Since my wife's long struggle with cancer and her eventual passing I have been painfully struggling with my once unquestionable faith. This man gives me hope. This man has articulated what I have been arguing with myself over. Is God really all good and if so, why.......why.....this man (or thru God) has sparked new arguments for my mortal brain to wrestle with. God changes through His own development, from a cold to a warm, loving God. Could this be God bringing Himself to earth in Human form to feel and experience human love? Jesus?
Better stick with science and take good care for your own health, many illnesses can be prevented with better understanding of biology, chemistry and physics, but not all.
The same religion that says if we don't love him back, convert to "his" religion, he will go Hitler on us - set us apart just like the Nazis set apart ALL Jews - ALL Hindus, Atheists, Buddhists etc will be dumped into gas chambers in hell to burn forever? That one?
Why is Christ placed at the top of the hierarchy of the human race and value? Was Christ more loving, more forgiving, more self sacrificing than Buddha? Did Christ have more wisdom, did he meet death more painfully and with more humbleness than Socrates? Was Christ more empathetic and charitable, than Epictetus? Did Christ’s philosophy have greater impact on history and were his thoughts and words more transformative in bringing joy and happiness than Epicurus? Did Christ demonstrate greater love and sacrifice for humanity than Zoroaster? Was Jesus gentler than Lao-tsze and teach a universal message of love, hope and peace more universal than the teachings of Confucius? Was the sermon on the mount and the proclamation to love your neighbour including your enemies more fundamental to the ideas of human rights and duties superior to those of Zeno? Did the eucastrophe of Christs death and resurrection express greater truths than Cicero? Truths that bring a fleeting glimpse of Joy, Joy beyond the walls of the world poignant as grief. ? Was the mind of Christ subtle and more humble than Spinoza’s? Were Newton, Dostoyevsky, Descartes, Soren Kierkegaard, Kant, Spinoza, Aquinas, George Lemaitre, Augustine, Kepler, Michelle Besso and John Henslow convinced that Christ was the embodiment of truth. ? Was his creativity, in the power and beauty of expression, in breadth and scope of influence, in wealth of words, explanation, in knowledge of and genuine concern for the human mind and heart, of all romances, suffering, hopes and fears, the equal of Shakespeare, Dickens and Miguel de Cervantes. Was Christ the greatest of the human race? The answer is yes he was which is why 2000 yrs later the greatest minds are still debating the significance of the historical Yeshua (Jesus Christ). ❤️
I had the distinct pleasure of having Dr Forrest for one of my courses at UNE when I was an undergrad. I can't say I've ever been more excited about attending anyone's lectures. I was deeply saddened when he took an early retirement and left, because I was planning to do at least two more courses for which he was the coordinator. Apparently the university's administration had circulated a redundancy notice to him, which is astonishing given his talent and the fact that he was the only Professor in the already impoverished philosophy department. I really wish he had stuck around at least a couple more years until I graduated. Having said all that, this video really does not reflect his true analytical prowess. I was always asking him difficult questions in class, but he would always think through the problem and come up with a solution on the spot. Even though my position was almost always contrary to his, he would always seriously consider my arguments, which I greatly admired. Everything he says here seems highly speculative and not the kind of stuff I would typically consider to be "philosophy" (even though I realize that in the early days of philosophy speculation was a big part of the game).
Peter wrote the notes for the metaphysics unit I’m currently doing and taught the coordinator running it! His notes are very thorough and he doesn’t beat around the bush about what his thoughts are on each of the subjects which I really like
So I'm a massive atheist and this was, strangely, emotional. I'm still an atheist, but if there is a God, I hope he's a God who limited himself because he loves.
Sadly God seen as the ticket to the easy good life in Heaven Are we no better than any ordinary prostitute/Gigolo/leech who praise the Rich Guy sky-high hoping for a bone?
I think if you’re a piece of the puzzle then you’ll be perfect as far as you fit in. As far as the nature of God ; it’s irrelevant in this plane of life but on the other side what I gather is it exceeds your expectations but maintains the characteristic trajectory
Judging by ‘His’ works - for example countless bazillions of incidences of totally, utterly meaningless pain & suffering - personally I’m opting for a 100% malicious-but-only-85%- effective God….
Maybe 95-65 for me. I've always wondered why people only posit a god who is good. Why couldn't god be partially or even fully evil? Anyway, I like your comment.
Listening to Beethoven's music, especially the later more difficult and profound works, make me think there is a higher form of consciousness to which we all potentially belong. I am an atheist and don't think the concept of God, whether traditional or alternative, is very meaningful, since it exists as an intellectual abstraction. It is limited by our language and our mental capacity, Yes, we can talk about certain things that religion/God have traditionally seen as important, such as love, compassion etc. but we cannot theorise them as philosophers and theologians do, we can only experience them, sometimes just glimpse them or intuit their existence and their meaning. Music and art seem to me the ways through which such experiences are channelled (and of course music of all kinds can accomplish this, not just 'serious' music such as Beethoven's)
That is what sets us apart from animals - art, music Most animals focus on the 4 S's - Safety, Sleep, Sex & Sustenance - most of the day is spent hunting for food - they don't/can't think much beyond the above And that is what Heaven offers - the easy living - the basic 4 S's God can provide Fools don't understand that the Heaven is being reborn as Animals As a Dog they get free food, shelter, protection and care - zero work, zero responsibilities or worries - Heaven!
@@danbaron2561 That’s fine. I’m not a believer, and am not asking you to postulate anything. I’m just saying that utilitarian approach to what we should be thinking about isn’t how human beings work, and that the specific thought experiment you posed had glaring and obvious holes in it
“Vedanta” might be good add to this conversation. It is a “non dualism”, so sort of a monism. The “non-dual” part is that while non-material (spiritual) is the ultimate reality, the material world that comes out of it is also real for so long as it exists. Then it dissolves back into the “spirit”. The physical world evolved to intelligent, conscious beings. That which makes them conscious is the same entity that the universe is born out of and it dissolves into. Our consciousness is us. We don’t possess consciousness, we ARE consciousness. Timeless, infinite, consciousness. The fundamental identity of each of us, consciousness, is the “same as” the fundament of the universe. “Same as”, aka “non dual”.
@@hatebreeder999 I can see why you’d say so- the POV is not moored to any known philosophy or science. However, I’d encourage you to listen to and reflect on the teachings of Vedanta. To me, it comes across as a legitimate pedagogy, anchored in true insight. The Vedanta folk are clear on this teaching being a knowledge, and not an experience. Experience, produced, by “indreeyan”, which include the five senses, the mind, reflexes, and our intuitions, is seen as a source of illusion. I believe a psyc experience belongs in this category, and will be looked at askance by these practitioners.
@@PaulHoward108 ... I struggle to ascribe authenticity to advait vs. bhedabheda Vedanta, since the former is focused on “ultimate reality”, the latter emphasized the world as it exists. I think there are as many distinct philosophies as there are philosophers. To me, advait encompasses bhedabhed, and therefore is preferable. I am sure you see some distinct value in bhedabhed. In the end, these are road maps, and we find our own way. Let fools argue which map is better. That which takes you home the best, is the best map.
@@hershchat Advaita theory is not Vedānta at all and does not accurately describe the ultimate reality. The purāṇas say it is based on deception to promote the decline of knowledge in Kali-yuga, so it won't take anyone home. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the natural commentary on the Vedānta-sūtras (subsequently composed by the same author with specific references to its topics), and it specifically disqualifies the advaita followers: SB 10.2.32: [Someone may say that aside from devotees, who always seek shelter at the Lord's lotus feet, there are those who are not devotees but who have accepted different processes for attaining salvation. What happens to them? In answer to this question, Lord Brahmā and the other demigods said:] O lotus-eyed Lord, although nondevotees who accept severe austerities and penances to achieve the highest position may think themselves liberated, their intelligence is impure. They fall down from their position of imagined superiority because they have no regard for Your lotus feet. Www.vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/2
That is a good point. The argument can be made that if God could communicate, He (She, It) would - but He doesn't, so He can't - therefore, He does not exist.
Aside from the topic discussed in the video, the notion of considering all possibilities and choosing (one, I suppose) is so classic, in the literal sense of classical logic... and classical logic is just the wrong one to deal with a fundamental (omni-)potency.
An evolving, thinking God? For God to be able to change or choose, He has to have a less-than-perfect option. Even the mere consideration would imply fallibility.
16:50 "So you make a cold calculating, rational choice to be an emotional and concerned being because its so much better to be an emotional concerned being than to be a cold rational chooser." A nice quote at the end, but of course too black&white. Or at least for finite individuals, as Erich Fromm might say you EXPRESS your love for whole by choosing to care deeply about a small portion of the world, so the "sin" isn't about loving selectively, but more if we select who we love only on the basis of what's in it for us.
I have a friend who just lost his wife after 2 decades of debilitating MS, and ~4 years of cancer, and she was diagnosed with MS just a few years after they got married. A "cold rational chooser" might say "This isn't what I agreed on when I got married" and divorce to find someone to love who was less of a burden. But after you've committed, the pain to the conscience would not allow changing course, and the reward for sticking with his wife was a chance to daily need to give more than he was getting back, and he could learn about that side of himself, how much he had to give, and how to do that in a way that his needs were also met. Of course, it could have gone differently, and his wife also had her family support potentially, so if she had seen suffering in her husband, that he was unhappy, she could have told him it was okay for him to break his marriage vows and that she's be cared for. Maybe she did say that at times to him, to make sure he WANTED to be with her. I can see how hard it would be for her, if she thought her disabilities were a burden to him. And maybe those fears gave her more courage, to not give in to her despair and self-pity, and know her staying strong and looking at the upside each day was something she could do for him, something she might not have done for herself. It's a mystery how we have the capacity to rise above our circumstances, whatever they are.
@@aresmars2003 My wife was diagnosed with MS 1978, three months before we were married. She died in December of 2018. The last 20 years of her life she spent in a special nursing home where she had a ventilator, stomach feeding tube, and bladder catheter. The nursing home was 60 miles from my house, and for the first 10 years she was there, I visited her every day of the year. None of us asked to exist, and we all will die. We should do what we think is right while we are here, otherwise we exist for nothing. How many people are there who simply try to distract themselves with trivialities until they drop dead? Such people are good for no one, not even themselves, although most of them never realize it. (I think there is no God. I think when we die we cease to exist forever. But, I hope I am wrong. Either way, I think those who live only for themselves, are emotionally defective.)
@@danbaron2561 You know all of this intimately. I have found myself judgemental about 3 married friends (and even as parents), divorcing out of no where in the last 2 decades, because they were unhappy and something finally pushed them over the edge. And 5 of 6 people remarried and happily it seems for much longer than first marriage. I saw some blame-games, but it also taught me some humility to judge from the outside. But you're right, perhaps the biggest reason for divorce is if one person is simple emotionally absent, unable to be open, although probably that is the history of many of the men in my ancestry, provider first and that's the only duty, and delegate emotions to the wife. And now women will divorce men who think they can stop with that one role.
@@aresmars2003 Here is the involuntary way almost all people feel (I guess me included), and it is kind of pitiful - "Preserve my body - keep it alive - let it cross oceans - long may it thrive!" 😊
@@danbaron2561 My other vanity is as a runner, but seeing older runners running all crooked so you can see the end is near for their graceful days, and wonder how that happens. Now I see in my 50s, everything tightens up with age, and unequally, A compensating for B compensating for C compensating for A again, unless you pay attention and the symptoms are all there to feel, and face them down, rather than just saying "this is aging." But I see with busy lives why so many people corrupt their bodies first through neglect, even athletes. I can see my fate if I don't do better.
If you're going to define God in a way which has little to do with what the word "God" has traditionally meant, what are you accomplishing? The word "soul" has had a traditional meaning assigned to it. If I redefine soul to mean the imprint my body makes when I lay down in the snow, I'm just creating confusion in language.
God is ultimately and perfectly humble. Their love is free flowing. The God who evolves is our evolution of our understanding of God as week seek God. God was never a nasty bastard. He has always been seeing as a friend of the poor, not the powerful. God came to us in a vision quest as the Christ and suffered the abandonment to even his own self, thus taking the Father to the loneliness of the human heart.
So basically he described Christianity without calling it Christianity? First he says the old testament is full of bad things. Then he makes a case for a COLD God who does things that are maximally good. When he's asked good for WHOM? He casually explain that good doesn't exclude painful... That a good choice could harm some, but given a certain set of conditions it's a sacrifice god should make. And then he talks about this other God who is one and yet plural, and who knows cares a lot about love. Sounds familiar. I mean I know a god who limited his own power just like he described. Came down on earth and told everyone to love their neighbours...
I like the story he told about Aladdin, which I hadn't thought about before, which leads to his point that one of the most 'powerful' things we can do is limit ourselves for the benefit of others. I've long thought that the only God that makes sense is a God that evolves as a consequence of humanity. After all, God has no meaning or purpose outside the human psyche. In fact, God doesn't become manifest outside the human psyche. Now, it's possible that there are other highly intelligent entities elsewhere in the Universe who have their own concept of God. Remember what Xenophanes said, that if animals had Gods they would have the same morphology of the respective animal. So, in some ways Peter Forrest is describing such a God who evolves along with humanity's subjective morality. Karen Armstrong, in her book, The History of God, literally tells the story of the monotheistic God (the Abrahamic God) as a God who evolves according to whoever is telling the story. I've always tended to agree with Ludwig Feuerbach that God is an external projection of the human psyche. If God is a consequence of humanity rather than the other way round, then we get the God we deserve. I keep a blog called Journeyman Philosopher, where I discuss many things on the philosophical spectrum, in a similar way that you do.
Yep meanwhile the victim is twice-raped! If you made a mess, repentance is fine, but you must make amends, that is the important part Like making a New Years Resolution - that is great, but the follow-thru is what is important And no Judge has the right to forgive Only the victim has that right God is not going to help you twice rape the victim, take away the victim's rights
@@ramaraksha01 Jesus said by their fruits you shall know them. And the devil just keeps raping and taking people's lives. That's the part of scripture to still be fulfilled when he is cast into the lake of fire and the new heaven and the new Earth is created new. Revelation 21.
@@ramaraksha01 but yet who's the one that actually knows the intense of their hearts? It's jesus. I sure don't know and you don't know the intent of my heart but he does and all that matters is what's between me and him and then what's between him and the other person. Cuz he even said if your brother sins against you seven times to forgive him seven times.
@@ChuckBrowntheClown You use God to preach division and hate - all the while talking about love & using Jesus to push conversions There are good people ALL over the world, from ALL walks of life! Why are you blind to that? Working for your religion to push conversions, "only my God can do this or that" - all you are doing is working for religion, not God! And religion is not the only factor that defines us - Jews were defined by their religion by the Nazis When you use their language, you are no better than a Nazi or a Racist You are in an accident, hit and run by a drunk racist Christian, you & your family is lying down on the road, bleeding to death, crying in pain! An Atheist stops by to help you, saves your lives You don't need Jesus to be a good person, let your heart guide you Are you then saying since this Atheist is not Christian, he gets hell & the drunk Christian who almost caused you to lose your family will get heaven? So then, how can you talk morals or ethics?
@@ChuckBrowntheClown You view God as your ticket to the good life - He will take you away from here, put you up in Heaven & you live the good life! Much as Prostitutes/Gigolos/leeches do down here, praising their Rich Sugar Daddies, boosting their ego and living the good life sponging off them! None of you ask why? Why are you just sitting about doing nothing in Heaven? Free food, drinks, a mansion? Nothing to do? What is this all about? Why would God have billions of people just sitting about/snoring away, an idle, useless, pointless existence for eternity? AND NONE OF YOU ASK - WHAT ABOUT MY FAMILY DOWN ON EARTH? While I am having a good time, they could be starving/sick/homeless! Children dropping out of school, daughter running away from rapists! YOU DON'T CARE! NONE OF YOU DO! AND THESE ARE THE CALLOUS, UNFEELING PEOPLE GOD IS GOING TO REWARD?
I suggest that a good starting point in the process of visualizing God is to realize that we each carry around - right within our own skulls - a literal representation of what God is. In other words, the human mind (along with its accompanying "agent") is the "embryonic" (seed-like) replication of the mind of God, wherein each human is imbued with the potential that will allow us to create a universe out of the fabric of our very own being (just as God has done).
Meanwhile a Doctor/Front line worker is spending 16-18 hours a day tending to the sick, risking getting sick and dying from Covid19. They have no time to think of even themselves, their own comforts - forget about God is God not with these good folks?
Anything that changes is impermanent. If god changes, god is impermanent. But the claim is made that god is eternal. If god is eternal then god is permanent. If god can change, god is impermanent and therefore not eternal. It's basic logic.
@@thedudegrowsfood284 If people's belief in god is beyond human logic, then anyone can postulate anything. They could claim that god is a little green man on the far side of the moon who controls the universe. That belief is a valid as any other non-logical idea about a supreme being.
With regard to the infinity of God Dr. William Lane Craig already solved that problem and argues God prior to creation was infinite and post creation is now temporal. With regard to plurality of Gods I suggest you read the work of Dr. Michael Heiser. When the OT is understood in proper Jewish language and culture you will see there now exists a Divine Counsel and a plurality of gods like in Greek Mythology where the God of the Bible takes his stand in their midst. It is almost frightening to know this.
@@thedudegrowsfood284 It is now a plurality of gods where the God of the Bible takes his stand in their midst. Read Dr. Michael Heiser on Divine Counsel Theology.
that's one way to go at a metaphysical ideal. and there are other ways. impermanent. permanent. those are only so if the metaphysics you have in your heart is so and so
Sounds like he's saying that, if there is a God, then that God is a non-caring God because of all the suffering in the world. Which makes me wonder, why can't there be several or many Gods, with some caring and some non-caring? Why be limited to one God? There are still many possibilities when creating a God or Gods in your mind. And the whole idea of creating this God is to explain how existence began?
This world is not a pleasant place for anyone. Everyone has their own destiny, but no matter how favorable one's destiny may be, everyone has to undergo pain and death. Why? Because sooner or later we all must realize that we do not belong here.
God is with the Living. God is not with the Dead - never forget that That would be like looking for God in a cemetery or among Ghosts in dusty, old & creepy abandoned mansions! No Sir, God is with us! God is with us sharing not only in our joys, but our sufferings as well
Maybe the big bang was the birth of " god " not good not bad but evolving conciousness Love is the expression of more complex more subtle and refined expression of creation .in this sense there's no separation In our experience of pain and pleasure we make this distinction
Maybe there was no Big bang, but it seems to me it doesn't matter for your ideas, they can work any way you like because they don't depend on anything that actually exist.
It's not the change of god that is being described but the change of the perception of god. (cf 6 blind men and the elephant). God equates to good as defined by the preference for life. It took a long time for people to awaken to the notion of good, which is love. But the preference for life remains unchanged, any god predates any church or religion. The principle of life (or good) evidently underpins the universe. It operates through ephemeral biological matter so cannot be cast in stone and objectified. As a principle inherent in the universe it can be followed and adhered to. One is then carried along by the flow through time of the principle as a bear floats down a river on his back, safely manoeuvred around obstacles in a way that can appear supernatural. Hence some people perceive an omnipotent god.
The Blind Man And The Elephant It was six men of Indostan, to learning much inclined, who went to see the elephant (Though all of them were blind), that each by observation, might satisfy his mind. The first approached the elephant, and, happening to fall, against his broad and sturdy side, at once began to bawl: "God bless me! but the elephant, is nothing but a wall!" The second feeling of the tusk, cried: "Ho! what have we here, so very round and smooth and sharp? To me tis mighty clear, this wonder of an elephant, is very like a spear!" The third approached the animal, and, happening to take, the squirming trunk within his hands, "I see," quoth he, the elephant is very like a snake!" The fourth reached out his eager hand, and felt about the knee: "What most this wondrous beast is like, is mighty plain," quoth he; "Tis clear enough the elephant is very like a tree." The fifth, who chanced to touch the ear, Said; "E'en the blindest man can tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can, This marvel of an elephant, is very like a fan!" The sixth no sooner had begun, about the beast to grope, than, seizing on the swinging tail, that fell within his scope, "I see," quothe he, "the elephant is very like a rope!" And so these men of Indostan, disputed loud and long, each in his own opinion, exceeding stiff and strong, Though each was partly in the right, and all were in the wrong! So, oft in theologic wars, the disputants, I ween, tread on in utter ignorance, of what each other mean, and prate about the elephant, not one of them has seen! allpoetry.com/The-Blind-Man-And-The-Elephant
God is very much like the screen in a movie theatre. It allows the movie (tragedies and comedies) to play out without influencing the movie, and by the same token the movie has no affect on the screen. The screen does not need the movie to exist, but the same is not true the other way around. Like the screen, without ‘Awareness’, nothing could exist.
The gods always act the way that you need them to act. They always act with all the emotions and failings that make us human. Not very god like at all.
Ancient people living under Kings/Dictators made God using them as their template Amazingly modern, educated people living in the 21st century blindly follow these primitive ideas of God - groveling to long-dead Kings/Dictators! The prospect of an easy living for eternity seems to brainwash even the best of minds
@@ramaraksha01 I agree. It does seem too be the pattern. And thinking that they somehow had a better grasp of reality than we do seems ridiculous. Or should be considered ridiculous by any intelligent mind.
@@thomasridley8675 What I find frightening is the silence from the educated & the media Anytime the media has one of these priests on their show they only ask safe questions that these guys love to answer 1. Will we be happy? 2. Will we see our loved ones again? These questions are asked over and over, year after year, and they already know the answer, what the guy is going to say & has been saying all these years And yet they play this game These guys are pushing a Ponzi-scheme - life is harsh, difficult & so a nice Sugar Daddy/King/Dictator awaits - if you would get down on your knees and grovel to him, assure him of your loyalty, Join "his" religion, he will be pleased & GIVE you the good life! NOT ONE ASKS! God is a Putin? A Stalin? I support him and he will reward me? If I do not he will burn me in hell? And what do I DO in heaven? Nothing? Just sit around, a lazy, idle, useless, point less existence for eternity? They talk of life is being in sin and we see these people shamelessly sponging off God like any Prostitute/Gigolo/leech does mooching off their Rich Sugar Daddies Not doing a lick of work, a lazy existence! "Pure" living indeed! And do they not care anymore about their loved ones down on earth? If the Bread-winner dies, the family could be starving/homeless! AND NOT ONE PERSON EVER ASKS! AND NO ONE POINTS THIS OUT! NOT ONE EDUCATED PERSON! NOT ONE ASKS FOR DETAILS ABOUT THIS "HEAVEN"!
@@thomasridley8675 It's way too easy to figure these out - Guy starts making cheap promises of the good life to be had in magic land in the sky, has no proof People like what he is saying, the easy lazy life sounds wonderful But then pesky guys like us might start asking questions like where is the evidence for such land? How convenient that everything happens after death! And why would any being keep billions of people fed, clothed and kept in comfort like any prostitute/gigolo/leech being kept in comfort by their Rich Sugar Daddies? Of course then they counter with "it will only happen if you believe. This is for believers only" And now they have followers who will believe blindly The story of Abraham willing to kill his own son is an example! If you were to meet someone on the street brandishing a knife and saying he is going to kill and rape because God told him to, you would call the cops who would probably shoot him down and everyone would cheer But in religion we have the exact opposite! People cheering the murderer! And not any ordinary people! Professors! Read "The knowledge Illusion" by Sloman & Fernbach - these guys are Professors! Teaching young minds! Praising Abraham for his willingness to blindly obey! Anyway now that the religious guy has willing followers ready to kill, rape it is just a matter of numbers - once they had enough numbers, start with abuse and discrimination - "They hate you because you are with us" - "All those who do not believe as we do will end up in hell" And then the killing will start So many innocents murdered this way And they have killed their way to the top! Media, the educated, the philosopher & the moral willing to turn a blind eye to these preachers of hate
The only 'alternative views' on God I accept is the Pandeistic/Monistic ones as proposed by 'Conversation with God' (written by Neale Donald Walsh) and 'Ethics' (written by Spinoza). Theism is the *Old Way* and should be abandoned😉
If you get the chance, look up Vedanta, perhaps the videos by Tadatmananda. The @intro to Vedanta” series might be good. It is a “non dualism”, so sort of a monism. The “non-dual” part is that while non-material (spiritual) is the ultimate reality, the material world that comes out of it is also real for so long as it exists. Then it dissolves back into the “spirit”. The physical world evolved to intelligent, conscious beings. That which makes them conscious is the same entity that the universe is born out of and it dissolves into. Our consciousness is us. We don’t possess consciousness, we ARE consciousness. Timeless, infinite, consciousness. The fundamental identity of each of us, consciousness, is the “same as” the fundament of the universe. “Same as”, aka “non dual”. The timeless, infinite, conscious entity is the divinity to which it all owes creation, existence, and dissolution. It engenders all the intelligence needed to create all possible universes, makes possible all possibilities, and supports all existence. ... I exceed my brief. Check it out- Tadatmananda, on UA-cams.
@Ahmad Shamil Interesting: his philosophy evolved over the years and this could be an earlier conviction he had. Even if that remained his view on the matter, it doesn't change the fact that if God is Infinite, God and all (not: _'some')_ Substance are still one and the same [thing]. And Spinoza still regarded God to be an Absolute and Infinite being (logically, he was right about that).
Ancient people living under Kings/Dictators made God using them as their Template - think Putin, Mao, Stalin - such men naturally demanded obedience and loyalty(belief) and rewarded accordingly Who you are as a person does not matter - "works are not enough" - unless you profess loyalty to the King/Dictator you could not stay in his Kingdom "We must get down on our knees, swear loyalty & obedience to the master, obey and serve only this master(a slave may serve only one master - hence the One God & the insistence that only their God is the True one), beg for his mercy, pleased, he will reward(Heaven) us" That is the slave mentality being blindly followed even today by the best of minds! Amazing, just amazing! To make sure you remain a slave, they insist that you do not question their ideas, hence the "heresy" But of course they can question all OTHER religions, mock them, put them down, rape, kill & abuse them but their own? Oh my God we must be respectful!
Stalin was kinda OK, he was only a brutal criminal, too primitive to grasp any sort of spiritualism. That actually saved soviet empire, religious, drunk animal would be indistinguishable from Hitler.
It makes light of the Nicene Creed, believing in the “One God, the Father Almighty” etc. I don’t think that is what the Christians or Muslims had in mind. They certainly gave no indication that they had such an open mind as to allow you to believe in any God you fancied. In fact to claim such would had ensured an appointment with the mendicant Franciscan friars, a session of torture and a long period of imprisonment and even burning at the stake if you didn’t abjure. I’m afraid a loving God was non-existent. People lived ‘In fear of the Lord’. God is wrathful and, even today the fear of eternal torture in Hell scares some into maintaining belief. It’s quite shameful.
Agree, there is much wisdom in the Veda, especially in Vedanta, that is routinely overlook in this channel. When he does talk to an India, it is with the new age kinds (Dipak Chopra), or with India scientists or doctors, who have no claim to Vedic education. It is like me suggesting that a Canadian auto mechanic should be able to explain the roads in London, “because white men drive in London”.
God creating life from the get-go is loving. Cuz loving my wife is how we've gotten children. So love creates life is merciful and graceful and just. Jesus Christ who is God is unchanging he holds to his word and some of his words are still to be fulfilled. Free Will choice to believe it or not to believe the determinenation of his word.
Not sure. There are three other reasons for creation that need to be ruled out: creation for enjoyment; for selfishness; and for curiosity. For example, people create more animals (zoo animals) but not out of love, but out of enjoying the beings for show. Some people (narcissists) create others (children) out of selfish desires. And some people (creatives/artists, scientists) could conceivably create intelligent creatures (perhaps general AI, or extinct creatures) out of sheer curiosity but not love. The point is that creation itself by an intelligent being isn’t evidence that what motivates it is love.
@@ChrisPhilos did that narcissist want that child or not? Creating them different animals more than likely is a selfish desire. Satan, Lucifer said about exalting his throne above God's. A selfish desire to rule over all. Instead of a desire for all. And what is wrong with enjoyment? If enjoyment brings joy and happiness, not just enjoyment for self but enjoyment for all. And he says he'd rather that one not perish. In creating an artificial intelligence how is something artificial supposed to love? I know I don't like fake things I like real things and I like real truth.
@@ChrisPhilos how do you know the intents of those people's hearts? How do you know what the motivations were for their creation? And yet the fact that we can do that stuff even proves the fact of God making us in his likeness and image.
Many women get impregnated with frozen seed from sperm bank. Getting pregnant and finding a person to live with are two completely separated things. There are many kinds of love because it's a mixed emotion, none of them last very long, except if people are brainwashed into certain kinds of traditions and community life.
What kind of nonsense these 'inteligent' people are talking about! If there is a God there is a God. We need to find out who He is. Only a revelation will help. But here they create a hypothesis about a simple god using their ideas or they are creating a god to suit their ideas of a god. It's not much different from the gods created by prmitives out of their imaginations using chisel and hammer. How foolish these people are!
The Torah is not nasty, it is just guiding us how to live and is a blueprint for the whole of humanity. People can be awful, for instance the Romans and the Nazis, but that is why we need G-D's guidance at all times. We live in a world of 7.5 billion people and numerous other species and fauna. This is truly remarkable and awesome.
There is a purpose to those nasty stories You hear of an acquaintance that is into torturing animals or "into Kids" but can help you financially - do you give that person a wide berth or do you close your eyes and give him a hug? And so when you hear of a "God" who mass murders people, they want to see what is your reaction. Such a "God" offers Heaven - the easy lazy life forever! And so if you are a person who wants the easy lazy life, then justification will start - those people were pure evil, deserved to be killed! yes sir, even women and little children!
@@ramaraksha01 G-D is infinite love. It is mankind who engage in the nasties. We have free choice and that is part of the deal. Due to dual arrow of time we have free will(in forward time), but our future is deterministic in Backward Time.
@@julianmann6172 Like saying you have free choice to vote or not for the Dictator, but if we don't you get our legs broken! Is that free choice? Talk of free love & at the same time pushing division and hate Pure love comes with no conditions But you people use God to preach hate & division just to promote conversions! If we deny your religious God we get dumped into hell? But you don't care for our Gods - do you see us using such threats? Because we remain TRUE CHILDREN OF GOD! God made ALL of us - we are ALL His children You have lowered yourself down to a slave of religion, that is whom you serve, not God! You people sicken God!
@@ramaraksha01 We do have free choice but you have to remember we must play our part as well. It is not a one way process, we are not automatons. You seem very negative about everything. Just take a closer look at our amazing world. I would not change a thing even if I had the power. If you don't believe me ,take a trip to one of our fellow planets and the harsh conditions faced there. There is beauty everywhere on Earth, it is truly a paradise.
Too many fallacies and idiotic presuppositions in Peter's to list. Yet I have to ask both: Are you really looking for the God, or more realistically looking for a servant who will act as your god when you want it/him/her to.
Very complicated! God sounds an awful lot like people dreamed him/her/it up. I mean if we apply Occam’s razor the simplest explanation is we had a need for mythology in the past that we dont now have.
@@mazolab Myth is just another concept, it doesn't need to arise with time, traditions or culture, Freud discovered people are influenced by childhood, dreams, traumatic experiences...
If you so smart.... create your own universe and become god? But if you depend on provided things on this planet ....u are nut....a speck of dust like everyone else...find the Truth and stick to the Truth.... there can be only one Truth and The Truth doesn't change! In alQuran the are 100 beautiful names of The Almighty God.... Allah is the name of His essence...,one of another name is alHaq (~ The Truth). ( Note: the beautiful names implies that the One with the name is true to His name eg Allah is also alKhaliq - The Creator so true to His name He created everything from nothing. Allah is also alHaq - The Truth - so anything from Him( the perfect scientific knowledge behind the originating, creation, sustainance and the end of nature/universe and the contents of His Books of Revelation) are the true to truth.)
If your Allah can be called anything people can come up with, why not simply say Allah is force of nature, then? There is an objective truth, it's like trying to know the entire universe as a whole from outside and from all possible perspectives inside, at the same time. That doesn't mean your Allah is like that, we call this physical state the reality, it just is, and it doesn't serve any particular purpose.
God only changes because the people who do believe in him realise that he has to change to keep him up to date. The sooner people who stop believing in this fiction the better. I really don’t believe that there is any supernatural power . Until there is any real proof then I shall not change my opinion . Why are people still believing in fairy tales in the 21st Century?
isnt science updating itself every 10 years ? Then why spirituality cant update itself ? isnt obvious to update yourself regarding something you dont know 100% ?
@@francesco5581 The difference is that science is something that can be proved and will continue to update and there is 0% proof about religion apart from some dubious texts written by not particularly literate or knowledgable people centuries ago. We do not know enough to justify anything we believe!
@@brianmusson1827 Science cannot be proven . Just subjective interpretations of observations . Science and Religion are philosophies on both sides of the same COIN. (The old name of Science was the Philosophy of Nature, and when you get a PhD degree in Physics or whatever field of study, it means Doctor of Philosophy.) Both require FAITH. There is nothing absolute in Science. Medicine, Nutrition, Psychology, Archeology, Paleontology, as well as all other fields of science are ever-changing and constantly open to re-interpretation. What's confirmed as "scientific truth" today can easily be marked as "scientifically disproved" tomorrow. New discoveries can render the information in this post obsolete at any time. Newton vs Einstein time going forward vs time is relative Big Rip vs Big Crunch Vegan is healthy vs non-vegan is healthy fats are healthy vs fats unhealthy coconut oil healthy Superfood vs coconut unhealthy fats ketogenic diet vs less fat diet fasting is unhealthy vs fasting is healthy eat 8 meals a day vs eat 1 meal a day milk is healthy vs milk is unhealthy calcium from milk vs can't absorb calcium from milk egg is healthy vs egg is unhealthy vitamin pills are healthy vs vitamin pills have no benefit TCM Traditional Chinese Medicine (alternative medicine) is not scientific vs TCM is scientifically proven (food supplement boom) asexual reproduction detrimental to a species vs asexual species thriving after many generations . evolution as random mutation vs mimicry evolution . matter is real using 5 senses vs 5 senses not real , matter not real . steady state universe vs Big Bang as beginning Water is dead vs Water is alive . virus is dead vs virus is alive atom as solid vs atom as energy, vibration , frequency carbon dating as accurate vs not accurate dinosaur had reptilian skin vs dinosaur had Avian feathers Neanderthal as separate species vs Neanderthal and humans interspecies, interbreeding.
@@brianmusson1827 science is a method, is not a religion. A lot of scientists are religious/spiritual (52%) and many Nobel prize winners (80%+). So i would keep the two things apart ...if tomorrow science says "hey we found the soul !!" then everyone become spiritual ...then two days later "nope, we were wrong" and everyone become materialist again ? Some things are OUTSIDE science because they deal with philosophical questions . The most materialist of Italian scientists said "Science explain how things work , religion is about why things are here" . Religion is in general not very much based on the old testament (i am pretty sure that 70% of Catholics have never read it, me once and i laughed all the time) but is an inner sense of spirituality that use the path of religion to arrive to a truth you feel inside. But still, maturing, getting older and adding knowledge it's natural that you update yourself.
Misconceptions about Science : In reality, Science has Not Proven anything ... they are all theories only. Common misconceptions about science I: “Scientific proof” Why there is no such thing as a scientific proof. Proofs exist only in mathematics and logic, not in science. The primary criterion and standard of evaluation of scientific theory is evidence, not proof. Proofs are not the currency of science. all scientific knowledge is tentative and provisional, and nothing is final. There is no such thing as final proven knowledge in science. The currently accepted theory of a phenomenon is simply the best explanation for it among all available alternatives. Further, proofs, like pregnancy, are binary; a mathematical proposition is either proven (in which case it becomes a theorem) or not (in which case it remains a conjecture until it is proven). There is nothing in between. A theorem cannot be kind of proven or almost proven. These are the same as unproven. ………………… Misconceptions about the nature and practice of science abound, and are sometimes even held by otherwise respectable practicing scientists themselves. One of the most common misconceptions concerns the so-called “scientific proofs.” Contrary to popular belief, there is no such thing as a scientific proof. by Satoshi Kanazawa - an evolutionary psychologist at LSE
Time, infinity, Mathematically, 0 zero. Everything= nothing. Light=dark. +-=0 God=everything Conscious being from infinity of time for infinity time god. Creator and destroyer. And time.
@@soubhikmukherjee6871 This is all about personal concept. Some time one can feel happy without anything and sometimes same one feel desires of everything. Yes success is not all about having expensive items. I respect humanity equally.
Heaps of concepts Aristotle Prime Mover Laozi Tao Confucius Tian or Heaven Plato The Good Supreme Being; Almighty Power, Allah, The Tao that can be described is not the Tao; no single absolute concept of God God is all, everything, all inclusive. You say God is immoral or amoral is definitely wrong
"Alternative Concepts of God" or You can make up any shit you want. And Peter Forrest is very good at making shit up. Somehow when listening to him I started to feel genuinely sorry for him. He seems to really need this ridiculous fantasy. It feels unhealthy.
Since my wife's long struggle with cancer and her eventual passing I have been painfully struggling with my once unquestionable faith. This man gives me hope. This man has articulated what I have been arguing with myself over. Is God really all good and if so, why.......why.....this man (or thru God) has sparked new arguments for my mortal brain to wrestle with. God changes through His own development, from a cold to a warm, loving God. Could this be God bringing Himself to earth in Human form to feel and experience human love? Jesus?
Better stick with science and take good care for your own health, many illnesses can be prevented with better understanding of biology, chemistry and physics, but not all.
@@xspotbox4400 you don't have to choose between God and science. It's like choosing between left and right eyes
@@cvsree Not true, if we trust scientific model and work with scientific community, we don't need notion of any God and church of man.
The same religion that says if we don't love him back, convert to "his" religion, he will go Hitler on us - set us apart just like the Nazis set apart ALL Jews - ALL Hindus, Atheists, Buddhists etc will be dumped into gas chambers in hell to burn forever?
That one?
Why is Christ placed at the top of the hierarchy of the human race and value? Was Christ more loving, more forgiving, more self sacrificing than Buddha? Did Christ have more wisdom, did he meet death more painfully and with more humbleness than Socrates? Was Christ more empathetic and charitable, than Epictetus? Did Christ’s philosophy have greater impact on history and were his thoughts and words more transformative in bringing joy and happiness than Epicurus? Did Christ demonstrate greater love and sacrifice for humanity than Zoroaster? Was Jesus gentler than Lao-tsze and teach a universal message of love, hope and peace more universal than the teachings of Confucius? Was the sermon on the mount and the proclamation to love your neighbour including your enemies more fundamental to the ideas of human rights and duties superior to those of Zeno? Did the eucastrophe of Christs death and resurrection express greater truths than Cicero? Truths that bring a fleeting glimpse of Joy, Joy beyond the walls of the world poignant as grief. ?
Was the mind of Christ subtle and more humble than Spinoza’s? Were Newton, Dostoyevsky, Descartes, Soren Kierkegaard, Kant, Spinoza, Aquinas, George Lemaitre, Augustine, Kepler, Michelle Besso and John Henslow convinced that Christ was the embodiment of truth. ? Was his creativity, in the power and beauty of expression, in breadth and scope of influence, in wealth of words, explanation, in knowledge of and genuine concern for the human mind and heart, of all romances, suffering, hopes and fears, the equal of Shakespeare, Dickens and Miguel de Cervantes. Was Christ the greatest of the human race?
The answer is yes he was which is why 2000 yrs later the greatest minds are still debating the significance of the historical Yeshua (Jesus Christ).
❤️
I had the distinct pleasure of having Dr Forrest for one of my courses at UNE when I was an undergrad. I can't say I've ever been more excited about attending anyone's lectures. I was deeply saddened when he took an early retirement and left, because I was planning to do at least two more courses for which he was the coordinator. Apparently the university's administration had circulated a redundancy notice to him, which is astonishing given his talent and the fact that he was the only Professor in the already impoverished philosophy department. I really wish he had stuck around at least a couple more years until I graduated.
Having said all that, this video really does not reflect his true analytical prowess. I was always asking him difficult questions in class, but he would always think through the problem and come up with a solution on the spot. Even though my position was almost always contrary to his, he would always seriously consider my arguments, which I greatly admired.
Everything he says here seems highly speculative and not the kind of stuff I would typically consider to be "philosophy" (even though I realize that in the early days of philosophy speculation was a big part of the game).
Man i have never seen a man more humble yet excellent with his questions. You the man MR Kuhn
Peter wrote the notes for the metaphysics unit I’m currently doing and taught the coordinator running it! His notes are very thorough and he doesn’t beat around the bush about what his thoughts are on each of the subjects which I really like
Congrats 👏
I become so happy to see Robert because he's also so desperate to become a theist as I want to. So there is man who's like me.
So I'm a massive atheist and this was, strangely, emotional. I'm still an atheist, but if there is a God, I hope he's a God who limited himself because he loves.
Sadly God seen as the ticket to the easy good life in Heaven
Are we no better than any ordinary prostitute/Gigolo/leech who praise the Rich Guy sky-high hoping for a bone?
I think if you’re a piece of the puzzle then you’ll be perfect as far as you fit in. As far as the nature of God ; it’s irrelevant in this plane of life but on the other side what I gather is it exceeds your expectations but maintains the characteristic trajectory
Judging by ‘His’ works - for example countless bazillions of incidences of totally, utterly meaningless pain & suffering - personally I’m opting for a 100% malicious-but-only-85%- effective God….
Maybe 95-65 for me. I've always wondered why people only posit a god who is good. Why couldn't god be partially or even fully evil? Anyway, I like your comment.
I’m getting closer to it
God is infinity consolidated into a thought our finite minds can understand. How do we consolidate infinity you ask? Thru personification.
Listening to Beethoven's music, especially the later more difficult and profound works, make me think there is a higher form of consciousness to which we all potentially belong. I am an atheist and don't think the concept of God, whether traditional or alternative, is very meaningful, since it exists as an intellectual abstraction. It is limited by our language and our mental capacity, Yes, we can talk about certain things that religion/God have traditionally seen as important, such as love, compassion etc. but we cannot theorise them as philosophers and theologians do, we can only experience them, sometimes just glimpse them or intuit their existence and their meaning. Music and art seem to me the ways through which such experiences are channelled (and of course music of all kinds can accomplish this, not just 'serious' music such as Beethoven's)
That is what sets us apart from animals - art, music
Most animals focus on the 4 S's - Safety, Sleep, Sex & Sustenance - most of the day is spent hunting for food - they don't/can't think much beyond the above
And that is what Heaven offers - the easy living - the basic 4 S's God can provide
Fools don't understand that the Heaven is being reborn as Animals
As a Dog they get free food, shelter, protection and care - zero work, zero responsibilities or worries - Heaven!
It's pointless to ponder about what God might be without having a solid proof of his existence.
It’s pointless to ponder a lot of questions. Most human beings aren’t utilitarian thinkers
Yes, like postulating the attributes of Santa Claus.
@@danbaron2561 That’s fine. I’m not a believer, and am not asking you to postulate anything. I’m just saying that utilitarian approach to what we should be thinking about isn’t how human beings work, and that the specific thought experiment you posed had glaring and obvious holes in it
@@joegibbskins I replied to the original comment, not to you.
@@danbaron2561 that makes more sense. Sorry for getting snippy
“Vedanta” might be good add to this conversation. It is a “non dualism”, so sort of a monism. The “non-dual” part is that while non-material (spiritual) is the ultimate reality, the material world that comes out of it is also real for so long as it exists. Then it dissolves back into the “spirit”. The physical world evolved to intelligent, conscious beings. That which makes them conscious is the same entity that the universe is born out of and it dissolves into.
Our consciousness is us. We don’t possess consciousness, we ARE consciousness. Timeless, infinite, consciousness.
The fundamental identity of each of us, consciousness, is the “same as” the fundament of the universe. “Same as”, aka “non dual”.
Your comment describes psychedelic experience well specially on LSD
@@hatebreeder999 I can see why you’d say so- the POV is not moored to any known philosophy or science.
However, I’d encourage you to listen to and reflect on the teachings of Vedanta. To me, it comes across as a legitimate pedagogy, anchored in true insight.
The Vedanta folk are clear on this teaching being a knowledge, and not an experience. Experience, produced, by “indreeyan”, which include the five senses, the mind, reflexes, and our intuitions, is seen as a source of illusion. I believe a psyc experience belongs in this category, and will be looked at askance by these practitioners.
Vedānta is more than nondualism. A better understanding is bhedābheda, oneness and difference.
@@PaulHoward108 ... I struggle to ascribe authenticity to advait vs. bhedabheda Vedanta, since the former is focused on “ultimate reality”, the latter emphasized the world as it exists. I think there are as many distinct philosophies as there are philosophers. To me, advait encompasses bhedabhed, and therefore is preferable. I am sure you see some distinct value in bhedabhed.
In the end, these are road maps, and we find our own way. Let fools argue which map is better. That which takes you home the best, is the best map.
@@hershchat Advaita theory is not Vedānta at all and does not accurately describe the ultimate reality. The purāṇas say it is based on deception to promote the decline of knowledge in Kali-yuga, so it won't take anyone home. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the natural commentary on the Vedānta-sūtras (subsequently composed by the same author with specific references to its topics), and it specifically disqualifies the advaita followers:
SB 10.2.32: [Someone may say that aside from devotees, who always seek shelter at the Lord's lotus feet, there are those who are not devotees but who have accepted different processes for attaining salvation. What happens to them? In answer to this question, Lord Brahmā and the other demigods said:] O lotus-eyed Lord, although nondevotees who accept severe austerities and penances to achieve the highest position may think themselves liberated, their intelligence is impure. They fall down from their position of imagined superiority because they have no regard for Your lotus feet.
Www.vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/2
It would be nice to have a god who knows how to COMMUNICATE.
Maybe God exists and doesn’t want to talk to us. Do you want to have a conversation with the bacteria in your gut?
@@joegibbskins at least i try not to hurt them 🤭😂😎
And keep them happy ☺️
Because they cause lots of problems if they not🤣🤣🤣
@@panosvrionis8548 I don't think they appreciate much when you take antibiotics, that pretty much kill them... even the good ones 😅
@@panosvrionis8548 lol
That is a good point. The argument can be made that if God could communicate, He (She, It) would - but He doesn't, so He can't - therefore, He does not exist.
Aside from the topic discussed in the video, the notion of considering all possibilities and choosing (one, I suppose) is so classic, in the literal sense of classical logic... and classical logic is just the wrong one to deal with a fundamental (omni-)potency.
An evolving, thinking God? For God to be able to change or choose, He has to have a less-than-perfect option. Even the mere consideration would imply fallibility.
16:50 "So you make a cold calculating, rational choice to be an emotional and concerned being because its so much better to be an emotional concerned being than to be a cold rational chooser."
A nice quote at the end, but of course too black&white. Or at least for finite individuals, as Erich Fromm might say you EXPRESS your love for whole by choosing to care deeply about a small portion of the world, so the "sin" isn't about loving selectively, but more if we select who we love only on the basis of what's in it for us.
I have a friend who just lost his wife after 2 decades of debilitating MS, and ~4 years of cancer, and she was diagnosed with MS just a few years after they got married.
A "cold rational chooser" might say "This isn't what I agreed on when I got married" and divorce to find someone to love who was less of a burden. But after you've committed, the pain to the conscience would not allow changing course, and the reward for sticking with his wife was a chance to daily need to give more than he was getting back, and he could learn about that side of himself, how much he had to give, and how to do that in a way that his needs were also met.
Of course, it could have gone differently, and his wife also had her family support potentially, so if she had seen suffering in her husband, that he was unhappy, she could have told him it was okay for him to break his marriage vows and that she's be cared for. Maybe she did say that at times to him, to make sure he WANTED to be with her. I can see how hard it would be for her, if she thought her disabilities were a burden to him. And maybe those fears gave her more courage, to not give in to her despair and self-pity, and know her staying strong and looking at the upside each day was something she could do for him, something she might not have done for herself. It's a mystery how we have the capacity to rise above our circumstances, whatever they are.
@@aresmars2003 My wife was diagnosed with MS 1978, three months before we were married. She died in December of 2018. The last 20 years of her life she spent in a special nursing home where she had a ventilator, stomach feeding tube, and bladder catheter. The nursing home was 60 miles from my house, and for the first 10 years she was there, I visited her every day of the year. None of us asked to exist, and we all will die. We should do what we think is right while we are here, otherwise we exist for nothing. How many people are there who simply try to distract themselves with trivialities until they drop dead? Such people are good for no one, not even themselves, although most of them never realize it. (I think there is no God. I think when we die we cease to exist forever. But, I hope I am wrong. Either way, I think those who live only for themselves, are emotionally defective.)
@@danbaron2561 You know all of this intimately. I have found myself judgemental about 3 married friends (and even as parents), divorcing out of no where in the last 2 decades, because they were unhappy and something finally pushed them over the edge. And 5 of 6 people remarried and happily it seems for much longer than first marriage. I saw some blame-games, but it also taught me some humility to judge from the outside.
But you're right, perhaps the biggest reason for divorce is if one person is simple emotionally absent, unable to be open, although probably that is the history of many of the men in my ancestry, provider first and that's the only duty, and delegate emotions to the wife. And now women will divorce men who think they can stop with that one role.
@@aresmars2003 Here is the involuntary way almost all people feel (I guess me included), and it is kind of pitiful - "Preserve my body - keep it alive - let it cross oceans - long may it thrive!" 😊
@@danbaron2561 My other vanity is as a runner, but seeing older runners running all crooked so you can see the end is near for their graceful days, and wonder how that happens. Now I see in my 50s, everything tightens up with age, and unequally, A compensating for B compensating for C compensating for A again, unless you pay attention and the symptoms are all there to feel, and face them down, rather than just saying "this is aging." But I see with busy lives why so many people corrupt their bodies first through neglect, even athletes. I can see my fate if I don't do better.
Look into the philosophy of Spinoza
If you're going to define God in a way which has little to do with what the word "God" has traditionally meant, what are you accomplishing? The word "soul" has had a traditional meaning assigned to it. If I redefine soul to mean the imprint my body makes when I lay down in the snow, I'm just creating confusion in language.
very interesting..
God is ultimately and perfectly humble. Their love is free flowing. The God who evolves is our evolution of our understanding of God as week seek God. God was never a nasty bastard. He has always been seeing as a friend of the poor, not the powerful. God came to us in a vision quest as the Christ and suffered the abandonment to even his own self, thus taking the Father to the loneliness of the human heart.
So basically he described Christianity without calling it Christianity?
First he says the old testament is full of bad things. Then he makes a case for a COLD God who does things that are maximally good. When he's asked good for WHOM? He casually explain that good doesn't exclude painful... That a good choice could harm some, but given a certain set of conditions it's a sacrifice god should make.
And then he talks about this other God who is one and yet plural, and who knows cares a lot about love. Sounds familiar.
I mean I know a god who limited his own power just like he described. Came down on earth and told everyone to love their neighbours...
So the devil is the part of god that is not in line with the loving god?
I like the story he told about Aladdin, which I hadn't thought about before, which leads to his point that one of the most 'powerful' things we can do is limit ourselves for the benefit of others. I've long thought that the only God that makes sense is a God that evolves as a consequence of humanity. After all, God has no meaning or purpose outside the human psyche. In fact, God doesn't become manifest outside the human psyche.
Now, it's possible that there are other highly intelligent entities elsewhere in the Universe who have their own concept of God. Remember what Xenophanes said, that if animals had Gods they would have the same morphology of the respective animal. So, in some ways Peter Forrest is describing such a God who evolves along with humanity's subjective morality.
Karen Armstrong, in her book, The History of God, literally tells the story of the monotheistic God (the Abrahamic God) as a God who evolves according to whoever is telling the story. I've always tended to agree with Ludwig Feuerbach that God is an external projection of the human psyche. If God is a consequence of humanity rather than the other way round, then we get the God we deserve.
I keep a blog called Journeyman Philosopher, where I discuss many things on the philosophical spectrum, in a similar way that you do.
BOOM!!!
Perfect yet merciful and graceful and faithful and just. Therefore he is unchanging. He has always forgiven people who have repented.
Yep meanwhile the victim is twice-raped!
If you made a mess, repentance is fine, but you must make amends, that is the important part
Like making a New Years Resolution - that is great, but the follow-thru is what is important
And no Judge has the right to forgive
Only the victim has that right
God is not going to help you twice rape the victim, take away the victim's rights
@@ramaraksha01 Jesus said by their fruits you shall know them. And the devil just keeps raping and taking people's lives. That's the part of scripture to still be fulfilled when he is cast into the lake of fire and the new heaven and the new Earth is created new. Revelation 21.
@@ramaraksha01 but yet who's the one that actually knows the intense of their hearts? It's jesus. I sure don't know and you don't know the intent of my heart but he does and all that matters is what's between me and him and then what's between him and the other person. Cuz he even said if your brother sins against you seven times to forgive him seven times.
@@ChuckBrowntheClown You use God to preach division and hate - all the while talking about love & using Jesus to push conversions
There are good people ALL over the world, from ALL walks of life! Why are you blind to that?
Working for your religion to push conversions, "only my God can do this or that" - all you are doing is working for religion, not God!
And religion is not the only factor that defines us - Jews were defined by their religion by the Nazis
When you use their language, you are no better than a Nazi or a Racist
You are in an accident, hit and run by a drunk racist Christian, you & your family is lying down on the road, bleeding to death, crying in pain!
An Atheist stops by to help you, saves your lives
You don't need Jesus to be a good person, let your heart guide you
Are you then saying since this Atheist is not Christian, he gets hell & the drunk Christian who almost caused you to lose your family will get heaven?
So then, how can you talk morals or ethics?
@@ChuckBrowntheClown You view God as your ticket to the good life - He will take you away from here, put you up in Heaven & you live the good life!
Much as Prostitutes/Gigolos/leeches do down here, praising their Rich Sugar Daddies, boosting their ego and living the good life sponging off them!
None of you ask why? Why are you just sitting about doing nothing in Heaven? Free food, drinks, a mansion? Nothing to do? What is this all about?
Why would God have billions of people just sitting about/snoring away, an idle, useless, pointless existence for eternity?
AND NONE OF YOU ASK - WHAT ABOUT MY FAMILY DOWN ON EARTH?
While I am having a good time, they could be starving/sick/homeless!
Children dropping out of school, daughter running away from rapists!
YOU DON'T CARE! NONE OF YOU DO!
AND THESE ARE THE CALLOUS, UNFEELING PEOPLE GOD IS GOING TO REWARD?
I suggest that a good starting point in the process of visualizing God is to realize that we each carry around - right within our own skulls - a literal representation of what God is. In other words, the human mind (along with its accompanying "agent") is the "embryonic" (seed-like) replication of the mind of God, wherein each human is imbued with the potential that will allow us to create a universe out of the fabric of our very own being (just as God has done).
God is what you want her to be. As long as you are honestly seeking.
Meanwhile a Doctor/Front line worker is spending 16-18 hours a day tending to the sick, risking getting sick and dying from Covid19. They have no time to think of even themselves, their own comforts - forget about God
is God not with these good folks?
@@ramaraksha01 yes God is within them and giving them the strength
Anything that changes is impermanent. If god changes, god is impermanent. But the claim is made that god is eternal. If god is eternal then god is permanent. If god can change, god is impermanent and therefore not eternal. It's basic logic.
Perhaps basic logic is beneath a deity (or deities)
@@thedudegrowsfood284 If people's belief in god is beyond human logic, then anyone can postulate anything. They could claim that god is a little green man on the far side of the moon who controls the universe. That belief is a valid as any other non-logical idea about a supreme being.
With regard to the infinity of God Dr. William Lane Craig already solved that problem and argues God prior to creation was infinite and post creation is now temporal.
With regard to plurality of Gods I suggest you read the work of Dr. Michael Heiser. When the OT is understood in proper Jewish language and culture you will see there now exists a Divine Counsel and a plurality of gods like in Greek Mythology where the God of the Bible takes his stand in their midst. It is almost frightening to know this.
@@thedudegrowsfood284 It is now a plurality of gods where the God of the Bible takes his stand in their midst. Read Dr. Michael Heiser on Divine Counsel Theology.
that's one way to go at a metaphysical ideal. and there are other ways.
impermanent. permanent.
those are only so if the metaphysics you have in your heart is so and so
Sounds like he's saying that, if there is a God, then that God is a non-caring God because of all the suffering in the world. Which makes me wonder, why can't there be several or many Gods, with some caring and some non-caring? Why be limited to one God? There are still many possibilities when creating a God or Gods in your mind. And the whole idea of creating this God is to explain how existence began?
This world is not a pleasant place for anyone. Everyone has their own destiny, but no matter how favorable one's destiny may be, everyone has to undergo pain and death. Why? Because sooner or later we all must realize that we do not belong here.
@@mazolab No, Buddhists want to lose their individuality and merge in a vacuum. That's another illusion.
God is with the Living. God is not with the Dead - never forget that
That would be like looking for God in a cemetery or among Ghosts in dusty, old & creepy abandoned mansions! No Sir, God is with us! God is with us sharing not only in our joys, but our sufferings as well
There is only ONE Creator and ONE Creation where all created minds, Servant with a Voice and all our life experiences are contained in.
U made this video before about 32 times..
To help realise the gap between us and god try to understand god has no beginning and no end.really think that over.
Maybe the big bang was the birth of " god " not good not bad but evolving conciousness
Love is the expression of more complex more subtle and refined expression of creation .in this sense there's no separation
In our experience of pain and pleasure we make this distinction
Maybe there was no Big bang, but it seems to me it doesn't matter for your ideas, they can work any way you like because they don't depend on anything that actually exist.
@@xspotbox4400 yea right , just like your comment doesn't exit you don't exist
@@kenzen3564 Everything is the same for you, it seems, your world must be very small and simple.
Do you think that, some individual, forces god’s, to do something ?
It's not the change of god that is being described but the change of the perception of god. (cf 6 blind men and the elephant). God equates to good as defined by the preference for life. It took a long time for people to awaken to the notion of good, which is love. But the preference for life remains unchanged, any god predates any church or religion. The principle of life (or good) evidently underpins the universe. It operates through ephemeral biological matter so cannot be cast in stone and objectified. As a principle inherent in the universe it can be followed and adhered to. One is then carried along by the flow through time of the principle as a bear floats down a river on his back, safely manoeuvred around obstacles in a way that can appear supernatural. Hence some people perceive an omnipotent god.
The Blind Man And The Elephant
It was six men of Indostan, to learning much inclined,
who went to see the elephant (Though all of them were blind),
that each by observation, might satisfy his mind.
The first approached the elephant, and, happening to fall,
against his broad and sturdy side, at once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the elephant, is nothing but a wall!"
The second feeling of the tusk, cried: "Ho! what have we here,
so very round and smooth and sharp? To me tis mighty clear,
this wonder of an elephant, is very like a spear!"
The third approached the animal, and, happening to take,
the squirming trunk within his hands, "I see," quoth he,
the elephant is very like a snake!"
The fourth reached out his eager hand, and felt about the knee:
"What most this wondrous beast is like, is mighty plain," quoth he;
"Tis clear enough the elephant is very like a tree."
The fifth, who chanced to touch the ear, Said; "E'en the blindest man
can tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an elephant, is very like a fan!"
The sixth no sooner had begun, about the beast to grope,
than, seizing on the swinging tail, that fell within his scope,
"I see," quothe he, "the elephant is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan, disputed loud and long,
each in his own opinion, exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right, and all were in the wrong!
So, oft in theologic wars, the disputants, I ween,
tread on in utter ignorance, of what each other mean,
and prate about the elephant, not one of them has seen!
allpoetry.com/The-Blind-Man-And-The-Elephant
God is very much like the screen in a movie theatre. It allows the movie (tragedies and comedies) to play out without influencing the movie, and by the same token the movie has no affect on the screen. The screen does not need the movie to exist, but the same is not true the other way around. Like the screen, without ‘Awareness’, nothing could exist.
You hit Bull's eye
The gods always act the way that you need them to act.
They always act with all the emotions and
failings that make
us human.
Not very god like at all.
Ancient people living under Kings/Dictators made God using them as their template
Amazingly modern, educated people living in the 21st century blindly follow these primitive ideas of God - groveling to long-dead Kings/Dictators!
The prospect of an easy living for eternity seems to brainwash even the best of minds
@@ramaraksha01
I agree. It does seem too be the pattern. And thinking that they somehow had a better grasp of reality than we do seems ridiculous. Or should be considered ridiculous by any intelligent mind.
@@thomasridley8675 What I find frightening is the silence from the educated & the media
Anytime the media has one of these priests on their show they only ask safe questions that these guys love to answer
1. Will we be happy?
2. Will we see our loved ones again?
These questions are asked over and over, year after year, and they already know the answer, what the guy is going to say & has been saying all these years
And yet they play this game
These guys are pushing a Ponzi-scheme - life is harsh, difficult & so a nice Sugar Daddy/King/Dictator awaits - if you would get down on your knees and grovel to him, assure him of your loyalty, Join "his" religion, he will be pleased & GIVE you the good life!
NOT ONE ASKS! God is a Putin? A Stalin? I support him and he will reward me? If I do not he will burn me in hell?
And what do I DO in heaven? Nothing?
Just sit around, a lazy, idle, useless, point less existence for eternity?
They talk of life is being in sin and we see these people shamelessly sponging off God like any Prostitute/Gigolo/leech does mooching off their Rich Sugar Daddies
Not doing a lick of work, a lazy existence!
"Pure" living indeed!
And do they not care anymore about their loved ones down on earth? If the Bread-winner dies, the family could be starving/homeless!
AND NOT ONE PERSON EVER ASKS!
AND NO ONE POINTS THIS OUT!
NOT ONE EDUCATED PERSON!
NOT ONE ASKS FOR DETAILS ABOUT THIS "HEAVEN"!
@@ramaraksha01
I have too agree.
A free pass to bend reality into whatever shape they need isn't news. Its propaganda.
@@thomasridley8675 It's way too easy to figure these out - Guy starts making cheap promises of the good life to be had in magic land in the sky, has no proof
People like what he is saying, the easy lazy life sounds wonderful
But then pesky guys like us might start asking questions like where is the evidence for such land? How convenient that everything happens after death!
And why would any being keep billions of people fed, clothed and kept in comfort like any prostitute/gigolo/leech being kept in comfort by their Rich Sugar Daddies?
Of course then they counter with "it will only happen if you believe. This is for believers only" And now they have followers who will believe blindly
The story of Abraham willing to kill his own son is an example! If you were to meet someone on the street brandishing a knife and saying he is going to kill and rape because God told him to, you would call the cops who would probably shoot him down and everyone would cheer
But in religion we have the exact opposite! People cheering the murderer!
And not any ordinary people! Professors!
Read "The knowledge Illusion" by Sloman & Fernbach - these guys are Professors!
Teaching young minds! Praising Abraham for his willingness to blindly obey!
Anyway now that the religious guy has willing followers ready to kill, rape it is just a matter of numbers - once they had enough numbers, start with abuse and discrimination - "They hate you because you are with us" - "All those who do not believe as we do will end up in hell" And then the killing will start
So many innocents murdered this way
And they have killed their way to the top!
Media, the educated, the philosopher & the moral willing to turn a blind eye to these preachers of hate
The only 'alternative views' on God I accept is the Pandeistic/Monistic ones as proposed by 'Conversation with God' (written by Neale Donald Walsh) and 'Ethics' (written by Spinoza).
Theism is the *Old Way* and should be abandoned😉
If you get the chance, look up Vedanta, perhaps the videos by Tadatmananda. The @intro to Vedanta” series might be good. It is a “non dualism”, so sort of a monism. The “non-dual” part is that while non-material (spiritual) is the ultimate reality, the material world that comes out of it is also real for so long as it exists. Then it dissolves back into the “spirit”. The physical world evolved to intelligent, conscious beings. That which makes them conscious is the same entity that the universe is born out of and it dissolves into.
Our consciousness is us. We don’t possess consciousness, we ARE consciousness. Timeless, infinite, consciousness.
The fundamental identity of each of us, consciousness, is the “same as” the fundament of the universe. “Same as”, aka “non dual”.
The timeless, infinite, conscious entity is the divinity to which it all owes creation, existence, and dissolution. It engenders all the intelligence needed to create all possible universes, makes possible all possibilities, and supports all existence.
... I exceed my brief. Check it out- Tadatmananda, on UA-cams.
@@hershchat Thank you, any non-dualistic philosophy is welcome :-)
@Ahmad Shamil Interesting: his philosophy evolved over the years and this could be an earlier conviction he had. Even if that remained his view on the matter, it doesn't change the fact that if God is Infinite, God and all (not: _'some')_ Substance are still one and the same [thing].
And Spinoza still regarded God to be an Absolute and Infinite being (logically, he was right about that).
Humans criticizing god is like a vacuum cleaner criticizing humans.
I like this.
Denies the Trinity whereby God is eternally loving. God never becomes loving.
Our idea about God is what keeps God away. For iwithout God we lived before God.
its obvious that everything is willed together. matter and time r perfect
Not sure if you understand the definition of perfect, because objective reality is not perfect. Clearly.
All ours ideas of God ,if His is there, is all wrong. All the religion in the world is man made.
Ancient people living under Kings/Dictators made God using them as their Template - think Putin, Mao, Stalin - such men naturally demanded obedience and loyalty(belief) and rewarded accordingly
Who you are as a person does not matter - "works are not enough" - unless you profess loyalty to the King/Dictator you could not stay in his Kingdom
"We must get down on our knees, swear loyalty & obedience to the master, obey and serve only this master(a slave may serve only one master - hence the One God & the insistence that only their God is the True one), beg for his mercy, pleased, he will reward(Heaven) us"
That is the slave mentality being blindly followed even today by the best of minds!
Amazing, just amazing!
To make sure you remain a slave, they insist that you do not question their ideas, hence the "heresy"
But of course they can question all OTHER religions, mock them, put them down, rape, kill & abuse them but their own? Oh my God we must be respectful!
Stalin was kinda OK, he was only a brutal criminal, too primitive to grasp any sort of spiritualism. That actually saved soviet empire, religious, drunk animal would be indistinguishable from Hitler.
What is the cheapest ideology to sell in the current state of world? Ans: Materialism.
there are two actually
a western ontology of materialism
an eastern ontology of (all is mind/self)
It makes light of the Nicene Creed, believing in the “One God, the Father Almighty” etc.
I don’t think that is what the Christians or Muslims had in mind. They certainly gave no indication that they had such an open mind as to allow you to believe in any God you fancied. In fact to claim such would had ensured an appointment with the mendicant Franciscan friars, a session of torture and a long period of imprisonment and even burning at the stake if you didn’t abjure. I’m afraid a loving God was non-existent. People lived ‘In fear of the Lord’. God is wrathful and, even today the fear of eternal torture in Hell scares some into maintaining belief. It’s quite shameful.
try the Vedic. the answers lie there.
Agree, there is much wisdom in the Veda, especially in Vedanta, that is routinely overlook in this channel. When he does talk to an India, it is with the new age kinds (Dipak Chopra), or with India scientists or doctors, who have no claim to Vedic education. It is like me suggesting that a Canadian auto mechanic should be able to explain the roads in London, “because white men drive in London”.
This title perhaps should have been “Less Wrong Concepts of God”.
Good
Alternative concepts to God? Well the first thing to consider is Clark's Third Law.
this dialog for me as a Muslim I find it very primitive, it seems they know nothing about who is the true God.
Exactly, it's weird you think you do.
lol
4:15 - sounds like the general artificial intelligence everyone is so afraid of.
So many leaps. These idea coming from " a good place" doesn't add any validity to the non-arguments that were offered here.
God creating life from the get-go is loving. Cuz loving my wife is how we've gotten children. So love creates life is merciful and graceful and just. Jesus Christ who is God is unchanging he holds to his word and some of his words are still to be fulfilled. Free Will choice to believe it or not to believe the determinenation of his word.
Not sure. There are three other reasons for creation that need to be ruled out: creation for enjoyment; for selfishness; and for curiosity.
For example, people create more animals (zoo animals) but not out of love, but out of enjoying the beings for show. Some people (narcissists) create others (children) out of selfish desires. And some people (creatives/artists, scientists) could conceivably create intelligent creatures (perhaps general AI, or extinct creatures) out of sheer curiosity but not love. The point is that creation itself by an intelligent being isn’t evidence that what motivates it is love.
@@ChrisPhilos did that narcissist want that child or not? Creating them different animals more than likely is a selfish desire. Satan, Lucifer said about exalting his throne above God's. A selfish desire to rule over all. Instead of a desire for all. And what is wrong with enjoyment? If enjoyment brings joy and happiness, not just enjoyment for self but enjoyment for all. And he says he'd rather that one not perish. In creating an artificial intelligence how is something artificial supposed to love? I know I don't like fake things I like real things and I like real truth.
@@ChrisPhilos how do you know the intents of those people's hearts? How do you know what the motivations were for their creation? And yet the fact that we can do that stuff even proves the fact of God making us in his likeness and image.
Many women get impregnated with frozen seed from sperm bank. Getting pregnant and finding a person to live with are two completely separated things. There are many kinds of love because it's a mixed emotion, none of them last very long, except if people are brainwashed into certain kinds of traditions and community life.
@@xspotbox4400 so you have love for nothing? You don't even love yourself?
Me too
He doesn't like the Old Testament? He's doing the same as those authors... making shit up.
If God’s became dishonest, then he will be able , to create peaceful environments for himself,
What is that accent?
Could this hypothetical god have the ability to become intoxicated? Go home, god - you're drunk.
Dionysus has it covered. He also is bisexual, enjoying penetrating and being penetrated.
What kind of nonsense these 'inteligent' people are talking about!
If there is a God there is a God.
We need to find out who He is.
Only a revelation will help.
But here they create a hypothesis about a simple god using their ideas or they are creating a god to suit their ideas of a god. It's not much different from the gods created by prmitives out of their imaginations using chisel and hammer.
How foolish these people are!
You will not able to teaching wolf,s to love others
“The Old Testament is a nasty book” well that’s kind of the point. People are awful.
The Torah is not nasty, it is just guiding us how to live and is a blueprint for the whole of humanity. People can be awful, for instance the Romans and the Nazis, but that is why we need G-D's guidance at all times. We live in a world of 7.5 billion people and numerous other species and fauna. This is truly remarkable and awesome.
There is a purpose to those nasty stories
You hear of an acquaintance that is into torturing animals or "into Kids" but can help you financially - do you give that person a wide berth or do you close your eyes and give him a hug?
And so when you hear of a "God" who mass murders people, they want to see what is your reaction. Such a "God" offers Heaven - the easy lazy life forever!
And so if you are a person who wants the easy lazy life, then justification will start - those people were pure evil, deserved to be killed! yes sir, even women and little children!
@@ramaraksha01 G-D is infinite love. It is mankind who engage in the nasties. We have free choice and that is part of the deal. Due to dual arrow of time we have free will(in forward time), but our future is deterministic in Backward Time.
@@julianmann6172 Like saying you have free choice to vote or not for the Dictator, but if we don't you get our legs broken!
Is that free choice?
Talk of free love & at the same time pushing division and hate
Pure love comes with no conditions
But you people use God to preach hate & division just to promote conversions!
If we deny your religious God we get dumped into hell?
But you don't care for our Gods - do you see us using such threats?
Because we remain TRUE CHILDREN OF GOD! God made ALL of us - we are ALL His children
You have lowered yourself down to a slave of religion, that is whom you serve, not God!
You people sicken God!
@@ramaraksha01 We do have free choice but you have to remember we must play our part as well. It is not a one way process, we are not automatons. You seem very negative about everything. Just take a closer look at our amazing world. I would not change a thing even if I had the power. If you don't believe me ,take a trip to one of our fellow planets and the harsh conditions faced there. There is beauty everywhere on Earth, it is truly a paradise.
Too many fallacies and idiotic presuppositions in Peter's to list. Yet I have to ask both: Are you really looking for the God, or more realistically looking for a servant who will act as your god when you want it/him/her to.
Very complicated! God sounds an awful lot like people dreamed him/her/it up. I mean if we apply Occam’s razor the simplest explanation is we had a need for mythology in the past that we dont now have.
Most people still need it, in order to not give up.
@@mazolab Jung was wrong, can't start by saying every concept is a myth and never define what is a myth.
@@mazolab Myth is just another concept, it doesn't need to arise with time, traditions or culture, Freud discovered people are influenced by childhood, dreams, traumatic experiences...
If you so smart.... create your own universe and become god? But if you depend on provided things on this planet ....u are nut....a speck of dust like everyone else...find the Truth and stick to the Truth.... there can be only one Truth and The Truth doesn't change!
In alQuran the are 100 beautiful names of The Almighty God.... Allah is the name of His essence...,one of another name is alHaq (~ The Truth).
( Note: the beautiful names implies that the One with the name is true to His name eg Allah is also alKhaliq - The Creator so true to His name He created everything from nothing. Allah is also alHaq - The Truth - so anything from Him( the perfect scientific knowledge behind the originating, creation, sustainance and the end of nature/universe and the contents of His Books of Revelation) are the true to truth.)
If your Allah can be called anything people can come up with, why not simply say Allah is force of nature, then?
There is an objective truth, it's like trying to know the entire universe as a whole from outside and from all possible perspectives inside, at the same time. That doesn't mean your Allah is like that, we call this physical state the reality, it just is, and it doesn't serve any particular purpose.
Sorry, a ''changing God'' who would restrict his power to allow sheer evils in the world for his loving sake could ''love'' but in a perverted way!
Peter has God atributes is absurd mind . Peter hasnt consistence proof God . He pedantics mind is obscure God definition.
God only changes because the people who do believe in him realise that he has to change to keep him up to date. The sooner people who stop believing in this fiction the better. I really don’t believe that there is any supernatural power . Until there is any real proof then I shall not change my opinion . Why are people still believing in fairy tales in the 21st Century?
isnt science updating itself every 10 years ? Then why spirituality cant update itself ? isnt obvious to update yourself regarding something you dont know 100% ?
@@francesco5581 The difference is that science is something that can be proved and will continue to update and there is 0% proof about religion apart from some dubious texts written by not particularly literate or knowledgable people centuries ago. We do not know enough to justify anything we believe!
@@brianmusson1827 Science cannot be proven . Just subjective interpretations of observations .
Science and Religion are philosophies on both sides of the same COIN. (The old name of Science was the Philosophy of Nature, and when you get a PhD degree in Physics or whatever field of study, it means Doctor of Philosophy.)
Both require FAITH. There is nothing absolute in Science.
Medicine, Nutrition, Psychology, Archeology, Paleontology, as well as all other fields of science are ever-changing and constantly open to re-interpretation. What's confirmed as "scientific truth" today can easily be marked as "scientifically disproved" tomorrow. New discoveries can render the information in this post obsolete at any time.
Newton vs Einstein
time going forward vs time is relative
Big Rip vs Big Crunch
Vegan is healthy vs non-vegan is healthy
fats are healthy vs fats unhealthy
coconut oil healthy Superfood vs coconut unhealthy fats
ketogenic diet vs less fat diet
fasting is unhealthy vs fasting is healthy
eat 8 meals a day vs eat 1 meal a day
milk is healthy vs milk is unhealthy
calcium from milk vs can't absorb calcium from milk
egg is healthy vs egg is unhealthy
vitamin pills are healthy vs vitamin pills have no benefit
TCM Traditional Chinese Medicine (alternative medicine) is not scientific vs TCM is scientifically proven (food supplement boom)
asexual reproduction detrimental to a species vs asexual species thriving after many generations .
evolution as random mutation vs mimicry evolution .
matter is real using 5 senses vs 5 senses not real , matter not real .
steady state universe vs Big Bang as beginning
Water is dead vs Water is alive .
virus is dead vs virus is alive
atom as solid vs atom as energy, vibration , frequency
carbon dating as accurate vs not accurate
dinosaur had reptilian skin vs dinosaur had Avian feathers
Neanderthal as separate species vs Neanderthal and humans interspecies, interbreeding.
@@brianmusson1827 science is a method, is not a religion. A lot of scientists are religious/spiritual (52%) and many Nobel prize winners (80%+). So i would keep the two things apart ...if tomorrow science says "hey we found the soul !!" then everyone become spiritual ...then two days later "nope, we were wrong" and everyone become materialist again ? Some things are OUTSIDE science because they deal with philosophical questions . The most materialist of Italian scientists said "Science explain how things work , religion is about why things are here" . Religion is in general not very much based on the old testament (i am pretty sure that 70% of Catholics have never read it, me once and i laughed all the time) but is an inner sense of spirituality that use the path of religion to arrive to a truth you feel inside. But still, maturing, getting older and adding knowledge it's natural that you update yourself.
Misconceptions about Science :
In reality, Science has Not Proven anything ... they are all theories only.
Common misconceptions about science I: “Scientific proof”
Why there is no such thing as a scientific proof.
Proofs exist only in mathematics and logic, not in science. The primary criterion and standard of evaluation of scientific theory is evidence, not proof. Proofs are not the currency of science. all scientific knowledge is tentative and provisional, and nothing is final. There is no such thing as final proven knowledge in science. The currently accepted theory of a phenomenon is simply the best explanation for it among all available alternatives. Further, proofs, like pregnancy, are binary; a mathematical proposition is either proven (in which case it becomes a theorem) or not (in which case it remains a conjecture until it is proven). There is nothing in between. A theorem cannot be kind of proven or almost proven. These are the same as unproven.
…………………
Misconceptions about the nature and practice of science abound, and are sometimes even held by otherwise respectable practicing scientists themselves. One of the most common misconceptions concerns the so-called “scientific proofs.” Contrary to popular belief, there is no such thing as a scientific proof.
by Satoshi Kanazawa - an evolutionary psychologist at LSE
Meh, I could come up with a better God than THAT !!
The proof is in the pudding mate.
but there is no puddin only poop mate..look around hard...
@@davidusnazarus1700 someone tell you 'eat this poo', you eat it?
Alternative concepts of Harry Potter, Bhagfoot, Nessie...Submit your Phd theses (feces) Now!
🤭 no comment
Oh goodie...a new version of make believe!
Time, infinity,
Mathematically, 0 zero.
Everything= nothing.
Light=dark.
+-=0
God=everything
Conscious being from infinity of time for infinity time god.
Creator and destroyer.
And time.
What's your thought on pragmatic consumerism?
@@soubhikmukherjee6871
This is all about personal concept.
Some time one can feel happy without anything and sometimes same one feel desires of everything.
Yes success is not all about having expensive items.
I respect humanity equally.
Do you think is time to let them know? They seemed confused.
@@experiencemystique4982 love them to death.
@@soubhikmukherjee6871 I just love them to death...but I don't understand the psychological auto-mutilation they are in.
Heaps of concepts
Aristotle Prime Mover
Laozi Tao
Confucius Tian or Heaven
Plato The Good
Supreme Being; Almighty Power, Allah,
The Tao that can be described is not the Tao; no single absolute concept of God
God is all, everything, all inclusive.
You say God is immoral or amoral is definitely wrong
God is a complete idiot then, this world he created is utter nonsense, and he knows it.
the worst Tao sauce's recipe ever
"Alternative Concepts of God" or You can make up any shit you want.
And Peter Forrest is very good at making shit up.
Somehow when listening to him I started to feel genuinely sorry for him.
He seems to really need this ridiculous fantasy. It feels unhealthy.