Before Big Bang God or Singularity

so in essence, you want to know...before that?ok. there was the big bang.before that?something. before that? before that? before that?the before that never ends until you get to one thing.since nothing outside of energy is real, the one thing is energy.you calling that the singularity? and wanna know before that? another singularity? once its singular, there's nothing to be before. if nothing, the singularity wouldn't be, so only the singular energy could be, and had to be, because we are.why? i dunno. it was. or i wouldn't be.so if anyone truly asks "before that" your going to eventually stop at one. because as long as two things are, before that is relevant.so , the "one" energy. what are we looking for to be able to observe it. what did it look like.question that has to be answered: intelligent, yes or no?the observation that cannot be ignored: singular and evolved or created. sign of intelligence. if intelligent, the action is an act of faith.so what now? ignore the before that's? go back to the big bang? say God was created by a greater energy? wouldn't the greater energy be God?if you follow this thread by what your asking, your going to follow my path of logic.if you don't, what are you asking?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

oooh i see sorry for misinterpreting.i believe they are both one and the same. God is the singularity.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

oh no need, your fine.i also believe God is everywhere and everything, but it was and is also the singularity, but from the singularity came all things and the singularity did not cut off what it made from itself. but all that is that came from it is sustained by it, hence why we need it. that is my belief.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

good question. and if we are alive in this universe, its one we should ask.something cannot "literally" come form nothing.so by science, explore what the something was. and to know if it came from intelligence, or from random force, we need to observe what the start can potentially be, or not be.a single timeless energy that just was, and evolved points to intelligence on every level. and a single intelligent energy that evolved would then be "creation". a single intelligent energy that creates based on only itself is an act of faith.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

wrong. im saying at no time was there ever a point that there was "nothing" because if that is even considered you invite to possibility you do not exist. thats mental illness.dig deeper. even if there is a greater heaven beyond our universe in another "plane" of existence, then there was still another "before that".and if you follow "before that" you find T=0regardless of the spaces in between.its science.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

the true answer is the first chicken came with the first egg.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

same problem with this theory that is with the big bang.there was still a before that. the dimensions came from..what? existed..how?inevitably, there is still T=0

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

ok. so these dimensions existed singularly then.because if one was before another then time is measured. since as long as two things are, time is relevant to the order by which was first.so this theory is, as your suggesting, a singular energy with multiple dimensions?order? chaos? intelligent? not intelligent?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

why do you end your statements with "have fun"?it can be inflammatory, not that it is your intention, but its apparently condescending given the nature of the conversation.i have come to know you as a believer in Jesus, and Jesus would want you to love all men, good or bad, and to put others before you. to be condescending is not humility. (off topic, but you can always click my name and send me an e-mail if we could pursue this)back on topic: the "always was" has evolved. so what did the "always was" look like in its Genesis state?this theory of dimensions still applies to singular energy in its initial state, that encompasses multiple planes of reality in a timeless state (t=0) which still is saying singularity, but showing a greater complexity.the question still must be asked , if this energy of many dimensions that "always was" existed singularly, in great complexity, was it :ordered? chaotic? intelligent? or not intelligent?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

it always was.thats the start.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

very well. it does sound better.john 1:1 and the science of the singularity are both talking bout the same reference point of T=0the problem is, many Christians do not realize the reality of God, and science has not pursued the singularity in full by asking :order? chaotic? intelligent? not intelligent?this dispute is about T=0 and what it is, and so should be examined for the truth of what can or cannot be said of it by what reality is.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

ok. good. it should be apparent that T=0 would be defined either: chance, or direction for the point after it.this means, intelligence, or not intelligent.regardless of its complexity.if science determines, that chance is impossible for either an ordered or disordered energy to beget of itself as it would exist singularly, then it would mean intelligence.this means : that religion is based on the T=0 energy to be true, and not based on a God that exists outside of that energy, which would be impossible. another way to put this is: "because nothing can exist outside of existence" but it may not be understood by that terminology.so to continue:t=0 energy, multiple realities, all existing in one singular state and great complexity:singular timeless complex energy from whence all things came:intelligent? not intelligent? ordered energy? chaotic energy?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

ok, so T=0 is : timeless ordered energy spanning multiple realities.so, since its ordered, and it spawned the universe and time, does this mean:intelligent? or not intelligent?does not a singular ordered timeless energy mean : intelligent?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

i dont get the statement.surly, T=0 is the beginning.for time to no longer be relevant, then it would mean singular energy. nothing before it. so its the start.as long as a second energy, that did not exist form the same point in time as the first, time would be relevant.so if time is no longer relevant: T=0then we are discussing a singular complex energy, which is the beginning.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

ok. what is it? in your words?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides