water, earth and air [...] were in such a state in which everything that the Demiurge (Builder) did not touch. Therefore, the Demiurge began to build the Cosmos by bringing these four kinds [elements] in order with the help of forms and numbers. "
Thus, the elements (primary matter) had no form. Disordered matter (chaos) was interpreted by Plato as "primary matter", but not in the sense of "substance", but as "non-material matter", in which matter existed only in possibility, and not in reality. Plato called this non-material matter with the Greek term μη ον (me he), which literally means “non-existent,” “non-being,” or rather the only possibility of being (the ability to transform into something), i.e. the absence of any properties, insubstantiality.
So, according to Plato, matter and God-Demiurge are co-eternal, i.e. God is not the Creator, He does not create matter, but simply transforms it like an artisan makes things from some available material. The Universe was formed by God-Demiurge by transforming eternal, invisible and immaterial matter (elements of chaos) into visible material objects of the Universe using forms and numbers. As we can see, in comparison with the purely materialistic belief of Epicurus in the causeless emergence of the world, Plato's cosmology is a step forward, proposing the cause of this emergence.
The Truth of "Creation from Nothing" and Its Dogmatization by Christian Apologists
Let's trace the formation of the Christian dogma of the creation of the world by God from nothing (creatio ex nihilo). It should be noted that this formation took place almost exclusively in the struggle against the Platonic doctrine of the creation of the world from pre-eternal matter, and not with the doctrine of Epicurus about the spontaneous generation of the world (the latter doctrine generally rejected the existence of an immaterial God and therefore was not seriously considered).
Creatio ex nihilo as the revealed Old Testament truth of "creation from nothing"
The Old Testament truth of "creation from nothing" (creatio ex nihilo, in Latin) underlies one of the most fundamental dogmas of Christianity - creatio ex nihilo (the creation of the world by God from nothing). The truth of "creation from nothing" was encoded in the Book of Genesis by means of the word Bara already in the 15th-14th centuries BC, and was first clearly "spoken" "in the 2nd Book of Maccabees (2nd century BC - 1 century AD), which says that the world arose from "absolute nothingness" - ουκ όντων (uk onton):
“I implore you, my child, look at heaven and earth, and seeing everything that is on them, know that God created everything out of nothing [non-existent, ουκ όντων] and that this is how the human race came into being” (2 Mac. 7:28 )
One of the first personal statements in support of the truth of "creation from nothing" (in the sense that matter is not eternal, but created by God) was made by a rabbi of the 1st century CE. Gamaliel the Elder (teacher of the Apostle Paul). When a philosopher suggested that God was a great artist because he already had good materials (for example, the waters mentioned in Genesis 1: 2), Gamaliel answered him: “All of them [these materials] are said in detail that they were created By Himself. "
The Christian Church, however, revealed this truth and raised it to the level of indisputable, i.e. dogmatized her. Indeed, from the very beginning of Christianity, Orthodox Christians adhered to the truth that God is the Creator of “heaven and earth,” who created them out of nothing.
The opposition of Christianity to the philosophical systems of antiquity
For Christian theologians of the 1st century CE the statement that God created the entire universe, including primordial matter, had the status of an axiom. In all the symbols of the most ancient churches there was a member testifying to faith in God as the Creator of the whole world. For example, in the symbols of Jerusalem and Cyprus, this faith is expressed by the following words after “we believe” or “I believe in one God the Father”: “Almighty, Creator of all things visible and invisible”.
It took an extended struggle against non-Christian teachings (mainly the followers of Plato) and Christian heretics (for example, the Marcionites and other Gnostics), until by 180 AD. Christian theologians have formulated the creatio ex nihilo dogma in its classical form. Indeed, the Old Testament truth of "creation from nothing" was alien to all philosophical schools and cosmogonic systems of the Greco-Roman world, including Plato's doctrine of the eternal coexistence of matter and God, the Epicurean doctrine of the eternal and spontaneous generation of worlds, and the pantheistic doctrine of the world as a part of God. The main struggle took place with the Platonic model of world formation from primordial matter. As shown below, in their apologetic writings against Platonists and heretics, ancient (1-2 centuries AD) Christian theologians asserted the following six postulates:
- the world ontologically depends on God (i.e. the existence of the world is conditioned by God as its cause)
- God and matter are ontologically distinct (different in their basis of existence): God is not born (agennetos) and is not created (agenetos), but matter is created; moreover, matter does not have in itself anything of the essence of God;
- matter was created by God Himself, and not by anyone else (through the second Hypostasis of the Trinity - the Word - the Son of God), according to His almighty will alone;
- God did not have and does not have a need for the created world;
- primordial formless matter was created by God out of nothing (ex nihilo); or, which is the same, from absolute nothingness (εξ ουκ όντων);
- the matter created by God is transformed by God into everything that exists in the Universe;
Below are the main milestones in the history of dogmatization of the truth of "creation from nothing" by Christian apologists.
The Beginnings of Revealing the Truth of "Creation Out of Nothing" in the New Testament
The first attempts to explicitly formulate the Old Testament truth of "creation from nothing", hidden in the word of Bara in Genesis, appear already in the New Testament (for example, in the Epistles of the Apostle Paul). A quote like Rome. 4:17 (where God is mentioned, “calling into existence that which does not exist”) is proof that the ancient Christian theologians from the very beginning rejected Plato's doctrine of the eternal coexistence of matter and God. However, in the New Testament, the truth of "creation from nothing" is not yet fully revealed.
The Shepherd of Herma: God creates being out of nothing
The first Christian work that clearly begins to reveal the truth of "creation from nothing" is the Shepherd of Hermas (late 1st - early 2nd century AD), where we find the following statements rooted in the Old Testament, namely , at 2 Mack. 7:28, which speaks of God's bringing the world out of nothingness (εξ ουκ όντων) into existence:
"First of all, believe that there is one God, who created and accomplished everything, who brought everything from nothing [non-being, εξ τοΰ μή όντωs] into being (ex nihilo omnia fecit)."
Aristides of Athens: God is not just a Craftsman, but a Creator
The truth of "creation from nothing" is further revealed in Apology (c. 125 AD) of the Christian apologist Aristides of Athens:
"The elements [primary matter] were brought out of nothingness at the command of the true God."
With these words, Aristides asserts that God is not just the Platonic Demiurge-Craftsman (who is able to create things only from ready-made matter), but the Creator, for He Himself creates primary matter. Thus, he openly opposed the then dominant Platonic idea of God as a simple Artisan.
Justin the Philosopher: God as the beginningless and omnipotent Creator
The disclosure of the truth of "creation from nothing" continues in the middle of the 2nd century by St. Justin the Philosopher. Like Aristide of Athens, he denies the Platonic idea of God as a simple Craftsman, forming things from matter which is his own, and defends the idea of God as the uncreated Creator of all things (while everything else was created by Him), who does not need anything for creation and produces what is created. by its own strength:
"Only God is not created and is not subject to destruction ..." (here Justin, perhaps the first among the apologists, reveals the truth of the beginninglessness of God)
Justin also denies the ancient Epicurean opinion about the spontaneous (causeless) origin of the world and the pantheistic teaching about the world as an emanation of God.
Tatian of Assyria, Theophilus of Antioch and Irenaeus of Lyons: matter was created
The creatio ex nihilo dogma in the Orthodox (cleared of Gnostic opinions) Christian tradition takes its final formulation around 170-180s. AD in the writings of Tatian of Assyria, St. Theophilus of Antioch and St. Irenaeus of Lyons. The cosmogony of Tatian goes back to the idea of the beginninglessness of God (His absolute independence from anything), expressed by his teacher, St. Justin the Philosopher. Denying the Platonic model of the world-formation from matter, and going further than Justin, Tatian became the first (170-s AD) Christian theologian who clearly expressed the Old Testament truth that the original matter (the ancient Greeks called it "weaker" ) had a beginning, and that she was created (Tatian uses the term "thrown out") by God, and not by some other being:
“For matter [hile], unlike God, is not beginningless, and, not being beginningless, it is not equal in strength [power] to God. It is generated by [προβάλλεται (pop), "thrown out"], not produced by any being; but brought into being only by the Creator of all that exists. "
Due to the influx in the second half of the 2nd century of heretical opinions against the truth about the creation of matter by God, it was necessary to pay special attention to its protection. This was done by an eminent Christian apologist of the late 2nd century C.E. - St. Theophilus of Antioch. Following Tatian, he unconditionally rejects the idea of beginninglessness (uncreatedness) of matter:
"Moreover, if matter is not created, [as] and God is not created, then God is no longer the Creator of all things."
Using the foundation laid by his predecessors, St. Theophilus proves the internal inconsistency of the Platonic model of world formation, saying that the omnipotence of God (as the Creator of all that exists) is found in creation from nothing [absolute nothingness, ουκ όντων]:
“If matter were not created, it would also be unchanging and equal to God, for what is created is changeable, and what is not created is unchangeable. […] What is great if God created the world from existing matter? [...] The power of God is revealed in the fact that He from [absolute] non-existence [εξ ουκ όντων] creates what He wants, [...] creates and created things ... ".
It is generally accepted that around the 180s. AD St. Irenaeus of Lyons puts the final touch in the dogmatization of the Old Testament truth of "creation from nothing." Taking as an affirmed truth the beginninglessness, eternity, omnipotence, all-contentment (self-sufficiency) of God and His absolute necessity for the emergence of all that exists, St. Irenaeus completes the disclosure of the truth of the creation of previously non-existent matter (as opposed to the idea of its eternal existence) and its (matter) complete difference from God:
“For He [God] Himself is uncreated, without beginning and without end, and is all-satisfied. He [Himself] is sufficient for existence; but what was created by Him received a beginning ... He Himself called to existence the matter of His creation, which did not exist before. "
Here St. Irenaeus especially emphasizes the idea that the will of God (and not any service creatures) is the only basis for creation ("He Himself called matter to existence ...").
Thus, in the writings of Irenaeus of Lyons and Theophilus of Antioch, the creatio ex nihilo dogma receives its final formulation:
God created matter not from any previously existing substance or from His own being, but from nothing (absolute nothingness), solely through the act of His omnipotent will. Then God created the world out of this matter. At the same time, God Himself did not lose (and did not gain) anything from His very being.
Since the end of the 2nd century AD, this dogma has become one of the fundamental truths of the Christian Church. Indeed, for Hippolytus, Tertullian, Origen and Athanasius the Great (3-4 centuries), the origin and creation of matter from nothing is already an established and indisputable truth. For example, at the beginning of the 3rd century, Tertullian, in his On Principles, gives a short but succinct formulation of the creatio ex nihilo dogma:
"... universa de nihilo produxerit per Verbum suum." ("[Believe in the One God,] who made everything out of nothing through His Word").
And here is how the creatio ex nihilo dogma is formulated in a 19th century textbook on Orthodox dogmatic theology:
“… As Revelation itself teaches, the world was created by the almighty and all-wise God, and was created both in its form and in matter. God did not create it from something outside the ready [not from the previously existing matter] or from His own being, but created it solely through the act of His omnipotent will, bringing His thoughts about him into being and He Himself did not lose anything from this, like that , like a man-artist, producing his creation into the world, only realizes his thoughts with the power of will, but does not lose anything from his very being. "
The relation of the dogma creatio ex nihilo to the dogma of the existence of God
The creatio ex nihilo dogma (the truth of the creation of the world by God from absolute nothing), being the fundamental dogma of the Christian faith, itself is based on its most important truth - the truth of the existence of a single, beginningless, autocratic and omnipotent God. Indeed, the eternal existence of matter would come into conflict with the truth of the existence of God, for God would not then be sovereign and omnipotent (God would not have power over beginningless matter).
The Rebirth of the Materialist Faith by Stephen Hawking and Laurence Krauss
Having familiarized ourselves with both the materialistic belief in the spontaneous generation of the universe and the Christian belief in the divine creation of the world, let us consider the recent attempts to revive the materialistic belief by the American physicist Lawrence Krauss and British cosmologist Stephen Hawking, in parallel with these attackers of the truths of the Christian faith. In his book A Universe from Nothing, Krauss unreasonably denies the creation of the world by God, and even His very being:
"... this further suggests that God is not necessary, or at best, he is superfluous."
After examining the arguments of Lawrence Krauss, we will see the inconsistency of his opinion about the existence of God.
Lawrence Krauss openly declares the existence of God as the Cause of the world as the main problem (for atheists):
“The central problem with the concept of [Divine] creation is that it seems to require something [ie. God], which is outside the system [the Universe] itself, in order to create the conditions necessary for the system to come into being. "
To refute the truth of the existence of God, Krauss carries out a maneuver known to the ancient materialists-atheists: he attacks the dogma of the creation of the world by God. This attack consists in replacing the Divine act of the Creation of the World by God the Creator with two versions of the materialistic origin of the Universe.
In the first version, Dr. Krauss tries to replace the free will of the Creator God with chance ("spontaneous appearance"), and the truth of the Divine Creation of the world with the hypothesis of the spontaneous birth of the Universe from quantum nothing:
“You can imagine one special universe that can appear spontaneously and [thus] not disappear almost instantly. [...] the universe could, and perhaps emerged from a deeper nothing - including the absence of space itself. "
At the same time, he himself, unwillingly, partially confirms the Christian dogma about the creation of the world by God from nothing.
In the second version, Lawrence Krauss tries to replace God the Creator with a speculative set of parallel (and eternally) existing universes (multiverse), one of which is our Universe:
“Our modern understanding of the universe gives another possible and, I [L. Krauss] would add a more physical solution to this [Divine Creation] problem ... I mean the multiverse. "
"The proof [of] the multiverse is, of course, indirect, as it always will be."
In 2010's best-selling book, The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking makes a move similar to Krauss's, trying to replace God the Creator with an unconfirmed materialistic hypothesis - this time with multidimensional superstring theory (the so-called M-theory):
“M-theory predicts the existence of a huge variety of universes, created literally out of nothing. Their creation did not require the intervention of any supernatural being or God. On the contrary, this multitude of universes arises naturally from physical laws. Spontaneous creation [of the universe] is the argument that something is better than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. "
The main argument against Hawking's reasoning is that theories and laws by themselves cannot create anything, they cannot even cause anything. Thinking that laws can produce something on their own is tantamount to assuming that the summation itself (as a mathematical operation) will result in money appearing in your bank account.
In fact, the opinions of Krauss and Hawking cited here are a substitution of the Christian belief in the Creation of the world by God with the ancient materialistic belief in the accidental (causeless) emergence of the world (from nothing, behind which the eternally existing “something” is actually hidden) (faith originating from ancient Greek philosophers, first of all, Epicurus). In an attempt to divert people from belief in the Divine creation of the Universe, atheist-minded scientists ascribe creative abilities either to matter itself, or to the laws according to which this matter exists, or (from complete hopelessness) to theories describing these laws.
This ancient belief in eternal or randomly arising from nothing matter remains a belief (despite attempts to link it with scientific theories), since it is not scientifically proven. Moreover, this belief, in principle, cannot be scientifically proven, since the moment of the beginning of the Universe lies outside the natural limits of physics and, in general, outside of our knowledge (natural science can only study the existing reality).
So, the reader sees that both materialistic hypotheses - the spontaneous (causeless) appearance of the Universe from nothing and the eternal existence of many Universes - are neither new nor scientifically proven. Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking simply want to revive the materialistic faith (mind you, not scientific theory, but faith) of the ancient Greek philosophers Democritus and Epicurus. But this faith, as it was faith, will remain so, in spite of all the efforts of atheists from science. I would like the reader to remember this in another conversation with a familiar "scientist" atheist who is trying to present the opinion (and materialistic faith) of Stephen Hawking as the last word in science.
Now Putin has shown exactly the same incriminating evidence to Poroshenko. Through Medvedchuk. And now Poroshenko has no choice: a decision must be made on Crimea and Donbass on Putin's terms.
Yesterday and today I received many messages from my friends that the authorities are beginning to carry out repressions. Damn fly! And what did I say in Krakowiec? Who has the video? Take a look!
All the same. It's not even the second episode. It's the same. Only with other actors. The script and direction are the same.
Now we are looking at the denouement: Yanukovych signs an "agreement on the settlement of the political crisis" and knocks out of the country. Together with him - the Attorney General. Minister of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, head of the SBU and close associates. Yanukovych's wife remains in Ukraine with chopped oranges.
We change the surnames according to the positions.
Now about the panic.
I will not leave the country anywhere. I already left once, but then, as a citizen of Ukraine, I went to the mainland from the Russian invaders. I am ready for any change. I have absolutely no fear of the future, for I know it. Therefore, do not write to me: "Beware", "Be careful", "Look around", etc.
Everything is fine with me. It was in the Crimea and will be now.
I have nothing to fear. In the script with Petr Alekseevich, my violin is not at all the main one. In this case, the prima is himself. Let him be afraid. Moreover, in the scenario with Yanukovych, the president was not an alcoholic. Perhaps this is the only, but very significant difference.
O F C Y
Demigods and humans
ABOUT WHAT WAS IN THE BEGINNING
Like other peoples of the Ancient East, in India, myths about the origin of the world make up the earliest layer. For centuries, in different parts of the huge peninsula, human thought pulsated and beat in search of an answer to the questions: where does all this splendor surrounding us come from; where are we from? And other peoples have pondered these questions, but in the diversity and richness of their mythological solutions, India has no rivals.
In Indian myths about the origin of the world, two groups of legends are clearly distinguished: the creation of the world itself and the protection of the newborn world from monsters who are ready to swallow it and plunge it into initial chaos. At this second stage, the creator gods are replaced by the dragon-fighting gods, already familiar to us under other names from other mythologies.
In the beginning there was neither being nor non-being. There was no airspace, no sky above him. There was no death, no immortality. There was no day or night. But there was something that breathed without vibrating the air. And there was nothing but him. The world was hidden in darkness. Everything was indistinguishable abyss, emptiness generated by the power of heat. Desire, the seed of thought, came first. Then the gods appeared. But did they create the world? Where did this creation come from? Has it not created itself? The one who oversees the world in the out-of-town world may or may not know about it 1 ..
Waters arose before all other creations. They created fire. By fire, the Golden Egg was born in them. It is unknown how many years it has been floating in the endless and * bottomless ocean. From the Golden Embryo in the egg, the Progenitor Brahma arose. He cracked the egg. The upper part of the shell became the sky, the lower one became the earth, and between them Brahma placed airspace. On the land floating among the waters, he determined the cardinal points, laid the beginning of time. This is how universe 2 was created.
Looking around, Brahma saw that he was alone. And he was scared. Therefore, with the power of thought, he begot six sons from his eyes, his lips, right and left ears, from the nostrils. From them came the gods, demons, people, birds and snakes, giants and monsters, priests and cows and many other creatures inhabiting all three worlds.
Having transferred power to the gods and demons, Brahma went to rest in the shade, under the branches of a silk tree 3. Brahma's rest, his "day", will last for billions of years, until the "night of Brahma" comes and the world he created again becomes a huge body of water, which will have to wait in the wings, the birth of a new world egg and the appearance of a new creator Brahma.
At first there was nothing alive except the first man, the thousand-headed, thousand-eyed, thousand-legged giant Purusha. He lay, covering the ground with his huge body, and still towered over it by ten fingers. After all, Purusha is the universe that was and will be. Such is its magnitude and greatness. The gods approached Purusha, tied him like an animal during a sacrifice, doused him with oil and divided into parts 4. His mouth became a brahmana 5, his hands became a ksatriya 6, his thighs became a vaisya 7, a sudra 8 emerged from the soles of his feet. The moon was born from his soul, from the eyes - the sun, from the mouth - Indra and Agni, from the breath was born the wind, from the navel 9 - air space, from the head - the sky, from the legs - the soil, from the ear - the cardinal points. Thus, the worlds arose from the first man.
1 This is the earliest description of the creation of the world, given in the Vedas, is at the same time the most abstract. No god or other mythological character is mentioned. The author of this hymn refuses to make any firm judgments. Thus, the widespread opinion that abstractions are alien to primitive thinking is refuted by this text.
2 The concept of the world egg, from which the universe arose, is inherent in many mythologies. Let us recall the Egyptian myth about the origin of the world from the egg laid by the “great Gogotun”. Hence the role of the egg in the burial rites of the Etruscans (on the funeral frescoes the deceased was depicted with an egg in his hand), as well as the place of the egg in fertility festivals among the Eastern Slavs.
3 The silk tree, under which Brahma rested, is the world tree present in all cosmogonic myths, occupying a central position in the world. In Chinese myth, it is also a mulberry.
4 This passage from the hymn of the Rig Veda shows that this version of the creation of the world from the body of a cosmic giant is nothing more than a description of the human sacrifice of the first man, from which all the constituent elements of the world arose. When sacrificed, the Purusha is dismembered into parts, from which the elements of cosmic and at the same time social organization arise.
5 Brahmanas are priests.
6 The Kshatriyas, or Rajanias, are the warriors.
7 Vaisyas are farmers, herders, merchants.
8 Shudras - the lowest class in Indian society, engaged in unskilled labor.
9 The navel played a special place in other mythologies as well, being considered as the world axis or the central world mountain. The navel of the Purusha is the navel of the earth. But none of the mythologies knows the origin of the sky from this center.
