Robin LePoidevin - Alternative Concepts of God?

[@leviconnermusic]

I never like the "evil, and bad things happening in the world" as an argument against the existence of God. As a parent you let your child make mistakes and you try to help them learn a better way, you don't put them in a box so they can never make another mistake again. And from a parent's perspective there is a level of understanding the child will not gain until they are older, or until they have learned from their mistakes; this is a vital part of growing up. Now extrapolate that a trillion times to an all-knowing omnipotent being, I imagine God does not see evil acts or the suffering that humans commit or go through in the same way we do.

[@Practicality01]

Yes, many who make the argument that present evil is argument against God presume that the evil can't possibly have a benefit. Like a child who can't understand why they have to save money and be patient to get things, we may lack the capacity to truly understand the benefits we receive from relatively short-term problems.

[@jimliu2560]

What about evil that have No benefit? Like Intestinal Parasites that ravages little children in poor villages...that severely handicaps the child or kills them??? Explain the benefit of this?

[@Kyssifrot]

But I don't think that "evil is necessary to gain a specific form of knowledge" is a metaphysical necessity. Imagine being an omnipotent parent that have the power to create a child that can meaningfully learn whatever without the need of (sometimes horrendous) suffering, but still choose to create one that need this suffering to learn. Wouldn't such a parent be profoundly immoral?

[@leviconnermusic]

@@jimliu2560 I would not ascribe evil to non-sentient lifeforms and their role in human suffering; that is just part of nature; I think of of the word evil in terms of morality. I am also not of the mind that God is "pulling the strings" I think he has put the gears in motion and lets things move forward as they will. If we think of God and humans, or consciousness as eternal or infinite than a single human lifetime, or the suffering of a human within ones lifetime, or even the totality of all human suffering is really no more than a blip within the measure of eternity and more or less benign in the grand scheme of things. This is not to say that we as human beings should not be mindful of others' suffering but, maybe that is the benefit? Perhaps the benefit or learning that can be done from suffering is not always as much for the individual experiencing it but for those who witness it so that they (we) can learn empathy and compassion and are compelled to serve our fellow humans.

[@Practicality01]

@@jimliu2560 I mean, given that it would be beyond my ability to understand its not likely I could explain it. That said, I can make it stab at the general idea: The fact that it upsets you likely will motivate you to fix this problem. Your compassion will drive you to work towards a more just world. For the child, they will learn that sometimes things beyond your control define your life and it will give them strength when dealing with smaller problems. I would be remiss if I didn't mention that nearly all beliefs in God include the idea that individuals are immortal in some form so those experiences aren't lost when a person dies. 40-80 years of suffering might be difficult but it's very minor when compared to infinite years of benefit to the individual. I know that seems unfair to point towards specific additional beliefs to justify the idea. But that's exactly the point. The belief that it's evil or unjust is based on the belief that the person simply suffers and then ceases to exist. I.e. believing that humans are mortal and then saying in such a situation a God would be evil. However, very few hold such a belief. The additional beliefs come along as sort of a framework. I hope I'm making sense here. My point is that yes if you assume that a God just made everything as we observe it and nothing else that would be kind of pointless and awful, but that's not really what most theists believe. It's kind of a whole different paradigm. Anyway, there's more to the idea but I wrote an article here so I will stop now :)

[@AtheistCook]

Some agnostics reject the existence of deities, But, are open to conciousness being fundamental, Making the observer inside us an alternate definition of god.

[@jimliu2560]

How can you have conscious without a body???

[@nickmet123]

@@jimliu2560 Quantom Mechanics

[@jimliu2560]

@@nickmet123 ???

[@Elrond_Hubbard_1]

@@nickmet123 'Quantum mechanics' is the name for quite a broad field of physics. What specifically in quantum mechanics are you talking about here? What part of it proves there's a fundamental consciousness?

[@nickmet123]

@@jimliu2560 kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqmThKacm8mAeNk

[@ryanfinnerty6239]

Religion as a placebo... great concept. Nothing fits better than the saying ignorance is bliss than when a consolation at a funeral is “they are in a better place” “they’re watching down on us”.

[@tessarnold7597]

Agnosticism answers a different question. Agnosticism states that we can not know if there is a God or not. That is an Epistemological question about justification and knowledge. Whether or not one believes in a supernatural entity loosely referred to as a "God" is not a question about what we can know, it's a question about what we believe to be true about the nature of reality. In short, it's a Metaphysical question. One can be both an Athiest (one who does not believe any of the mythologies or doctrines about any gods) and be a Gnostic, (one who believes that, if any kind of god exists, we can know that.) As a gnostic atheist myself, I don't believe any of the stories we've been told about God. It's all second-hand knowledge and all of it lacks credible evidence. However, if such a thing as a god exists, we should be able to know that information, either through direct experience or through experience facilitated by a reliable medium, like looking at germs through a microscope. (No, Virginia, the stories religions tell about god are not to be considered a reliable medium. Too many variables and too many egos have touched that information to make it reliable. It's a spiritual game of Telephone, and really, would you trust the state of your spirit to anyone else?) As to Pascal's Wager. It's rank cynicism, at best, and grand hypocrisy at worst. And Pascal didn't suggest there would be benefits to this wager in life - save for the commonly held notion of his time that ex-communication typically meant shunning and death by solitude in the wilderness, no. He meant eternal heaven or eternal Hell. His argument is very specific about that. Seeing it for what it is, Pascal's Wager is literally a way to hedge one's bets, or, at least, that's what Pascal wanted. Thankfully the video mentions that Pascal is woefully unresponsive to the notion of other faiths. In his time they did know about Judaism and Islam, but maybe he thought he was safe so long as he stayed with the god of Abraham? I'm going to stop here because I just remembered this is a KZbin comment - not a position paper - and likely no one will bother to read a chunk of text this long. TLDR: the guy being interviewed is a fool, and not the good kind.

[@ccampbell02yt]

I read it, thanks for writing it.

[@svperuzer]

"Whether or not one believes in a supernatural entity loosely referred to as a "God" is not a question about what we can know, it's a question about what we believe to be true about the nature of reality" I came to this conclusion recently. I used think, when people asked the question, "do you believe in god?", that it was silly. And it is epistemologically. But that's not was the question is really about. It's asking about belief. And this type of belief can never be grounded in factual, hard information; in the way a criminal trial or scientific experiment can be. Things which, although we do not know the answer, we know a definite answer exists. It's really a question about what kind of person you are. And I think that's really interesting.

[@3-dwalkthroughs]

Regarding the intro line above "Is God, if there is a God, a personal, conscious, all-powerful Supreme Being?" the ancient Vedic, Sanskrit Texts found in India would agree with that definition: "God, a personal, conscious, all-powerful Supreme Being" but would also include "inconceivable" as part of the definition - with a qualification. Inconceivable in the sense of God's energies are beyond the scope of the human mind to fully comprehend and measure, but at the same time, God can be revealed to some extent within one's heart, by God's own favor. The Bhagavad Gita describes different methods to connect to God (yoga means to connect) by good works (karma yoga) intellectual congruence in ethics, morals and deciphering illusions (jnana yoga) along with depending on God's descending grace in the heart, reciprocated by loving service to God personally, also seen in all manifestations of God's energy, both material and spiritual (bhakti yoga). Increasing happiness and revealed knowledge gradually replace self-doubt, and defuse imagined possibilities of a placebo effect which can haunt the mind and intellect. Practically all religions and yoga practices require some mental discipline, to free the mind from the constant demands of the senses - which can open a channel within the heart for God to inspire and direct when the mind is steady. People seek God for different reasons - wanting a favor like healing a relative or money, or out of curiosity, or seeking pure knowledge and absolute truth. God can reciprocate in kind, but the blossoming of a spiritual love for the Creator and all of creation, is said to be the real fruit of religion/spirituality, beyond bargaining or demanding, or an intellectualism that needs to calculate the full length and breadth of the inconceivable Supreme Lord, before making a simple submission from the heart. Everyone has choice, which come with reactions, which are meant for consideration over time and personal introspection. As the saying goes, seek and ye shall find - no matter what part of the world you hail from. God is like the sun, shining universally and giving all the chance to see

[@MrSanford65]

I think agnosticism is a perfect position if you’re only going to use detached rational logic . But I think as human beings we were designed to use emotion and subjective feelings as a guide towards the truth that’s transcendent and not dependent on local space and time. Science examines things more closely, but still ignores the larger lines of cause-and-effect on both sides of everything. I think we all feel the experience of an eternal mind and the benefits of focusing on one particular thing that is beyond space and time. Just don’t give it a label And then try to prove the existence of that label in Exact detail

[@joegibbskins]

You can be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist. Agnosticism just means that you don’t think it can be known, which it can’t. Not really anything to do with your comment I guess, other than that I largely agree with you and am tired of people thinking the agnostic part of, in my case agnostic theism, means that I don’t believe or haven’t thought about it

[@MrSanford65]

@@joegibbskins True, I can’t rationally tell you pro or con . I can only tell you that it’s highly unlikely we could’ve survived all on are own

[@Kyssifrot]

"But I think as human beings we were designed to use emotion and subjective feelings as a guide towards the truth that’s transcendent and not dependent on local space and time" I'm not sure how would you be able to defend this. I can definitely see that humans have a tendency to use emotion as a guide in their choice, but I'm not sure how one would start from this observation and conclude that a mind designed humans to do so. It might very well be that humans have that tendency to use emotions in their choices because of another reason (might be evolutionary or purely random).

[@chriswinchell1570]

@@Kyssifrot Agree. And what are people like me to conclude when I’ve never felt any visceral belief in a god?

[@konsolidated]

Evil and suffering is not evidence against the existence of God. Benevolence is not a requirement of a creator.

[@thomasrubbery3455]

*Mondern man is not the man who goes off to discover himself, his secrets, and his hidden truth; he is a man who tries to invest himself in something beneficial for the future.*

[@scottkarl2514]

@Joshua Taylor Perfect you buy when the market is low to get profit when it rises

[@hatsapp1716]

I wanted to trade Crypto but got confused by the fluctuations in price

[@alanfoss8990]

@@hatsapp1716 That won't bother you if you trade with a professional like Expert Scott Tyler

[@lennoxbaker4182]

Getting in with him just last week, am winning already so awesome.

[@rogercanevari6920]

I lost £12000 carelessly trading on a platform then I was referred to Expert Scott he recovered the loss and made an extra profit of £4600

[@DifficultFlannel]

I could listen to him all day.

[@valkonrad]

Agnosticism has been the standard Catholic position on God for two thousand years. It’s only those who constantly try to understand him in some mundane (usually glossed as “scientific”) terms who have problems with this. The only way to come to terms with God is through his self revelation to you. And the only way to understand this is engaging with one or other of the traditions engaged in the same task. A bit like science really, if you want to engage with the revelation through measurement and manipulation, but this is a limitation.

[@xspotbox4400]

Yes, it takes religion to raise above the natural wilderness. But once modern civilization gets invented and built, people must ask themselves, what is the meaning of abundance and comfort if not to simply enjoy what was made.

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@hollyhunt9116]

If you are agnostic, you don't believe in god because belief in god is a matter of faith. If you question, as in, unsure, you don't have faith required to be a deist. Those considering themselves agnostic are in truth atheist but are perhaps open to information or maybe a new concept of god than the traditional idea. The one requiring blind faith.

[@mrshankerbillletmein491]

Whatever position you take it is a matter of faith I think faith in the absense of certain knowledge

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Believe in GOD isnt evidence agnostic. Mind honesty need agnostic proof. Agnostic hasnt evidence GOD.

[@mainman2256]

The existence of the universe is absolutely not “evidence for God” lol and even if there was a God I doubt he would care about whether or not you chose to live a “religious life” or spent any time “worshiping”

[@kiancuratolo903]

There is something I learned when learning about quantum mechanics, can it be proven can only take you so far. Is it useful, do you get more out of the idea than you put into it That can chart a path through that singularity, you just have to be sure not to overstate your confidence when other opinions give the same predictions and outcomes as yours

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@francesco5581]

i would like to listen more of this, very sharp very useful ...

[@irfanmehmud63]

"Rather than love, than money, than fame, GIVE ME THE TRUTH." ------------ Henry David Thoreau

[@surendrakverma555]

Excellent discussion. Thanks 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@Dion_Mustard]

I am more fascinated by consciousness, and it seems when people have an out of body or near death experience they encounter a sort of godly being - a creator, so I am more persuaded to think "god" is real than not, other wise how else do we explain existence?

[@FabianReschke]

Maybe the Matrix? There is not a single argument against it, but a lot against a god.

[@Dion_Mustard]

@@FabianReschke oooh explain? i like the matrix.

[@amongussus4]

​@@Dion_Mustardretro causality the present influenced the past that one too.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

What if God is existence, rather than exists?

[@S3RAVA3LM]

That's right. Science is: observable, measurable, testable, repeatable. You're conclusion is not plausible to materialists because their method isn't great enough, and what materialists cannot prove they deem nonsense. It's really a joke.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

The Lord(Source) 1st God is unbegotten, is the fountain of life overflowing from within and of himself, self sustainable and existent and existence itself. Science cannot prove this. Surely if there were an end, there would be no beginning. God is known as the beginning being one with end -- indicating existence. Outside both time and space.

