Deciphering The Moment Of Creation

Abstract: How do we establish the moment of creation without assuming what has been created? How do we talk about the beginning of time without using temporal expressions such as before, prior and so on? Does it even make sense to discuss the situation that existed when time and space did not? Physicists talk about reality in terms of Matter, Energy, Space and Time (MEST). Ontologically, time cannot give rise to time. Time cannot exist before time. Eternal time is as problematical as a time-dependent time, a time that only exists when time is present.

Article: Deciphering The Moment Of Creation

When did Creation occur? Can we define the moment of creation using the concept of time, or must we establish the moment of Creation by some other means? Must a different context be employed than the theory of reality employed by physicists? Can we even talk about creation, without employing the terms popularized by empiricists?

Are we to accept that creation occurred when matter, energy, space and time (MEST) came into being? This is the conventional understanding of the moment of creation. But the conventional understanding of the creation event cannot logically pinpoint the moment of creation. The creation moment was not a temporal event, and it could not have created space. Time cannot be created in time and time cannot create time. Creativity is not time dependent, or time could not have come into existence. Something had to exist prior to the formation of matter, for matter to be formed. Creativity had to be in place, before a creation occurs, or an event of creation comes about. There needed to be a place for space to emerge, before space came into being. Creativity cannot be confined to a MEST universe. The MEST universe cannot contain or even explain creativity. Creativity, for want of a better expression, is pure and absolute. There is a creativity and a creativity event and a creator, that is absolute. Or there is no actuality. A Creator must exist as a transcendent absolute for anything to exist that is created.

Creation had to be a planned event. Time had to have a potentiality before it became an actuality. An allowance for creation had to have been made. Preparations had to be made prior to the event. Time could not begin without knowledge of its emergence. The idea of an event emerging without its creation, is incomprehensible. For time to begin, time had to exist, and it had to not-exist. However, time cannot exist without there being a place for it to begin in, a birth time. The non-existence of time could not preclude the existence of time. This is logic and the fact that creation could not happen in a way we cannot logically conceive of it happening, tells us that logic had to exist prior to creation.

The only logical place for creation of happen is in logic. Logically, logic had to exist prior to creation, or it could not logically happen. If creation did not happen logically, it is illogical to assume anything happened or happens, logically. Time could not exist unless its existence is a logical possibility. This means logic had prior existence to time and exists beyond space.

The moment of creation was the moment when logic came into being. But what created logic has to be above and beyond logic. The creation of logic must be greater than logic and the originator of logic cannot be confined to logic.

The creation of logic is not the creation of MEST. The creation of MEST must be logical but the creation of logic has to be beyond the limits of logic. The creation of logic requires the prior creation of information about logic. Meta-logic forms the rules of logic.

Without these rules there is no logic and no law. Without law there is no MEST universe.

It is the rules of meta-logic that gives rise to the elements of physical creation. But logic had to come first. If we do not assume or postulate LOGIC EXISTS there are no viable assumptions possible.

But if logic contains the rules of creation, the rules could not create themselves. Meta-logic must be logically self-aware. Logic must be encapsulated in a logical being that formed laws. At some point these laws manifested as the MEST universe.

The point is, if we have information about MEST, the information had to exist before the manifestation. MEST is the authored form of the created information, like the book that comes from the mental narrative.

Needless to say, if there had to be information about MEST there had to be a sentient being as only sentience can fashion information. Only sentience can form symbols according to a grammar or in this context, the formal rules of logic.

Knowledge, which is transmitted information, needs two sources of sentience, one to code the symbolic language form and the other to decipher the symbolic narrative. But before this there needs to be a meta language that transmits the information about the language. In other words, the sentience of one must be created by the sentience of the other.

Otherwise, the language rules, the grammar, cannot be transmitted which makes it impossible for one sentient being to comprehend the creation of another.

If logic was created by a sentient being the understanding of logic had to come after the creation event. So, logic was created, then logical creation occurred, and after this event the sentience that understands the original creation, was created as an additional creation. This last creation was created with the language skills that enabled it to understand creation.

The moment of creation was not logical. Creation is not a logical event. Logic enables us to understand creation in the form of language. But language has to be about what exists and so the creation of language had to follow the creation of that which language discusses and this had to follow the rules that govern what is discussed. What we call the physical creation comes after the logic which governs it, but before the sentience that comprehends it and is able to discuss it.

However, this sentience does not understand the physical manifestation but the governing logic that gives rise to the physical creation.

Metalogic gives rise to the object discussed, then the subject that does the discussing, is formed.

What comes before logic cannot be logically discussed.

Only the logic that is created from meta logic, the logic that gives rise to the physical world and thought can be discussed rationally.

The sentience that created the rules of logic cannot possibly be known, through logic. Reason cannot delve into the nature of that which formed the limits of reason. We can know, as the limits of our knowing, that what is beyond logic is the greatest and most sublime of all conceptions. Nothing can logically be greater than that which formed logic.

We can call this perfection, God. Not because we understand perfection and what is the most perfect of all perfections, but because that which is beyond our understanding is what we refer to as God.

That which was created from logic to understand logic and what is created logically cannot understand that which is beyond logic. It is not logically possible. But if we can conceive of something greater than logic which is the highest perfection we can understand, the only logical assumption we can make is that this perfection, beyond the perfection we are logically able to comprehend, is God.

Logically we can assume that this perfection beyond perfection, gave birth to the perfection we are able to cognitively embrace. Can we agree to call this which existed at the movement of Creation, God because we cannot logically conceive of that which came before. Man, and his knowledge, is trapped in logic, God is not. The Creator is always greater than His Creation.