I have to agree with Robert: there are lots of ways God could intervene and not mess up Natural Law. I really like the idea of panentheism, though, for a bunch of reasons. It sounds consistent with Incompleteness -- no matter how sophisticated our models, there is always something more, even those initiated by the most well-defined, most restrictive axioms. Our view of God and universe is nothing but a model -- a map, not the territory.
An excellent interview, very engaging from start to finish.. Try as I may, I can't get behind panENtheism, BUT I'm certainly agnostic when it comes to SOME versions of pantheism.. The idea that the cosmos could be a vast information processing "Machine" seems more likely to me than the construct that this fine gentleman imagines.. MAYBE the universal wave function could be thought of as God..?? If that's so however, AND there's some sort of godlike intent involved, why would the universe be so chaotic, violent and destructive?? Peace.
It seems that speculation can take you anywhere you wanted to go. We have a long set of wish lists (religious theologies). All putting us in the center of the action. When it is pretty obvious that we are not.
(7:30) *RLK: **_"I want to try to find truth, not what makes you comfortable."_* ... It's interesting to see RLK and his many guests trying to figure out what's going on in these CTC videos (what we represent, why we are here, why anything exists at all). The TRUTH is that all of the puzzle pieces can be neatly assembled in a 2021 book titled *"0"* that our modern, bot-based technology won't allow to go mainstream. ...What good is it for humanity to seek the answers to life's most complex questions while erecting unsurpassable barriers for whatever answers may emerge?
OK, I'll bite. Your video of images matched to rad beats got me. I have been perceiving existence as polarity of +1 and -1. Are you implying the polarity is +1 and 0? I recently had a discussion on reddit (chat) with someone arguing that position. To me, the zero state/ lack of activity is the womb and the positive and negative polarity is our world. In a Trinitarian sense, God is the void, God's Son is the "matter" spoken/vibrated by the void and God's Spirit is formless breath/ energy. If I am speaking to a similar aspect of your book, how does my metaphor differ?
@@guywhoisnotbob *"Your video of images matched to rad beats got me."* ...UA-cam's automated bots took down the video even though every segment was pulled from other UA-cam videos. It was deemed *"too violent for community standards"* by UA-cam. Amazon KDP's automated bots also refuses to publish this same book. Support emails stated that the author's name *(1)* _"may be too confusing to their customers."_ Even CTT's own comment thread has automated input filters that prevent me from posting certain words, links, or phrases. Yes, even on a channel that's dedicated to '"discovering the truth" will screen and censor our information. Ironically, all of this bot-blocking is discussed in the final chapter. *"Are you implying the polarity is +1 and 0?"* ... No. *0* and *1* (Nonexistence and Existence) represent the most rudimentary state of Existence. Anything prior to this most basic of all possible juxtapositions cannot exist. ... Polarity doesn't emerge until much later. *" God's Son is the "matter" spoken/vibrated by the void and God's Spirit is formless breath/ energy. If I am speaking to a similar aspect of your book, how does my metaphor differ?"* ... You have a personality that is more open to differing views than most, so you'd probably understand this book better than most. However, yours and my thinking are different. You are taking the accepted, historic understanding of a metaphysical God and rebranding it with the many new discoveries of modern science. In my book titled *"0"* there is no God in the way that we have it defined. ... Everything is connected (even atheism and theism). Humans represent the tail end of a 13.8-billion-year evolution of Existence (information) seeking more information via conscious exploration. There have been 6 different information-seeking "Recursions" (including the one we are in right now) that demonstrate how Existence has been pursuing a single piece if crucial data. It's not some unimaginably complex mathematical formula, metaphysical revelation, or an unobtainable state of knowledge. In fact, it's the same information humanity has been seeking all along. *The big question is:* What if Existence has already discovered this information via the life experiences of billions of _Homo sapiens_ ... but we're too self-focused to realize that this has already happened?
I wish the new thought teacher Neville Goddard was around to be interviewed. He speaks similarly in terms of a divinity inherent in life limiting itself so it can expand and become more than it once was.
This is one of my favorite episodes or interview excerpts. Because it homes in on the relevant. I am repelled by discussions which leave some consideration out and endlessly circle actual core issues. This was a breath of fresh air. Thank you 🙏🏻 🥰🙌 However as a disclaimer, I have built a wholly new paradigm which allows me to clearly see and know what god actually is and how it connects with what we call reality at every level. 😂 🤷♀️ So, in other words, I see much more meaning in what is being said.
I'd like to see some cross contextual examination on this channel. Kuhn examines each person on their own are of interest. Why not ask this guy of the relevance of say ESP to his views.
Indeed that would be very interesting and probably provoke altogether new questions and theories, not just in the viewers' but even the interviewee's mind. Though I'm sure he must have thought of this only to have submitted to time limit.
One of the best discussions on this channel. Uses concrete language and concepts instead of vague abstract word salad blither-blather like so many others.
As above, so below, is an expression of ancient wisdom that allows for the ebb and flow of the wave. I think that being the god of our own Universe helps us to understand our relationship to the Creator. Observing how we interact with our inner domains of bodily flora and fauna is very revealing.
(Spinoza's God? ) Did Einstein believe in God? Yes. He defined God in an impersonal, deistic fashion, but he deeply believed that God's handiwork was reflected in the harmony of nature's laws and the beauty of all that exists. He often invoked God, such as by saying He wouldn't play dice, when rejecting quantum mechanics. Einstein's belief in something larger than himself produced in him a wondrous mixture of confidence and humility. As he famously declared: "A spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort." When asked directly if he believed in God, he always insisted he did, and explained it once this way: "We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws." . ~ by Albert Einstein (from Time Magazine) April 5, 2007
Relative quote from Star Trek - Jean-Luc Picard: It's our mortality that defines us:.. It's part of the truth of our existence. Soran: What if I told you I found a new truth? Jean-Luc Picard: ...The nexus? Tolian Soran: Time has no meaning there. The predator has no teeth.
@@guywhoisnotbob Snow is falling everywhere Snow is falling all the time All the time - [Yoko Ono] Galaxie 500 - ua-cam.com/video/qX-o3rN99pI/v-deo.html
this way of thinking translates to the science of God, which is redundant in itself. you cannot scientifically prove God’s existence, this is more of a reconciliation.
the thing is you can literally 'experience' god, while in this life, where you think religions come from? go meditate in light/sound deprived room for 3days+ while fasting, this will dissolve your ego, only then you can reach union with god, this method of course if you wanna go there without using external subtances,or else you can use psychedelics, forcing an ego death, within minutes if not hours(depends on what psychedelic)
Theism, pantheism, panantheism, all assume that there is a hidden mystery and if we believe their stories, the mystery disappears. In other words, they assume the story is complete and we see only the parts mot covered by supernatural mysteries. What about if the story is not complete? We are witnessing how consciousness becomes aware of mathematics so that mathematics becomes alive in classrooms, online courses, journals and conferences. If you must have a supernatural thing that transcends time, that is always true, that is eternal, not made, not created, there you have it: mathematics. It needs to become alive in us. Dinosaurs never knew elliptical curves.
Panentheism is an interesting idea. But if god can transcend the world, then that is still more “existence.” So, it seems to me that it would revert back to pantheism. The idea of pantheism would include this transcendent part of god. Say if you think all things are physical, and that some aspects may not exhibit physicalism like consciousness, it may just be that the “physical” stretches further than you thought. Maybe the physical can include the mental. So, in the same sense, the transcendent part of god is still a part of the whole existence of everything. It is pantheism with levels.
I like it, god as relationship. We have a language for this - mind and heart, god as mind may be perfect but impotent, God as heart is limited to the relationships that can be known. E.F. Schumacher expresses this in his four fields of knowledge, self-inside, other-outside as direct (mind knowledge), and self-outside, other-inside as indirect (heart knowledge). To the heart, the only real thing we can give the world is our own integrity, to be whole with one's own word, which gives away "power" that the mind tries to maintain. Love arises from that vulnerability, which is expressed in our ability to give of ourselves, and relationship gives the knowledge to better know what sort of giving is helpful and what is not. Jesus took it to the limit, giving his own life, to take away the mind's suffering, that our past sins can never be undone. Jesus says we can start again today and raise ourselves past our past selves, and it is possible because of God's grace.
Think of the life of Kyle Rittenhouse, teenager who took it upon himself to "protect" a city from rioting, and ended up killing two people, and now he's been raised as a right-wing hero, proof that guns are good and allow us to protect ourselves and our possessions from people who would destroy. What sort of relationship with God can he have, where the world must be divided between good and bad people, where good people can shoot and kill bad people and self-justify that they had no choice. Science and materialism can't touch his moral dilemma. His yet underdeveloped conscience has a tough battle head, and he has no incentive to feel the pain of what he's done, and now has a culture that defines it as good. Only religious language can help him face that, and religion can be just as good at justifying violence than facing a wounded innocence when you take a life out of fear.
I may be wrong, but am not sure pantheists believe this explanation of pantheism. The forms of matter in creation are nothing but patterning void. God is what "pushes" and contains the pattern, not what patterns.
Let me try and ask ourselves a thought provoking question: What would an external, alien, unbiased (as far as possible) watcher or listener think about this admittedly sophisticated discussion? My suspicion is, she would ask herself: "What the heck is this entity called God meant to be, why do they even use this word, isn’t it all about the structure of the universe? Why are they so much focused on a hypothetical being (called God) who governs the whole world - is it just the anthropic analogy that some superhero must exist to hold the world together? Poor human beings… not willing to be self-responsible…" ❓ Occams Razor: Pantheism (even without theism) is simpler than Panentheism, no outer entity needed (as sad as it sounds, but probably true). Human bias eliminated. 😀
Panentheism allows the great mystery of existence (the Divine) to emerge where straight Pantheism may not. It also places the Divine within Existence, without some cigarette smoking separate Old Nobadaddy like Yaweh constantly messing with us.