[@sunandasau1296]

The smartest comment

[@maxwellsimoes238]

If foi bielive in GOD is evidence TRUE, so if you dont believes GOD is evidence God. GOD or Not are same object means diferent name. Taulogy. He has stupid mind pseudociência unable discernir words GOD means.

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@ngurappa0411]

As usual, God once again succeeded in engaging both of you in a discussion about Him. His existence is very apparently alive in your dialogues whether you yourself believe in Him or not.

[@Bassotronics]

God is not male nor female. It has no body for it is omnipresent.

[@Phoenix258]

This is a very interesting viewpoint, never thought of it like this before....

[@MichaelDembinski]

@@Bassotronics Quite right. A God of a Universe of hundreds of billion of galaxies each of hundreds of billion of stars - so many life forms - and God takes on the attributes of terrestrial organisms that produce gametes known as sperm, which fuse with the larger female gamete or ovum, in the process of fertilisation. WHY?

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@Bassotronics]

@@drmontague6475 😂 But it designed the fart!

[@kos-mos1127]

Agnosticism is the only view of God anyone can reasonable have. The Universe does not demonstrate there is a god it just shows there is the universe. Any argument for the Judeo-Christian God works the other way against God

[@S3RAVA3LM]

What makes you think you can fathom a God, or that your definition is absolute referring to a God in correct context or assumption. God derives from the word good, predicated of Source not properly because we cannot fathom Source, rather as a way to get an idea. From my understanding consciousness is ignorance. "The more you know, the more you realize how little you know". Agnosis so seeking gnosis. "The universe does not demonstrate there is a god, it just shows there is a universe" This is only your perspective. Who is the one seeing. Who is the one looking from inside. Is the observer the same as the preceiever. How do you know that what your looking at you are really seeing it properly. Relying on your mere physical senses to contemplate on God Is not reason, and logically erroneous. The universe does not demonstrate what you think God is. What you think the universe is, is only what you think. Etc. Implausible stance.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

The universe surely demonstrates something that is beyond human conception and science ability. Why should we not consider this universe the work of the Lord[Source(God)]? How should we fathom God?

[@oneworldonehome]

Here are a few quotes about God, from *The New Message from God* - as presented to Marshall Vian Summers. "God is the experience of total relationship." "God permeates all things, lives within all things and yet is beyond all things-all at the same time." "It could be said that God is the sum of all relationships. God is the consummation of all relationships." “The Presence of God is first experienced as emptiness because it lacks movement, and then within this emptiness, you begin to feel the Presence that permeates all things and that gives all meaning in life.” "God must enter a world where God is not welcome, in ways that do not generate fear and panic amongst those who believe the world is their only reality. It is for this reason that the Will of God manifests itself in subtle and ingenious ways in this world." "God is like the air. Everyone breathes the air, but few pay any attention to it. Everyone is sustained every moment with every breath. Their bodies depend upon each breath in order to live in the next moment. Cut off this supply of air and the person dies quickly and everything comes to an end. God is like that-so pervasive, so present, so supportive and so nourishing."

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@yeolee2703]

Closer to truth but not there yet. Keep seeking, when the harvest is ripe, reap. When one knows the truth, the truth will set one free. It will not be manipulative, artifical or in any carnal sense, come taste the Lord. How? Be humble or be humbled. I am not one who believes, I was humbled. My time had come.

[@mintakan003]

There can be different forms of "agnosticism". For e.g., one can be a Bayesian. Some things are more likely to be true, based on the evidence. But one never knows for sure. Certainly, a kind of "God" as the creator of the physical universe, seems unlikely, given what we know about physical processes, scientific evidence garnered through the centuries. On the other hand, there is religious sentiment, felt my many people. It belongs in the realm of human meaning. Whether it is "true" or not, one acts as if it were "true", at some level. (Physicality may not be the last word.) One acts based on what is available at the time, what can be (partially) seen, intimated, even if one doesn't know what is the "ultimate truth" (whatever this means). It is not certainty. This is why Christians call it "faith". Either that, or just be the best atheist that one can be. This is in the moral sense, in the sense of integrity, that one can find one's own fulfillment.

[@bluelotus542]

Agnosticism is the blind alternative to blind theism and blind atheism. The Vedanta says that while God is easily available to those who are disillusioned with matter, those who are intoxicated by social prestige, wealth, physical beauty and speculative knowledge cannot approach Him because they lack the proper attitude.

[@AtheistCook]

So called magical or mystic books including the bible are not reliable proof of the existence of deities

[@bluelotus542]

@@AtheistCook You can call magic or mystic even a potato, for although you give it for granted, no biologist has any idea how to create it.

[@AtheistCook]

@@bluelotus542 of course, i agree completely

[@johannuys7914]

I am not intoxicated by any of those things you mentioned. I am also not swayed easily by anyone claiming they are messengers from god. Your argument is based on a logical fallacy, I'm afraid.

[@gladishilton1943]

Taking the meaning of Agnosticism, or being Agnostic as : "...a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God." - Google I find such a position odd. I mean, on what basis can we place limits on what we are capable of understanding or what we're able to investigate, tomorrow or into the distant future? Given it is quite clear we have never had any idea about what the future holds, it seems obvious we have no basis for putting any limits on our ability to discover truths if they're out there to be discovered. Therefore, I can't decide..... is Agnosticism simply an unjustifiable position because, like God himself, there is a complete lack of evidence to justify it (and is therefore simply a religious proclamation)..... ...OR... Is Agnosticism 100% true, which implies that God does not exist.....because only if He does not exist can we say with certainty that nothing can be known about him.

[@jayrob5270]

He's basically saying self delusion can be a good thing

[@johannuys7914]

I am slowly coming around agreeing with this premise. Belief, to me, means trust without any evidence - an impossible position to take for someone like me. But it seems a huge swathe of the world's population needs that self delusion to get through their day, remain positive, be civilized, refrain from creating havoc, etc. etc. From that perspective the guy has a point, I think.

[@matterasmachine]

when you really believe in god and afterlife you get a good simulation of what we, humans, really exist for. And getting happiness from beliefs is the proof for that. But that's only simulation. In reality we exist to build a better world during our life, not after it ends.

[@nelsonpinheiro1148]

Perfect.

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@matterasmachine]

@@drmontague6475 scientists make mistakes. Are they intelligent?

[@donmegahole]

There you go, making a bunch of assumptions. Did you even watch this video lol?

[@matterasmachine]

@@donmegahole I don’t have to repeat the video

[@patrickkillabrew6207]

Sorry. The existence of the Universe and Earth are NOT arguments for god at all.

[@davenchop]

my thoughts exactly... why would he even interview this guy there is a need for some better quality guests on this channel quite a few recently were just plain laughable

[@jamesnordblom855]

Consider the idea that there are more gods than the one we blame for creation. The biblical god implied this when he commanded "thou shalt have no other gods before me". When confronted by a being that can work "magic", there is little else that can be concluded but that the being is a god, certainly a higher power.

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@ChuckBrowntheClown]

The only rewards here on this Earth and in this world is to live for Christ and to die is gain. To be made new again.

[@AtheistCook]

Reward? That looks like a requirement

[@ChuckBrowntheClown]

@@AtheistCook Every breath you take isn't a reward? That breath does require energy.

[@ChuckBrowntheClown]

@@AtheistCook Jesus Christ requires the life and gives the reward of life.

[@AtheistCook]

@@ChuckBrowntheClown i would like to meet your invisible friend Jesus so i can ask him myself

[@ChuckBrowntheClown]

@@AtheistCook For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; that at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: but now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; and that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: and came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; in whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: in whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit. Ephesians 2:8‭-‬22 KJV

[@1p6t1gms]

How do I know the messaging in these books may have started out as truth, but has been corrupted by multiple authors misinterpretations. Or other few of that time that could read and write who just claimed to have first knowledge only to enrich themselves in some way by writing things that sounded close to it all... and among other things that haven't even been thought about yet. How can I be sure that this is all more than likely corrupted to varying degrees of “truth” isn't going to injure me in some way I don't currently understand fully? These books could be outright damning those whom trust it the most when there may be another “truth” hidden from the people whom worship... besides for it's either this way or that way? You could use the wager in the same way of protecting yourself by not believing...

[@nelsonpinheiro1148]

Each hour you been in this world is your book. Voices whisper in your heart... Until you find how to read your own book. No faith, faith, conviction. It's your path your book. Trust in your heart..... You sabotage my comment. Why? I know why. You expands the cancer. No do that. Extinct the cancer.

[@1p6t1gms]

@@nelsonpinheiro1148 I define feelings/emotions as such, that the feelings are those that are built up slowly over time and can express positive/negative long lasting inner substances which control where the thoughts eventually accumulate... Whereas, the emotions are defined as the sudden outburst that happens from an accumulation of positive/negative feelings. Nevertheless, thoughts still must be a precursor to these feelings/emotions. Meaning that when listening to your heart you must first understand the thoughts internally to work with any of the positive/negative feelings and the consequences that follow from false truths that can happen by following your heart without enough forethought. But rather these can become the forerunner to deluded-beliefs that eventually affect into a personal suffering over time from a choice of carelessness that seems unnatural or perhaps unaware. The “Voices whisper in your heart” are your uncontrolled thoughts?

[@skiphoffenflaven8004]

Or it shuts down your mind to discovering amazing truths. He left that option out. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@TheEnfadel]

He says "the creation of the universe is proof of gods existence" but then who or what created or caused god? If he or she "exists necessarily", because something must exist in the first place, well god is more complex than the laws of physics, so ill defer to the more simple explanation.

[@wrackable]

Wait until they figure out this is the after life and this is heaven,hell,purgatory and anything else you can dream up 😂

[@aqilshamil9633]

;)

[@wrackable]

@@aqilshamil9633 took me a lot of life’s to figure it out not gonna lie lol

[@bobblacka918]

Death is a fact. No debate there. But God sent prophets to let us know that eternal life is an option that is available for those people who want it. Then he sent his son to explain in great detail how a person can get eternal life. So either you want it or you don't. If you don't want or don't care about eternal life, then you will surely not get it. That is also a fact. But if you want eternal life, then Jesus shows us the things he expects us to do in order to get it. Is eternal life guaranteed? No. Only death is guaranteed, that is, if you don't choose life. For more detail, read the books of Matthew and John. The rest of the Bible is unnecessary and irrelevant for this topic. Everything you need to know about eternal life is contained in the books of Matthew and John.

[@AtheistCook]

I do not know anybody who lives forever, most religions promise outrageous benefits to join their religions including eternal life after one is dead, a lot if these primitive offers were made more than 2000 years ago when there were no schools, not even kindergarden. There is no way to get the money back after one is dead.

[@bobblacka918]

@@AtheistCook : Yes, many religions offer outrageous promises. But the founder of one religion, and only one religion, said this: I promise you eternal life, and to prove I have power to do this I will be publically killed and then rise from the dead. And he did what he said he would do and thousands of people saw this in person. No other person in history can claim this. And by the way, eternal life is free. Jesus tells you how to get it in his own words if you bother to read just one book in the Bible, the book of Matthew.

[@secullenable]

None of us really know the real 'why' but deeply religious people are further away from it than the rest of us.

[@hashiromer7668]

Existence of evil undercuts the evidence for an omni benevolent God, not a God who is indifferent to human suffering or evil.

[@spiralsun1]

The evidence for and against god examples he uses is not evidence but criteria projected by human judgement. Why do people in every generation think they know everything and project how they feel onto the universe? Even though now it’s known that we do this? It helps me understand what level people are at, how they can’t escape their own ego and coping or rationalization behavior. Some would call it delusional, but maybe they are just not capable of anything else. Having so many assumptions-memorized “right” answers-then judging based on them when they really can’t because they are so flawed, but they use the ideas anyway because they think accessing assumptions is “thinking”. Then they fill the world with those erroneous assumptions. It’s exactly like slash and burn agriculture in a rain forest. And in the end, it is for the same class of instrumental reasons why they do these things as well. This is why human forebrain planning and intentions can become so problematic if not reined-in or directed by higher meaning, thought, and patterns. Openness, agreeableness, and reading comprehension are the types of things which have been historical antidotes when combined with high IQ. Also not prioritizing conscientiousness as a pattern for everyone-especially those with the above qualities. To stay in motion in thought and life toward higher meaning. Which always seems to be there. Levels of meaning, different perspectives, these things are foundations of true morality. If you define morality as following higher meaning in the long term than you right now in this particular time and place. The life idea portrayed by the human body is this, but we need to extend the symbol to the larger reality-which is why I mentioned reading comprehension. See a human as “in motion” rather than the destination or end. I love how these videos are so stimulating and allow you to see and respond to these ideas and patterns. Thanks so much for this 🙏🏻❤️🥰

[@godthecreatoryhvh681]

Hi, it's crazy I know. This is very unclear to Me. I belived it's About too mutch, no It's more biologycal, like a traumatise geenes. Like borderline?dont you have any client Sincères amitiés 😎

[@spiralsun1]

@@godthecreatoryhvh681 Hi, thank you. 🥰 Yes, I do get the “traumatized genes” comment. Well said, friend.

