Cosmos Existed Before the Big Bang

Science believes that our Universe could come out of nothing. No.
Cosmos has not been created by the Big Bang - just a part of it,
our Universe, which is a child developing in its mother's womb.

James Webb Space Telescope. Image by NASA via Wikimedia Commons, Public domain.

I recently came across several articles about the work of new James Webb Space Telescope in an outer space. The telescope transmitted several infrared photos of distant parts of our Universe which showed 6 ancient galaxies of enormous size and density, containing a very large number of stars. Scientists have dated the birth of these galaxies around 500-700 Myr (million years) after so-called Big Bang. In terms of modern physics, the formation of such massive galaxies must have taken much longer, so their existence is in contradiction with the fundamental doctrine of the Big Bang.
Modern science considers it the beginning of everything, which means these galaxies either evolved much faster than other ones, or the Big Bang theory is untenable.

Scientists paused to make a final decision because they wanted to check their conclusions with sensitive spectroscopy methods - maybe the galaxies are not so massive and dense, or maybe they are not galaxies at all, but faint quasars or obscured supermassive black holes …

Actually, everything should be right, these are massive and very ancient galaxies, and they didn't evolve faster than the others. They simply existed before the Big Bang. Unfortunately, scientists can only see within the limits of what they were taught in universities, and only a few ones can go beyond conventional dogmas.

One of the discoveries that esotericism already has made many years ago is that cosmos existed before the Big Bang and it cannot be otherwise because something cannot come out of nothing. The Big Bang happened in then-existed cosmos and it couldn't happen anywhere else. Thus, cosmos has not been created by the Big Bang - just a part of it, our Universe. This is the fundamental difference in the viewpoints of esotericism and modern science on the Big Bang and the beginning of our Universe. The explanation of science is partial.

The Big Bang can be compared to the impregnation (not the birth) of our Universe, which of course could only happen inside its “Mother”. We know nothing at all about the very existence of the “Mother” of our Universe which is a good example of “dark” matter and energy.

After the Big Bang, the body of our Universe started to get built - it began expanding, cooling down, and condensing into a matter. In the same way the body of every child is created in the womb during the first 2 trimesters of pregnancy. Galaxies (organs of the body), stars (energy centers) with their planetary systems and all of us as living microscopic cells of a growing living body have emerged. The Big Bang created light and released so much heat that the body of our Universe kept being built (as it is still expanding) for almost 14 billion years!

Science has always had some doubts about the Big Bang theory and it seems that soon it will get another confirmation thanks to new researches of James Webb Space Telescope. Then science will make an important discovery and again will describe the Universe only in part because of limitations of human’s cognition which is called in esotericism “the Circle Pass-Not”.
A good example of self-imposed “Circle Pass-Not” is the Big Bang theory itself, which circumscribes the age of cosmos to 14 billion years and does not allow scientists to go further in their understanding.

That's the way it should be - humans are here to seek, but not to find.
Esotericism has been telling the world its ultimate truth for years, but humans cannot recognize it. And science despite its supposed power, still cannot answer the questions of "who we are," "why we are here," and "where we are going”.


I once wrote a little book about all that. Here is the first chapter of it.
✚ Add comment
Add comment: