As I look around, there is nothing whatsoever that I can observe that came from 'nothingness'. Nor have I ever encountered any other human being that can show me otherwise. 'Belief', then, becomes irrelevant. THANK YOU, Robert Kuhn, for taking us on your journey for objective 'Truth'
How can you paint a pure spirit? One cannot picture any micro "object": any term of microworld is just a term denoting sth but not an object like your ox or just a mass-point. Excellent, you reveal just your absolute idiocy on the divine wisdom called philosophy and Rev.Aristotle dealt perfectly with such apes already in the 3th cent. contra skeptics and agnostics -argumenta are that of any formal science, eternal.! Before Christ. Why don't you know it? Who is responsible for jour Ididocy in 21 cent. Christ Ere?
...I have a smile on my face because I understand it is your job to stir the pot of life, questions, and delve into the people you interview. I am sure you have your own insights. Many are looking at GOD from where we are to where HE is, Omniscient & Omnipresent. Man tends to be a bit Arrogant, respectfully, Chuck...captivus brevis...you tube...Blessings...GOD said, I Am that I Am...how marvelous...
"The source and limit and the constitution of all things is God." - Corpus Hermeticum “We living beings all belong to one another, we are all actually members.. or aspects.. of a single Being, which we may in western terminology call God, while in the Upanishads it is called Brahman.”- Erwin Schrödinger "Is it not written in your Law, `I said: "You are gods"'? - I John 10:31
According to the Neoplatonist Plotinus, one just need utter the word 'Good' and say no more. Anything else, personhood, etc is to limit the simplicity of God. So the simplest, may not logically infer personhood. Or at least as we might understand the word / term.
@@pasquino0733 That depends on the theology, and definition of good can be subjective, the basics for all monotheistic religions is God is One, self-sufficient, and with will.
These are very hard to listen to because my thoughts and attention keep going off on tangents and when my attention comes back to the video I notice that I have missed a lot of the content and I have to start over. Frustrating but worth it.
Your hope counts... FOR YOU... And that's the most important! We don't know what God IS because we already don't know what WE ARE !... what is our consciousness.... maybe our consciousness, our being and the one of God are alike.
When it comes to God, I'm totally like Robert.A skeptic who Wants to believe in a all good and all powerful personal God, but I don't want to fool myself.
It starts bad it goes even worse and finally towards the end it gets way better! Still it fails grossly at admitting Unity cannot be a perspective. All perspectives together nullify personhood.
If God exists, and has a will and intelligence, he surely has to be considered a person. I read one religious writer who said that we can think of him as more than just a person...but not less than one.
Theists are just so afraid to say we don't know a lot about a lot of things or even most things They cannot admit that their God is a God of the gaps. Religions would have more respect if they did not have concepts like blasphemy and apostasy.
I absolutely agree with some of what you are saying. Religion, most of the time, is attempting to validate with too much reason. I say, one who believes simply has to have faith....and leave it at that. Christianity for example can use reason to discuss the historical Jesus. However, theology is more supernatural and can not be proven by reason.....at least not yet.
When you think about it, an infinite, perfect being can't really have a personality, goals, feelings etc. For example, feelings are our reactions to new information and new events. If God knows everything for all eternity before it even happens, he can't have an emotional reaction to it. It's just logically impossible. Goals also indicate a lack of something. If you're perfectly content you have no desires and no goals, because you're already everything you could ever dream of. As for personality and the ability of personal relationships, a being can only have personal relationships with beings that are somewhat on the same level as it (or at least a bit lower than it). For example, a human can have a personal relationship with another human, or even a dog -but not with a fish or an insect. If God is infinitely more intelligent and "higher" than us, then he's *automatically* infinitely more distant and NOT personally related to us.
Yes- our yearnings, our doubts, shortcomings, etc., would seem to be meaningless and absurd without our attachment to, or imprisonment by the very essence of sorrow and frustration to contradiction and not achieving transcendence. It seems illogical for li’l ol’ me to personally, subjectively experience transcendence, unless it was on a gargantuan, profound level or experience. Making no sense- my apologies.
We are not human beings who go through a spiritual experience.- We are spiritual beings who go through a human experience. Religion is for those who need someone to tell them what to do and want to be guided. Spirituality is for those who pay attention to their inner voice.
@Andreaz-64 well I'm just a student of religions, history (and science). You said "and that in general the religious are more full of themselves than of their so called gods." have you studied all religions or at least mainstream religions? Or you just made this up :)
The universe is an existence of it's own, that we human have limited understanding. We by chance happened to experience life and one day everything will come to an end.
You said : 1) The universe is an existence of it's own, 2) we human have limited understanding. What the **** How do you know that universe is an existence of it's own with your limited understanding !!!
@@RustedFaith because I said so....therefore we don't fully understand how the universe work the fact is universe the name itself we given...it might be call god we don't know
If we could shed our ego, we would see that there is nothing that's not God. “Your task is not to seek for God, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it." - Rumi
Tempted to ad-lib a little further... would gender-neutral help... heading toward... multi-classification gender-neutral... Or maybe simply he is a she... 😁
@@djpodesta Well, George Carlin is of a different opinion on this matter : _I honestly believe, looking at these results, that if there is a God, it has to be a man. No woman could or would ever fuck things up like this._
Now imagine that some kind of physics we do not know about yet, makes oure consciousness live on. And then the God you imagine is the god you get after your "death". 😲
Ahem...that may not be a good thing. Why? Lots of reasons. Like...being eternal means you'll have to watch all your children die, and some of their horrible deaths could give you PTSD. But you'll have a lot of time to get over it.
Does the God of the NT, requires human blood and manslaughter for mercy and salvation? As you know not killing Jesus means no salvation waiting for Christians right?
@Andreaz-64 From multiple sources. Science says there’s only Energy and matter in existence. Most philosophers agrees that mind gives rise to matter. Spiritual people believe that all things flow from the one spirit, the source. Religious types call this source God but one thing is certain, this force has no width, no length, no height. It can’t be measured. What is the width, length, height of Spirit/Mind/Energy/Light? It has none! Plus there’s nothing faster than it. It appears to be everywhere at all time.
I realize I’m commenting 2 years after this episode was published, but I think Lawrence gets this one wrong from the get go, when he early on asserts that only a person has intents, awareness, etc. Is he granting personhood to nonhuman higher mammals? Not his intent, idk..
Exactly. The very first statement saying only a person has goal and blah blah blah. Doesnt the god of the bible have a purpose and a goal? Or am I lost here
@@andrelesf agreed. I actually thought this video was going to actually talk about the possibility of the god concept deriving from a human being. Clit-bait and they got me lol
@@heathenthatheretic5960 No, you are begging the question. You cannot validly claim that God is a person, b/c the bible says so, when the question is if the bible is correctly attributing personhood to God.
No, this is a basic philosophical question. Personhood is a particularly defined quality of a subset thinking things, so naturally the question arises as to the personhood status of God. Straightforward stuff, honestly.
What is about God, that whenever his name popped up or mentioned people goes crazy, especially those who deliberately disobeying his existence keep on coming back to deny his existence. There must be something deeper that we don't know (yet).
Islamic view on God would have added a different angle to this video. Islamic philosophy has many branches and became so complex over the centuries and many of their works were translated in the 13th century and used by western philosophers. However, the pure monotheism, a God that doesn't make a mistake, doesn't plan, doesn't think, doesn't get frustrated, etc, was not picked up by the west because Christianity teaches differently. That's why Islamic view still has many new aspects for a western audience. I should point out that there is no single view, there are concepts and interpretations like unity of being which says everything is within God while not being God, to literal understandings of the Quraan.
A segment from 'Saved by the Light of the Buddha Within'... My new understandings of what many call 'God -The Holy Spirit' - resulting from some of the extraordinary ongoing after-effects relating to my NDE... Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what some scientists are now referring to as the unified field of consciousnesses. In other words, it’s the essence of all existence and non-existence - the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source. Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the actual creator of everything that exists now, ever existed in the past, or will exist in the future - right down to the minutest particles of dust - each being an individual ripple or wave. The big difference between chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of inner enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves. That’s because chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo allows us to tap directly into our enlightened state by way of this self-produced sound vibration. ‘Who or What Is God?’ If we compare the concept of God being a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to the teachings of Nichiren, it makes more sense to me that the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people perceive to be God, is the fantastic state of enlightenment that exists within each of us. Some say that God is an entity that’s beyond physical matter - I think that the vast amount of information continuously being conveyed via electromagnetic waves in today’s world gives us proof of how an invisible state of God could indeed exist. For example, it’s now widely known that specific data relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects - including an instant global awareness of something or a mass emotional reaction. It’s also common knowledge that these invisible waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars - none of which is possible without a receiver to decode the information that’s being transmitted. Without the receiver, the data would remain impotent. In a very similar way, we need to have our own ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our own life, all other life and what everything else in existence is. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach the core of our enlightenment and keep it switched on. That’s because Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what scientists now refer to as the unified field of consciousnesses. To break it down - Myoho represents the Law of manifestation and latency (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. For example, the state of Myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists - including our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them - our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re dormant - our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma - and more importantly, our enlightenment. The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes evident to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory - whenever we experience or express our emotions - or whenever a good or bad cause manifests as an effect from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it merely means that it’s come out of the state of Myo (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing. The second law - Renge - Ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect, governs and controls the functions of Myoho - these two laws of Myoho and Renge, not only function together simultaneously but also underlies all spiritual and physical existence. The final and third part of the tri-combination - Kyo, is the Law that allows Myoho to integrate with Renge - or vice versa. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects all Life and matter - as well as the past, present and future. It’s also sometimes termed the Universal Law of Communication - perhaps it could even be compared with the string theory that many scientists now suspect exists. Just as the cells in our body, our thoughts, feelings and everything else is continually fluctuating within us - all that exists in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux - constantly controlled by these three fundamental laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of Myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible to calculate or describe. And it doesn’t matter how big or small, famous or trivial anything or anyone may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past, exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of the Laws ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ - the basis of the four fundamental forces, and if they didn’t function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. That’s because all forms of existence, including the seasons, day, night, birth, death and so on, are moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation - rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two fundamental states of Myo and ho in absolute accordance with Renge - and by way of Kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn under the workings of what the combination ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ represents. Nam, or Namu - which mean the same thing, are vibrational passwords or keys that allow us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’. On a more personal level, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives - as well as the environment from moment to moment. By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is spinning, and chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo for a minimum of, let’s say, ten minutes daily to start with, any of us can experience actual proof of its positive effects in our lives - even if it only makes us feel good on the inside, there will be a definite positive effect. That’s because we’re able to pierce through the thickest layers of our karma and activate our inherent Buddha Nature (our enlightened state). By so doing, we’re then able to bring forth the wisdom and good fortune that we need to challenge, overcome and change our adverse circumstances - turn them into positive ones - or manifest and gain even greater fulfilment in our daily lives from our accumulated good karma. This also allows us to bring forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that’s preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we indeed are - regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexuality. We’re also able to see and understand our circumstances and the environment far more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations. As I’ve already mentioned, everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect - the ‘actual-proof-strength’ resulting from chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo always depends on our determination, sincerity and dedication. For example, the levels of difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, producing a great song, and so on. Something else that’s very important to always respect and acknowledge is that the Law (or if you prefer God) is in everyone and everything. NB: There are frightening and disturbing sounds, and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It’s the emotional result of any noise or sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day, we are producing a sound vibration that’s the password to our true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things - such as your fears and desires etc. The best way to get the desired result when chanting is not to view things conventionally - rather than reaching out to an external source, we need to reach into our own lives and bring our needs and desires to fruition from within - including the good fortune and strength to achieve any help that we may need. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo also reaches out externally and draws us towards, or draws towards us, what we need to make us happy from our environment. For example, it helps us to be in the right place at the right time - to make better choices and decisions and so forth. We need to think of it as a seed within us that we’re watering and bringing sunshine to for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s also important to understand that everything we need in life, including the answer to every question and the potential to achieve every dream, already exists within us.
I keep waiting for a god to show up for all the world to see at once. I have been waiting for a long time. Folks like me have been waiting for centuries and longer. God always seems to be a no-show.
Why don't Christians accept their own doctrine that specifically declares them all as Gods both individually and collectively? John 10:34, Psalms 82:6 and so on throughout scripture. The whole point being to accept ones own divinity so as to no longer fear death. aka Transcendence and or ascension of mind and the death of ego leading to enlightenment and a collective oneness? Why don't they teach it the way it is? Along with the esoteric astrology and astronomy encoded within it as well? Why corrupt your own wisdom? It makes no sense...
It is written in layers. The inner core that you speak of is hidden at the deepest level for the seekers to find. The religious shell is the pretty box used to carry it far and wide by the masses who do not seek. They not only don't know how to open it, but they would tell you it can't be opened. You found the magic inside. They just make sure it gets the widest possible dissemination. (Clever authors) Tell people it's up to them and they won't pass it around.
@@michaelbarry755 Thank you, Mike. I am totally interested in sharing with people who see that there is something below the outer shell. I'm working on a condensed version of what I believe the keys are for unlocking the verses. I'm new at this and don't have a system dialed in very well. I have blended my beliefs with my life. They go together, but not everyone wants to hear it all. I need to cut to the chase. Thank you again. I look forward to hearing your ideas.
@@michaelbarry755 I find it interesting to suggest to a Christian that they don't understand the Bible. Then an atheist pats you on the back agreeing with you that the Bible is all wrong. And then you tell them that's not what you said, and that they're wrong too. Kinda puts people like us out in left field.
Sometimes i think we could go nuts on all of this. We are a miracle and should be astonished and live gratefully. Given life to see life continues gratefully. If he brought us in such a miracle we can love each creation greatly for thanks !! Sadly games and wars have some ridiculous hold to make sweet miracles bitter, jealous and like insects or jungle animals. We are men and women who can communicate for loving solutions. Spiritual or religions to fight ? This is the question so we better comprehend these messages..for good kind manners yet helping like little children bringing flowers to mom..and being happy about it.
@@stevenhoyt might be a joke, son...if you ever tried to read Spinoza you would understand... a better person to ask would be PG Wodehouse, Berty Wooster has a go round with Spinoza... I felt the same way... sort of makes the head spin Freud and Jung... ditto.. Karl Marx.. a lunatic.. all of them take themselves way too seriously... so... do you want to know the results of many years of contemplating one's bellybutton?... a clean bellybutton
@@richardcarew4708 ... my degree is philosophy. i would venture a guess that i've read more spinoza than most, and i'm pretty sure you've not read him at all. it is because i've read spinoza and others that makes me wonder why you single him out ... hume and kant are far more interesting, it seems to me, for example. for instance on the point of you not likely having read spinoza, tell me then, on his view, what's the difference between a physical and mental event and in which of his works would you find that answer?
Christian theoogians' explanations of the Trinity, I am sorry to say, always strike me as complicated rationalisations of a notion that basically doesn't make sense.
@@amirkhalid5449 Thank you my friend... but you are only referring me to somebody else’s opinion? I thought that the explanations of the Trinity didn’t make sense to you.
@@djpodesta I agree with Dr Ehrman's arguments, which are that the Trinity was conceived of after Jesus' time and has no basis in anything he actually said; and that the whole idea of a three-in-one person (or three persons in one entity) is clearly confused.
@@amirkhalid5449 Good morning Amir. I totally agree with the fact that the Trinity was conceived after the fact... as I think that all religions evolved in the minds of men and written down after the fact... borrowing from previously known situations and stories... just as good fiction writers have always derived their fantasies from. ‘Nothing is new under the sun.’ However, ‘IF’ the Biblical Scriptures are taken as truth, both via the Old Testament and the New Testament, which they were... after the fact. While it is true that the Scriptures do not explicitly state anything of the Trinity; and depending upon which available Greek Text one relied upon, there is good circumstantial evidence within the overall bodies of the texts to suggest good reason for the idea of the Trinity evolving in the minds of the thinkers of the day. I agree that 1+1+1... Father + Son + Holy Spirit = 3 Heads of the God Head... so to speak. But... IF it were true that Man were made in the image of God... Man has a Mind, Body and thoughtful decision making... all baked into one entity. The mind conceives of an idea... we ‘decide’ to act upon that idea and direct our body to carry out what is necessary to make that idea to come to a ‘hopefully’ satisfying conclusion. Mans only limitation is that he/she is limited by experiential knowledge... but over time, the collective mind has (and continues to do so) learned more than anything thought possible even a hundred years ago... not forgetting the thousands of years of collective knowledge... but that is a side issue. The Scriptures talk about God... the creator... all knowing, all seeing... etc. The Scriptures also state that Jesus, while being born around 2000 years ago at this point in time... was with God in the beginning... that statement could not be so, as the actual body was born/came into being at a particular point in time. However, just as we inherit aspects of our personality from our ancestors... whether you wish to call it personality traits or DNA... or what ever... which carries on down through the generations... why should it be any different, in the minds of the thinkers of that era, for their Son of God (which was just as much a metaphor as it was their reality) to have inherited from... or even God separating his/it’s spirit (as I have not touched upon the concept of Spirit) and imparting it in the body of the child Jesus. The Holy Spirit can be seen as the essence of God carrying out of His/its will in response to prayerful intercession of His/it’s believers here on earth... both before and after the body of their Christ... Jesus was a physical being walking on earth at that particular time in history... if it is indeed true of course. 🤫 Rather than looking at the problem of 1+1+1=1... Impossible. Try looking at the complex nature of any thinking being as being 1x1x1=1 Just as we are complex in physical and mental nature. How is it that you can imagine yourself both flying to the moon, eating an ice cream and sitting upon a sandy beach... or anything... according to what you have experienced or seen in a movie... etc... almost simultaneously... and without leaving your couch? If you are learned in engineering... you first find a need for a particular structure... say... a bridge to cross a river... you then conceptualise such a bridge... you then direct your attention to figuring out all the issues required to make the bridge... then you physically get to work and build the bridge... three 1x1x1 overall aspects coming from one entity to realise the final product... if there is nobody around to help you. Remember, this is the type of mind that conceived of the Trinity via studying and interpreting their chosen scriptures. It doesn’t make it factual... but it is understandable.
Near death Experiencers tell of a life review where they relive all of their life experiences from birth to the moment of their current life threatening event. Someone up there is clearly interested in how we live our lives. I'd say that's a pretty good indication that our maker is not impersonal nor are they uninterested in our lives.
@@ashley_brown6106 actually the neo cortex which is the part of the brain that is responsible for thinking, completely shuts down during cardiac arrest. There may be remaining electrical activity in the brain but it that cannot create any thought process. I've been reading up on the literature concerning the data on the veridical NDE and this is what I've learned. You can research it yourself if you don't believe me.
@@ashley_brown6106 then what about the people who are blind all their life and have a near-death experience.... come back and describe what they can see during their near death experience?
All the interviewees stumble over the same stone: they make use of Reason without knowing what Reason is about. Through it they intend to demonstrate the unprovable, appealing to arguments that without exception are based on dogmas. Dogma is the antithesis of Reason, so its "rational" arguments do not hold up.
Indeed, we seem to rationalizing rather than rational. Dogmas of any kind stifles pursuit of knowledge. Open-mindedness and pursuit of truth seems preferable to close minded attitudes. Enlightened agnosticism keeps us from making boxes containing God or anything else.
Why does the most perfect creation in and of itself need to create anything? O yeah , bunch of little ants to subjugate and show how much he loves the same little ants h created, but isn’t god perfect already?? and it’s always so amusing to listen to the theist give “their” personal definitions of god and scriptures and tailor them into neat answers to answer the gap questions...
The perfect being creates out of love for all things and being perfect he creates perfect ants. And would not care about subjugation. And if you complain about nasty ants, remember he also gave them free will, which is also perfect freedom.
Why wouldn't the most perfect existence want to create? We can't create, we can only experience what is, in whatever form it takes; the expression of potential as an actuality. We live in a sandbox of rules and structures uncontrolled by us, we simple discover recipes, write them down, share them, and use them. Ingredients (matter) arranged through processes (scientific & mathematical laws) produces observable forms emerging from layered structures. For any of this to be, whether it was created or not, the will of the creator or the system remains the same: increase in order and stability of systems to produce an outcome. The shifting of the goal posts is meaningless, as proposed by universe seeding systems. Same answer to the same question. Why would God create? And why wouldn't God create? These questions are superfluously targetted and fundamentally unrequired when we exist within the scope of the constructed system of reality. This question could for all we know simply fall outside of our limits inside the system.
@@joshuacadebarber8992 The perfect existence can (or cannot) do whatever it wants since it's we who decide what its abilities are. As far as I am concerned this perfect existence belongs in its perfect lake of fire. Besides, no such thing as perfect, perfect is just like infinity -- unquantifiable.
Man is just a multi-particle bond state of quantum fields, and still have "personality", so the whole assumption is already false from the very beginning. God can not be defined or limited by a particular personality.
@Undisclosed 000000 I like your comment "... as a human we will never experience these microscopic or quantum states of reality as such." That's very interesting. Wouldn't it be weird if humans could experience such states of reality? I don't think the definition of humans as "multi particle bond state of quantum fields" is necessarily a "inhuman and dehumanizing definition" but I guess it depends on what assumptions we choose to believe regarding the definition of human life. To some scientists, such a definition might be logical in defining humanity as some kind of biological/physical process. I prefer to see humanity in a different way, as I assume you do. I see humanity as part of the "image of God" but other people don't focus on such a definition. I do find Rafael's statement very interesting when he says " at the microscopic level, things are what they are, not what they pretend to be." That observation makes me think. John in Florida
The essence is the “whatness” that makes us us. What gibberish! It’s comical to see educated people try to rationalize what they were likely taught as toddlers. They just can’t get past that.
Until you accept death for what it obviously is - the permanent end of the self and of loved ones, you are still an emotional toddler. If I'm wrong and there is some kind of life after death, then awesome. But obviously, that's a fantasy.
‘What-ness’ is ultimately decided by something with a conscience; through rational... or irrational... thought... In this case... through ‘us’ I say ‘through us;’ in this case firstly because of your statement... and secondly, to differentiate between the human quest and all other living things that have a conscious dimension to their existence... even plants; it seems, according to some experimentation. As a side issue... what makes us any more special than any other living creature/organism. The ultimate human question, which we were not taught as toddlers is... (and forgetting about what I see as the irrelevant question of Why) - What is consciousness... and Where/How did consciousness originate? That, unfortunately with most emphasising the Why, is the underlying question/theme that has driven countless generations, across cultural barriers (which is probably modified from some ‘way back when’ notion, as people spread out or migrated apart throughout the ages... to teach their toddlers to believe in something higher than themselves. I have to admit that I find it fun to toy with such possibilities and questions... even if I find difficulty in believing what I was taught as a toddler.
Another excellent vidéo. Impressive. Thank you. My contribution in a ( large) nutshell: everything is spiritual because nothing lasts. God therefore is the receptacle of the law of physics that states that only information 'survives' since it is impossible to destroy information. And so we matter and we may have a purpose and a meaning thanks to our minds and feelings which represent our personal stories (our information) on Earth. P.S: I loved the Rabbi's contribution.😀
The vast majority of answers to these important questions basically amount to "my imaginary friend is like this" or "my favorite fictional character is like that". Completely indistinguishable from any other whimsical creation of the human mind. They offer no substantial evidence to support the notion that any sort of supreme/divine person has ever interacted with humanity. Words about "God(s)" mean absolutely nothing until such a being makes itself known in a way that can be identified as something other than "nature did something we don't fully understand yet, therefore that was my personal version of divinity at work", or "I feel peaceful when I read this book, therefore it describes reality better than any other book in human history", or "my parents taught me to be nice, therefore everything else they believed must be unquestionably true", or "some guy said that God said that we need to do something special, therefore we should just take all his words as divine in origin", or other completely useless claims. The entire genre of debates about "divinity" are meaningless until any claim about divinity can be corroborated by verifiable evidence. Please note: My arguments are against the idea of "God" and other empty claims made by organized religions, not against the broadly human search for spirituality and personal purpose in life.
The existence of a perfect god is refuted in that it could only act perfectly, ever taking the most perfect action, thus no free will, but rather conformance to whatever exists in reality, thus no god, but rather reality.
I wonder what multiple dimensions of TIME would mean. We keep hearing String Theorists talk about hidden extra dimensions of space, but what about time? Our current conception of time is 1 dimensional, which comes with an infinite regress (Turtles all the way down past) paradox. Even space, in three dimensions, contains Zeno's Paradox of continuity. I had a dream in which my dad explained, "When you look at a fire, it appears flat [(2-Dimensional)], but if you look more closely it's a 3-Dimensional object. So too is time."
Yes, God is a spirit person. A conscious living divine Being with a heart and mind and personality. There are things he loves and things he hates. He is also generous and kind while at the same time a counselor and disciplinarian.
If God was a person, I do wonder as to where he would choose to live. I mean what does a god crib look like? I also know that if I didn’t write this comment, it wouldn’t exist.
There likely is no devil yet a guy like Hitler is considered to be a devil. In a person like that the devil manifestates itself of sorts. So god himself even being non-existent could manifestate itself in a person making that person god. In the bible you have that guy name Elia who is prettymuch considered to be god for instance.
Could we get closer to God if we could find the God particle . The particle that makes everything exist. where did this particle come from ? how did it come to be ? is it the mind of nonexistence that makes it exist and starts the building blocks to life and existence ? I am sorry but for some reason I don’t think God is a bing Nora human like . I believe plants , trees and animals . all sorts of living things are just as Important as a simple human being . they exist . they have a life to. Love your show. ❤️👍
Person: noun. a human being regarded as an individual. Therefore if there is a "creator" (which I am inclined to think there is), he/she/it cannot be a person, because a person is a *human* who dies. So the creator cannot be composed of the same material as the physical universe. I am an atheist meaning one without a personal "god" of any sort.
Actually god can manifestate itself in a person. Just like the devil can manifestate itself in a person. A guy like Hitler is considered to be the devil. Evilness taking a human form. Even if there is no god/devil such manifestations happens.
JP Moreland clearly misses the point and makes a huge logical error when he describes God as One Being, but with three centres or parts. How is that so ? Well such a Being is composite and derive its reality from those three parts. And those three parts, in turn, need each other to make a whole. So when these parts are taken individually, they go into the category of contingent and not necessary, as each one is in need of the other to make the one God, and if those parts were necessary in their ownself, they would not have needed another to make a whole. And thus each of these parts, when taken individually, is contingent and is itself in need of a Cause. This would make whole of this idea of God to be a contingent one, and not a necessary. This cannot be the first independent cause or an Uncaused Being. The idea of such a God fails as there lies a clear contradiction. The first Cause must be non-composite and simplest in nature interms of unity in order to have its existence identical to its essence.
@@realitycheck1231 That is why us, being composite, are contingent. We are also a composite of quiddity and existence. But for the first cause such a tripartite mind contradicts its unity and implies multiplicity. Every multiplicity ceases to exist at fundamental level of reality, in order for it to be fundamental and not in further need of a cause. When you imply God as mind only with three components, then each component must have some individuality in order to make it different from the other two, otherwise it would be one and not three. By making a distinction between the three, each one in separate becomes something that has some individual function distinct from the other two. And that makes each one limited in its own domain and would need the other two to make the idea of God workable. Then this leads to each of these parts contingent in nature, and each cannot exist on its own as necessary. Thus this idea of God becomes contingent as it stands on three contingent parts and not one absolute unity. For God, there can bo no multiplicity but absolute unity. That is why God is termed as pure existence or Necessary Being in philosophy.
@@realitycheck1231 Brother, saying "multiplicity cease to exist at fundamental level" is not tantamount to saying "we cease to exist at fundamental level". As you are saying that you are not much familiar with Philosophy, as I am myself just a humble student of this beautiful subject, still I would try to simplify the argument as much as possible. When i say "Contingent Being", i mean the mental concept for an existent for whom existence and non-existence both are possible (mentally speaking). Only a complete Cause would decide its fate, or the absence of it. While Necessary Being is the One that derives its existence from nothing else, it is self-sufficient, or in other words, to exist is necessary for such a Being, and non-existence for it is impossible. There is also a third category called impossible being, i.e a concept that cannot exist in exterior world, like triangle with four sides or a rectangle with five sides. To decide from which category this material Cosmos belongs to, one has to see all these three possible choices one by one. Firstly, material cosmos cannot be impossible being as it clearly exists. We are left with two choices now. It either is necessary or contingent/possible. The very composite nature of Cosmos implies that it exists in parts, and each part is in need of the other to make it a whole. Such a whole is dependent on its parts, and "dependent" and "necessary" do not go together. Every thing in this Cosmos when considered alone, is contingent and needs prior causes. E.g Raining, you, me, planets, stars etc. They can easily be non-existent if their prior causes dont exist, or, are incomplete. This universe also is in motion, that implies, it needs a fundamental reality as a Mover. These obvious facts make this universe a contingent reality, that needs a cause. Now the first Cause must have those properties that makes it a first cause i.e not in need of a cause prior to it. When you imply God has a mind with three distinct parts, each with something of its own and different from the other two (that differences would make them to be three, you cannot say one thing to be three if there lies no distinction among them). Inturn, each of these parts with a unique feature distinguished from the other two, and its demand to align with the other two to make a whole, will make, each part in separate, a contingent or possible reality, that in turn would itself be in need of a cause as it is not self-sufficient or necessary. Thus the Being you are talking about with a Mind having three distinct parts is not a Necessary Being, but a Contingent one. For the First Cause, its absolute unity is a necessity to make it fundamental reality. I hope i make myself clear now. Thanks :)
@@realitycheck1231 Once again, my dear brother, try to ponder over this: You are saying that those three distinct features of mind make one reality of God. Those three parts cannot be their own cause as nothing can cause itself. You are implying God as not something that is cause of those three, but those very three parts are God. Hence each separate feature of mind, being limited in terms of its dependence on other two features to make a mind, needs a further cause. How can this be One God (or one fundamental reality), where clearly they are three inter-dependent realities, making each one a contingent and in need of the other to make a whole ? The causal chain will go on until it stops at a fundamental reality where there is no multiplicity anymore. Absoulte unity of this reality will make its existence Necessary and in no need of further foundational reality.
@@realitycheck1231 Singularity word is used in many a sense, especially science. I am using the word Unity, or Absolute. Although I have already answered your question in depth. Still I would like to proceed in a way that it remains a friendly and an educational discussion, but in order to do so, I would like to ask you a question: Are we having this discussion to reach a conclusion based on truth, or is it because we want to defend the notions our minds have already perceived over the years and indoctrinated within us so much that we do not want to see beyond that point ?
@@realitycheck1231 Hi Brother. It is a delight to learn about your journey to the truth. As we all are seeking the same by our innate nature, yet sometimes we confuse the opinion with the knowledge to have some notions not in corroboration with the objective reality or existence. What I have learnt from your journey, is that you are open to the truth as you have spent a considerable span of your life in seeking it. And as how I see it, that is enough for a conscious being to search for the truth in an impartial way, and with true vigour, one reaches it, beyond any doubt. Intellect is the tool to reach the reality, and then we can compare it with any existing ideology to confirm the validity of that ideology. As you are willing to discuss, which is quite evident by your civil and friendly comment, I would like to ask a few questions, with your permission: As you say so: God is mind with three components, Do you assign any individuality to each of the part that the other dont possess, that makes them to be "three" and not "one" ? It will be more considerate if you state your answer as clearly as possible.
The second interview.. the interviewee says “we are spiritual being having a physical experience “ but to me it’s we are physical being transitioning to spiritual beings. I don’t have any memories of being a spiritual being. When you die your physical body decomposes back to molecules and atoms.
It is more accurate to say that we are Spiritual beings (eternal ) having a body experience rather than a body (temporary) having a spiritual experience. We are shapeshifters ( many many incarnations) but our true and real being is the eternal soul. Some people do remember being a soul in the many Near Death Experiences. Some children remember past lives which hints strongly of a common soul.
Kuhn, in discussing Christianity you approach discussing the Father and Son however the third person of the trinity is who you are getting to know best in your quest to understand (a very human thing) the triune God.
@Undisclosed 000000 according to christians, muslims believe in a false god - so much for the sophistication in that. How do you know your understanding is correct? Well, that's easy, others got it wrong. Yeah, we all believe that santa claus doesn't exist. But some of us have the clear sight to know we can't prove it.
@Undisclosed 000000 I'm talking about people who are convinced that they can prove (mainly to atheists) that their god exists. I think you left that out of you "point". But please, continue making sense, half sense or whatever it is you are trying to do.
@@timonp3412 yes. I want to say there are some incredible things are going on in real philosophy of Buddhism. If we can collect all the philosophies in one place, there might be something we can learn.
@ 7:14 How does he know there is only one god? @ 8:50 Physiology Not Physics gets at the fundamentals of reality? @ 9:13 We are spirits trying to have a human life?........ .....Why do spirits need to go through this mortal stage?........if the end goal is to enter a “perfect” heaven, as a non-human?
I very much respect the Rabbi. However, I would say the people continually fail (God)....God doesn't fail the people. BTW, I absolutely love your work. Thank you.
As I look around, there is nothing whatsoever that I can observe that came from 'nothingness'. Nor have I ever encountered any other human being that can show me otherwise. 'Belief', then, becomes irrelevant.
THANK YOU, Robert Kuhn, for taking us on your journey for objective 'Truth'
I soooo love this channel, so glad I found it! Thank you so much Dr Kuhn for asking all the questions that probably cross everyone's mind!
me too, i feel like a kid in the candy store. I don't even want to go into work, I just want to be here for the rest of my life
I discovered this show on the MPT TV network
"If an ox could paint a picture, his God would look like an ox" - Xenophanes, fl 540 BCE.
How can you paint a pure spirit? One cannot picture any micro "object": any term of microworld is just a term denoting sth but not an object like your ox or just a mass-point. Excellent, you reveal just your absolute idiocy on the divine wisdom called philosophy and Rev.Aristotle dealt perfectly with such apes already in the 3th cent. contra skeptics and agnostics -argumenta are that of any formal science, eternal.! Before Christ. Why don't you know it? Who is responsible for jour Ididocy in 21 cent. Christ Ere?
But then why does the Christian God consist of three aspects - unlike anything human?
@@krzysztofciuba271
You can't paint a pure spirit, only a pure spirit could paint a pure spirit, if it existed.
@@sebastianmelmoth685
Simple, human is body, soul and spirit. NO self-respecting God can be less in quantity than a human.
@@sebastianmelmoth685 Only the Catholic church and evangelical offshoots teach that nonsense about the Trinity.
these sort of clips coming in this day and age, it's a miracle
Your words and questions were exactly the things I have asked and thought. Thank you so much.
...I have a smile on my face because I understand it is your job to stir the pot of life, questions, and delve into the people you interview. I am sure you have your own insights. Many are looking at GOD from where we are to where HE is, Omniscient & Omnipresent. Man tends to be a bit Arrogant, respectfully, Chuck...captivus brevis...you tube...Blessings...GOD said, I Am that I Am...how marvelous...
From when someone describes God as He, that person has no concept of what our creator actually is?......God is everything🤔.
"The source and limit and the constitution of all things is God." - Corpus Hermeticum
“We living beings all belong to one another, we are all actually members.. or aspects.. of a single Being, which we may in western terminology call God, while in the Upanishads it is called Brahman.”- Erwin Schrödinger
"Is it not written in your Law, `I said: "You are gods"'? - I John 10:31
Pantheism
The transcendent creator Id imagine can be anything it wants to be
God can’t do or assume the identity of anything that goes against His divine nature.
"Is that too simple for describing the creator of all existence?" YES - the greatest of truths are the simplest.
According to the Neoplatonist Plotinus, one just need utter the word 'Good' and say no more. Anything else, personhood, etc is to limit the simplicity of God. So the simplest, may not logically infer personhood. Or at least as we might understand the word / term.
@@pasquino0733 That depends on the theology, and definition of good can be subjective, the basics for all monotheistic religions is God is One, self-sufficient, and with will.
"Simple = True" - the wisdom of a simple mind.
@@ezbody simple means easily comprehensible and if it is easy to understand then it is rational. That is why greatest truths are simplest.
@@kakalam6004
What greatest truths are simplest?
These are very hard to listen to because my thoughts and attention keep going off on tangents and when my attention comes back to the video I notice that I have missed a lot of the content and I have to start over. Frustrating but worth it.
It's called ADD, and yes, it is frustrating. Thankfully, by the time it starts becoming frustrating my mind is already a thousand miles away 😉.
Your hope counts... FOR YOU... And that's the most important! We don't know what God IS because we already don't know what WE ARE !... what is our consciousness.... maybe our consciousness, our being and the one of God are alike.
When it comes to God, I'm totally like Robert.A skeptic who Wants to believe in a all good and all powerful personal God, but I don't want to fool myself.
It starts bad it goes even worse and finally towards the end it gets way better! Still it fails grossly at admitting Unity cannot be a perspective. All perspectives together nullify personhood.
If God exists, and has a will and intelligence, he surely has to be considered a person. I read one religious writer who said that we can think of him as more than just a person...but not less than one.
Theists are just so afraid to say we don't know a lot about a lot of things or even most things
They cannot admit that their God is a God of the gaps.
Religions would have more respect if they did not have concepts like blasphemy and apostasy.
They don't want your respect, they want your money.
I absolutely agree with some of what you are saying. Religion, most of the time, is attempting to validate with too much reason. I say, one who believes simply has to have faith....and leave it at that. Christianity for example can use reason to discuss the historical Jesus. However, theology is more supernatural and can not be proven by reason.....at least not yet.
That’s why it’s called faith
the third guy was unexpected. brought tears to my eyes
When you think about it, an infinite, perfect being can't really have a personality, goals, feelings etc. For example, feelings are our reactions to new information and new events. If God knows everything for all eternity before it even happens, he can't have an emotional reaction to it. It's just logically impossible. Goals also indicate a lack of something. If you're perfectly content you have no desires and no goals, because you're already everything you could ever dream of. As for personality and the ability of personal relationships, a being can only have personal relationships with beings that are somewhat on the same level as it (or at least a bit lower than it). For example, a human can have a personal relationship with another human, or even a dog -but not with a fish or an insect. If God is infinitely more intelligent and "higher" than us, then he's *automatically* infinitely more distant and NOT personally related to us.
You bring up many good observations. As for myself, I'm surprised that the idea of the self being an illusion wasn't considered by Mr. Kuhn.
I like and can relate to your thoughts.
Yes- our yearnings, our doubts, shortcomings, etc., would seem to be meaningless and absurd without our attachment to, or imprisonment by the very essence of sorrow and frustration to contradiction and not achieving transcendence.
It seems illogical for li’l ol’ me to personally, subjectively experience transcendence, unless it was on a gargantuan, profound level or experience. Making no sense- my apologies.
God is a person. You are made in his image, God is absolute and you are a work of progress in becoming like him❤
Dey say god made us look da best, so do humans look like god? And is god....... a person 🤨
None of these people can break out of their cultural conditioning of seeing the divine as singular, male, and separate from the universe.
I respect your journey, mister Kuhn.
So do I, but it doesn't seem to me that he's really getting anywhere.
@@amirkhalid5449 There is no finish line; enjoy the ride.
@@amirkhalid5449 how far he gets is his own journey. Those who dont get anywhere you say dont have this level of thought.
You always ask the right questions. Thank you Robert
The absurdity and ridiculousness of this topic is phenomenal
Why?
Very true
@@johntexas8417 are you from Texas and a believer of Christ?
God is eloquence, expressed in the magnificence of existence
We are not human beings who go through a spiritual experience.-
We are spiritual beings who go through a human experience.
Religion is for those who need someone to tell them what to do and want to be guided.
Spirituality is for those who pay attention to their inner voice.
More on science and math, and less on fantasy please.
@@realitycheck1231 Bwahahahahaha
In the real world we do not know if there is a god so we also do not know is god is something like a fantasy.
@Andreaz-64 Science brought me closer to the God (Truth).
@Andreaz-64 LOL I like your comment.
I'd suggest you to study a little more and come back.
@Andreaz-64 well I'm just a student of religions, history (and science).
You said "and that in general the religious are more full of themselves than of their so called gods."
have you studied all religions or at least mainstream religions? Or you just made this up :)
The universe is an existence of it's own, that we human have limited understanding. We by chance happened to experience life and one day everything will come to an end.
You said :
1) The universe is an existence of it's own,
2) we human have limited understanding.
What the ****
How do you know that universe is an existence of it's own with your limited understanding !!!
@@RustedFaith because I said so....therefore we don't fully understand how the universe work the fact is universe the name itself we given...it might be call god we don't know
Knowing doesn't help. Knowing and being are different. From being to becoming is the journey
Pretty bold statements start at :54. If true, then most of the living creatures on this planet can be called "Person".
Don’t you mean ALL living creatures... and possibly organisms... 😁
He is a consciousness without limits .
What exactly is consciousness
@@ishantaldekar406 It can be seen as a verb.
Con = with
Scious/science = knowing/knowledge.
Who is with knowing?
What if God was one of us, just a slob like one of us, just a stranger on a bus, trying to find his way home..?
If we could shed our ego, we would see that there is nothing that's not God.
“Your task is not to seek for God, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it." - Rumi
We created God/gods in our images.
In some ways we could say that the question of God becomes like 'What came first? Consciousness or space-time?'
it would be cool to see robert answer youtube questions or something kinda like startalk. i have watched so many of these interviews its unreal
Yeah,
Merry Christmas and thank u for awesome content!
No, he is a woman
Tempted to ad-lib a little further... would gender-neutral help... heading toward... multi-classification gender-neutral...
Or maybe simply he is a she... 😁
@@djpodesta Well, George Carlin is of a different opinion on this matter : _I honestly believe, looking at these results, that if there is a God, it has to be a man. No woman could or would ever fuck things up like this._
@@odiupickusclone-1526 Hahaha! You may be right there... That is the modern concept of viewing the past... 👍
"God is vulnerable." Wow, that's a new one!
Are you familiar with the image of Christ suffering on the cross for mankind?
@@Robb3348 Image by who? Based on what? How do you know it depicts "suffering on the cross for mankind"? What does it have to do with God?
God is fantasy. So God is whatever you want it to be. Just imagine.
Now imagine that some kind of physics we do not know about yet, makes oure consciousness live on. And then the God you imagine is the god you get after your "death". 😲
@@Nissenov Then be careful the god you imagine.
So is evolution.
@@simplicityistheultimatesop6571 false
Amen
Interesting exploration on various religious perspectives. Very complex, trying to grasp what a God could actually be. I learned a lot.
Good. Keep seeking the truth!
I thought I was God. I keep hearing "oh my God, it's you again !" 😏
Woah
Nice try though 😅
😄😄😄
Ahem...that may not be a good thing. Why? Lots of reasons. Like...being eternal means you'll have to watch all your children die, and some of their horrible deaths could give you PTSD. But you'll have a lot of time to get over it.
Hope counts 💜💜💜
God is spirit/mind/energy/light. All of these are one and the same. It exists in the singularity, outside space and time.
Does the God of the NT, requires human blood and manslaughter for mercy and salvation?
As you know not killing Jesus means no salvation waiting for Christians right?
@Andreaz-64 From multiple sources. Science says there’s only Energy and matter in existence. Most philosophers agrees that mind gives rise to matter. Spiritual people believe that all things flow from the one spirit, the source. Religious types call this source God but one thing is certain, this force has no width, no length, no height. It can’t be measured. What is the width, length, height of Spirit/Mind/Energy/Light? It has none! Plus there’s nothing faster than it. It appears to be everywhere at all time.
@Andreaz-64 If mind does not exists what gave rise to matter?
@Andreaz-64 So let`s hear what you could easily make up, who make sense.
@Andreaz-64 I did not expect an answer from you that made sense, only a bad argument, and you fulfilled it perfectly.
I realize I’m commenting 2 years after this episode was published, but I think Lawrence gets this one wrong from the get go, when he early on asserts that only a person has intents, awareness, etc.
Is he granting personhood to nonhuman higher mammals? Not his intent, idk..
That’s some serious intellectual gymnastics right there
Exactly. The very first statement saying only a person has goal and blah blah blah. Doesnt the god of the bible have a purpose and a goal?
Or am I lost here
This is presup stuff level
@@andrelesf agreed. I actually thought this video was going to actually talk about the possibility of the god concept deriving from a human being.
Clit-bait and they got me lol
@@heathenthatheretic5960 No, you are begging the question. You cannot validly claim that God is a person, b/c the bible says so, when the question is if the bible is correctly attributing personhood to God.
No, this is a basic philosophical question. Personhood is a particularly defined quality of a subset thinking things, so naturally the question arises as to the personhood status of God. Straightforward stuff, honestly.
We want an explanation and because we are persons we want the explanation to be personal.
Who else cant sleep unless watching at least one episode in bed
What is about God, that whenever his name popped up or mentioned people goes crazy, especially those who deliberately disobeying his existence keep on coming back to deny his existence. There must be something deeper that we don't know (yet).
Morgan Freeman.
Who replaced Charlton Heston... :) And maybe Liam Neeson will be next in line... hehehe
God is everything and anything.
Islamic view on God would have added a different angle to this video. Islamic philosophy has many branches and became so complex over the centuries and many of their works were translated in the 13th century and used by western philosophers. However, the pure monotheism, a God that doesn't make a mistake, doesn't plan, doesn't think, doesn't get frustrated, etc, was not picked up by the west because Christianity teaches differently. That's why Islamic view still has many new aspects for a western audience. I should point out that there is no single view, there are concepts and interpretations like unity of being which says everything is within God while not being God, to literal understandings of the Quraan.
Get rid of sharia law
god here. religions are all inconsequential. surprise.
A segment from 'Saved by the Light of the Buddha Within'...
My new understandings of what many call 'God -The Holy Spirit' - resulting from some of the extraordinary ongoing after-effects relating to my NDE...
Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what some scientists are now referring to as the unified field of consciousnesses. In other words, it’s the essence of all existence and non-existence - the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source. Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the actual creator of everything that exists now, ever existed in the past, or will exist in the future - right down to the minutest particles of dust - each being an individual ripple or wave.
The big difference between chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of inner enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves. That’s because chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo allows us to tap directly into our enlightened state by way of this self-produced sound vibration. ‘Who or What Is God?’ If we compare the concept of God being a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to the teachings of Nichiren, it makes more sense to me that the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people perceive to be God, is the fantastic state of enlightenment that exists within each of us. Some say that God is an entity that’s beyond physical matter - I think that the vast amount of information continuously being conveyed via electromagnetic waves in today’s world gives us proof of how an invisible state of God could indeed exist.
For example, it’s now widely known that specific data relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects - including an instant global awareness of something or a mass emotional reaction. It’s also common knowledge that these invisible waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars - none of which is possible without a receiver to decode the information that’s being transmitted. Without the receiver, the data would remain impotent. In a very similar way, we need to have our own ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our own life, all other life and what everything else in existence is.
Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach the core of our enlightenment and keep it switched on. That’s because Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what scientists now refer to as the unified field of consciousnesses. To break it down - Myoho represents the Law of manifestation and latency (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. For example, the state of Myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists - including our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them - our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re dormant - our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma - and more importantly, our enlightenment.
The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes evident to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory - whenever we experience or express our emotions - or whenever a good or bad cause manifests as an effect from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it merely means that it’s come out of the state of Myo (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing.
The second law - Renge - Ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect, governs and controls the functions of Myoho - these two laws of Myoho and Renge, not only function together simultaneously but also underlies all spiritual and physical existence.
The final and third part of the tri-combination - Kyo, is the Law that allows Myoho to integrate with Renge - or vice versa. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects all Life and matter - as well as the past, present and future. It’s also sometimes termed the Universal Law of Communication - perhaps it could even be compared with the string theory that many scientists now suspect exists.
Just as the cells in our body, our thoughts, feelings and everything else is continually fluctuating within us - all that exists in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux - constantly controlled by these three fundamental laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of Myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible to calculate or describe. And it doesn’t matter how big or small, famous or trivial anything or anyone may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past, exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of the Laws ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ - the basis of the four fundamental forces, and if they didn’t function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. That’s because all forms of existence, including the seasons, day, night, birth, death and so on, are moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation - rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two fundamental states of Myo and ho in absolute accordance with Renge - and by way of Kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn under the workings of what the combination ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ represents. Nam, or Namu - which mean the same thing, are vibrational passwords or keys that allow us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’.
On a more personal level, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives - as well as the environment from moment to moment. By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is spinning, and chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo for a minimum of, let’s say, ten minutes daily to start with, any of us can experience actual proof of its positive effects in our lives - even if it only makes us feel good on the inside, there will be a definite positive effect. That’s because we’re able to pierce through the thickest layers of our karma and activate our inherent Buddha Nature (our enlightened state). By so doing, we’re then able to bring forth the wisdom and good fortune that we need to challenge, overcome and change our adverse circumstances - turn them into positive ones - or manifest and gain even greater fulfilment in our daily lives from our accumulated good karma. This also allows us to bring forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that’s preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we indeed are - regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexuality. We’re also able to see and understand our circumstances and the environment far more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations. As I’ve already mentioned, everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect - the ‘actual-proof-strength’ resulting from chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo always depends on our determination, sincerity and dedication.
For example, the levels of difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, producing a great song, and so on. Something else that’s very important to always respect and acknowledge is that the Law (or if you prefer God) is in everyone and everything.
NB: There are frightening and disturbing sounds, and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It’s the emotional result of any noise or sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day, we are producing a sound vibration that’s the password to our true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things - such as your fears and desires etc. The best way to get the desired result when chanting is not to view things conventionally - rather than reaching out to an external source, we need to reach into our own lives and bring our needs and desires to fruition from within - including the good fortune and strength to achieve any help that we may need. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo also reaches out externally and draws us towards, or draws towards us, what we need to make us happy from our environment. For example, it helps us to be in the right place at the right time - to make better choices and decisions and so forth. We need to think of it as a seed within us that we’re watering and bringing sunshine to for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s also important to understand that everything we need in life, including the answer to every question and the potential to achieve every dream, already exists within us.
I keep waiting for a god to show up for all the world to see at once. I have been waiting for a long time. Folks like me have been waiting for centuries and longer. God always seems to be a no-show.
Just keep waiting and pass the collection plate.
That's never wanna happen. And if it happens, it's probably an alien invasion lmao😭🤣🤣
Great, thoughtful video. Raised new thoughts and questions for me. Thanks
Why don't Christians accept their own doctrine that specifically declares them all as Gods both individually and collectively? John 10:34, Psalms 82:6 and so on throughout scripture. The whole point being to accept ones own divinity so as to no longer fear death. aka Transcendence and or ascension of mind and the death of ego leading to enlightenment and a collective oneness? Why don't they teach it the way it is? Along with the esoteric astrology and astronomy encoded within it as well? Why corrupt your own wisdom? It makes no sense...
It is written in layers. The inner core that you speak of is hidden at the deepest level for the seekers to find. The religious shell is the pretty box used to carry it far and wide by the masses who do not seek. They not only don't know how to open it, but they would tell you it can't be opened. You found the magic inside. They just make sure it gets the widest possible dissemination. (Clever authors) Tell people it's up to them and they won't pass it around.
@@michaelbarry755 I’ve started making videos outlining this idea if you’re interested. Not trying to monetize the channel though so no pressure.
@@michaelbarry755 Thank you, Mike. I am totally interested in sharing with people who see that there is something below the outer shell. I'm working on a condensed version of what I believe the keys are for unlocking the verses. I'm new at this and don't have a system dialed in very well. I have blended my beliefs with my life. They go together, but not everyone wants to hear it all. I need to cut to the chase.
Thank you again. I look forward to hearing your ideas.
@@michaelbarry755 I find it interesting to suggest to a Christian that they don't understand the Bible. Then an atheist pats you on the back agreeing with you that the Bible is all wrong.
And then you tell them that's not what you said, and that they're wrong too.
Kinda puts people like us out in left field.
@@michaelbarry755 Sage advice. Always a welcome pleasure. Thank you
Sometimes i think we could go nuts on all of this. We are a miracle and should be astonished and live gratefully. Given life to see life continues gratefully. If he brought us in such a miracle we can love each creation greatly for thanks !! Sadly games and wars have some ridiculous hold to make sweet miracles bitter, jealous and like insects or jungle animals. We are men and women who can communicate for loving solutions. Spiritual or religions to fight ? This is the question so we better comprehend these messages..for good kind manners yet helping like little children bringing flowers to mom..and being happy about it.
To find a better answer, Spinoza would be the right person to ask.
why would spinoza be the right person to ask?
hahaha... any quotes from him you would suggest?
@@stevenhoyt might be a joke, son...if you ever tried to read Spinoza you would understand... a better person to ask would be PG Wodehouse, Berty Wooster has a go round with Spinoza... I felt the same way... sort of makes the head spin
Freud and Jung... ditto.. Karl Marx.. a lunatic.. all of them take themselves way too seriously...
so... do you want to know the results of many years of contemplating one's bellybutton?... a clean bellybutton
Oh I have a better one, why not have a god, any god, speak for itself instead of having humans rationalize, justify or argue it into existence.
@@richardcarew4708 ... my degree is philosophy. i would venture a guess that i've read more spinoza than most, and i'm pretty sure you've not read him at all. it is because i've read spinoza and others that makes me wonder why you single him out ... hume and kant are far more interesting, it seems to me, for example.
for instance on the point of you not likely having read spinoza, tell me then, on his view, what's the difference between a physical and mental event and in which of his works would you find that answer?
God is a word.
Christian theoogians' explanations of the Trinity, I am sorry to say, always strike me as complicated rationalisations of a notion that basically doesn't make sense.
Why not?
@@djpodesta I refer you to the videos of Dr Bart Ehrman, where he discusses the origin of the Trinity concept in early Christianity.
@@amirkhalid5449 Thank you my friend... but you are only referring me to somebody else’s opinion? I thought that the explanations of the Trinity didn’t make sense to you.
@@djpodesta I agree with Dr Ehrman's arguments, which are that the Trinity was conceived of after Jesus' time and has no basis in anything he actually said; and that the whole idea of a three-in-one person (or three persons in one entity) is clearly confused.
@@amirkhalid5449 Good morning Amir. I totally agree with the fact that the Trinity was conceived after the fact... as I think that all religions evolved in the minds of men and written down after the fact... borrowing from previously known situations and stories... just as good fiction writers have always derived their fantasies from. ‘Nothing is new under the sun.’
However, ‘IF’ the Biblical Scriptures are taken as truth, both via the Old Testament and the New Testament, which they were... after the fact.
While it is true that the Scriptures do not explicitly state anything of the Trinity; and depending upon which available Greek Text one relied upon, there is good circumstantial evidence within the overall bodies of the texts to suggest good reason for the idea of the Trinity evolving in the minds of the thinkers of the day.
I agree that 1+1+1... Father + Son + Holy Spirit = 3 Heads of the God Head... so to speak.
But... IF it were true that Man were made in the image of God... Man has a Mind, Body and thoughtful decision making... all baked into one entity.
The mind conceives of an idea... we ‘decide’ to act upon that idea and direct our body to carry out what is necessary to make that idea to come to a ‘hopefully’ satisfying conclusion. Mans only limitation is that he/she is limited by experiential knowledge... but over time, the collective mind has (and continues to do so) learned more than anything thought possible even a hundred years ago... not forgetting the thousands of years of collective knowledge... but that is a side issue.
The Scriptures talk about God... the creator... all knowing, all seeing... etc. The Scriptures also state that Jesus, while being born around 2000 years ago at this point in time... was with God in the beginning... that statement could not be so, as the actual body was born/came into being at a particular point in time.
However, just as we inherit aspects of our personality from our ancestors... whether you wish to call it personality traits or DNA... or what ever... which carries on down through the generations... why should it be any different, in the minds of the thinkers of that era, for their Son of God (which was just as much a metaphor as it was their reality) to have inherited from... or even God separating his/it’s spirit (as I have not touched upon the concept of Spirit) and imparting it in the body of the child Jesus.
The Holy Spirit can be seen as the essence of God carrying out of His/its will in response to prayerful intercession of His/it’s believers here on earth... both before and after the body of their Christ... Jesus was a physical being walking on earth at that particular time in history... if it is indeed true of course. 🤫
Rather than looking at the problem of 1+1+1=1... Impossible.
Try looking at the complex nature of any thinking being as being 1x1x1=1 Just as we are complex in physical and mental nature.
