Montrovant
Fuzzy bears!
The physical may have always existed, just as you claim of the spiritual.
Perhaps there is some way for something to come from nothing, assuming nothing is what existed prior to the Big Bang. You continue to assert knowledge of the beginning of the universe as though it is indisputable fact.
You have said, many times, you can offer spiritual evidence of spiritual nature, but as always do a poor job defining those terms. 'Not of the physical world' is vague, could potentially encompass an infinite variety of things, doesn't really describe the nature of this spiritual nature, etc.
We've been through this before. It's easy enough to make claims about something that one must believe in before one can experience any evidence for it.
Well no... We've already determined where physical reality comes from. It didn't exist until a physical universe existed and time and space for physical things to exist in existed. If you have some other theory, you need to explain it and support it with science.
I don't understand how it's vague to say something is not of the physical world. You can comprehend that something physical can't exist if there is no time space for it to exist. If it's not physical, it's non-physical... seems pretty logical to me.
And I have told you before, I don't really give two good shits what you believe in. That doesn't change evidence. I could just argue that I don't accept physical evidence for things and then how would you explain anything physical to me? See how that works? The fact that you refuse to accept the evidence doesn't mean it's not there.
Neither you nor I knows for sure what the beginning of our universe entailed, nor what may or may not have come before. So there may well have been physical reality before our universe. I've already pointed out that I have never seen the singularity which is believed to have contained all of what is in our universe described as other than physical, and that the usual rules of physics are thought to have not applied within it. As such, neither time nor space may have existed, yet contained all the matter of the universe.
I've already mentioned one idea, although it's fallen out of favor, which hypothesized a physical universe which could have existed before ours : the Big Crunch/Big Bang.
Saying something is not of the physical world doesn't say what that thing is, only what it is not. Your descriptions of spiritual nature do not truly define it, merely point out what it is not and that it cannot be sensed with the physical senses humanity knows. Saying that an ill-defined something exists, but can only be sensed through something non-physical and therefore not observable, is an argument that cannot be refuted, because there's nothing substantive or objective to refute. Nor does it explain how you come by such knowledge about this spiritual nature, especially considering almost no one else has this knowledge.
You could argue that you don't accept physical evidence, sure. But unless you are blind, deaf, and cannot taste, smell or feel through touch, you will experience such things. What sense is it that I and others who have not experienced spiritual nature are missing? Is it a physical sense that you can point to the organ responsible, or is it a spiritual sense, therefore you cannot point to anything responsible yet can claim that it's there and I simply can't know it until I believe in spiritual evidence?
Ok we're all a little nuts. But at least I know it. These people believe gods watching and talking to them and he can't wait for them to come to heaven. Oh boy
It's a sign of the end times. Nothing we can do about it.
