The morality of the Bible?

[tat tvam asi]

Actually, I am enjoying this immensely. I find a number of the BT people to be inventive and engaging. As far as proselytizing goes, you should be able to see from most of my posts that I am not proselytizing. If I were, I would be constantly presenting the plan of salvation, and little else.

Good. I'm glad you're enjoying this.

Now tell me where did God dwell with no beginning? In heaven, before the creation of this universe? If so, then God having no beginning means his dwelling place couldn't have a beginning either. Gods dwelling place is the realm of Gods existence as it were. This has nothing to do with the universe yet so let's move on. You need to think bigger than just the universe for the sake of this point. I'm talking about the theistic belief in the existence of God and Heaven well before the creation of the universe. The realm of existence consisted of just heaven before the creation of the universe and then the realm of existence expanded to include both heaven and the universe after the creation of the universe. Can you follow my use of the term existence in those terms? I'm not limiting existence to the universe alone as you keep trying to do. And in this way the realm of existence refers to Gods dwelling place or abode, which has to have no beginning just as God has no beginning. Both the realm of existence and God can have no beginning in this way.

Now, to shift over to science for another perspective, our beginning point is the beginning of the expansion of the universe. So what existed previous to the first point of expansion in order to expand outward in the first place? Obviously not nothing, because then nothing would have been there to expand outward and we wouldn't be here now thinking about it. Some would say the potential universe existed before the first point of expansion, infinitely small or whatever, but somthing had to exist in some way which then began to expand out ward in order to spread out into the universe we currently experience and are contemplating. In this case, as well, there is no way of giving mere existence itself a fixed beginning. In both cases something had to already exist before the point of what we would call the beginning. The beginning not being the actual beginning of mere existence itself in either case, just a point that we can back track to in the mind and then choose not to go back any further because we get lost in an infinite regression at that point, such as asking where did God originate....

So, as I was saying, on the one hand we have the God with no beginning and at the same time we have mere existence with no beginning either. Two things that can not have a beginning. In that way God and Existence are infused. That's what omnipresent entails. God and Existence can not be separated away from one another. And it's pretty obvious that God is simply a personification pointing towards mere existence and it's deep mystery which appeared in world mythology as a sense of divinity in nature and then evolved into the polytheisms and eventually monotheism. The God who brings both light and darkness is mere existence. The God who both loves and hates is mere existence. The God who is described as all knowing, all powerful, and all present, is mere existence. Everywhere that knowing exists, it's mere existence itself having the knowing. Everywhere that power, force, or energy exists, it's the power, force, or engery of mere existence. Mere existence is all knowing and all powerful in that way. These mythological / symbolic attributes point back to mere existence. The human mind has been grasping at trying to understand mere existence / God and its deep mystery factor through our evolving and all of this mythic personification is addressed to just that. They were imagining mere existence as a great being in which we all exist. That's where the personification verses are going. It's a hodge podge of various human thinking, much of it contradictory, all mixed in together in the bible. And that's why the God concepts have expanded with time just as human conceptualization has expanded with time and evolving.

And now, all of these years later, the personification imagery about existence has passed down from generation to generation right to the modern era. Now it's being carefully analyzed by freethinking minds and those who want to cling on to the ancient personification concepts are slowly dimishing to those who do not. The testimony of those trying to cling to the ancient personification of existence imagery, such as the testimony you've been giving here so far, is lost on freethinking minds. You believe that motion and movement existed before time and that God was around before existence, presumably moving around and having life (God is a living God remember) before existence, and time. So Life / God was around before existence and time? Brilliant Stahrwe!

You claim to be schooled in physics throughout all of this fantasy blabber you've been posting at BT. But you accuse me of blabber because I don't think like you do, while you're thinking is the actual blabber - movement before time, a living being (God) before existence, and so on... I'm trying to reason my way through these thoughts, while you've tossed out all reason. It's good for a laugh though and I'm glad that its amusing to you as well. What else can be said of any of this fantasy blabber? It's good for a laugh...

