Most of today’s physicists will have you believe that the whole physical universe was created out of nothing (ex nihilo).
Why do our scientists embrace such an irrational principle? Well, if you insist on the existence of only physical realities, there is nowhere else for the finite human mind to go.
So one minute you have nothing, and the next, you have everything—time, space, energy, matter, gravity and all the known forces.
However, scientist/theologian Emanuel Swedenborg insisted that “everythingness” emerged out of “everythingness.” But where was this everythingness hiding before the creation of the physical universe? His answer: in a non-material (non-temporal and non-spatial) realm.
Instead of change of location and changing moments, this non-material realm consists of change of states.
In fact, Swedenborg claimed that “Love” is the most fundamental substance of reality.
Some pioneering physicists are actually looking into the notion that the physical universe had a non-material origin. But even if they embraced the existence of a supra-normal, spiritual reality they would have even greater trouble establishing a causal link between physical and non-physical phenomena.
Swedenborg discovered these multi-leveled links in his science of correspondences and in his multi-dimensional models of flow, forms and gravity.
In my award-winning book, Proving God, I examine these fascinating issues. I will continue this topic in my next major publication as well. The world is created from rational laws—otherwise we would not be able to discover anything coherent in it.
TheGodGuy 
Hi Ed,
Thanks for a good post.
A further problem with scientists accepting a non-material source for the material universe is the difficulty of thinking non-temporally and non-spatially while we are living here in this temporo-spatial world.
In True Christianity #31:3 and Marriage Love #328.3 Swedenborg speaks of his difficulty in thinking about what God did from eternity, whether God was planning out creation, and so on, and how it nearly drove him (Swedenborg) insane until the Lord lifted him up into a spiritual light, where he could think non-temporally and non-spatially. Then he understood that “from eternity” doesn’t make any sense in terms of time, but it does according to (spiritual) state. And he makes the fascinating statement that “time was first introduced by God as part of creation.”
I doubt that many people who lived in his day could even appreciate, let alone comprehend, what he was saying. The old idea, which was a presupposition of Newtonian physics, was that the universe existed in a pre-existing, independent, fixed grid of time and space. But now, with more modern theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, and so on, it’s much easier to think of time and space as being properties of matter and the material universe. This implies that outside the material universe, time and space simply don’t exist.
This also means that there is no such thing as “before creation” temporally. “Before creation,” time didn’t exist, so there was no “before.” That’s why “from eternity” makes no sense in terms of time and space.
It also means that God was not thinking out and planning creation before creating the universe. Creation came from an eternal state beyond time. In the core of God, there is not even the passage of events that angels and spirits experience in the spiritual world. There is only infinite state, which perceives as one complete system, simultaneously, everything we perceive as spread out in time and space, and everything we perceive spiritually as changes of state with regard to good and truth.
I do find it ironic that as much as materialistic scientists would like to think that matter just is and always has been, so that there was no creation and no need for a creation, all the evidence points back to a point at which time, space, and matter all started in the Big Bang. This makes it much harder to posit matter as the self-existing ground of creation.
Creation did not operate from “before” to “after.” It operated from higher to lower, and from within to outside.
Thanks again for a thought-provoking post!
Lee, my next book will add more details for this topic!
Spiritually yours,
TheGodGuy
Its down to Hubble who discovered the expanding universe, in other words a big explosion. So rational thinking lead us to a very small start at the beginning. I never did make out why it should mean a minute speck most explosions have a small compact origin.
What this means is that logic leads us to make illogical conclusions but it does not necessarily mean that God started the explosion. This failure of logic does not mean we should totally abandon all logical procedures they serve well in many ways. We just must not get on our high horse and assume logic takes us everywhere.
Dear magnocrat,
There was no explosion – Love doesn’t create that way. Please read “Proving God” and let me know what you think!
Spiritually yours,
TheGodGuy
You wish me to move from the scientific realm into another with different rules and different ideas. the only realm I know like that is the realm of poetry.
‘A thing of beauty is a joy forever’
It makes no scientific sense but it still speaks to us deeply.
Dear Mr. God Guy:
Three things: Have you read any Pierre Teilhard de Chardin? He, too, thinks that love (i.e. attraction between to things, completeness in union) is the fundamental metaphysical phenomenon in the universe.
Second, why do you only ever seem to write about Swedenborg? I mean, I know that you must know about a lot of other theologians too. And wasn’t Swedenborg into some cultic stuff and thought the Final Judgment had already happened in 1757? I don’t mean to discredit the guy, but I mean, he’s not the end-all-be-all of theological thought is all I’m trying to say.
Third, can one “prove” God? Plenty of theologians construct arguments about the reasonableness of God, but actually empirically proving God–doesn’t that take away from the commitment of faith? Have your read any of Kierkegaard’s writing, for instance? for him, faith is the greatest thing out there, not against reason but beyond it. And he thought that apologetics were kinda wack because they take away from the existential commitment of faith–that and he thought history was irrecoverable, but you get the picture.
Peace.
Dear friend,
I read those thinkers in Seminary but find Swedenborg’s and Gurdjieff’s writings to be the most helpful. In the same way that the universe did not have a physical beginning we can’t expect “The Last Coming” to have a mere literal or physical meaning, either.
Faith is dead without mutual love.
Spiritually yours,
TheGodGuy
Thank you for the reply. I understand the need to specialize in intellectual pursuits. If the origin of all physical existence was necessarily outside of physical existence (makes sense), the end of it would seem to have a non-physical component as well. Do you have an opinion regarding the usefulness of apologetics and proving God versus believing through the kind of leap that Kierkegaard describes?
Dear magnocrat,
The laws of science (when correctly interpreted) are the same as the truths of religion. That is the evidence I provide in my award-winning book “Proving God.” These ideas (of unity and harmony) go well beyond poetry.
Spiritually yours,
TheGodGuy
Dear cducey2013,
A new dispensation is now coming out of heaven. Both the apologists and Kierkegaard cannot comment on it. The great usefulness of these new spiritual revelations is that it is now permitted to enter into the mysteries of faith with the understanding and reasoning.
Spiritually yours,
TheGodGuy