If we understand the God’s, he’s doing the same, which means, he creates something and drops it down to the earth 🌍 and waiting to see if he did it well, or worse , then , if anything goes wrong, he will fixing the problem !
We can have relationships with ourselves so therefore God being a three-part being could also have relationship with himself why do you think Jesus Christ stated the father and I are one and then he told the disciples once he has sent us into a heaven that he would send them the comforter the Holy Spirit would come upon them
This is nothing but Advaita Vedanta. Why do these people not give credit where it is due? The Katha Upanishad 6.7 (कथा उपनिषद ६.७) succinctly explains the nature of the Self. इन्द्रियेभ्यः परं मनो मनसः सत्त्वमुत्तमम् सत्त्वादधि महानात्मा महतोऽव्यक्तमुत्तमम् Beyond the senses is the mind, Beyond the mind is emotion sublime, Beyond reason is the consciousness of man, Beyond this is the consciousness of the Universe, the evolver of all.
If God was always there he would have wait for eternity to create the universe. But before there was time, though, things would be very different. I don't think we will be able to figure it out.
When you “experience” God you will look at the world differently and never be able to comprehend it in the same way you did before, science isn’t able to explain the unexplainable, God will make you question everything you ever believed. Anyone who thinks God fits into a “human” theory will be unable to accept God and will deny the power because if can’t be explained by anyone field of study: science theology psychology philosophy etc.. think of God as an Alien being and then try to make that work in this world..because technically that’s what HE is..God can do things that we cannot and with every generation he creates knew challenges for everyone to try to figure out.. and he will change the rules and the laws that we think are unchangeable .. compare Quantum physics, string theory to the theory of general relativity and you will see how God will play with your mind..
Time has 2 arrows. It only exists within the framework of a space time. When we pass to the next world (NDE'S) it is plain that time is not part of our soul's existence. Time is only necessary in this world. G-D is eternal and fully explained in the Torah(Bible) We do not need alternative theories. Forward and backward time commenced at Big Bang(Creation)
I agree, God would not violate the laws of physics. But we don't know all the laws of physics either... Angels, for example, can accelerate time. The Universe Mother Spirit has powers of anti-gravity. And the Divine Father is not omnificent, he created a whole host of celestial beings to delegate tasks to, like creating local universes of time and space to his Paradise Creator Sons, like the one who incarnated as Jesus. The Master knew all about the universe, because he created it. And yet, he put all that power in a sort of blind trust, while he grew up as a man. Apparently, to be divine, is also to be humble. Way Cool!
*They need to modify/update their religions because science doesn't suport their tales of magic.* Seems if god knew of the universe he would have wrote it in his book.
If I were God I would be mad at humanity for using Me and my name for their infantile creations. Be a creature, like the animals are, use your intelligence only for peace purposes and be happy like animals are!
The God of the Atheists definitely Does not exist because that is his definition of God, which is limited due to lack of education and/or understanding of what a God is .
@HelloThere Religion teaches Morality and Spirituality , they are not fiction . They are called moral and religious truths . There are also many theologians (Religious Studies) who earn Phd's just like other sciences. Science and Religion-Spirituality are philosophies on both sides of the same COIN. (The old name of Science was the Philosophy of Nature, and when you get a PhD degree in Physics or whatever field of study, it means Doctor of Philosophy.) … … Science and religion are two sides of the same deep human impulse to understand the world, to know our place in it, and to marvel at the wonder of life and the infinite cosmos we are surrounded by. Let’s keep them that way, and not let one attempt to usurp the role of the other. .
@@ksdogg Evidence grounded in science does not point to supernaturalism. Only anecdotal personal subjective experience and its erroneous perception and interpretation points to the supernatural. "Existence cannot ever be explained by logic." I wouldn't bet on that. Perhaps not by logic alone, but together with evidence. At its fundamental layer, existence is physical.
@@georgegrubbs2966 ''Only anecdotal personal subjective experience and its erroneous perception and interpretation points to the supernatural'' _All epistemology and all evidence is ''subjective'' and doesn't exist absent of a mind. And The mind itself cannot be explained within a materialistic framework or scientific method as it is the requisite condition for the creation of the scientific method. This essentially fits the definition of supernatural(beyond the limits of scientific knowledge)_ _The concept of existence is not logical, pertaining the question: why is there actually something? Also physical is an illusion as all physical must obey the Schrödinger equation ,that states all matter exists as a probabilistic waves at it's fundamental layer, that doesn't exist in physical form until collapse occurs. What causes collapse is an unknown phenomena within QM for a 100 years and is another example of a supernatural occurrence_
He can do almost everything but can surely do one thing , that’s God can’t *kill* himself ! That’s his limitation ; existence is a prison for him , so bored out his existence he creates world , nations , families , individual lives with dense stories good and bad experiences
Jesus Christ is God he died and suffered death just like we all have to die he died so our sins could be forgiven and all we have to do is believe and trust in that which is faith. See how your ideal has already been fulfilled he's going to come again one day I'd rather not go through the tribulation that set aside for the Jews.
You are allowed to use the correct, traditional pronoun, because the “traditional” view is THE view. There is no adjusting it to fit into current times, that would be a different religion then. There is no shame in saying “himself” in this context. These “t’s” are really ruining everything, making nonsense for no reason.
So funny that finite mind wants to fit the infinite, timeless mind inside it and then successfully explain the existence. Just say that you are God and then try to explain who you are..try to explain the illogical using logical mind..
He concepts GOD is it anti Science. GOD atributies true concept is necessary proof. Spinoza GOD used geometry to proof HIM. Guys are, so pedantic. He minds concern GOD are weird words.Possibilities show up existence GOD requires honest mind.
So, this is how gods are made. If the current explainations don't do it for you. Well, just make your own Frankenstein theology that fits your expectations. 🤔
Light is not fast E=mc² is wrong We couldn't have see sun if light is fast. Even we never ever have able to imagine about stars if light is fast forget about to see stars too. When sun rises sun light/photons takes 8 minutes 20 seconds to reach from sun to earth. When sun light reach earth our eyes directly sees sun. Sun light travel by taking second second distance. By travelling second second it able to reach up to earth at 8 minutes 20 seconds. When it hit our eyes after 8:20m our eyes directly observed sun. Distance of sun from earth and earth to sun is equal. Our eyes should have see like light travel if light is fast. Our eyes should have see like light travel . Our eyes should see second second distance and only could have see sun. Our eyes shouldn't have see sun at ones if light/photons is fast. Our eyes should have open up to more than 8 minutes 20 seconds when light hits by sun to see sun. Our eye should have open continuous up to more than 8:20 when light hits eyes to see sun. Even one blink eyes should not have see sun. One blink should have unable to see sun. We wouldn't have see sun like we are observing now if light is fast. About Stars are far about to see and imagine if is fast. We never have have observed stars in life if light is fast. To see moon also we have take more than 2 minutes time to see too. To observe moon too our we face to face our eyes more then 2 minutes continue without blink too. Light is not fast.
Absolutly WRONG. Distance Sun light are so millions. Light from SUN is coming Earth fastest. Please per attention. Einstein theory was proof while you comments over his theory wasnt.
there's an Up and Atom video that just arrived that describes this very well I think, the speed of light remains the same and the circumstances change, or something like that :) ua-cam.com/video/JUwpOWOg0fk/v-deo.html
@@maxwellsimoes238 I'm saying wrong. Yes wrong. Light fast is wrong. If light is fast we never would have able observed sun. If light is fast than we have able to observe only few distance at ones. We just have see like light travel Distance distance per second. . Yes we should have see like light/photons travel.
@@cps_Zen_Run Light is not fast e=mc² is infinity times wrong. Because if it is fast we are are are observing sun like light travel some distance at some some second. We never ever have observed at ones.
I really love how Robert Kuhn pushes his interviewee with the right questions
I have to agree with Robert: there are lots of ways God could intervene and not mess up Natural Law. I really like the idea of panentheism, though, for a bunch of reasons. It sounds consistent with Incompleteness -- no matter how sophisticated our models, there is always something more, even those initiated by the most well-defined, most restrictive axioms. Our view of God and universe is nothing but a model -- a map, not the territory.
You are right. We can have science, when the world is regular most of the time. We don't need 100% of the time.
This was one of the best concerning theology, great stuff.
The complete absence of the divine will always be the most novel and THE MOST CORRECT!
An excellent interview, very engaging from start to finish.. Try as I may, I can't get behind panENtheism, BUT I'm certainly agnostic when it comes to SOME versions of pantheism.. The idea that the cosmos could be a vast information processing "Machine" seems more likely to me than the construct that this fine gentleman imagines.. MAYBE the universal wave function could be thought of as God..?? If that's so however, AND there's some sort of godlike intent involved, why would the universe be so chaotic, violent and destructive?? Peace.
preciselly because otherwise " we? " could not have had this " conversation ". It's beautyful isn't it..?
It seems that speculation can take you anywhere you wanted to go.
We have a long set of wish lists (religious theologies). All putting us in the center of the action.
When it is pretty obvious that we are not.
(7:30) *RLK: **_"I want to try to find truth, not what makes you comfortable."_* ... It's interesting to see RLK and his many guests trying to figure out what's going on in these CTC videos (what we represent, why we are here, why anything exists at all). The TRUTH is that all of the puzzle pieces can be neatly assembled in a 2021 book titled *"0"* that our modern, bot-based technology won't allow to go mainstream.
...What good is it for humanity to seek the answers to life's most complex questions while erecting unsurpassable barriers for whatever answers may emerge?
OK, I'll bite. Your video of images matched to rad beats got me. I have been perceiving existence as polarity of +1 and -1. Are you implying the polarity is +1 and 0? I recently had a discussion on reddit (chat) with someone arguing that position. To me, the zero state/ lack of activity is the womb and the positive and negative polarity is our world. In a Trinitarian sense, God is the void, God's Son is the "matter" spoken/vibrated by the void and God's Spirit is formless breath/ energy. If I am speaking to a similar aspect of your book, how does my metaphor differ?
@@guywhoisnotbob *"Your video of images matched to rad beats got me."*
...UA-cam's automated bots took down the video even though every segment was pulled from other UA-cam videos. It was deemed *"too violent for community standards"* by UA-cam. Amazon KDP's automated bots also refuses to publish this same book. Support emails stated that the author's name *(1)* _"may be too confusing to their customers."_
Even CTT's own comment thread has automated input filters that prevent me from posting certain words, links, or phrases. Yes, even on a channel that's dedicated to '"discovering the truth" will screen and censor our information.
Ironically, all of this bot-blocking is discussed in the final chapter.
*"Are you implying the polarity is +1 and 0?"*
... No. *0* and *1* (Nonexistence and Existence) represent the most rudimentary state of Existence. Anything prior to this most basic of all possible juxtapositions cannot exist. ... Polarity doesn't emerge until much later.
*" God's Son is the "matter" spoken/vibrated by the void and God's Spirit is formless breath/ energy. If I am speaking to a similar aspect of your book, how does my metaphor differ?"*
... You have a personality that is more open to differing views than most, so you'd probably understand this book better than most. However, yours and my thinking are different.
You are taking the accepted, historic understanding of a metaphysical God and rebranding it with the many new discoveries of modern science. In my book titled *"0"* there is no God in the way that we have it defined.
... Everything is connected (even atheism and theism).
Humans represent the tail end of a 13.8-billion-year evolution of Existence (information) seeking more information via conscious exploration. There have been 6 different information-seeking "Recursions" (including the one we are in right now) that demonstrate how Existence has been pursuing a single piece if crucial data.
It's not some unimaginably complex mathematical formula, metaphysical revelation, or an unobtainable state of knowledge. In fact, it's the same information humanity has been seeking all along.
*The big question is:* What if Existence has already discovered this information via the life experiences of billions of _Homo sapiens_ ... but we're too self-focused to realize that this has already happened?
I highly recommend that the divine be found in the hearts ( innermost self) of men. Divine love is the way.
I wish the new thought teacher Neville Goddard was around to be interviewed. He speaks similarly in terms of a divinity inherent in life limiting itself so it can expand and become more than it once was.
This is one of my favorite episodes or interview excerpts. Because it homes in on the relevant. I am repelled by discussions which leave some consideration out and endlessly circle actual core issues. This was a breath of fresh air. Thank you 🙏🏻 🥰🙌
However as a disclaimer, I have built a wholly new paradigm which allows me to clearly see and know what god actually is and how it connects with what we call reality at every level. 😂 🤷♀️ So, in other words, I see much more meaning in what is being said.
Same here, my husband had the same theory
I'd like to see some cross contextual examination on this channel. Kuhn examines each person on their own are of interest. Why not ask this guy of the relevance of say ESP to his views.
Indeed that would be very interesting and probably provoke altogether new questions and theories, not just in the viewers' but even the interviewee's mind.
Though I'm sure he must have thought of this only to have submitted to time limit.
I really "feel" Professor Clayton. I think he may be my favorite among your recurring interviewees.
Love is all. Everything is Possible. ❤️
Great conversation. I do see excess labels that distracts us, but I see them trying to join ideas and mix them
Learn something new every day.
One of the best discussions on this channel. Uses concrete language and concepts instead of vague abstract word salad blither-blather like so many others.
As above, so below, is an expression of ancient wisdom that allows for the ebb and flow of the wave. I think that being the god of our own Universe helps us to understand our relationship to the Creator. Observing how we interact with our inner domains of bodily flora and fauna is very revealing.
(Spinoza's God? )
Did Einstein believe in God?
Yes. He defined God in an impersonal, deistic fashion, but he deeply believed that God's handiwork was reflected in the harmony of nature's laws and the beauty of all that exists. He often invoked God, such as by saying He wouldn't play dice, when rejecting quantum mechanics. Einstein's belief in something larger than himself produced in him a wondrous mixture of confidence and humility. As he famously declared: "A spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort."
When asked directly if he believed in God, he always insisted he did, and explained it once this way: "We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."
.
~ by Albert Einstein
(from Time Magazine)
April 5, 2007
Guys pantheism are fallacies because he Not understood Spinoza than Einstein nature .concept .
@HelloThere Spinoza GOD nature. Christian GOD is necessary emocionaly.
Relative quote from Star Trek - Jean-Luc Picard: It's our mortality that defines us:.. It's part of the truth of our existence. Soran: What if I told you I found a new truth? Jean-Luc Picard: ...The nexus? Tolian Soran: Time has no meaning there. The predator has no teeth.
Row, row row your boat gently down the stream... When I see Clayton levitate I'll take him seriously.
"All opposing gravity rise rise rise" Zdzislaw by Rishloo
@@guywhoisnotbob
Snow is falling everywhere
Snow is falling all the time
All the time - [Yoko Ono]
Galaxie 500 - ua-cam.com/video/qX-o3rN99pI/v-deo.html
Yes, worth the dialog and presentation. Thanks...🐣
the Rocky and Bullwinkle Show was truth in a cartoon. At the end of each episode someone still had to clean up after the elephants.
Good one, did know of pantheism but had no idea of the concept of panentheism.
Great show fellas!!
this way of thinking translates to the science of God, which is redundant in itself. you cannot scientifically prove God’s existence, this is more of a reconciliation.
or maybe you can scientifically prove his existence, but that would mean “He” is playing hide and seek with humanity.
the thing is you can literally 'experience' god, while in this life, where you think religions come from? go meditate in light/sound deprived room for 3days+ while fasting, this will dissolve your ego, only then you can reach union with god, this method of course if you wanna go there without using external subtances,or else you can use psychedelics, forcing an ego death, within minutes if not hours(depends on what psychedelic)
Theism, pantheism, panantheism, all assume that there is a hidden mystery and if we believe their stories, the mystery disappears. In other words, they assume the story is complete and we see only the parts mot covered by supernatural mysteries. What about if the story is not complete? We are witnessing how consciousness becomes aware of mathematics so that mathematics becomes alive in classrooms, online courses, journals and conferences. If you must have a supernatural thing that transcends time, that is always true, that is eternal, not made, not created, there you have it: mathematics. It needs to become alive in us. Dinosaurs never knew elliptical curves.
Panentheism is an interesting idea. But if god can transcend the world, then that is still more “existence.” So, it seems to me that it would revert back to pantheism. The idea of pantheism would include this transcendent part of god. Say if you think all things are physical, and that some aspects may not exhibit physicalism like consciousness, it may just be that the “physical” stretches further than you thought. Maybe the physical can include the mental. So, in the same sense, the transcendent part of god is still a part of the whole existence of everything. It is pantheism with levels.
God is absolute concious Being.He is omnipotent and omniscient and his name is Krishna.
I like it, god as relationship. We have a language for this - mind and heart, god as mind may be perfect but impotent, God as heart is limited to the relationships that can be known. E.F. Schumacher expresses this in his four fields of knowledge, self-inside, other-outside as direct (mind knowledge), and self-outside, other-inside as indirect (heart knowledge). To the heart, the only real thing we can give the world is our own integrity, to be whole with one's own word, which gives away "power" that the mind tries to maintain. Love arises from that vulnerability, which is expressed in our ability to give of ourselves, and relationship gives the knowledge to better know what sort of giving is helpful and what is not. Jesus took it to the limit, giving his own life, to take away the mind's suffering, that our past sins can never be undone. Jesus says we can start again today and raise ourselves past our past selves, and it is possible because of God's grace.
Think of the life of Kyle Rittenhouse, teenager who took it upon himself to "protect" a city from rioting, and ended up killing two people, and now he's been raised as a right-wing hero, proof that guns are good and allow us to protect ourselves and our possessions from people who would destroy. What sort of relationship with God can he have, where the world must be divided between good and bad people, where good people can shoot and kill bad people and self-justify that they had no choice. Science and materialism can't touch his moral dilemma. His yet underdeveloped conscience has a tough battle head, and he has no incentive to feel the pain of what he's done, and now has a culture that defines it as good. Only religious language can help him face that, and religion can be just as good at justifying violence than facing a wounded innocence when you take a life out of fear.
Is panentheism nature and meaning?
I may be wrong, but am not sure pantheists believe this explanation of pantheism. The forms of matter in creation are nothing but patterning void. God is what "pushes" and contains the pattern, not what patterns.
Let me try and ask ourselves a thought provoking question:
What would an external, alien, unbiased (as far as possible) watcher or listener think about this admittedly sophisticated discussion?
My suspicion is, she would ask herself: "What the heck is this entity called God meant to be, why do they even use this word, isn’t it all about the structure of the universe? Why are they so much focused on a hypothetical being (called God) who governs the whole world - is it just the anthropic analogy that some superhero must exist to hold the world together? Poor human beings… not willing to be self-responsible…" ❓
Occams Razor:
Pantheism (even without theism) is simpler than Panentheism, no outer entity needed (as sad as it sounds, but probably true). Human bias eliminated.
😀
lazyness...
That Alien it would be an idiot not to wonder where this "structure" of the universe comes from
When you do better. do better. ❤️
I’m a good ONE 4 this one !
Sounds wishy washy to me.
Panentheism allows the great mystery of existence (the Divine) to emerge where straight Pantheism may not. It also places the Divine within Existence, without some cigarette smoking separate Old Nobadaddy like Yaweh constantly messing with us.
If we understand the God’s, he’s doing the same, which means, he creates something and drops it down to the earth 🌍 and waiting to see if he did it well, or worse , then , if anything goes wrong, he will fixing the problem !
Robert asked,why do you need panentheism? Answer: Because " truth " is the property of consciousness alone and not matter.
Source God. ❤️
We can have relationships with ourselves so therefore God being a three-part being could also have relationship with himself why do you think Jesus Christ stated the father and I are one and then he told the disciples once he has sent us into a heaven that he would send them the comforter the Holy Spirit would come upon them
This is nothing but Advaita Vedanta. Why do these people not give credit where it is due?
The Katha Upanishad 6.7 (कथा उपनिषद ६.७) succinctly explains the nature of the Self.
इन्द्रियेभ्यः परं मनो मनसः सत्त्वमुत्तमम्
सत्त्वादधि महानात्मा महतोऽव्यक्तमुत्तमम्
Beyond the senses is the mind,
Beyond the mind is emotion sublime,
Beyond reason is the consciousness of man,
Beyond this is the consciousness of the Universe, the evolver of all.
We are what the Bible States we are body mind soul
If God was always there he would have wait for eternity to create the universe. But before there was time, though, things would be very different. I don't think we will be able to figure it out.
Then how come the underdog can win the game? Cuz stat wise and scientific wise the underdog shouldn't win.
When you “experience” God you will look at the world differently and never be able to comprehend it in the same way you did before, science isn’t able to explain the unexplainable, God will make you question everything you ever believed. Anyone who thinks God fits into a “human” theory will be unable to accept God and will deny the power because if can’t be explained by anyone field of study: science theology psychology philosophy etc.. think of God as an Alien being and then try to make that work in this world..because technically that’s what HE is..God can do things that we cannot and with every generation he creates knew challenges for everyone to try to figure out.. and he will change the rules and the laws that we think are unchangeable .. compare Quantum physics, string theory to the theory of general relativity and you will see how God will play with your mind..
Time has 2 arrows. It only exists within the framework of a space time. When we pass to the next world (NDE'S) it is plain that time is not part of our soul's existence. Time is only necessary in this world. G-D is eternal and fully explained in the Torah(Bible) We do not need alternative theories. Forward and backward time commenced at Big Bang(Creation)
Fascinating but no, i think you cant get rid of a "no-time" God to explain everything .
I agree, God would not violate the laws of physics. But we don't know all the laws of physics either... Angels, for example, can accelerate time. The Universe Mother Spirit has powers of anti-gravity. And the Divine Father is not omnificent, he created a whole host of celestial beings to delegate tasks to, like creating local universes of time and space to his Paradise Creator Sons, like the one who incarnated as Jesus. The Master knew all about the universe, because he created it. And yet, he put all that power in a sort of blind trust, while he grew up as a man. Apparently, to be divine, is also to be humble. Way Cool!
"God stepping in from time to time...."
That's not what traditional theism teaches, m8
*They need to modify/update their religions because science doesn't suport their tales of magic.*
Seems if god knew of the universe he would have wrote it in his book.
If I were God I would be mad at humanity for using Me and my name for their infantile creations. Be a creature, like the animals are, use your intelligence only for peace purposes and be happy like animals are!
if i were a god, i'd have bigger fish to fry.
KEvron
Closer to truth but still far away.
The God of the Atheists definitely Does not exist because that is his definition of God, which is limited due to lack of education and/or understanding of what a God is .
@HelloThere Yes , convinced Atheists are stup*d . You would have already known it if you ve seen Robert's over 5000 videos .
@HelloThere Religion teaches Morality and Spirituality , they are not fiction . They are called moral and religious truths . There are also many theologians (Religious Studies) who earn Phd's just like other sciences. Science and Religion-Spirituality are philosophies on both sides of the same COIN. (The old name of Science was the Philosophy of Nature, and when you get a PhD degree in Physics or whatever field of study, it means Doctor of Philosophy.) … …
Science and religion are two sides of the same deep human impulse to understand the world, to know our place in it, and to marvel at the wonder of life and the infinite cosmos we are surrounded by. Let’s keep them that way, and not let one attempt to usurp the role of the other.
.
Why not look at the evidence and see where it points? There is no evidence for panentheism or for process theology. Evidence points to naturalism.
The evidence points to supernaturalism as existence cannot ever be explained by logic.
@@ksdogg Evidence grounded in science does not point to supernaturalism. Only anecdotal personal subjective experience and its erroneous perception and interpretation points to the supernatural. "Existence cannot ever be explained by logic." I wouldn't bet on that. Perhaps not by logic alone, but together with evidence. At its fundamental layer, existence is physical.