[@originalcontent210]

I think this guy really misses the mark with Paschal’s wager, talking about how there’s a fallacy regarding an artificial definition of a religious life.. he also felt the need to interrupt the other gentleman to say it. I believe the premise is simple, that if you blatantly disregard the notion that your choices and behaviors here may have eternal consequences, that possible damnation and suffering for eternity is possible. While on the other hand the choice to seek out truth snd strive for a virtuous, morally good life comes with very low risk should the existence of a morally just God turn out to not be true. Thus it is certainly a wager worth taking seriously.

[@godthecreatoryhvh681]

Eureka!!!!you are a real genius. Bravo. Wake up.try to use your brain. I swear My child, I know many of you are into a real nightmare, I Do anyXthink to repair the bug. I probably fix IT. You, all of You will get free from the zomby syndrome. I ackowlege this firts with My Earth dad firts. And after I see it was a big problème all over the world. I am sad but I work on. Your brain fonction I will give you that back. sincères amitiés 😎

[@godthecreatoryhvh681]

Martin , is french from France. Yes.😎

[@dongshengdi773]

RELIGION IS NOT FICTION: 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.

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@godthecreatoryhvh681]

Hello good Day partenaire. Did life take care of you these Day. I hope. Sincères amitiés 😎

[@pikiwiki]

how do you contrast universal creation with evil and say evil is an argument against god

[@g_m15]

When... Evil is just a consequence of Free will agents with limited knowledge.

[@182bullseye]

"Fake it till you make it"

[@divinechi2468]

Garbage conversation. For starters, agnosticism is not a declaration of faith. It’s not a religious position. It is simply a declaration of knowledge. So you can be a theist and still be agnostic - in fact many religions are like this (e.g. no one understands the ways of god, etc). You can also be an agnostic atheist. If your answer to “do you believe in god” is anything other than “yes” then you are an atheist. This is a binary answer. You either believe or you don’t.

[@PetraKann]

So Pascal’s wager will fool god into ‘thinking’ that you have genuine faith? Good luck - better off being an honest atheist than an agnostic who is believing in God just in case He/She exists.

[@MrDubyadee1]

How do know you’d be better off? Who or what rewards “honest atheists?” The agnostic doesn’t believe or not believe in God. The agnostic knows that he does not know which is the most honest position. Pascal’s wager is really something else.

[@mehowop]

Atheist is no different than theist. In that case "truth" depends on assumptions. And assumptions in both cases are based on pure believe.

[@benjaminthomas7237]

Closer to Truth needs to interview Jordan Peterson!!!

[@AtheistCook]

i hope he does not get invited

[@andrebrown8969]

Why?

[@tjentalman]

yea ask him why he's sexist

[@tomfaranda]

@@tjentalman sexist? Ridiculous comment but nice try

[@blijebij]

The definition of god should be self-explanatory, like a model of reality should be. So forget religion if you wanne define god, as religion is conditioning you. I never met any good definition of what god should be so far. Sounds maybe cynical, but it is not ment that way. I think the person that can do that also can give a model about reality it self. Reality is based on principles, to name one. All mighty is a concept like kids have in a way, that their father is the strongest person at earth. As a principle it totally fails. Same with absolute freedom. God can not also be defined as within time. God as well as reality must be their own cause, their own origin. Must contain themselves. The relation that contains it self. It is a fascinating puzzle.

[@g_m15]

The Ultimate Observer. God is the highest dimensional being, maybe 5D, or 8D.. In that "World", God is alone and in the lower ones, God continuesly creates. God is All- Powerful, because of being with highest dimensions. God is All-Knowing, because * all* was generated by God. This makes His masterplan the best possible. Thats why its benevolent Masterplan. God is aware because He is observing, and we are existing. Also because we are aware, therefore, there is Ultimately an aware Observer. God is limitless because in His world there is nothing else, so, no coordinates. Out of the SpaceTime that we know. Now religion; Before our biological selves, we were created as awarenesses. God asked us, Am I not your God? And all testified, yes. Then God created the test for selection of a greater creation than angels(which have no free will). This greater creation is a human that chooses obeying to God's laws. Just like everything in existence obeys to God's laws (except some agents with free will). The humans that choose to stay true with their first "testimony" before this world, will be in a World of reward, with other law-abiding agents.