How is it that you can imagine yourself both flying to the moon, eating an ice cream and sitting upon a sandy beach... or anything... according to what you have experienced or seen in a movie... etc... almost simultaneously... and without leaving your couch?
If you are learned in engineering... you first find a need for a particular structure... say... a bridge to cross a river... you then conceptualise such a bridge... you then direct your attention to figuring out all the issues required to make the bridge... then you physically get to work and build the bridge... three 1x1x1 overall aspects coming from one entity to realise the final product... if there is nobody around to help you.
Remember, this is the type of mind that conceived of the Trinity via studying and interpreting their chosen scriptures.
It doesn’t make it factual... but it is understandable.
I Am He That Sent Me
Near death Experiencers tell of a life review where they relive all of their life experiences from birth to the moment of their current life threatening event. Someone up there is clearly interested in how we live our lives. I'd say that's a pretty good indication that our maker is not impersonal nor are they uninterested in our lives.
I'd say that's a pretty good indication that the brain is active the moment right after your heart stops.
@@ashley_brown6106 actually the neo cortex which is the part of the brain that is responsible for thinking, completely shuts down during cardiac arrest. There may be remaining electrical activity in the brain but it that cannot create any thought process. I've been reading up on the literature concerning the data on the veridical NDE and this is what I've learned. You can research it yourself if you don't believe me.
@@ferdinandkraft857 to you it doesn't make sense. To her it does. Move on Kraft..
@@ashley_brown6106 then what about the people who are blind all their life and have a near-death experience.... come back and describe what they can see during their near death experience?
When the blind have a near-death experience and come back and describe things that they've never seen before.... This is pretty strong
you are not a person you have a person.. therefore God is not a person. semantics possibly
All the interviewees stumble over the same stone: they make use of Reason without knowing what Reason is about. Through it they intend to demonstrate the unprovable, appealing to arguments that without exception are based on dogmas. Dogma is the antithesis of Reason, so its "rational" arguments do not hold up.
Rationalizations. They make up the arguments _after_ they've decided what the conclusion will be.
Indeed, we seem to rationalizing rather than rational. Dogmas of any kind stifles pursuit of knowledge. Open-mindedness and pursuit of truth seems preferable to close minded attitudes. Enlightened agnosticism keeps us from making boxes containing God or anything else.
Existence in its Totality is God from which everything emanates and into which everything dissolves.
dissolves - to return to Source.
One thing humans have is good imagination.
Well,we have imagination.
God is a person or a tree or a flower or a number...everything
Why does the most perfect creation in and of itself need to create anything?
O yeah , bunch of little ants to subjugate and show how much he loves the same little ants h created, but isn’t god perfect already?? and it’s always so amusing to listen to the theist give “their” personal definitions of god and scriptures and tailor them into neat answers to answer the gap questions...
The perfect being creates out of love for all things and being perfect he creates perfect ants. And would not care about subjugation. And if you complain about nasty ants, remember he also gave them free will, which is also perfect freedom.
@@easyeagle2
Well, haven't you forgotten about the perfect subjugation?!
Why wouldn't the most perfect existence want to create? We can't create, we can only experience what is, in whatever form it takes; the expression of potential as an actuality. We live in a sandbox of rules and structures uncontrolled by us, we simple discover recipes, write them down, share them, and use them. Ingredients (matter) arranged through processes (scientific & mathematical laws) produces observable forms emerging from layered structures. For any of this to be, whether it was created or not, the will of the creator or the system remains the same: increase in order and stability of systems to produce an outcome. The shifting of the goal posts is meaningless, as proposed by universe seeding systems. Same answer to the same question. Why would God create? And why wouldn't God create? These questions are superfluously targetted and fundamentally unrequired when we exist within the scope of the constructed system of reality. This question could for all we know simply fall outside of our limits inside the system.
@@joshuacadebarber8992
The perfect existence can (or cannot) do whatever it wants since it's we who decide what its abilities are.
As far as I am concerned this perfect existence belongs in its perfect lake of fire. Besides, no such thing as perfect, perfect is just like infinity -- unquantifiable.
@@ezbody I agree. It does what it does regardless of our ponderings. Not sure what the lake of fire part means?
if canonization hasnt washed together Jahve and the real God, Neo wouldn't be tense, and confused. God is not failing, Jahve did.
Man is just a multi-particle bond state of quantum fields, and still have "personality", so the whole assumption is already false from the very beginning. God can not be defined or limited by a particular personality.
@Undisclosed 000000 at the microscopic level, things are what they are not what they pretend to be! 😉
@Undisclosed 000000 I like your comment "... as a human we will never experience these microscopic or quantum states of reality as such." That's very interesting. Wouldn't it be weird if humans could experience such states of reality?
I don't think the definition of humans as "multi particle bond state of quantum fields" is necessarily a "inhuman and dehumanizing definition" but I guess it depends on what assumptions we choose to believe regarding the definition of human life. To some scientists, such a definition might be logical in defining humanity as some kind of biological/physical process. I prefer to see humanity in a different way, as I assume you do. I see humanity as part of the "image of God" but other people don't focus on such a definition.
I do find Rafael's statement very interesting when he says " at the microscopic level, things are what they are, not what they pretend to be." That observation makes me think. John in Florida
YOU ARE GOD ROBERT!
The essence is the “whatness” that makes us us. What gibberish! It’s comical to see educated people try to rationalize what they were likely taught as toddlers. They just can’t get past that.
Until you accept death for what it obviously is - the permanent end of the self and of loved ones, you are still an emotional toddler. If I'm wrong and there is some kind of life after death, then awesome. But obviously, that's a fantasy.
What ignoramuses, every modern, educated person knows that it's the essence of "us-ness" that makes us us.
@@eventhisidistaken Obviously?
@Muzaffar Zaky
Not really, is it as funny as "whatness" is?
‘What-ness’ is ultimately decided by something with a conscience; through rational... or irrational... thought... In this case... through ‘us’
I say ‘through us;’ in this case firstly because of your statement... and secondly, to differentiate between the human quest and all other living things that have a conscious dimension to their existence... even plants; it seems, according to some experimentation. As a side issue... what makes us any more special than any other living creature/organism.
The ultimate human question, which we were not taught as toddlers is... (and forgetting about what I see as the irrelevant question of Why) - What is consciousness... and Where/How did consciousness originate?
That, unfortunately with most emphasising the Why, is the underlying question/theme that has driven countless generations, across cultural barriers (which is probably modified from some ‘way back when’ notion, as people spread out or migrated apart throughout the ages... to teach their toddlers to believe in something higher than themselves.
I have to admit that I find it fun to toy with such possibilities and questions... even if I find difficulty in believing what I was taught as a toddler.
God's Life Is Very Rich And I'm Learning To Finally Shut Up And Be Quiet
Three persons but only one being. Some believe.
out of all those explanations that one seemed to be the most silly.
As far as I'm concerned, in any context God is absurd.
Another excellent vidéo. Impressive. Thank you.
My contribution in a ( large) nutshell: everything is spiritual because nothing lasts. God therefore is the receptacle of the law of physics that states that only information 'survives' since it is impossible to destroy information. And so we matter and we may have a purpose and a meaning thanks to our minds and feelings which represent our personal stories (our information) on Earth.
P.S: I loved the Rabbi's contribution.😀
The vast majority of answers to these important questions basically amount to "my imaginary friend is like this" or "my favorite fictional character is like that". Completely indistinguishable from any other whimsical creation of the human mind. They offer no substantial evidence to support the notion that any sort of supreme/divine person has ever interacted with humanity.
Words about "God(s)" mean absolutely nothing until such a being makes itself known in a way that can be identified as something other than "nature did something we don't fully understand yet, therefore that was my personal version of divinity at work", or "I feel peaceful when I read this book, therefore it describes reality better than any other book in human history", or "my parents taught me to be nice, therefore everything else they believed must be unquestionably true", or "some guy said that God said that we need to do something special, therefore we should just take all his words as divine in origin", or other completely useless claims. The entire genre of debates about "divinity" are meaningless until any claim about divinity can be corroborated by verifiable evidence.
Please note: My arguments are against the idea of "God" and other empty claims made by organized religions, not against the broadly human search for spirituality and personal purpose in life.
The existence of a perfect god is refuted in that it could only act perfectly, ever taking the most perfect action, thus no free will, but rather conformance to whatever exists in reality, thus no god, but rather reality.
School must be out.
There are a lot of children in the chatroom today.
And apparently an empty head too.
@Andreaz-64 hands high reaching to Heaven, that's how high.
I wonder what multiple dimensions of TIME would mean. We keep hearing String Theorists talk about hidden extra dimensions of space, but what about time? Our current conception of time is 1 dimensional, which comes with an infinite regress (Turtles all the way down past) paradox. Even space, in three dimensions, contains Zeno's Paradox of continuity.
I had a dream in which my dad explained, "When you look at a fire, it appears flat [(2-Dimensional)], but if you look more closely it's a 3-Dimensional object. So too is time."
Yes, God is a spirit person. A conscious living divine Being with a heart and mind and personality. There are things he loves and things he hates. He is also generous and kind while at the same time a counselor and disciplinarian.
Hmm.. Appreciate the way you've expressed this. 🙏❤️
Your imaginary friend named "God" sounds like he is just an amalgamation of whatever traits you personally think would be best.
@@simianbarcode3011
The same as your imaginary non existence of God. But that is not my concern nor problem. 😀
I am coming for the "C'mon JP!" moment
If God was a person, I do wonder as to where he would choose to live. I mean what does a god crib look like? I also know that if I didn’t write this comment, it wouldn’t exist.
If God doesn't live in Colorado , I'll bet that's where he spends most of his time.....Merle Haggard .
There likely is no devil yet a guy like Hitler is considered to be a devil. In a person like that the devil manifestates itself of sorts. So god himself even being non-existent could manifestate itself in a person making that person god. In the bible you have that guy name Elia who is prettymuch considered to be god for instance.
I am just a person never forget
Could we get closer to God if we could find the God particle . The particle that makes everything exist. where did this particle come from ? how did it come to be ? is it the mind of nonexistence that makes it exist and starts the building blocks to life and existence ? I am sorry but for some reason I don’t think God is a bing Nora human like . I believe plants , trees and animals . all sorts of living things are just as Important as a simple human being . they exist . they have a life to. Love your show. ❤️👍
Person: noun. a human being regarded as an individual.
Therefore if there is a "creator" (which I am inclined to think there is), he/she/it cannot be a person, because a person is a *human* who dies. So the creator cannot be composed of the same material as the physical universe.
I am an atheist meaning one without a personal "god" of any sort.
Actually god can manifestate itself in a person. Just like the devil can manifestate itself in a person. A guy like Hitler is considered to be the devil. Evilness taking a human form. Even if there is no god/devil such manifestations happens.
How many fairies can dance on the head of a pin?
four?
Why do you ask?
@@briankayeke1396 Because it's just as meaningful as the question in the title of the video.
Great job I like what you are doing.
JP Moreland clearly misses the point and makes a huge logical error when he describes God as One Being, but with three centres or parts.
How is that so ?
Well such a Being is composite and derive its reality from those three parts. And those three parts, in turn, need each other to make a whole. So when these parts are taken individually, they go into the category of contingent and not necessary, as each one is in need of the other to make the one God, and if those parts were necessary in their ownself, they would not have needed another to make a whole.
And thus each of these parts, when taken individually, is contingent and is itself in need of a Cause. This would make whole of this idea of God to be a contingent one, and not a necessary. This cannot be the first independent cause or an Uncaused Being.
The idea of such a God fails as there lies a clear contradiction.
The first Cause must be non-composite and simplest in nature interms of unity in order to have its existence identical to its essence.
@@realitycheck1231
That is why us, being composite, are contingent. We are also a composite of quiddity and existence. But for the first cause such a tripartite mind contradicts its unity and implies multiplicity. Every multiplicity ceases to exist at fundamental level of reality, in order for it to be fundamental and not in further need of a cause.
When you imply God as mind only with three components, then each component must have some individuality in order to make it different from the other two, otherwise it would be one and not three. By making a distinction between the three, each one in separate becomes something that has some individual function distinct from the other two. And that makes each one limited in its own domain and would need the other two to make the idea of God workable. Then this leads to each of these parts contingent in nature, and each cannot exist on its own as necessary. Thus this idea of God becomes contingent as it stands on three contingent parts and not one absolute unity.
For God, there can bo no multiplicity but absolute unity. That is why God is termed as pure existence or Necessary Being in philosophy.
@@realitycheck1231
Brother, saying "multiplicity cease to exist at fundamental level" is not tantamount to saying "we cease to exist at fundamental level".
As you are saying that you are not much familiar with Philosophy, as I am myself just a humble student of this beautiful subject, still I would try to simplify the argument as much as possible.
When i say "Contingent Being", i mean the mental concept for an existent for whom existence and non-existence both are possible (mentally speaking). Only a complete Cause would decide its fate, or the absence of it.
While Necessary Being is the One that derives its existence from nothing else, it is self-sufficient, or in other words, to exist is necessary for such a Being, and non-existence for it is impossible.
There is also a third category called impossible being, i.e a concept that cannot exist in exterior world, like triangle with four sides or a rectangle with five sides.
To decide from which category this material Cosmos belongs to, one has to see all these three possible choices one by one.
Firstly, material cosmos cannot be impossible being as it clearly exists.
We are left with two choices now. It either is necessary or contingent/possible.
The very composite nature of Cosmos implies that it exists in parts, and each part is in need of the other to make it a whole. Such a whole is dependent on its parts, and "dependent" and "necessary" do not go together.
Every thing in this Cosmos when considered alone, is contingent and needs prior causes. E.g Raining, you, me, planets, stars etc. They can easily be non-existent if their prior causes dont exist, or, are incomplete.
This universe also is in motion, that implies, it needs a fundamental reality as a Mover.
These obvious facts make this universe a contingent reality, that needs a cause.
Now the first Cause must have those properties that makes it a first cause i.e not in need of a cause prior to it.
When you imply God has a mind with three distinct parts, each with something of its own and different from the other two (that differences would make them to be three, you cannot say one thing to be three if there lies no distinction among them). Inturn, each of these parts with a unique feature distinguished from the other two, and its demand to align with the other two to make a whole, will make, each part in separate, a contingent or possible reality, that in turn would itself be in need of a cause as it is not self-sufficient or necessary.
Thus the Being you are talking about with a Mind having three distinct parts is not a Necessary Being, but a Contingent one.
For the First Cause, its absolute unity is a necessity to make it fundamental reality.
I hope i make myself clear now.
Thanks :)
@@realitycheck1231
Once again, my dear brother, try to ponder over this:
You are saying that those three distinct features of mind make one reality of God. Those three parts cannot be their own cause as nothing can cause itself. You are implying God as not something that is cause of those three, but those very three parts are God.
Hence each separate feature of mind, being limited in terms of its dependence on other two features to make a mind, needs a further cause. How can this be One God (or one fundamental reality), where clearly they are three inter-dependent realities, making each one a contingent and in need of the other to make a whole ?
The causal chain will go on until it stops at a fundamental reality where there is no multiplicity anymore. Absoulte unity of this reality will make its existence Necessary and in no need of further foundational reality.
@@realitycheck1231
Singularity word is used in many a sense, especially science. I am using the word Unity, or Absolute.
Although I have already answered your question in depth. Still I would like to proceed in a way that it remains a friendly and an educational discussion, but in order to do so, I would like to ask you a question:
Are we having this discussion to reach a conclusion based on truth, or is it because we want to defend the notions our minds have already perceived over the years and indoctrinated within us so much that we do not want to see beyond that point ?
@@realitycheck1231
Hi Brother.
It is a delight to learn about your journey to the truth. As we all are seeking the same by our innate nature, yet sometimes we confuse the opinion with the knowledge to have some notions not in corroboration with the objective reality or existence.
What I have learnt from your journey, is that you are open to the truth as you have spent a considerable span of your life in seeking it. And as how I see it, that is enough for a conscious being to search for the truth in an impartial way, and with true vigour, one reaches it, beyond any doubt. Intellect is the tool to reach the reality, and then we can compare it with any existing ideology to confirm the validity of that ideology.
As you are willing to discuss, which is quite evident by your civil and friendly comment, I would like to ask a few questions, with your permission:
As you say so: God is mind with three components, Do you assign any individuality to each of the part that the other dont possess, that makes them to be "three" and not "one" ?
It will be more considerate if you state your answer as clearly as possible.
The second interview.. the interviewee says “we are spiritual being having a physical experience “ but to me it’s we are physical being transitioning to spiritual beings. I don’t have any memories of being a spiritual being. When you die your physical body decomposes back to molecules and atoms.
It is more accurate to say that we are Spiritual beings (eternal ) having a body experience rather than a body (temporary) having a spiritual experience. We are shapeshifters ( many many incarnations) but our true and real being is the eternal soul.
Some people do remember being a soul in the many Near Death Experiences. Some children remember past lives which hints strongly of a common soul.
Of course he is a person. And he lives under a bridge in Santa Monica.
Yes god is a person . The Vedic literature confirms this very categorolly
Dumb. You'd have to prove that it exists first and then you can try to decide whether it's a person or not.
👍
Kuhn, in discussing Christianity you approach discussing the Father and Son however the third person of the trinity is who you are getting to know best in your quest to understand (a very human thing) the triune God.
If god was a person, it/she/he would certainly be a sadist! :P
Thats your opinion
Compassion of mercy and time
Buddhist: is person a God?
Christian: is God a person?
Me: a person trying to be good.
God is good.
God can be whatever you want it to be. And that is necessary.
@Undisclosed 000000 according to christians, muslims believe in a false god - so much for the sophistication in that.
How do you know your understanding is correct? Well, that's easy, others got it wrong.
Yeah, we all believe that santa claus doesn't exist. But some of us have the clear sight to know we can't prove it.
@Undisclosed 000000 I'm talking about people who are convinced that they can prove (mainly to atheists) that their god exists.
I think you left that out of you "point".
But please, continue making sense, half sense or whatever it is you are trying to do.
Why don’t you find a solution from Buddhism it is a great philosophy and far beyond the science. Scientists must research about Buddhism.
@@timonp3412 yes. I want to say there are some incredible things are going on in real philosophy of Buddhism. If we can collect all the philosophies in one place, there might be something we can learn.
All the theories and methods are born in humans mind and brain. So we can improve our our mind the question is how?
@ 7:14 How does he know there is only one god?
@ 8:50 Physiology Not Physics gets at the fundamentals of reality?
@ 9:13 We are spirits trying to have a human life?........
.....Why do spirits need to go through this mortal stage?........if the end goal is to enter a “perfect” heaven, as a non-human?
I very much respect the Rabbi. However, I would say the people continually fail (God)....God doesn't fail the people.
BTW, I absolutely love your work. Thank you.
Go with God is love and leave it at that.
What Neil Gillman said has taken me to a new perspective, much respect.
JP only speaks nonsense.