"If your beliefs are true, then you have nothing to lose by subjecting them to the harshest scrutiny. If they're false, then you have everything to gain." -- Peter Boghossian
Ramana Maharshi said to trace the source of the "I" feeling. God is not an object to be searched for. He's the subject. You Are That. Tat Tvam Asi, the great saying of the Upanishads. Want to understand more? Look up Nonduality or Advaita Vedanta. Look up Sarvapriyananda on UA-cam and his lecture on the Ashtavakra Gita. The text says you are that supreme being, the one undivided awareness.
1. He is not the original author of this idea, many other people had alredy said that, but thats ok. The bigger problem is, that most people are not willing to really find the truth, they have alredy decided what they want to believe in like Peter Boghossian. He is not ready to give his ideas up, would be to scary and painful. There is no way to find truth with that mindset.
"Now eligible for medicare, I am still wondering". Robert looks so much younger than 76. could not believe it! so happy that he did not choose to retire. what would I do without this channel :P
200.000 are more than just deserved. It should have millions ;)) Look, if it is about making money, you go to Instagram and advertise trash to people that you would never use by your own. MAYBE they do it for the money. You do not create a UA-cam channel exploring deep questions of reality. Nobody could ever pretend such strong interests. I’m just happy that there are people outside, who are interested in the same topics and interview all of these great thinkers and make the content available to everyone. I wonder where all of that negativity comes from. Sad byproduct of Social Media in general. I see it everywhere (no matter what you are doing and how good you are doing) and I wish people could be less jealous and appreciate achievements of others.
There are no masks in these video's. They are being rehashed from old footage. Still good material, but this isn't current. In new ones they're teleconferencing.
@@andreas.9353 I agree, this channel should have millions. And Robert could do way worse things with his money than pursuing his passion, which just happens to be our passion. If this man happens to be rich, he probably deserves it. He is smart, introspective, and probably a hard worker. I am happy for him.
Dude, Greg is probably the most interesting person he’s talked to. At least what he described as “God” is often transcendence through art, science, math, or the physical experience in general. He’s describing our reality itself as God in a way. The real mind-fuck happens when you realize that essentially means you thinking about existing is the universe itself, God, thinking about itself. Nature itself is God to me in that sense. Everything is just an instance of all possibilities in the universe.
Why can't Kuhn see that atheism is a belief system it's self. He lost his argument with Greg hear and with Elils end Tipler. If he truly wants to get closer to truth he needs to know he does have a religious orientation and it's atheism . There are those who blind because they refuse to see .
@@rayvillers2688 Hmm… well I think a lot of people MAKE it into a religion of sorts. One example of this is people revolting against religion if they previously were a part of a religion. Atheism itself is more just about lacking theism. Atheism can be much looser in “dogma” than most think, but it becomes something else for many people simply because it’s seen to be something in opposition to religions.
Science if honest must allow for the possibility of God. Religion if fair has to permit that there may not be a God. Humankind if rational and forward-thinking must grant that science and God could co-exist.
@-GinPi Gamma he is atheist do you know atheism is legal in the hypocrite hinduism religion which called the charbak which is a materialism in hindu style like science do oh wow those idol worshipers trying to be homosexual to science
@-GinPi Gamma or you are hindu atheist and listen dont try to be very smart than us are you thinking you those idol worshipers trying to be homosexual to science im not showing the ignorance against science im showing ignorance against your behaviour to be very scientific than us 😂😂😂😂 and listen I think you trying to say god did not created the universe but science did not deny god science deny the supernatural acts of god not that god and many scientists try to denial on god do you know many scientists saying that the vaccum energy or the zero energy created the universe and many scientists think this is god however I have no problem and I have three faiths the agnosticism the religion and the pantheism
@-GinPi Gamma I dont care of your lecture to be very homosexual to science im not ignoring science im ignoring the homosexuality of science like atheism you are trying to deny god
how is god hope ? god is an excuse, something to blame when things go wrong. god is not hope, god is an unproven concept originating 2000 years ago to explain things when science couldn't. We don't have that issue any more.
I would love if you said where the first shots in the presentation were made. I didn't see it in the description. Perhaps it is noted in the library of episodes?
I loved this episode as it seemed to resonate perfectly with what I believe at this time of my life. I am amazed at how mathematics has helped us to discover and predict so much about the workings of our universe. I am so impressed with Greg! He moved me so much with his humility and his appreciation of the transcendence of the cosmos in which he sees God. He seemed to me to have a relationship with God. We are on a journey of discovery ….
Science can talk anything but the problem I see with a quantifiable explanation for God is the term itself. God has become such a loaded term that any discussion about the concept comes packed with a lifetime worth of ones own personal baggage. It's not possible to check this baggage at the gate so the first thing we need to do is make sure that all of our luggage matches. And this leads to one of the hardest parts about this conversation, that being the fact that we all have idiosyncratic definitions of God, that is if ones even willing to entertain a definition. I would have called myself an atheist for most of my life but thinking back I was actually agnostic about the question. I had always put my faith in mainstream science which had brought me to a pretty strict materialist view of the world. It wasn't until 2020 that I sincerely started to question my spiritual nature and I was only able to attain satisfactory answers to these profound questions once I strayed outside of the narrow establishment alley where science and religion sit. There is a way to peruse the concept of God outside of academic science and mainstream religion. If there is a God I don't believe he's a humanoid watching over Earth. It seems more likely to me that God is a creational force that embodies a conciousness beyond anything that we can comprehend and I see no reason why this conflicts with our best scientific understanding. Although it would negate the major religions which may be a net positive for society. I've found that some of the eastern spiritual philosophies have interesting things to say about all of this and Bhuddism in particular seems to get a lot right.
@zempath If there is some kind of intentional force responsible for creation than why would I be glad to not have a precise definition of it? What a silly question.
@zempath I am saying "I don't know". Did you even read my comment? We would have a definition of God if God existed? That doesn't make any sense. Why would you assume that we would automatically and necessarily be able to define the creator if one existed? You obviously aren't reading what I wrote and it seems like you may not be reading what you're writing either.
@zempath I apologize if I misread your comment. I assumed that you were just trying to mess with me and I may not have understood the context of what you were saying. My bad.
@zempath Life, just like quantum physics, is possibilities . No wonder Gods are also possibilities. To me, the problem is not that I dont know - the problem is that others tell me they know and if I dont believe them I am evil or lost and will go to Hell. In other words, I like science (investigation), but I dislike manipulation in order to achieve power.
I’ll explain how I’m getting somewhere with this.. our consciousness is tied to our individual genetic code, if the universe bangs again either internal or in a cycle, the next one all humans could be say, sheep... or maybe you get yours again in a billion or so cycles with would seem like a zeto second for you. I’m looking for this answer to be liked by someone else lol
When we seek the truth we are vulnerable to self-delusion. The best we can do is acknowledge that we will never reach any "truth" and contemplate the mystery and it's myriad of possible explanations.
Usually when these arguments rage there is an alternative which frees us from these binaries. Another factor which frees us is to realize that though historians draw boundaries between human chapters like Dark Ages, Enlightenment etc. But religion pre-existed science but still shared the curiosity of human thought. Religions flourish today as "science" fact beliefs for some but for many religion exists from tradition, moral systems, social systems and even theocratic nations**. Human brain is still very complex and we don't even fully understand language or as someone call consciousness and the hard problem. Deep questions like human pre-exustence, posr-existence etc. Still lay deep in the science of the human brain IF they exist.. **The beauty of God is that many can say God yet apply it to a variety of categories. Theism vs Atheism is an annoying bifurcation in the world but perhaps it is the grain of sand in the oyster which yields the pearls.
Surely the "beauty " in all - Thru- Art - and the hidden meaning of our real purposes in our life ought to be unified with the physic laws in diverse domain but entangled anyway.
I pretty much agree with you. We see "through a faded glass." However I think someday our consciousness will become certain ( although it may happen in another existence in the afterlife ).
Reality is not two there can be no primacy. "Awareness is known by awareness alone," (Bret Netherton) is the sole irreducible axiom of reality. There is no such thing as a "corollary axiom," Ayn Rands contention.
@zempath No there are No wemon if you follow God. Lucifer on the other hand. The bringer of truth, light and love. He Will give you a universe where you almost can do as you please. Were every type of wemon you can think of is there for you. All you have to do, is reject God. And No, God Will not destroy Lucifer in the final battle. That is religous propaganda.
God needs His Spirit children and Spirit children(souls) need the Father (God). It's all part of the reason why the physical Universe (including humans) was Created.
God speaks science. Science exists because of God. God created all things studied by scientists, and things that are a result of creation too. God is all wise and gave mankind the capacity for wisdom and a desire to learn, explore with curiosity.
Science has basically two parts, universal/real/existential and second is known / to be known /not required to be known. So God is universal science not required to be known it is just for feeling /and realize as per our capacity of preparation. Our brains are not designed to comprehend/withstand infinite .
Most Science is a great source of Information and most Religion is a scam. You need God's Word to direct you towards Wisdom. Without Wisdom it is an infinite argument.
Atheism is a maximation of ugliness. Matter and mind shall always remain subservient to Spirit.. (not to be confused with subconscious,) Spirit will lead you to truth, understanding and to life eternal. Visceral ambiguity is only a mask for 'a thirst for righteous and a hunger for truth' take time to wonder about the God within. Imagination at its best.
@bad zombie when a creature denies the existence of his/ her creator, that in itself, is proof that there is a spiritual conspiracy within the mind of the creature to find the creator.
@@johnbrzykcy3076 visceral ambiguity is something the RLK said in the video. How he wants to believe but also wants definitive proof of God's person being real.
My argument is that if god is omniscient and omnipotent, ....etc, god must have the ability to reveal himself to everyone by different forms or ways leaving no uncertainty at all. Unfortunately this is not the case. Subjective experiences of god seem to one as facts at some point of man’s life but faith in such experiences changes over time and one gets back again to the start point looking for more and more evidences... this seems to me as an endless process. If there are other non-physical realms, we have no clue what kinds of rules and laws governing those realms ... we don’t know under which conditions we can access these realms ... we don’t even know all natural laws and rules our physical world. Therefore the problem is very hard. Done!
If anyone was omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent why would it do anything? Why wouldn't it do just what what omni able beings do...none of your damn business.
@@kallianpublico7517 Why? Because God knew conceptually that He was God. But in the never ending expansion He wanted to know what it FELT like to be God. Hence the physical Universe and us ('aliens' also) was Created so that God could accomplish this IN, AS, and THROUGH us. There is only Knowing in God's realm. Physicality is required for experiences and the feelings that that creates. Bless you.
It's a nice thought to think of a god who exists someplace in a supernatural sense: For me, from religious instructions starting at eight years old, I could never really believe in a Divine Being - probably because I've never, in my whole life seen a Divine Being; This doesn't mean to me a Divine Being doesn't exist. If one does it's province would have to be the whole Universe, never of Earth alone . One reason I doubt is that so many religions create dichotomies among people, and it's been happening from the beginning of religious beliefs: In my birth religion the beginning of time. Albeit, in this universe (Multiverse) were finding anything may be possible.
I beieve the universe revolves around the earth and the earth rests on pillars. Based on my inner feelings and the Bible. (1st Samuel 2:8 Chronicles 16:30 Psalm 93:1 Psalm 104:5)
From 2:26: The whole point of the Biblical God is that YES, he does exist outside of physics and the Laws of physics. Exactly like how the designer AND manufacturer both exist outside of the computer they designed and made. From that entire basis is how we get the miracles of not just the Bible, but also any other God given miracle reported on today. This is the whole point. Stopping the earth in its rotation (WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT) considering people have already come back from the dead and nobody believes them?! But regardless, the answer is a resounding YES!! this is the God of the Bible from the very beginning. Either you believe/see, or you do not believe/see. And yes. People representing God are able to slap you in the face or to commit other abuses on your person. Just like how YOU are free to commit abuses. It’s called FREE WILL. So please use common sense, look after yourself AND look after your neighbour.
The bottom line for me comes down to what just above every theists and atheist agree on. Science is about the nature of the universe, and religion is about moral values and self worth. The problem I have with that is that I seriously pity anyone who actually needs religion for moral guidance. That suggests that if they didn't believe there was a God or have religion then they wouldn't be a good person. In other words, anyone who actually needs to believe in a God or have a religion tell them how to behave is already fundamentally a bad person. Moreover, there are many examples of highly moral and decent atheists, thus proving that at least some humans have no need for a God or religion to have good moral values. So in a very real sense the very existence of good atheists prove the needlessness of a God or religion. Therefore religion doesn't really have much use other than perhaps deterring some seriously bad people from showing their true colors. And ironically, those people who think they are good but claim that they wouldn't see any reason to be good if there is no God have just revealed to the world that they actually are aren't good but are apparently just trying to be good to avoid God's wrath. In fact, I'm pretty sure Einstein has already said as much. He said something like, anyone who needs a threat of punishment or promise of reward to be good is in a pretty bad way. I couldn't agree more.
@zempath You're right. It's worse than I thought! Well, not really. I already knew that religions tend to teach ignorant moral values based on religious and cultural bigotry. So most religions don't even have a respectable place in society on any level. I won't say this is true of all of them because there are some decent religions around. Unfortunately the good ones aren't very popular.
What about GODEL, one of the three grater Logicians of all time: A translation of Gödel's proof sketch (in the version of Gödel's student Dana Scott) from formal logic into natural language: • Axiom 1: Either a property or its negation is positive. • Axiom 2: A property that is necessarily implied by a positive property is positive. • Theorem 1: Positive characteristics may be due to an existent entity. • Definition 1: A God-like entity has all the positive features. • Axiom 3: The property of being God-like is positive. • Conclusion: Perhaps God exists. • Axiom 4: Positive characteristics are necessarily positive. • Definition 2: A property is the essence of an entity, if it belongs to the entity and necessarily implies all the properties of the entity. • Theorem 2: To be God-like is the essence of every God-like entity. • Definition 3: An entity exists necessarily if all of its essences are necessarily realized in an existing entity. • Axiom 5: Necessarily existing is a positive property. • Theorem 3: God must necessarily exist.
There are some gaps in this "proof": how does Theorem 1 follow form Axioms 1 and 2? Once the gaps are closed, the proof shows that if we accept Axioms 1,2,3,4 and 5, and if we accept the modal logic used for the proof, we must also accept that God necessarily exists. It does not show that God necessarily exists.
"The God of the Gaps" is argument by ignorance; a logical fallacy. People once believed that lightning was caused by angry gods. "In all of human history, the supernatural has never turned out to be the right answer to anything: Natural explanations of phenomena have replaced supernatural ones thousands upon thousands of times, while supernatural explanations have replaced natural ones exactly never." -- Greta Christina
The gaps are still here, bub. The call it the quantum. When you take time out to get off your high horse on how smart scientists are, don't forget to thank the ignorance for not knocking you off your perch. Pride goeth before a fall if you believe in all that religious stuff.
With all due respect, the question itself is flawed. If God is, as it is said, limitless, can science measure? And somehow, if science can measure, will that be called God? Sorry sir, you are asking wrong questions and invariably ending up with no answer. Your questions are wrong. Please develop your ability to ask right questions. And someone rightly said "the most uncommon thing in this world is common sense". Further, you say you are not ready to agree that there is God. So, you are starting with assumption that there is no God. Why there can't be no third choice? Do you really think that with yes and no only science was able to evolve upto here? No value for creativity? How do you define creativity? And, finally, answer this: what answer will make you a better person? God or no God?
Isaiah 1:12 speaks to the audit of the courts, the SOUL language of the CORPORATION. Habakkuk 1:12 speaks to this legalist language translated to pure science. This ransom for the ADVERSARY (lawyers) of the public will to self-govern. This redemption of the ENEMY(judges) to the public domain of sovereign SAFETY.
I find it funny when some very religious Christians try to prove some point about God by mentioning parts of the bible. But on a second thought, they are not being silly, but just meticulously following the Christian teaching that all truths about God are to be found in the bible.
@@User-jr7vf it's a valid point however the bible in it's literal context is a fraud and imposter, a predator. It's written in legalist language. Currently you have 3 biblical endings coming. Israel. Ishmael. Christian. All 3 are adhering to biblical text. Their is a 4th.
If God exists, we would know it, intrinsically. Those who claim throughout history to be messengers from God only prove that he doesn't exist. God wouldn't need a messenge by His very definition.
When people start getting dull and dogmatic, too comfortable in their technological or intellectual shell, something comes around to knock them off their high horse. Don't start passing out those congratulations just yet, bub.
God has been with us since the beginning. He's NEVER left us alone. To help us He has ALWAYS sent us Teachers, Messengers, and Prophets - even today (sorry Muhammad).
Science doesn't need to talk god. God is a claim that has no proof and is not necessary to explain the universe. Science makes no claim about a god, that's religions purview, so why would science even have to talk about it
Are you looking for God or a supernatural experience? Direct evidence that there is more than frustrating, mediate logic? An immediate, accessible consciousness of telepathy limited, or unlimited, by one's personal pathos, ethos or logos? Can logic equal love? Once in a while it comes close. Don't let the success of science blind you to its flaws and limits. The "feel good fluff" of good old, reliable science shouldn't distort the nature of the world we live in. Knowledge blinds one to ignorance. Don't let it dismiss mystery and wonder as well.
In ancient time many people believed that the celestial bodies were gods. They made gods from sticks and stones and worshipped them. But the prophets in the Bible told the people that it was not gods, those gods that did not create heaven and earth were not gods. God created it by his Word, so that what is visible is made of what is not visible. This was not so easy to understand and accept at that time, but now we know that this suits to science. God said to his people through his prophets that they can know he is the only right God, because he talks to them, he tells what will happen and it happens and he saves. They killed him, but the true and living God made him alive again, rose him for the dead and set him by his right hand side in heaven. He makes his church alive and does same kind of wonders trough it.
But when science investigates and studies the human mind of a believer with neuroscience asking them questions about their belief they show that a specific part of the brain goes into activity. It doesn't matter which faith or religion, it occurs for all of them in the same part of the brain. You may like to check out the video 'Why We Believe In Gods - Andy Thompson - American Atheists 09' on the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science site.
Sure, the world is remarkable and we are even more remarkable. But God is more remarkable than anything he supposedly created. Remember, the potter is greater than his pots. How can we explain the potter ?
If there is god or the source of creation. What is his link to us his finest creation. I think its more reasonable to believe it is science than religion.
@Ψ It's all about the fundamentals you choose. Make this assumption, set this limit and the stipulated universe makes God very unlikely. Remove all limits, impose no assumptions and God is inevitable. I'm not really making a case either way. The question may never be answered objectively but in our own minds, we'll set limits that make us comfortable.
Think about how you know something, anything. There are only two ways of knowing anything. Observation and education. You can observe the sun, but you have to be educated about God. You cannot observe God. So how does anyone know anything about God, given that he is outside space and time ?
A pauper in the Emperor's new cloths? Or riches in poverty? I think the likelyhood of a "God the Father" is low at the outset. Then i do my survey and find a meditative flash and following visions; i find noncanonical testimony that says "you cannot see the Father but, you can see His light in my face", and i see a coherence of Being that is the ground of Truth; and i see a mountain of colonialism and misogyny i wish would move. The likelyhood goes through the roof if that mountain moves.
Belief and KNOWING are very different. Beliefs can be modified or changed but a knowing is not from the human physical brain. It's a certainty that is found deep within - a soul thing. Ironically, the soul is all knowing. Bless you.
God created science to give to His children something to learn. Everyone believes that science can explain everything so there is no need for God. However, since the Bible states that God is the creator of everything and God created people in His own image wouldn't it be logical that God provide a vast array learning opportunities for His children as well (and this would obviously include sciences as well)?
@@invisiblechurch9621 Most adults who go to church don't even acknowledge that God is 100% REAL. The reality is that everything is way too perfect to be the result of pure chance. Wherever you see organized structure logic dictates that there is intelligence behind that organized structure.
@@invisiblechurch9621 Nope! That's what I KNOW for a fact.... Why it is highly probable that there is a Omnipotent being (Creator) behind everything > > How mathematical balanced the universe is and works according to physical and mathematical laws with extreme precision > The fact that math and physics even exist > The probability of usable protein forming is 1.0E+43 > The probability of DNA forming from protein is 1.0E+243 > Why earth has an ozone layer that works to regulate the earth’s temperature > Why the earth has a moon that pulls on the earth’s water to prevent the oceans' water from becoming stagnant > Why the earth has a magnetic field that protects the earth’s atmosphere from being blown away by solar winds > Why the earth is located at the perfect distance from the sun (Goldilocks zone) > Why the earth and everything around us is designed like a classroom for the main purpose of learning > Why the earth is able to recycle itself and all its resources > Why does air just happen to be invisible? > Why every living organism on the planet is dependent upon the sun for its energy in one way or another > Why the periodic table of elements works in such a way that elements are able to combine together to form compounds necessary for the existence for life > Why E=MC2 is only 5 characters in length but the equation is able to summarizes all the matter and energy in the universe > Why Jupiter is positioned in such a way that Jupiter is able to catch all stray meteorites before they collide with earth > Why the human body consists of over a trillion cells and still manages to function as a single self aware conscious organism / being > Why all the internal and external human body organs just happened to evolve at EXACTLY the same instant rather than some organs evolving ahead or behind others organs > Why the properties of water are such that water expands when water freezes (which allows aquatic life to live in colder temperatures) > Why fish and aquatic animals are able to extract oxygen from the water > Why plants are able to use the CO2 animals breathe out and produce O2 which humans and animals require > Why plants are able to recycle the waste and decomposition of living organisms > Why ice expands instead of shrinking when cooled (which is necessary for the survival ocean and aquatic life > What evolved first, bees or flowering plants? >What humans evolved first males or females? > Why something as simple as a seed cannot be made with all the knowledge that humanity has had in all of human history > Why we just happen to be in a time where the moon and sun are at the perfect distance from the earth where the moon is able to perfectly eclipse the sun during a solar eclipse (the moon is just happens to be 400X smaller than the sun and the sun just happens to be 400X further away) Is everything just an extremely improbable coincidence or is there an intelligent Creator behind everything? Organization at this level of complexity dictates an extremely high level of intelligence....
@-GinPi Gamma Scientifically, God does not exist, but I like to believe in Him anyway. It makes me function better. Science cannot describe everything which may be true. No axiomatic system can capture everything which we may see to be true. Is part of reality non computable?
It’s really quite simple, this universe/multiverse and more importantly the laws of physics that allow them to exist did not come about by themselves so something had to bring them into existence. That is the Creator period. You can believe in God or not but until you can come of with a way for something to come from nothing intelligent design is just as valid as anything else.
Don't you see the huge flaw in your argument? Is your 'creator' not complex? If so, who designed 'him'? If you claim that a complex 'god' without a 'creator' always existed, then you might as well accept that a complex universe without 'creator' always existed. However, there is 100% proof that the universe exists, and zero proof or evidence of a 'god'. (Consider all the religious people who are praying during this pandemic, and does it make any difference? Of course not! It only gives people a false sense of hope.)
@@pierrejoubert681 I never said the Creator was complex. It’s 100% proven that the universe hasn’t existed forever, have you ever heard of the Big Bang? My proposal of intelligent design is based on one thing that no one has a solution to...how did the laws that govern the universe come about? Period. Laws and the universe don’t create themselves. Please don’t make the weak reply “who created the Creator” That misses the entire concept of a Creator.
"Beliefs are an odd thing, because a belief really just represents a cessation of critical thought. It's a deliberate choice to stop investigating something and just 'believe' it." -- Jason Leister
Okay you keep sitting in the current known facts and not improving yourself and not being curious the the mysterious side. Science must turn mystery / believe etc. In understandable facts
Can science talk about God? ua-cam.com/video/o6bxA_mtITI/v-deo.html That depends on how you define 'Science'. If you are talking about what we know from some scientists and not others, then obviously your 'science' is exclusive.
It is a bit like the word 'life'; excluding the one who created 'life' itself.
Your definition of Science and Life must be inclusive. Otherwise, we are on different wavelengths - a bit like talking to the wall.
No. God is all inclusive. Science can only make equations that compare separate entities. But, since God is all inclusive, there's nothing to compare with. So, no God for you 😆
Exactly. Science must abide by logic/reason whereas God not only encompasses the rational but can also encompass everything that is illogical, absurd and mysterious too.
What manifested the laws of nature? Why these laws and not some other kind. So you believe in coincidence then do you. That could be seen as a miracle -- either we all are, or nothing is. Explanation: it just is.
God has given us His mathematical name. God's mathematical name is Infinity = 1/x(change) + 1 Translated His name reads: God's Mind Is Man Changed With God How dose God fit into this equation? Breakdown: God's mind is infinite. In math this measure out as the set of infinity In math (1/x) represents a fraction of a whole. Any child is a fraction of a parent and man according to the Bible is God's child. Therefore, man is a fraction of God. Change in math is represented by the Greek letter (delta) and it denotes a difference of some kind. Plus (+) in math means to combine or add something with something. There is only one God. In math the number 1 means something, or someone is complete and individual from all the rest. Spelled out: God's Mind (Infinity) is (=) Man (1/x) Changed (delta) With (+) God (1). Scientific Method Step 1 Observation: Math can deliver unbreakable truths such as 2+2 will always = 4 Step 2 Question: Do math and Divinity share a common truth? Step 3 Hypothesis: If God exist, He should be found in the house of mathematics. Step 4 Prediction: God's Mind Is Man Change With God is an equation Step 5 Test: Any number (Infinity) is (=) a set-in space (1/x) that change (x^2) with (+) space (1)) Note: "X" describes any set, (1) describes any kind of space physical or otherwise This equation tells us why 2 feet is not the same as 2 inches. Both distances are measured out as 2 units of space but there is a change or difference between both units. They are each sets in a space of distance, but they represent changes in their measurement of distance. Step 6 Iterate: New look at what makes up reality. Reality consists of 3 domains of space. a. Fractured space or matter b. spatial expansion or energy c. Complete or unbroken space/Information Step 7 Conclusion: We now know Infinity is real therefore the value in enumeration demand God exists otherwise the domain for enumeration would be incomplete. We know the domain for enumeration is complete because we can count. God must be able to count too all the way to Infinity because His mathematical name tells us what is any number.
One must define what God is. Humans are so different from everything else we have found so far in the universe. Did it take a God to form us? If so, should we worship Him? Humans have suffered a lot to get to where we are now. Are we made in the image of God? It took a lot to get to where we are now. It was not easy. Remember Hitler. Was he needed? We will never know the mind of God if he is what we think He might be? I don't think so.
God is all that is AND all that isn't.if you wish to understand the necessity of a Hitler than I suggest that you research "Conversations with God" book 1 on UA-cam. If you listen to just 15-20 minutes you will know what to do next. Around the 1 hour mark there is a succinct description of how and why the Universe and us were Created. Of you stick with it it will also give you answers to ANY and ALL questions you may have about ANYTHING. Bless you.
@Pedro Parica Your comment seems to be pretty accurate about The social and psychological phenomenology ... Fortunately, Objective Reality is always independent from our beliefs but on the other and same side, Our beliefs been false and incomplete can affect our relationships with The objective reality, then, obfuscating That Reality from our common senses ... Then, Objective Reality can be totally independent from our beliefs but it has a relationship of interdependence with our beliefs ... Where those beliefs biased Us from perceive with more objective accuracy ... and letting us stuck in our subjectivity and or far fetched beliefs about shared Intersubjective domains mediated by The common environment and Its Zeitgest.
@@firstnamesurname6550 What is your source of this information and who is this particular thinker or is this common knowledge in some area of science or psychology?
@@theworkethic The Sources are diverse, syncretic, multidisciplinar and pretty eclectic from subjective reflections, reading & personal experiences, curiosity, passion and explorations, Partial Academic Studies ( Music, Empresarial Management, Engineering, Psychology & Economy ), and In-Field Profesional Practices ... There is not a Single Recognized Author or a Handful of them that I could quote as my 'Main' influence maybe Grandparents, parents, coaches, friends, teachers, social experiences and human relationships, in general, had been more influential than specific Books or Authors ... Lot of names comes to mind but to make a long list could be a bit pedantic because I will not put my self as an expert with an exhaustive study in each one of them ... and to name just a few would bias the interpreters and not represent the synthesis of information given by the experience ... but yes, With more time, I could find bibliographical references for - practically - most of the paragraphs ... but I presuppose that we are just informally hanging on and sharing 'informal commentaries, 'personal' reflections opinions in an intersubjective web 2.0 cyberspace ... not need for writing with 'academic rigour' and justifying each sentence with a Formal Academic Paper ... Yes, My Father was an Economist/Lawyer, Systems Theory Adept working for The Headquarters of the Energy/Oil Grid at a global scale ... before learning to talk fluently I was exposed to Set Theory, Flux Diagrams, Graph theory, Probabilistic and Statistical Analysis, Computer Simulations, Sociology, History, Down-Top and Top-Down corporate quantitative and qualitative modeling, heuristics, cybernetics, execution, collective self-organization, and practice, etc etc etc and My mother was a Diplomat and Art Curator & Dealer ... It seems that the early exposure to that kind of topics affected 'me' by nonstandard and uncommon early infancy ... letting a hard shadow of cognitive neo-cortical patterns that difficult in myself to think/write 'street smart, simple, commonly, direct, colloquial and easy' ... Paradoxically, I am pretty biased in interpreting the convoluted and obfuscating narrative as something 'simple, direct and easy' ... add to all those handicaps that English is not my native language .... and we get an ideal scenario for a complete linguistic disaster ... :-D
This gentleman adds nothing to the conversation, in my opinion, since he doesn't seem to grasp the primary distinction between observation based science and faith based religion, with the key word being "faith", or, literally, the belief in something that is unseen.
Science deals with data, with matter, with energy. Can science "see" a thought? Can science measure "love"? "I love you to the moon and back" is not exactly a real measurement. Religion and spirituality are concerned with behavior, morality, values and meanings... those are outside of the scientific realm. But what scientist would say, since he can't "measure" his mother's love, that it must not be real, (because there's no scientific evidence for it)? But when it doesn't involve any of his or her family members, then, somehow, all that super-material stuff, isn't real. It cannot be shown to have come from the Big Bang. So science has a blind spot. A really big one. Its theories on how life began are also crap! That's not to say that what the Bible says makes any sense either... The Bible has no business making statements of a scientific nature. Is there a "supernatural God", IMHO yes. Although I disagree about him (her, it, pwog-person without gender), being one to violate his own laws of physics. I do think there are spirit forces that have powers of anti-gravity, or that can speed up time, or bend space. But perhaps that still falls under the category as natural... And for those of us who follow Jesus, he had the power over life and death... including his own. Now, I suppose, that the creator, the uncaused cause, is capable of violating those laws, but I suspect contingencies are already built into the system, whereby there would never be a need to.
The Scientific Method has the final say on which claims about reality are false. Excluding what is provably false leads us nearer to knowing how reality operates (truth).
Rene Descartes was a mathematician who also believed in the perfect and I’m thinking in a similar way. But I’ll clearify that I get the Holy Spirit by faith in Jesus of mere grace. And it reveals Jesus for me and he makes the know the Father. I can compare my faith with the axioms in mathematical analysis, they are simple, like the existence of 0 and 1. But with what is deduced from it, it includes quite a lot. Then I use mathematical logics, “modus ponens”. Similarly my faith in Christ gives me quite a lot, by reading God’s Word and let the Holy Spirit reveal it for me. Like I can deduce something from the axioms in mathematics, I can deduce something from my faith in Christ, but then I also think with my heart and that is different from thinking with the brain. Jesus gave me life and spirit from heaven, the life was planted in my heart by Gods Word and his love was poured into my heart with the Holy Spirit. I believe by my heart, so I know by my heart, I have got wisdom from God in my heart. An important point to me here, is that I continue to use mathematical logics on what is said only by words. We believe something an it gets consequences for us, this I compare to mathematical deduction. We believe that Jesus is perfect and with one offer he has made those perfect who are made holy. His perfectness and holiness gets interned in us with the spirit and live he gives us from heaven.
@-GinPi Gamma God reconciled the world with himself when he let Jesus die on the cross instead of us. On that foundation I let myself reconcile with him, in this way I will get harmony between heart and brain, body and soul. I believe in God and his Word by my heart at the same time as I think mathematics and natural science with my brain. I shall seek Christ and believe in him and love him with all of my heart. That makes me wise in hearth, so that it is fruitful to my brain also.
@-GinPi Gamma I choose to turn to Jesus and bless him, in this way I am blessed. That’s why I become a blessing and so I say to them: May God bless you.
@@invisiblechurch9621 When I refer to Descartes' philosophy its quite clear what I say. Time doesn't change that. It was those who spoke what was written in the Bible that were persecuted, at the same time as the pioneers of modern science were percecuted.
"If your beliefs are true, then you have nothing to lose by subjecting them to the harshest scrutiny. If they're false, then you have everything to gain." -- Peter Boghossian
Ramana Maharshi said to trace the source of the "I" feeling. God is not an object to be searched for. He's the subject. You Are That. Tat Tvam Asi, the great saying of the Upanishads. Want to understand more? Look up Nonduality or Advaita Vedanta. Look up Sarvapriyananda on UA-cam and his lecture on the Ashtavakra Gita. The text says you are that supreme being, the one undivided awareness.
1. He is not the original author of this idea, many other people had alredy said that, but thats ok.
The bigger problem is, that most people are not willing to really find the truth, they have alredy decided what they want to believe in like Peter Boghossian. He is not ready to give his ideas up, would be to scary and painful. There is no way to find truth with that mindset.
Loved Gregg's way of explaining God. Its transcendence from the mess thats life is about. It reiterates our existence in timelessness
This is profound; " I do not alter truth, to get closer to truth." Love it.
"Now eligible for medicare, I am still wondering". Robert looks so much younger than 76. could not believe it!
so happy that he did not choose to retire. what would I do without this channel :P
He can't stop making money after doing it for decades, especially now that his channel has almost 200k subs.
200.000 are more than just deserved. It should have millions ;))
Look, if it is about making money, you go to Instagram and advertise trash to people that you would never use by your own. MAYBE they do it for the money.
You do not create a UA-cam channel exploring deep questions of reality. Nobody could ever pretend such strong interests.
I’m just happy that there are people outside, who are interested in the same topics and interview all of these great thinkers and make the content available to everyone.
I wonder where all of that negativity comes from. Sad byproduct of Social Media in general. I see it everywhere (no matter what you are doing and how good you are doing) and I wish people could be less jealous and appreciate achievements of others.
There are no masks in these video's. They are being rehashed from old footage. Still good material, but this isn't current. In new ones they're teleconferencing.
@@andreas.9353 I agree, this channel should have millions. And Robert could do way worse things with his money than pursuing his passion, which just happens to be our passion. If this man happens to be rich, he probably deserves it. He is smart, introspective, and probably a hard worker. I am happy for him.
I absolutely love Gregory's view on this topic. I feel honesty in his words.
I like Gregory Chaitin! And transcendence! Beauty, along with Truth, and Goodness... very Godly!
Dude, Greg is probably the most interesting person he’s talked to. At least what he described as “God” is often transcendence through art, science, math, or the physical experience in general. He’s describing our reality itself as God in a way. The real mind-fuck happens when you realize that essentially means you thinking about existing is the universe itself, God, thinking about itself. Nature itself is God to me in that sense. Everything is just an instance of all possibilities in the universe.
Why can't Kuhn see that atheism is a belief system it's self. He lost his argument with Greg hear and with Elils end Tipler. If he truly wants to get closer to truth he needs to know he does have a religious orientation and it's atheism . There are those who blind because they refuse to see .
@@rayvillers2688 Hmm… well I think a lot of people MAKE it into a religion of sorts. One example of this is people revolting against religion if they previously were a part of a religion. Atheism itself is more just about lacking theism. Atheism can be much looser in “dogma” than most think, but it becomes something else for many people simply because it’s seen to be something in opposition to religions.
Science if honest must allow for the possibility of God. Religion if fair has to permit that there may not be a God. Humankind if rational and forward-thinking must grant that science and God could co-exist.
God, the Creator, has to be the supernatural being that fine tuned the big bang.
It's so important to seek the truth no matter how uncomfortable it might make you. I love the channel
@-GinPi Gamma Not sure why you would say they are not seeking the truth. I guess everyone has their own definition of what "truth" is.
@-GinPi Gamma he is atheist do you know atheism is legal in the hypocrite hinduism religion which called the charbak which is a materialism in hindu style like science do oh wow those idol worshipers trying to be homosexual to science
@-GinPi Gamma are an pantheist or agnostic or a hindu
@-GinPi Gamma or you are hindu atheist and listen dont try to be very smart than us are you thinking you those idol worshipers trying to be homosexual to science im not showing the ignorance against science im showing ignorance against your behaviour to be very scientific than us 😂😂😂😂 and listen I think you trying to say god did not created the universe but science did not deny god science deny the supernatural acts of god not that god and many scientists try to denial on god do you know many scientists saying that the vaccum energy or the zero energy created the universe and many scientists think this is god however I have no problem and I have three faiths the agnosticism the religion and the pantheism
@-GinPi Gamma I dont care of your lecture to be very homosexual to science im not ignoring science im ignoring the homosexuality of science like atheism you are trying to deny god
God is hope. And if science is nothing more than the pursuit of knowledge, then i say yes. That can invoke hope.
how is god hope ? god is an excuse, something to blame when things go wrong. god is not hope, god is an unproven concept originating 2000 years ago to explain things when science couldn't. We don't have that issue any more.
I would love if you said where the first shots in the presentation were made. I didn't see it in the description. Perhaps it is noted in the library of episodes?
Thomas Heatherwick’s UK pavilion at World Expo 2010 in Shanghai.
What is that structure at the start of the video please. It is fascinating.
Thomas Heatherwick’s UK pavilion at World Expo 2010 in Shanghai.
I loved this episode as it seemed to resonate perfectly with what I believe at this time of my life. I am amazed at how mathematics has helped us to discover and predict so much about the workings of our universe. I am so impressed with Greg! He moved me so much with his humility and his appreciation of the transcendence of the cosmos in which he sees God. He seemed to me to have a relationship with God. We are on a journey of discovery ….
If God can be described by physics, then it is not God by definition.
Science can talk anything but the problem I see with a quantifiable explanation for God is the term itself. God has become such a loaded term that any discussion about the concept comes packed with a lifetime worth of ones own personal baggage. It's not possible to check this baggage at the gate so the first thing we need to do is make sure that all of our luggage matches. And this leads to one of the hardest parts about this conversation, that being the fact that we all have idiosyncratic definitions of God, that is if ones even willing to entertain a definition.
I would have called myself an atheist for most of my life but thinking back I was actually agnostic about the question. I had always put my faith in mainstream science which had brought me to a pretty strict materialist view of the world. It wasn't until 2020 that I sincerely started to question my spiritual nature and I was only able to attain satisfactory answers to these profound questions once I strayed outside of the narrow establishment alley where science and religion sit.
There is a way to peruse the concept of God outside of academic science and mainstream religion. If there is a God I don't believe he's a humanoid watching over Earth. It seems more likely to me that God is a creational force that embodies a conciousness beyond anything that we can comprehend and I see no reason why this conflicts with our best scientific understanding. Although it would negate the major religions which may be a net positive for society.
I've found that some of the eastern spiritual philosophies have interesting things to say about all of this and Bhuddism in particular seems to get a lot right.
@zempath
If there is some kind of intentional force responsible for creation than why would I be glad to not have a precise definition of it? What a silly question.
@zempath
I am saying "I don't know". Did you even read my comment?
We would have a definition of God if God existed? That doesn't make any sense. Why would you assume that we would automatically and necessarily be able to define the creator if one existed? You obviously aren't reading what I wrote and it seems like you may not be reading what you're writing either.
Emf 303. To me, the Aborigines consept of dreamtime makes sense.
@zempath
I apologize if I misread your comment. I assumed that you were just trying to mess with me and I may not have understood the context of what you were saying. My bad.
@zempath Life, just like quantum physics, is possibilities . No wonder Gods are also possibilities. To me, the problem is not that I dont know - the problem is that others tell me they know and if I dont believe them I am evil or lost and will go to Hell. In other words, I like science (investigation), but I dislike manipulation in order to achieve power.
I’ll explain how I’m getting somewhere with this.. our consciousness is tied to our individual genetic code, if the universe bangs again either internal or in a cycle, the next one all humans could be say, sheep... or maybe you get yours again in a billion or so cycles with would seem like a zeto second for you. I’m looking for this answer to be liked by someone else lol
When you seek the truth, truth finds you...
Leave yourself a child in the complex fair of this universe and the Universe manifests in you ...
When we seek the truth we are vulnerable to self-delusion. The best we can do is acknowledge that we will never reach any "truth" and contemplate the mystery and it's myriad of possible explanations.
What was that art space he started at with all the glass rods?
Thomas Heatherwick’s UK pavilion at World Expo 2010 in Shanghai.
who titles your videos?
God is something you hold to when you lost everything,even yourself
That was hard, but spot on.
@Pedro Parica Not just wishful thinking but holding onto hope
Smoot has an open mind and heart to the beleifs of others.
Usually when these arguments rage there is an alternative which frees us from these binaries. Another factor which frees us is to realize that though historians draw boundaries between human chapters like Dark Ages, Enlightenment etc. But religion pre-existed science but still shared the curiosity of human thought. Religions flourish today as "science" fact beliefs for some but for many religion exists from tradition, moral systems, social systems and even theocratic nations**. Human brain is still very complex and we don't even fully understand language or as someone call consciousness and the hard problem. Deep questions like human pre-exustence, posr-existence etc. Still lay deep in the science of the human brain IF they exist..
**The beauty of God is that many can say God yet apply it to a variety of categories. Theism vs Atheism is an annoying bifurcation in the world but perhaps it is the grain of sand in the oyster which yields the pearls.
"I can't even control my drinking." Dude is [unintentionally?] hilarious.
You can do ANYTHING - you just don't want to.
Surely the "beauty " in all - Thru- Art - and the hidden meaning of our real purposes in our life ought to be unified with the physic laws in diverse domain but entangled anyway.
Agree Mr. Smoot.
In the final analysis, there is no way to "know" with any certainty.
It will always remain a mystery.
I pretty much agree with you. We see "through a faded glass." However I think someday our consciousness will become certain ( although it may happen in another existence in the afterlife ).
@@johnbrzykcy3076 not may but will. When you 'die' all things shall be made known to you.
When you 'die' all things shall be made known to you.
@@garychartrand7378 How do you *know* that? Have you died before?
@@eternallight88 I know (not believe) that there's a God and my immortal soul. Both God and His Spirit children (souls) know EVERYTHING.
Awareness is known by awareness alone.
Is that a quote from someone? That’s definitely base level existentialism. Love it lol.
Existence exists.
All mental states are shown by their functions in the world. An obvious, useless truth.
Reality is not two there can be no primacy. "Awareness is known by awareness alone," (Bret Netherton) is the sole irreducible axiom of reality. There is no such thing as a "corollary axiom," Ayn Rands contention.
Useless to whom?
Learn to breathe in and out and then learn how to hold your breath and you will have a meeting with God
@zempath No there are No wemon if you follow God.
Lucifer on the other hand. The bringer of truth, light and love. He Will give you a universe where you almost can do as you please. Were every type of wemon you can think of is there for you.
All you have to do, is reject God.
And No, God Will not destroy Lucifer in the final battle. That is religous propaganda.
how do you define a divine god? by justifying god are we just defying god? does god need any justification? does god need us as much as we knead god?
If evolution is being pushed and pulled at the same time a guess so.
God needs His Spirit children and Spirit children(souls) need the Father (God). It's all part of the reason why the physical Universe (including humans) was Created.
The structure at the beginning is Thomas Heatherwick’s UK pavilion at World Expo 2010 in Shanghai.
Need of God cannot create God. Need of God can create life.
God speaks science. Science exists because of God.
God created all things studied by scientists, and things that are a result of creation too. God is all wise and gave mankind the capacity for wisdom and a desire to learn, explore with curiosity.
I'm surprised to hear Robert say he doesn't like the idea of God as part of nature. Would an omnipotent God really be better?
Ever lived under an ominpotent anything?
@bad zombie
Why indeed!?
It's because a god that hides in nature is a cop out.
Wouldn't his creation be better?
Science has basically two parts, universal/real/existential and second is known / to be known /not required to be known. So God is universal science not required to be known it is just for feeling /and realize as per our capacity of preparation. Our brains are not designed to comprehend/withstand infinite .
Alignment of the free will with the universal will will result in true understanding of God, I feel. Your works have an innate appeal, awesome
Conformists don't understand God more than non-conformists.
Change the question in the video title to read Can God Talk Science? Then answer it.
It's obvious to me that God is in denial about science. If he should ever begin to believe it, he will suddenly cease to exist. That's all.
Yes, when logic for cause / causality ends, science should think of creator.
Robert Lawrence Kuhn, you need to get Leo Gura on this series. This is absolutely essential and cannot be neglected!
Most Science is a great source of Information and most Religion is a scam. You need God's Word to direct you towards Wisdom. Without Wisdom it is an infinite argument.
The word "God" is just a sound some people make instead of saying "I don't know" or "I wish."
Atheism is a maximation of ugliness. Matter and mind shall always remain subservient to Spirit.. (not to be confused with subconscious,) Spirit will lead you to truth, understanding and to life eternal. Visceral ambiguity is only a mask for 'a thirst for righteous and a hunger for truth' take time to wonder about the God within. Imagination at its best.
What do you mean by "Visceral ambiguity is only a mask for 'a thirst for righteous and a hunger for truth" ?
Have you been listening to the orange condoms again?
@bad zombie when a creature denies the existence of his/ her creator, that in itself, is proof that there is a spiritual conspiracy within the mind of the creature to find the creator.
@@johnbrzykcy3076 visceral ambiguity is something the RLK said in the video. How he wants to believe but also wants definitive proof of God's person being real.
@@Nissenov ?? Orange condom?? I'll have to Google that one. 😆
My argument is that if god is omniscient and omnipotent, ....etc, god must have the ability to reveal himself to everyone by different forms or ways leaving no uncertainty at all. Unfortunately this is not the case. Subjective experiences of god seem to one as facts at some point of man’s life but faith in such experiences changes over time and one gets back again to the start point looking for more and more evidences... this seems to me as an endless process. If there are other non-physical realms, we have no clue what kinds of rules and laws governing those realms ... we don’t know under which conditions we can access these realms ... we don’t even know all natural laws and rules our physical world. Therefore the problem is very hard. Done!
If anyone was omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent why would it do anything? Why wouldn't it do just what what omni able beings do...none of your damn business.
@@kallianpublico7517 Why? Because God knew conceptually that He was God. But in the never ending expansion He wanted to know what it FELT like to be God. Hence the physical Universe and us ('aliens' also) was Created so that God could accomplish this IN, AS, and THROUGH us. There is only Knowing in God's realm. Physicality is required for experiences and the feelings that that creates. Bless you.
It's a nice thought to think of a god who exists someplace in a supernatural sense: For me, from religious instructions starting at eight years old, I could never really believe in a Divine Being - probably because I've never, in my whole life seen a Divine Being; This doesn't mean to me a Divine Being doesn't exist. If one does it's province would have to be the whole Universe, never of Earth alone . One reason I doubt is that so many religions create dichotomies among people, and it's been happening from the beginning of religious beliefs: In my birth religion the beginning of time. Albeit, in this universe (Multiverse) were finding anything may be possible.
To borrow from Bertrand Russell, "you are looking for something that can't be got".
(Russell vs Copleston Debate 1948)
I beieve the universe revolves around the earth and the earth rests on pillars.
Based on my inner feelings and the Bible.
(1st Samuel 2:8 Chronicles 16:30 Psalm 93:1 Psalm 104:5)
From 2:26:
The whole point of the Biblical God is that YES, he does exist outside of physics and the Laws of physics.
Exactly like how the designer AND manufacturer both exist outside of the computer they designed and made.
From that entire basis is how we get the miracles of not just the Bible, but also any other God given miracle reported on today.
This is the whole point.
Stopping the earth in its rotation (WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT) considering people have already come back from the dead and nobody believes them?!
But regardless, the answer is a resounding YES!!
this is the God of the Bible from the very beginning.
Either you believe/see, or you do not believe/see.
And yes. People representing God are able to slap you in the face or to commit other abuses on your person. Just like how YOU are free to commit abuses.
It’s called FREE WILL.
So please use common sense, look after yourself AND look after your neighbour.
Short answer: No. Science studies material reality. God is pure spirit...
Even science points to a creator
If we are designed to be scientists, why would we ever dispute science on religious grounds?
The bottom line for me comes down to what just above every theists and atheist agree on. Science is about the nature of the universe, and religion is about moral values and self worth.
The problem I have with that is that I seriously pity anyone who actually needs religion for moral guidance. That suggests that if they didn't believe there was a God or have religion then they wouldn't be a good person. In other words, anyone who actually needs to believe in a God or have a religion tell them how to behave is already fundamentally a bad person.
Moreover, there are many examples of highly moral and decent atheists, thus proving that at least some humans have no need for a God or religion to have good moral values.
So in a very real sense the very existence of good atheists prove the needlessness of a God or religion.
Therefore religion doesn't really have much use other than perhaps deterring some seriously bad people from showing their true colors.
And ironically, those people who think they are good but claim that they wouldn't see any reason to be good if there is no God have just revealed to the world that they actually are aren't good but are apparently just trying to be good to avoid God's wrath.
In fact, I'm pretty sure Einstein has already said as much. He said something like, anyone who needs a threat of punishment or promise of reward to be good is in a pretty bad way. I couldn't agree more.
@zempath You're right. It's worse than I thought! Well, not really. I already knew that religions tend to teach ignorant moral values based on religious and cultural bigotry. So most religions don't even have a respectable place in society on any level. I won't say this is true of all of them because there are some decent religions around. Unfortunately the good ones aren't very popular.
What about GODEL, one of the three grater Logicians of all time:
A translation of Gödel's proof sketch (in the version of Gödel's student Dana Scott) from formal logic into natural language:
• Axiom 1: Either a property or its negation is positive.
• Axiom 2: A property that is necessarily implied by a positive property is positive.
• Theorem 1: Positive characteristics may be due to an existent entity.
• Definition 1: A God-like entity has all the positive features.
• Axiom 3: The property of being God-like is positive.
• Conclusion: Perhaps God exists.
• Axiom 4: Positive characteristics are necessarily positive.
• Definition 2: A property is the essence of an entity, if it belongs to the entity and necessarily implies all the properties of the entity.
• Theorem 2: To be God-like is the essence of every God-like entity.
• Definition 3: An entity exists necessarily if all of its essences are necessarily realized in an existing entity.
• Axiom 5: Necessarily existing is a positive property.
• Theorem 3: God must necessarily exist.
He utilises S 5 MODAL LOGIC
All it says is that the conclusion follows from the axioms. But why believe in this axioms like dogma?
@@ferdinandkraft857 It´s up to you to analise the Axioms and consider or not their validity. There is no dogma.
There are some gaps in this "proof": how does Theorem 1 follow form Axioms 1 and 2? Once the gaps are closed, the proof shows that if we accept Axioms 1,2,3,4 and 5, and if we accept the modal logic used for the proof, we must also accept that God necessarily exists. It does not show that God necessarily exists.
@@YAWTon yes, of course.
Religion is an avenue of making their pockets full
David Gross is Christopher Waltz, change my mind
"The God of the Gaps" is argument by ignorance; a logical fallacy.
People once believed that lightning was caused by angry gods.
"In all of human history, the supernatural has never turned out to be the right answer to anything: Natural explanations of phenomena have replaced supernatural ones thousands upon thousands of times, while supernatural explanations have replaced natural ones exactly never." -- Greta Christina
The gaps are still here, bub. The call it the quantum. When you take time out to get off your high horse on how smart scientists are, don't forget to thank the ignorance for not knocking you off your perch. Pride goeth before a fall if you believe in all that religious stuff.
Finally I've seen the light
oh no
With all due respect, the question itself is flawed. If God is, as it is said, limitless, can science measure? And somehow, if science can measure, will that be called God? Sorry sir, you are asking wrong questions and invariably ending up with no answer. Your questions are wrong. Please develop your ability to ask right questions. And someone rightly said "the most uncommon thing in this world is common sense". Further, you say you are not ready to agree that there is God. So, you are starting with assumption that there is no God. Why there can't be no third choice? Do you really think that with yes and no only science was able to evolve upto here? No value for creativity? How do you define creativity? And, finally, answer this: what answer will make you a better person? God or no God?
you're absolutely correct! many of his questions are muddled for sure...
Isaiah 1:12 speaks to the audit of the courts, the SOUL language of the CORPORATION. Habakkuk 1:12 speaks to this legalist language translated to pure science. This ransom for the ADVERSARY (lawyers) of the public will to self-govern. This redemption of the ENEMY(judges) to the public domain of sovereign SAFETY.
I find it funny when some very religious Christians try to prove some point about God by mentioning parts of the bible.
But on a second thought, they are not being silly, but just meticulously following the Christian teaching that all truths about God are to be found in the bible.
@@User-jr7vf it's a valid point however the bible in it's literal context is a fraud and imposter, a predator. It's written in legalist language. Currently you have 3 biblical endings coming. Israel. Ishmael. Christian. All 3 are adhering to biblical text. Their is a 4th.
@@ophidiaparaclete They All seams kind of sus to me.
If God exists, we would know it, intrinsically. Those who claim throughout history to be messengers from God only prove that he doesn't exist.
God wouldn't need a messenge by His very definition.
When people start getting dull and dogmatic, too comfortable in their technological or intellectual shell, something comes around to knock them off their high horse.
Don't start passing out those congratulations just yet, bub.
God has been with us since the beginning. He's NEVER left us alone. To help us He has ALWAYS sent us Teachers, Messengers, and Prophets - even today (sorry Muhammad).
who is the god of the church of scientology??
Science doesn't need to talk god. God is a claim that has no proof and is not necessary to explain the universe. Science makes no claim about a god, that's religions purview, so why would science even have to talk about it
Exactly! Science is about reaching and understanding reality. God is about illusions from human ego-centralism.
Are you looking for God or a supernatural experience? Direct evidence that there is more than frustrating, mediate logic? An immediate, accessible consciousness of telepathy limited, or unlimited, by one's personal pathos, ethos or logos?
Can logic equal love? Once in a while it comes close. Don't let the success of science blind you to its flaws and limits. The "feel good fluff" of good old, reliable science shouldn't distort the nature of the world we live in. Knowledge blinds one to ignorance. Don't let it dismiss mystery and wonder as well.
In ancient time many people believed that the celestial bodies were gods. They made gods from sticks and stones and worshipped them. But the prophets in the Bible told the people that it was not gods, those gods that did not create heaven and earth were not gods. God created it by his Word, so that what is visible is made of what is not visible. This was not so easy to understand and accept at that time, but now we know that this suits to science.
God said to his people through his prophets that they can know he is the only right God, because he talks to them, he tells what will happen and it happens and he saves. They killed him, but the true and living God made him alive again, rose him for the dead and set him by his right hand side in heaven. He makes his church alive and does same kind of wonders trough it.
Sorry... But Bible is not the only way to look at god
Consciousness can talk God and is at least partly physical / scientific. Would human consciousness be able to talk God if science could not?
But when science investigates and studies the human mind of a believer with neuroscience asking them questions about their belief they show that a specific part of the brain goes into activity. It doesn't matter which faith or religion, it occurs for all of them in the same part of the brain.
You may like to check out the video 'Why We Believe In Gods - Andy Thompson - American Atheists 09' on the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science site.
@zempath guess bullshit part of God creation too
Sure, the world is remarkable and we are even more remarkable.
But God is more remarkable than anything he supposedly created.
Remember, the potter is greater than his pots.
How can we explain the potter ?
If there is god or the source of creation. What is his link to us his finest creation. I think its more reasonable to believe it is science than religion.
David looks alike tibes father
TL;DR : Almost for sure there is NO God. People believe because they can't accept reality. Still there is no way to completely disregard God.
In an infinite universe, a non-zero probability is tantamount to certainty.
That's quite a lens to view a potential portrait. Sooner or later all possibilities exhibit a presence. Makes the case.
@@Intraphase1 A lens is one way to view the universe. A mirror is another.
@Ψ It's all about the fundamentals you choose. Make this assumption, set this limit and the stipulated universe makes God very unlikely. Remove all limits, impose no assumptions and God is inevitable. I'm not really making a case either way. The question may never be answered objectively but in our own minds, we'll set limits that make us comfortable.
Think about how you know something, anything.
There are only two ways of knowing anything. Observation and education.
You can observe the sun, but you have to be educated about God. You cannot observe God.
So how does anyone know anything about God, given that he is outside space and time ?
Three words Mount Saint Helen
A pauper in the Emperor's new cloths? Or riches in poverty?
I think the likelyhood of a "God the Father" is low at the outset. Then i do my survey and find a meditative flash and following visions; i find noncanonical testimony that says "you cannot see the Father but, you can see His light in my face", and i see a coherence of Being that is the ground of Truth; and i see a mountain of colonialism and misogyny i wish would move. The likelyhood goes through the roof if that mountain moves.
I’m not religious but maybe I’m spiritual. But the one thing I realise when you know you know I think they call it belief
Belief and KNOWING are very different. Beliefs can be modified or changed but a knowing is not from the human physical brain. It's a certainty that is found deep within - a soul thing. Ironically, the soul is all knowing. Bless you.
God created science to give to His children something to learn. Everyone believes that science can explain everything so there is no need for God. However, since the Bible states that God is the creator of everything and God created people in His own image wouldn't it be logical that God provide a vast array learning opportunities for His children as well (and this would obviously include sciences as well)?
That is what you teach a child at Sunday school
@@invisiblechurch9621 Most adults who go to church don't even acknowledge that God is 100% REAL. The reality is that everything is way too perfect to be the result of pure chance. Wherever you see organized structure logic dictates that there is intelligence behind that organized structure.
@@happycat0411 Too perfect? Is that what you think
@@invisiblechurch9621 Nope! That's what I KNOW for a fact....
Why it is highly probable that there is a Omnipotent being (Creator) behind everything >
> How mathematical balanced the universe is and works according to physical and mathematical laws with extreme precision
> The fact that math and physics even exist
> The probability of usable protein forming is 1.0E+43
> The probability of DNA forming from protein is 1.0E+243
> Why earth has an ozone layer that works to regulate the earth’s temperature
> Why the earth has a moon that pulls on the earth’s water to prevent the oceans' water from becoming stagnant
> Why the earth has a magnetic field that protects the earth’s atmosphere from being blown away by solar winds
> Why the earth is located at the perfect distance from the sun (Goldilocks zone)
> Why the earth and everything around us is designed like a classroom for the main purpose of learning
> Why the earth is able to recycle itself and all its resources
> Why does air just happen to be invisible?
> Why every living organism on the planet is dependent upon the sun for its energy in one way or another
> Why the periodic table of elements works in such a way that elements are able to combine together to form compounds necessary for the existence for life
> Why E=MC2 is only 5 characters in length but the equation is able to summarizes all the matter and energy in the universe
> Why Jupiter is positioned in such a way that Jupiter is able to catch all stray meteorites before they collide with earth
> Why the human body consists of over a trillion cells and still manages to function as a single self aware conscious organism / being
> Why all the internal and external human body organs just happened to evolve at EXACTLY the same instant rather than some organs evolving ahead or behind others organs
> Why the properties of water are such that water expands when water freezes (which allows aquatic life to live in colder temperatures)
> Why fish and aquatic animals are able to extract oxygen from the water
> Why plants are able to use the CO2 animals breathe out and produce O2 which humans and animals require
> Why plants are able to recycle the waste and decomposition of living organisms
> Why ice expands instead of shrinking when cooled (which is necessary for the survival ocean and aquatic life
> What evolved first, bees or flowering plants? >What humans evolved first males or females?
> Why something as simple as a seed cannot be made with all the knowledge that humanity has had in all of human history
> Why we just happen to be in a time where the moon and sun are at the perfect distance from the earth where the moon is able to perfectly eclipse the sun during a solar eclipse (the moon is just happens to be 400X smaller than the sun and the sun just happens to be 400X further away)
Is everything just an extremely improbable coincidence or is there an intelligent Creator behind everything?
Organization at this level of complexity dictates an extremely high level of intelligence....
@@happycat0411 Or you are blinded by your preconceived ideas
You can't find God through academia...that totally misses the point.
@-GinPi Gamma Scientifically, God does not exist, but I like to believe in Him anyway. It makes me function better. Science cannot describe everything which may be true. No axiomatic system can capture everything which we may see to be true. Is part of reality non computable?
The only laws that can't possibly be broken? Natural laws
Don't natural law breakdown in black holes?
@@naturalLin It all depends on what you mean by "natural law".
Newtonian physics used to be the laws of nature, then Einstein and Minkowski broke those. Then quantum mechanics broke general relativity.
Any and all laws the occur naturally,discovered or undiscovered
Point being any societal law can and will be bent or broken.not physics
Get Dr. Bernardo Kastrup
Considering that there is no God the answer must be no.
It’s really quite simple, this universe/multiverse and more importantly the laws of physics that allow them to exist did not come about by themselves so something had to bring them into existence. That is the Creator period. You can believe in God or not but until you can come of with a way for something to come from nothing intelligent design is just as valid as anything else.
Don't you see the huge flaw in your argument? Is your 'creator' not complex? If so, who designed 'him'? If you claim that a complex 'god' without a 'creator' always existed, then you might as well accept that a complex universe without 'creator' always existed. However, there is 100% proof that the universe exists, and zero proof or evidence of a 'god'. (Consider all the religious people who are praying during this pandemic, and does it make any difference? Of course not! It only gives people a false sense of hope.)
@@pierrejoubert681 I never said the Creator was complex. It’s 100% proven that the universe hasn’t existed forever, have you ever heard of the Big Bang? My proposal of intelligent design is based on one thing that no one has a solution to...how did the laws that govern the universe come about? Period. Laws and the universe don’t create themselves. Please don’t make the weak reply “who created the Creator” That misses the entire concept of a Creator.
"Beliefs are an odd thing, because a belief really just represents a cessation of critical thought. It's a deliberate choice to stop investigating something and just 'believe' it." -- Jason Leister
Can you give an example of an idea that has not ceased, not one moment, from being criticized for its assumptions?
Okay you keep sitting in the current known facts and not improving yourself and not being curious the the mysterious side.
Science must turn mystery / believe etc. In understandable facts
"Can Science Talk God?"
Why not? When fantasists... I mean theologians... can, then science can.
No, Science can't talk God - Science is based on division and finitude, God is (w)holy and infinite.
But you also find infinite in Maths.
When science rejects infinity your argument can hold some weight. Until then, Science cannot exist without infinity!
Preconceived learned belief. Take some shrooms and you’ll unlearn all your trash.
Can science talk about God?
ua-cam.com/video/o6bxA_mtITI/v-deo.html
That depends on how you define 'Science'. If you are talking about what we know from some scientists and not others, then obviously your 'science' is exclusive.
It is a bit like the word 'life'; excluding the one who created 'life' itself.
Your definition of Science and Life must be inclusive. Otherwise, we are on different wavelengths - a bit like talking to the wall.
Impossibilities can only exist in the mind.
What exactly are you saying? This answers nothing. It’s not even a statement on where you fall on this issue.
That's the first stage yes, then you make it happen.
No. God is all inclusive. Science can only make equations that compare separate entities. But, since God is all inclusive, there's nothing to compare with. So, no God for you 😆
Exactly. Science must abide by logic/reason whereas God not only encompasses the rational but can also encompass everything that is illogical, absurd and mysterious too.
@bad zombie Yes. Because God is everything and "all in all".
Which God?
What does the word even matter
What manifested the laws of nature? Why these laws and not some other kind.
So you believe in coincidence then do you. That could be seen as a miracle -- either we all are, or nothing is.
Explanation: it just is.
How do you know that our laws of nature ain't of the other kind? 🙂
God has given us His mathematical name.
God's mathematical name is
Infinity = 1/x(change) + 1
Translated His name reads: God's Mind Is Man Changed With God
How dose God fit into this equation?
Breakdown: God's mind is infinite. In math this measure out as the set of infinity
In math (1/x) represents a fraction of a whole. Any child is a fraction of a parent and man according to the Bible is God's child. Therefore, man is a fraction of God.
Change in math is represented by the Greek letter (delta) and it denotes a difference of some kind.
Plus (+) in math means to combine or add something with something.
There is only one God. In math the number 1 means something, or someone is complete and individual from all the rest.
Spelled out: God's Mind (Infinity) is (=) Man (1/x) Changed (delta) With (+) God (1).
Scientific Method
Step 1 Observation: Math can deliver unbreakable truths such as 2+2 will always = 4
Step 2 Question: Do math and Divinity share a common truth?
Step 3 Hypothesis: If God exist, He should be found in the house of mathematics.
Step 4 Prediction: God's Mind Is Man Change With God is an equation
Step 5 Test: Any number (Infinity) is (=) a set-in space (1/x) that change (x^2) with (+) space (1))
Note: "X" describes any set, (1) describes any kind of space physical or otherwise
This equation tells us why 2 feet is not the same as 2 inches. Both distances are measured out as 2 units of space but there is a change or difference between both units. They are each sets in a space of distance, but they represent changes in their measurement of distance.
Step 6 Iterate: New look at what makes up reality. Reality consists of 3 domains of space.
a. Fractured space or matter b. spatial expansion or energy c. Complete or unbroken space/Information
Step 7 Conclusion: We now know Infinity is real therefore the value in enumeration demand God exists otherwise the domain for enumeration would be incomplete. We know the domain for enumeration is complete because we can count. God must be able to count too all the way to Infinity because His mathematical name tells us what is any number.
One must define what God is. Humans are so different from everything else we have found so far in the universe. Did it take a
God to form us? If so, should we worship Him? Humans have suffered a lot to get to where we are now. Are we made in the image of God? It took a lot to get to where we are now. It was not easy. Remember Hitler. Was he needed? We will never know the mind of God if he is what we think He might be? I don't think so.
The mind cannot define God, since God has no objective qualities. In other words, the mind can define only something that has objective qualities.
God is all that is AND all that isn't.if you wish to understand the necessity of a Hitler than I suggest that you research "Conversations with God" book 1 on UA-cam. If you listen to just 15-20 minutes you will know what to do next. Around the 1 hour mark there is a succinct description of how and why the Universe and us were Created. Of you stick with it it will also give you answers to ANY and ALL questions you may have about ANYTHING. Bless you.
PS. God doesn't need your worship or anything ( including Love) from Anyone. We are all One.
... "Kuhn, stop telling God How to be God or What is God" ...
@zempath Of Course, everybody can do that ... but that doesn't imply that God must obey them as a submitted & faithful slave ...
@Pedro Parica Your comment seems to be pretty accurate about The social and psychological phenomenology ...
Fortunately, Objective Reality is always independent from our beliefs but on the other and same side, Our beliefs been false and incomplete can affect our relationships with The objective reality, then, obfuscating That Reality from our common senses ... Then, Objective Reality can be totally independent from our beliefs but it has a relationship of interdependence with our beliefs ... Where those beliefs biased Us from perceive with more objective accuracy ... and letting us stuck in our subjectivity and or far fetched beliefs about shared Intersubjective domains mediated by The common environment and Its Zeitgest.
@@firstnamesurname6550 What is your source of this information and who is this particular thinker or is this common knowledge in some area of science or psychology?
@@theworkethic The Sources are diverse, syncretic, multidisciplinar and pretty eclectic from subjective reflections, reading & personal experiences, curiosity, passion and explorations, Partial Academic Studies ( Music, Empresarial Management, Engineering, Psychology & Economy ), and In-Field Profesional Practices ... There is not a Single Recognized Author or a Handful of them that I could quote as my 'Main' influence maybe Grandparents, parents, coaches, friends, teachers, social experiences and human relationships, in general, had been more influential than specific Books or Authors ... Lot of names comes to mind but to make a long list could be a bit pedantic because I will not put my self as an expert with an exhaustive study in each one of them ... and to name just a few would bias the interpreters and not represent the synthesis of information given by the experience ... but yes, With more time, I could find bibliographical references for - practically - most of the paragraphs ... but I presuppose that we are just informally hanging on and sharing 'informal commentaries, 'personal' reflections opinions in an intersubjective web 2.0 cyberspace ... not need for writing with 'academic rigour' and justifying each sentence with a Formal Academic Paper ...
Yes, My Father was an Economist/Lawyer, Systems Theory Adept working for The Headquarters of the Energy/Oil Grid at a global scale ... before learning to talk fluently I was exposed to Set Theory, Flux Diagrams, Graph theory, Probabilistic and Statistical Analysis, Computer Simulations, Sociology, History, Down-Top and Top-Down corporate quantitative and qualitative modeling, heuristics, cybernetics, execution, collective self-organization, and practice, etc etc etc and My mother was a Diplomat and Art Curator & Dealer ... It seems that the early exposure to that kind of topics affected 'me' by nonstandard and uncommon early infancy ... letting a hard shadow of cognitive neo-cortical patterns that difficult in myself to think/write 'street smart, simple, commonly, direct, colloquial and easy' ...
Paradoxically, I am pretty biased in interpreting the convoluted and obfuscating narrative as something 'simple, direct and easy' ... add to all those handicaps that English is not my native language .... and we get an ideal scenario for a complete linguistic disaster ... :-D
This gentleman adds nothing to the conversation, in my opinion, since he doesn't seem to grasp the primary distinction between observation based science and faith based religion, with the key word being "faith", or, literally, the belief in something that is unseen.
Plot twist. Science is GOD
Science deals with data, with matter, with energy. Can science "see" a thought? Can science measure "love"? "I love you to the moon and back" is not exactly a real measurement. Religion and spirituality are concerned with behavior, morality, values and meanings... those are outside of the scientific realm. But what scientist would say, since he can't "measure" his mother's love, that it must not be real, (because there's no scientific evidence for it)?
But when it doesn't involve any of his or her family members, then, somehow, all that super-material stuff, isn't real. It cannot be shown to have come from the Big Bang. So science has a blind spot. A really big one. Its theories on how life began are also crap!
That's not to say that what the Bible says makes any sense either... The Bible has no business making statements of a scientific nature.
Is there a "supernatural God", IMHO yes. Although I disagree about him (her, it, pwog-person without gender), being one to violate his own laws of physics. I do think there are spirit forces that have powers of anti-gravity, or that can speed up time, or bend space. But perhaps that still falls under the category as natural... And for those of us who follow Jesus, he had the power over life and death... including his own.
Now, I suppose, that the creator, the uncaused cause, is capable of violating those laws, but I suspect contingencies are already built into the system, whereby there would never be a need to.
The Scientific Method has the final say on which claims about reality are false.
Excluding what is provably false leads us nearer to knowing how reality operates (truth).
Those so called truths are illusions.
Rene Descartes was a mathematician who also believed in the perfect and I’m thinking in a similar way. But I’ll clearify that I get the Holy Spirit by faith in Jesus of mere grace. And it reveals Jesus for me and he makes the know the Father.
I can compare my faith with the axioms in mathematical analysis, they are simple, like the existence of 0 and 1. But with what is deduced from it, it includes quite a lot. Then I use mathematical logics, “modus ponens”.
Similarly my faith in Christ gives me quite a lot, by reading God’s Word and let the Holy Spirit reveal it for me. Like I can deduce something from the axioms in mathematics, I can deduce something from my faith in Christ, but then I also think with my heart and that is different from thinking with the brain. Jesus gave me life and spirit from heaven, the life was planted in my heart by Gods Word and his love was poured into my heart with the Holy Spirit. I believe by my heart, so I know by my heart, I have got wisdom from God in my heart.
An important point to me here, is that I continue to use mathematical logics on what is said only by words. We believe something an it gets consequences for us, this I compare to mathematical deduction. We believe that Jesus is perfect and with one offer he has made those perfect who are made holy. His perfectness and holiness gets interned in us with the spirit and live he gives us from heaven.
@-GinPi Gamma God reconciled the world with himself when he let Jesus die on the cross instead of us. On that foundation I let myself reconcile with him, in this way I will get harmony between heart and brain, body and soul. I believe in God and his Word by my heart at the same time as I think mathematics and natural science with my brain. I shall seek Christ and believe in him and love him with all of my heart. That makes me wise in hearth, so that it is fruitful to my brain also.
@-GinPi Gamma I choose to turn to Jesus and bless him, in this way I am blessed. That’s why I become a blessing and so I say to them: May God bless you.
Descartes was also a product of his time anyone who spoke against scripture was persecuted.
@@invisiblechurch9621 When I refer to Descartes' philosophy its quite clear what I say. Time doesn't change that. It was those who spoke what was written in the Bible that were persecuted, at the same time as the pioneers of modern science were percecuted.
@-GinPi Gamma One Spirit - many many souls.
Nature has know boss😔
I hope there is no god ...
Why
Because if there is a god waiting to punish us which we never met or talked to ...
5:32 “giving frame work for people on how to behave”. Ummmm. Wrong. Nice try with your false dichotomy fallacy.
Scientific method have discovered after life
👏👏👏 😎