[stahrwe]

Actually, I am enjoying this immensely. I find a number of the BT people to be inventive and engaging. As far as proselytizing goes, you should be able to see from most of my posts that I am not proselytizing. If I were, I would be constantly presenting the plan of salvation, and little else.

Good. I'm glad you're enjoying this.

Now tell me where did God dwell with no beginning? In heaven, before the creation of this universe? If so, then God having no beginning means his dwelling place couldn't have a beginning either. Gods dwelling place is the realm of Gods existence as it were. This has nothing to do with the universe yet so let's move on. You need to think bigger than just the universe for the sake of this point. I'm talking about the theistic belief in the existence of God and Heaven well before the creation of the universe. The realm of existence consisted of just heaven before the creation of the universe and then the realm of existence expanded to include both heaven and the universe after the creation of the universe. Can you follow my use of the term existence in those terms? I'm not limiting existence to the universe alone as you keep trying to do. And in this way the realm of existence refers to Gods dwelling place or abode, which has to have no beginning just as God has no beginning. Both the realm of existence and God can have no beginning in this way.

Sorry, but you are wrong. God does not need a realm in which to exist. The answer to where did God dwell before the creation is, "I am". There was no realm of existence..

What you are trying to do is to limit God to a realm of existence. That is your error. I understand that it is necessary to your argument just like the Day 4 argument was to your criticism of Genesis 1, but your need does not translate to validity. I am sorry, but you don't even have the start of a foundation to equate God and the realm of existence. You have nothing there.

Now, to shift over to science for another perspective, our beginning point is the beginning of the expansion of the universe. So what existed previous to the first point of expansion in order to expand outward in the first place? Obviously not nothing, because then nothing would have been there to expand outward and we wouldn't be here now thinking about it. Some would say the potential universe existed before the first point of expansion, infinitely small or whatever, but somthing had to exist in some way which then began to expand out ward in order to spread out into the universe we currently experience and are contemplating. In this case, as well, there is no way of giving mere existence itself a fixed beginning. In both cases something had to already exist before the point of what we would call the beginning.

Why? Why can't the expansion of the universe create space at its event horizon as it expands? You are fixed on the universe expanding into something. That is clearly wrong headed. It is wrong even to say that there is nothing beyond the edge of the expanding universe and perhaps even to say that there is an expanding edge. The universe is not expanding into anything, it is just expanding.

The beginning not being the actual beginning of mere existence itself in either case, just a point that we can back track to in the mind and then choose not to go back any further because we get lost in an infinite regression at that point, such as asking where did God originate....

In fact the beginning was the beginning of everything including the realm of existence. But you cannot ask when God began because that question has no meaning.

So, as I was saying, on the one hand we have the God with no beginning and at the same time we have mere existence with no beginning either.

No we don't. You keep making assumptions and then continue on as if they are correct. I don't agree with this at all. Existence most certainly did have a beginning, God did not.

Two things that can not have a beginning. In that way God and Existence are infused. That's what omnipresent entails. God and Existence can not be separated away from one another. And it's pretty obvious that God is simply a personification pointing to existence and it's deep mystery which appeared in world mythology. The God who brings both light and darkness is existence. The God who both loves and hates is existence. The God who is described as all knowing, all powerful, and all present, is existence. Everywhere that knowing exists, it's existence itself having the knowing. Everywhere that power, force, or energy exists, it's the power, force, or engery of existence. It's all knowing and all powerful in that way. These attributes point back to mere existence. The human mind has been grasping at trying to understand mere existence and its deep mystery factor and all of this mythic personification is addressed to just that. They were imagining existence as a great being in which we all exist. That's where the personification verses are going. It's a hodge podge of various human thinking all mixed in together in the bible. And that's why the God concepts have expanded with time just as human conceptualization has expanded with time.

Once again, I disagree with everything you are saying. You have no logical basis for it. It is a Massey/Murdock/tat tvam asi/pantheistic invention where the premise is not only indefensible but is clearly a contrivance.

And now, all of these years later, the personification imagery has passed down from generation to generation right to the modern era. Now it's being carefully analyzed and those who want to cling on to it are slowly dimishing to those who do not. The testimony of those trying to cling to personification imagery, such as the testimony you've been giving here, is lost on freethinking minds. You believe that motion and movement existed before time,

I did not say that motion is by definition time dependent.

God was around before existence, presumably moving around with life before existence, and time. You claim to be schooled in physics throughout all of this fantasy blabber. You assuse me of blabber because I don't think like you do, which is the actual blabber. I'm reasoning my way through these thoughts, you've tossed out all reason. It's good for a laugh though and I'm glad that its amusing to you as well. What else can said of any of this? It's good for a laugh...

Once again you get things wrong. I did not say it was amusing me, I said I was enjoying the discussion, a very different thing. I am not laughing at you. But once again, I must point out that the only thing we can say about God before creation is, "I am". You are the one claiming He was moving around. Why? Where was there to go? Another error on your part. Give it up. God and the realm of existence are not the same thing and you have no takers on that.

[johnson1010]

it is meaningless to speak of anything "being" which does not exist.

"I am" is in no way a satsifactory answer. "Am" what? Existing? Then god is part of existence.

[tat tvam asi]

Stahrwe, you skipped a few points. Is God a living God or not? If yes, then you are saying that life came before existence, and time. Did God move or sit still for eternity before existence and time? If God had movement, then you have movement coming before existence and time.

Sorry, but you are wrong. God does not need a realm in which to exist. The answer to where did God dwell before the creation is, "I am". There was no realm of existence..

What you are trying to do is to limit God to a realm of existence. That is your error.

And as for "I am", you don't seem to understand very much about Yahweh:

http://www.yhwh.com/asimple.htm

The Absolute Name as originally given to Moses on Sinai (Exodus 3:14) is AHYH ASR AHYH: "I Will Be Who I Will Be."
"I Am That I Am", while quite valuable, is ultimately a mistranslation. This is a Christian interpretation applied 1000 years after the fact.
Saying "I Will Be" made people very nervous...

Now I've had e-mail correspondence with this guy who has changed his name, legally, to AHYH (aleph hey yud hey) because he's so devout about it. But what we have here is very simple. The sacred name is given as both "I am" and "I will be", with "I will be" seemingly the older translation. In some footnotes I've seen this given as "I was, I am, I will be", which is closer to what it seems to convey. This is a common mythic motif and Isis declares of herself "I am all that ever was, is, or shall ever be..." This is clearly a reference to existence - the past (I was), the present (I am), and the future (I will be). And we find traces of the future (I will be), and present (I am) when approaching how the tetragrammaton has been preserved and passed along over the years. The ancient "I will be" seems to be a broken form of "I was, I am, I will be" - past, present, and future - existence!

So when you say "I am" was before existence, and time, your are taking a reference to the 'present' ("I am") and saying that the present ("I am") came before existence. To put it all together you are claiming that the past, present, and future - existence - came before existence. Brilliant Stahrwe.

And the fact that in all of this you are claiming that a supernatural 'living being' was before existence is meaningless. Being and Existing go hand in hand. The blabber is over the top in that respect and "I was" having a good laugh, "I am" having a good laugh, and "I will be" having a good laugh as well...

[stahrwe]

it is meaningless to speak of anything "being" which does not exist.

"I am" is in no way a satsifactory answer. "Am" what? Existing? Then god is part of existence.

Your mind is too small. When God was asked who He was His answer was "I am". The fact you can't comprehend it is not His problem nor does it negate what He is. Imagine, claiming that God is not because you can't get your mind around what He is. Ridiculous! Of course you can't fathom God. No one can.

[johnson1010]

classic religious mystery and spooky language.

God is just too magic to be understood. It isnt our fault that our descriptions of god don't make the least bit of sense in the real world. God is so super duper magic that nothing about him has to make sense, and i will still believe no matter what!

[stahrwe]

Stahrwe, you skipped a few points. Is God a living God or not? If yes, then you are saying that life came before existence, and time. Did God move or sit still for eternity before existence and time? If God had movement, then you have movement coming before existence and time.

What is your definition of living? Does He breathe? no. Does He eat? no. Does he sleep? No. Does He rest? No. Does He age? No. Does He procreate? no. Does He expel waste? no. According to that definition, He is not alive in the sense that we normally mean life, but He is alive. He is a living God. Actually each of the above points could be combined to come up with an interesting study. Thanks Tat. God is. He was before time, before the universe and will be after, except that we will be with Him them. Ask me then what it's like to exist without time and I'll tell you.

And I did not miss the point about movement, you missed what I said about it. Well, in re-reading it I might have been too brief. Before the universe was, before space and time, and therefore before motion, God was. He was self-existent. He is self-existent. Why do you maintain that He needs the universe to exist in. That is silly.

Sorry, but you are wrong. God does not need a realm in which to exist. The answer to where did God dwell before the creation is, "I am". There was no realm of existence..

What you are trying to do is to limit God to a realm of existence. That is your error.

And as for "I am", you don't seem to understand very much about Yahweh:

http://www.yhwh.com/asimple.htm

You usually do better than this. Your link crashed and burned before the end of the first sentence. I am proud to say that I just completed a 26 week class on Hebrew, and while it is just a beginning, it provides at least enough to bat the butterfly you set up.

Your source is, if not Kabbalistic, at least friendly with their beliefs.
If you would like to have an indepth discussion of God's name, I will be happy to undertake one with you.

The Absolute Name as originally given to Moses on Sinai (Exodus 3:14) is AHYH ASR AHYH: "I Will Be Who I Will Be."
"I Am That I Am", while quite valuable, is ultimately a mistranslation. This is a Christian interpretation applied 1000 years after the fact.
Saying "I Will Be" made people very nervous...

See above comment.

Now I've had e-mail correspondence with this guy who has changed his name, legally, to AHYH (aleph hey yud hey) because he's so devout about it. But what we have here is very simple. The sacred name is given as both "I am" and "I will be", with "I will be" seemingly the older translation. In some footnotes I've seen this given as "I was, I am, I will be", which is closer to what it seems to convey. This is a common mythic motif and Isis declares of herself "I am all that ever was, is, or shall ever be..." This is clearly a reference to existence - the past (I was), the present (I am), and the future (I will be). And we find traces of the future (I will be), and present (I am) when approaching how the tetragrammaton has been preserved and passed along over the years. The ancient "I will be" seems to be a broken form of "I was, I am, I will be" - past, present, and future - existence!

You always manage to contort and twist to try to get back to the Eqyptian nonsense. There is no basis for this. Even the most elementary attempts to conflate Horus and Jesus fail.

So when you say "I am" was before existence, and time, your are taking a reference to the 'present' ("I am") and saying that the present ("I am") came before existence. To put it all together you are claiming that the past, present, and future - existence - came before existence. Brilliant Stahrwe.

No, you are twisting words again. I am saying that God came before existence. I am pretty sure that you understand the point and are continuing to pursue it because it invalidates your attempt to fuse God and the realm of existence into the same thing for the purpose of justifying your panteism.

And the fact that in all of this you are claiming that a supernatural 'living being' was before existence is meaningless. Being and Existing go hand in hand. The blabber is over the top in that respect and "I was" having a good laugh, "I am" having a good laugh, and "I will be" having a good laugh as well...

[/quote]

When did I say that God was:
Supernatural? Never. God is God to say He is supernatural is to demote Him.
A 'Living Being"? Never. God is a living God and not god with a little 'g'.

Remember what they say about he who laughs.

But keep trying.

[stahrwe]

classic religious mystery and spooky language.

God is just too magic to be understood. It isnt our fault that our descriptions of god don't make the least bit of sense in the real world. God is so super duper magic that nothing about him has to make sense, and i will still believe no matter what!

As I have pointed out before God is not magic. That is one of the bromides atheist use to make them feel better. And there are lots simpler things than God that we don't understand, gravity for one.

[tat tvam asi]

He was self-existent. He is self-existent. Why do you maintain that He needs the universe to exist in. That is silly.

Yes, self-existent means "existing". And how many times do I have to directly spell it out for you that I am not and have not been limiting existence or God to the confines of this universe? That is a strawman you keep throwing up over and over again and trying to knock down no matter how many times I tell you that I'm not limiting any of this to just the universe - not god, not existence! There is no limitation whatsoever to what I have been refering to. That's the point.

Existence, as I'm using the term here, is necessarily the existence of everything both in and what may lay beyond the perceivable universe. The universe keeps getting bigger as we look out into it and as our technology increases we keep seeing more and more of it that had been out of sight previously. At one point the universe was merely the milky way galaxy - all we could see and know. Later the universe became much bigger as we began to see out beyond the galaxy and understand that our galaxy is not the whole universe but rather one of many other galaxies which all make up the greater universe. If some one with your current perspective were to say back then that existence is just inside the universe, just inside that which can be seen from the earth looking outward, they would have been dead wrong. Existence was actually much bigger than just what could be seen looking from the earth outward with the naked eye or primitive telescopes. The universe was not just our galaxy but rather clusters and superclusters of other galaxies all along, even though no one could see that far out into the universe yet to know that existence went on and on. Space and time and mere existence didn't stop at our galaxy. Mere existence was not that limited.

Watch very carefully and pay attention so that this strawman of yours about the universe and limitation can be put to rest. You look foolish trying to raise and knock it down over and over again:





And now theorists suspect that there is no boundry where space and time just stop off. Just as time and space didn't just stop off at the edge of the visible galaxy when that was all we could see and know. They see space and time as continuing out beyond our current perception of the universe to an infinite amount of space going on forever full of other universes (an infinite amount of other universes, or multiverse as its termed) like our own with no end in sight. That's the multiverse scenarios of modern theory. The big bang, according to modern theories, was nothing more than an interaction between two universes within this greater realm of an infinite multiverse. It's viewed as a cyclic process - happening over and over again. The big bang was not the beginning of existence, or of space, or of time because there were other universes in space and time before any the big bang event ever happened according to these larger concepts. So space, time, and mere existence - according to the forefront of modern theory - has no possible fixed beginning or end from these much deeper perspectives! We're in the realm of endless cycles of existence and the quest for the origins of existence is an infinite one. No limitations to existence here whatsoever. Existence, in this respect, is the eternal, the infinite, the all, "omnipresent", everything that mythic Gods are described as in symbolic mythology...

No, you are twisting words again. I am saying that God came before existence. I am pretty sure that you understand the point and are continuing to pursue it because it invalidates your attempt to fuse God and the realm of existence into the same thing for the purpose of justifying your panteism.

The self-existent God, obviously, was not 'before' existence. It is existence symbolized in terms of mythological personification. Self-existent God, existing God...

When did I say that God was:
Supernatural? Never. God is God to say He is supernatural is to demote Him.
A 'Living Being"? Never. God is a living God and not god with a little 'g'.

Remember what they say about he who laughs.

But keep trying.

So then you don't believe in the supernatural Stahrwe? Your God is not supernatural in your mind? And your God is not a living Supreme Being either from which all life comes in your mind either? Perhaps you're closer to atheism than you realized going into this...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, as for Yahweh (YHWH), here's a better link on the AHYH "I will be" issue: http://www.yhwh.com/godsrealname.htm

Let's look at the page above, starting at white #1. This is Ex 3:12. We see the Hebrew , which, from right to left is A (Aleph), H (Hey), Y (Yod) H (Hey). And, right below it, we see that the NIV has correctly translated this as "I Will Be."

This word "Ahyh" appears at many times in the Bible. See Gen 26:3, Gen 31:3 and Joshua 1:5, just to mention a few. Each time "Ahyh" appears in the entire Bible, the NIV translates it as "I will be", except in Ex 3:14 (white #2 above), where the same Hebrew is translated "I am."

This is quite interesting. It shows that the bias of the translators prevents them from doing a 100% correct job. However, they are not deceptive people, so they feel constrained by honesty to put a tiny side-note in at white #6: "Or, I will be what I will be."

So, that's the fact. The Hebrew , Ahyh, means "I will be." It is the 1st person infinitive of the verb To Be. It is translated everywhere in the Bible by the NIV translators as "I will be", except for Exodus 3:14, where the correct translation "I will be" is relegated to a side-note.

So, the intelligent person should ask, what really is the problem?

Perhaps you should ask about this in your class Stahrwe. Yahweh's basic meaning is "to be, to exist", the self-existent. I pulled this from another Christian website for brief explanatin of how it is very much a part of belief in God to believe that God "exists" - past (was), present (am / is), and future (will be):

When did God begin to exist? Who created God? How are these questions relevant to my life? Some answers.

Chapter 1 in Systematic Theology by Ian B. Johnson and Jonathan E. Brickman.
God is self-existent. This means that He had no creator, but always exists, unchanging, from before time until after its end.

Faith in God starts with a belief in His existence:

But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Hebrews 11:6 (KJV)

However, the existence of God implies more than just that he exists right now, in time as we see it, but may be absent or different tomorrow. In Exodus 3:6a, 13- 15 (WEB), it is written:

Moreover he said, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob..." Moses said to God, "Behold, when I come to the children of Israel, and tell them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you;’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ What should I tell them?" God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM," and he said, "You shall tell the children of Israel this: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’" God said moreover to Moses, "You shall tell the children of Israel this, ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and this is my memorial to all generations."

Thus, the name God desired his people Israel to remember was "I am" and "I am who I am." As will be demonstrated below, this name implies at least five things. The name God revealed to Moses clearly implies that God exists only in the present, so that what we perceive as past, present and future is all present to God ("I AM the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob"). God's name "I am" also asserts that He exists in Himself and that He was not created. God's self-existence, in turn, implies that He is eternal, existing both before and after His creation.

God's self-existence also implies his omnipresence in space - He exists both outside His creation and at every point within it. And because God is present at every point of time and space, and exists only in the present tense, He is now present at every place and at every time simultaneously.

This is probably why the translators took "I will be" (aleph hey yud hey) and translated it as "I am" in the text while leaving a foot note "I will be". They wanted to convey that for God its always the present. And guess what, the Realm of Existence is self-existent! The eternal realm of Existence (the whole infinitude of all existence with no limitation, all worlds, all universes, everything) simply "is". There is only the present for the Realm of Existence in the very same way. "Am" and "is" both refer to the present. Existence simply "is".

The Goddess Isis ("is" and "is", as rendered in Greek) declares, "I am all that ever was, is, or shall ever be, no mortal man hath me unveiled". In other word the eternal Realm of Existence 'is all there ever was, is, or will ever be and no man has ever cracked the mystery of existence' - on one has known when existence could have ever begun or why existence is even happening in the first place. It's that simple. It's just the absolutely unknown factor about the eternal Realm of Existence which is at the very base of everything that "is". And the mystery of God 'is' the very same as the mystery of existence and that much is plainly clear. It seems that during the late post Babylonian captivity bible writing periods, which were both (OT and NT) largely influcenced by Alexandria Egypt, this classic mythological motif about 'mere existence' was attached to the mythology of Yahweh and passed along in a some what broken form of the full "I was, I am, I will be" format of antiquity. And it's obvious. These guys on the Christian websites I've quoted are racking their brains trying to figure out how it all works and they're missing the main point:

The self-existent God of mythology parallels 'mere existence' in reality.

That's where it all comes together. There is no outside cause or creator for the eternal Realm of Existence because there is no going outside of the Realm of Existence in the first place when it has no border in which to leave behind. There's no beyond the Realm of Existence when it can't have any fixed beginning, or stopping point, and extends out infinitely and encompasses an infinity of existence. Just as the mythological supreme God is described as having no external cause, and eternal, eternally self-existent as it were. The mythological self-existent God with no beginning or end in mythology is the bringer of light and darkness, good and evil, positive and negative, male and female, this and that - exactly as 'the Realm of Existence' and you're having a great deal of trouble trying to wrap your mind around that.

