You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why the Universe is called "The Universe".
Conceptually it doesn't follow for me that the mind of God is the same as the expression of God. For example when I dream at night I create a dream world. That world is an expression of my mind but it's not my mind. Case in point when I wake up that dream has ended but my mind still operates. If my mind was the same as my dream, then when my dream ends, my mind would end too. But that doesn't happen which is a good thing for me! So my mind exists independently from my dream. So if the universe is a dream and God is the dreamer, then this dreamer's mind would also exist independently from the dream (the Universe).
In my opinion, the expression of God (all that is) , exists within the mind of God (the universe).
I believe that when the initial first thought (God) expanded into all possibilities through the 'big bang' , it created the "mind of God" as the universe (everything inside that first thought which permeated the void).
God is not the same as the dream; God is the dreamer that has made itself temporaily unaware that it is dreaming. (in my opinion)
God exists independently from space and time while still being immersed in space and time.
It feels closer to truth saying God is independent of time or space, if God brought time and space into existence, that is. The simpliest example is when we dream, we bring new time and space into being, but it's not the same as the time and space we generated that from. We go back to that when we wake up. A part of the reason our dreamscapes are so fleeting is we don't have much awareness in them and of them, so they tend collapse and we either generate new ones or wake up. The fact this dream we call life doesn't collapse but continues and feels "solid" points to the likelihood that the dreamer we're addressing, or God has full and complete awareness. That is awareness of all time, space, and all beings like us that are experiencing it all. So yes God would have to be fully immersed in it to have this awareness but not be of it. So I don't feel it's close to being true that God is unaware or has made himself, herself, itself (whatever we prefer) forgetful. A forgetful God couldn't hold the dream in place even momentarily. But why do that anyway? If it's about learning, wouldn't being fully aware faciliate learning better than not being aware? Anyway that's how I'm reading this now for what it's worth.
Also, here's an interesting concept that underpins the above. All matter needs rules that define it. So we can't have matter without underlying rules - laws of physics etc. We also can't have rules without matter to apply them on. Otherwise they couldn't exist in reality. But of rules and matter only one of these can exist independent of the other. We can have rules that exist in theory (without matter) but we cannot have matter that exists in theory (without rules). So these facts tell us a couple key pieces of knowledge: 1) that before matter could exist rules existed in theory and 2) that in order to have rules existing in theory, there needed to be an equivalently capable awareness to conceive of and hold these rules to govern all matter, time and space in theory.