@@georgegrubbs2966 ''Only anecdotal personal subjective experience and its erroneous perception and interpretation points to the supernatural''
_All epistemology and all evidence is ''subjective'' and doesn't exist absent of a mind. And The mind itself cannot be explained within a materialistic framework or scientific method as it is the requisite condition for the creation of the scientific method. This essentially fits the definition of supernatural(beyond the limits of scientific knowledge)_
_The concept of existence is not logical, pertaining the question: why is there actually something? Also physical is an illusion as all physical must obey the Schrödinger equation ,that states all matter exists as a probabilistic waves at it's fundamental layer, that doesn't exist in physical form until collapse occurs. What causes collapse is an unknown phenomena within QM for a 100 years and is another example of a supernatural occurrence_
@@ksdogg It seems that you do not exist.
He can do almost everything but can surely do one thing , that’s God can’t *kill* himself ! That’s his limitation ; existence is a prison for him , so bored out his existence he creates world , nations , families , individual lives with dense stories good and bad experiences
Jesus Christ is God he died and suffered death just like we all have to die he died so our sins could be forgiven and all we have to do is believe and trust in that which is faith. See how your ideal has already been fulfilled he's going to come again one day I'd rather not go through the tribulation that set aside for the Jews.
This is a prime example of the "human wisdom" that is foolishness to God.
You are allowed to use the correct, traditional pronoun, because the “traditional” view is THE view. There is no adjusting it to fit into current times, that would be a different religion then. There is no shame in saying “himself” in this context. These “t’s” are really ruining everything, making nonsense for no reason.
We are in some kind of a laboratory Yes s
😺👍🏻❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️👍🏻😺
Too much like Santa this God... But this might just be a better version than the Abrahamic versions...
Religion has already set us back 2000-years. How about some credible evidence upfront prior to fabrication of more mythical dogma.
So funny that finite mind wants to fit the infinite, timeless mind inside it and then successfully explain the existence.
Just say that you are God and then try to explain who you are..try to explain the illogical using logical mind..
Arguing for God self is foolish ideas
God creation and existence is true.
I love conversation.
Another attempt to reconcile religion with science. They know science removes the need for god. This is an strained attempt to keep god relevant.
same old stuff. speculation. no evidence.
He concepts GOD is it anti Science. GOD atributies true concept is necessary proof. Spinoza GOD used geometry to proof HIM. Guys are, so pedantic. He minds concern GOD are weird words.Possibilities show up existence GOD requires honest mind.
In Jesus' name, Amen.
Yes, the Real Reason for the season…Winter Solstice. Happy Saturnalia. Peace.
So, this is how gods are made. If the current explainations don't do it for you. Well, just
make your own Frankenstein theology that fits your expectations.
🤔
And they shall have itchy ears and want to hear a different truth. Again just a bunch of gobbledygook
🇺🇳8:09
Light is not fast
E=mc² is wrong
We couldn't have see sun if light is fast.
Even we never ever have able to imagine about stars if light is fast forget about to see stars too.
When sun rises sun light/photons takes 8 minutes 20 seconds to reach from sun to earth.
When sun light reach earth our eyes directly sees sun.
Sun light travel by taking second second distance.
By travelling second second it able to reach up to earth at 8 minutes 20 seconds.
When it hit our eyes after 8:20m our eyes directly observed sun.
Distance of sun from earth and earth to sun is equal.
Our eyes should have see like light travel if light is fast.
Our eyes should have see like light travel .
Our eyes should see second second distance and only could have see sun.
Our eyes shouldn't have see sun at ones if light/photons is fast.
Our eyes should have open up to more than 8 minutes 20 seconds when light hits by sun to see sun.
Our eye should have open continuous up to more than 8:20 when light hits eyes to see sun.
Even one blink eyes should not have see sun.
One blink should have unable to see sun.
We wouldn't have see sun like we are observing now if light is fast.
About Stars are far about to see and imagine if is fast.
We never have have observed stars in life if light is fast.
To see moon also we have take more than 2 minutes time to see too.
To observe moon too our we face to face our eyes more then 2 minutes continue without blink too.
Light is not fast.
Absolutly WRONG. Distance Sun light are so millions. Light from SUN is coming Earth fastest. Please per attention. Einstein theory was proof while you comments over his theory wasnt.
Ujjwal, that was painful to read. I will give you the benefit, and assume you were attempting to be humorous. Peace.
there's an Up and Atom video that just arrived that describes this very well I think, the speed of light remains the same and the circumstances change, or something like that :) ua-cam.com/video/JUwpOWOg0fk/v-deo.html
@@maxwellsimoes238 I'm saying wrong.
Yes wrong. Light fast is wrong.
If light is fast we never would have able observed sun.
If light is fast than we have able to observe only few distance at ones.
We just have see like light travel
Distance distance per second.
.
Yes we should have see like light/photons travel.
@@cps_Zen_Run
Light is not fast e=mc² is infinity times wrong.
Because if it is fast we are are are observing sun like light travel some distance at some some second.
We never ever have observed at ones.