[Robert Tulip]

theorists suspect that there is no boundry where space and time just stop off. Just as time and space didn't just stop off at the edge of the visible galaxy when that was all we could see and know. They see space and time as continuing out beyond our current perception of the universe to an infinite amount of space going on forever full of other universes (an infinite amount of other universes, or multiverse as its termed) like our own with no end in sight. That's the multiverse scenarios of modern theory. The big bang, according to modern theories, was nothing more than an interaction between two universes within this greater realm of an infinite multiverse. It's viewed as a cyclic process - happening over and over again. The big bang was not the beginning of existence, or of space, or of time because there were other universes in space and time before any the big bang event ever happened according to these larger concepts. So space, time, and mere existence - according to the forefront of modern theory - has no possible fixed beginning or end from these much deeper perspectives! We're in the realm of endless cycles of existence and the quest for the origins of existence is an infinite one. No limitations to existence here whatsoever. Existence, in this respect, is the eternal, the infinite, the all, "omnipresent", everything that mythic Gods are described as in symbolic mythology...

Tat, the multiverse theory is highly speculative. As far as we can see, there is one universe that started with the big bang. Galaxies spin too fast for the current theory of gravity to explain, hence the postulation of dark matter and dark energy that does not interact with light but has gravitational mass. It seems the expansion of the universe is accelerating, so the cycle of big bangs appears unlikely from the linear evidence to date. Yet, I imagine like you an endless cycle, perhaps with galaxies falling into black holes and eventually forming rivers of mass returning to a singularity, which might then exist for trillions of years before exploding again. This is all unkown enough, without supposing our universe is one of an infinite number of universes, a quark in a bigger space.

The Goddess Isis ("is" and "is", as rendered in Greek) declares, "I am all that ever was, is, or shall ever be, no mortal man hath me unveiled". In other word the eternal Realm of Existence 'is all there ever was, is, or will ever be and no man has ever cracked the mystery of existence' - on one has known when existence could have ever begun or why existence is even happening in the first place. It's that simple. It's just the absolutely unknown factor about the eternal Realm of Existence which is at the very base of everything that "is". And the mystery of God 'is' the very same as the mystery of existence and that much is plainly clear. It seems that during the late post Babylonian captivity bible writing periods, which were both (OT and NT) largely influcenced by Alexandria Egypt, this classic mythological motif about 'mere existence' was attached to the mythology of Yahweh and passed along in a some what broken form of the full "I was, I am, I will be" format of antiquity. And it's obvious. These guys on the Christian websites I've quoted are racking their brains trying to figure out how it all works and they're missing the main point: The self-existent God of mythology parallels 'mere existence' in reality. That's where it all comes together. There is no outside cause or creator for the eternal Realm of Existence because there is no going outside of the Realm of Existence in the first place when it has no border in which to leave behind. There's no beyond the Realm of Existence when it can't have any fixed beginning, or stopping point, and extends out infinitely and encompasses an infinity of existence. Just as the mythological supreme God is described as having no external cause, and eternal, eternally self-existent as it were. The mythological self-existent God with no beginning or end in mythology is the bringer of light and darkness, good and evil, positive and negative, male and female, this and that - exactly as 'the Realm of Existence' and you're having a great deal of trouble trying to wrap your mind around that.

This is a fine explanation of the realm of existence. Your comment about the exilic combination of Yahweh and existence marks the evolutionary expansion from a monolatrous tribal deity to the monotheist source of all, described well by Robert Wright in The Evolution of God.

This material is important for assessing the morality of the Bible because the separation of God from existence creates an intellectual edifice that is a source of Christian spiritual alienation from nature. The idea of spirit as above nature morphs into the idea of God as above existence. It is better to search for God within the realm of existence in order to build a natural morality, instead of the Judeo-Christian tradition of asserting that a traditional interpretation of Yahweh provides a full explanation. The Christology of kenosis attempts to resolve this problem through redemption of the universe in Christ. When Abrahamic faiths assert that their God is absolute, they continue a narrative of transcendental imagination. This narrative of Yahweh emerged in relative social isolation, considered in world terms, even while it found a role for God in protecting Israel from its enemies through prophecy. A pantheon for the future will bring the Christian trinity into conversation with other representations of the divine.