[@g_m15]

*The most mystical thing is rationality!* And yet they use it to say, "nothingggg special, just life being lived, and it accidentally makes sense." Laws of Physics and quantum Physics are proofs of a Law maker. Rationality is proof of the source of it. Awareness, same..

[@johannuys7914]

Who made the Law maker?

[@g_m15]

@@johannuys7914 The lawmaker MUST BE UNCREATED. Otherwise the lawmaker wouldnt be the lawmaker but the law abiding agent. 😅 The Ultimate Lawmaker, is the creator of everything, and in that "World" where the Lawmaker IS, is eternal, and alone! THINGS ARE CREATED or caused or observed in lower dimensional "worlds".

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

The truth about how god is defined has been available since 1927. We are the only generation in history that has been provided everything necessary to figure this out, but we're too self-absorbed to _connected the dots._ ... It's easier to just maintain the status quo.

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@drmontague6475 *"then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe"* ... There is "intelligence" but no intelligent designer.

[@Daysdontexist]

@@drmontague6475Lol, Fatboy analogy maybe you should take a break from your glutinous lust and go take a walk in nature and find truth alternatively, rather then consume all day watching this channel further justifying your self absorbtion and hopping bandwagon (agnostic atheist) philo- position. Am Just saying bud don't affend.

[@godthecreatoryhvh681]

This is the only awnsers I can give You, dont forget I am the Creator as an artist Who show is Art. To All of you.😎

[@S3RAVA3LM]

Why when materialists refer God it's always something out 'there'. Rather than acknowledgement and engagement with what's in them, what they're of and what they are, and everything else. Some grow old losing that touch of imagination, and that divine spark. For example: the Wright brothers imagined flying aspired by the birds, having a dream that divine spark within, and a Will to follow through with a seeming 'fantasy' of an idea. Imagination is certain, fantasy is false notion. I imagine God because of the aspirations all around. I need not fantasize at all. Life is certain, meaning and purpose is found in all. Before trusting science which is: observable, measurable, testable, repeatable. Why not realize that science is only revealing what is beyond. Why give science any credit or worship. Science didn't create anything -- it cannot oberserve the Universe, science cannot measure the consciousness, science cannot test Intellect, science cannot repeat the Laws. The teachings are here, Passed down through the ages, The key is found within. If you're going to talk about cake, Why not have a taste already.

[@dongshengdi773]

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.

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@dare-er7sw]

Hinduism > Advaita Vedanta > pure consciousness = Nirguna Brahman (Nirguna = no form, Brahman = the vast). Also Saguna Brahman or consciousness with qualities = God & us, a person, etc. You can have it both ways but the ultimate reality = ParaBrahman (Beyond the vast even) is pure awareness unaware of itself so it's both full & empty, full = filled to d brim with potential, empty = void (devoid of subject - object split). Words do not reach it and it's indescribable. Now Advaita says consciousness arose spontaneously on ParaBrahman absolute (our real nature). "I AM" or existence consciousness bliss or sat chit ananda came into being . Call it God, Brahman, Consciousness, whatever... It's expressing itself through us. Thus the one becomes many. Nisargadatta Maharaj in his book I AM THAT says that the duality of love is above the unity of being, that love is the whole purpose of duality. Consciousness is having an adventure through its power of projection. The light of awareness is beyond consciousness, so this nondual awareness is our real nature but we must explore this "I AM" or consciousness first and it (God)will reveal all its secrets to us and we will be the absolute (pure awareness) again. No experience is possible there. Advaita goes onto say further that all this creation or projection never happened in the first place! We were, are, and always be the ParaBrahman or the light of awareness beyond consciousness by which consciousness shines. So nisargadatta says, consciousness in movement becomes the world, consciousness at rest becomes the absolute. Makes sense? It's Advaita Vedanta. He has never interviewed Saryapriyananda of NYC Vedanta society. It would be an hour long interview with him only revealing all the teachings of Advaita Vedanta in terms in which we can understand or relate to. He's on KZbin, look Sarvapriyananda up. The best teacher alive on the subject of advaita or nonduality. He must be interviewed for the Vedantic viewpoint of God, us, and the nature of reality.

[@evaadam3635]

You do not need Pascual's Wager to be responsible and moral. Let me explain, as follows : To be a true responsible moral human being is to acknowledge all the free natural bounties that he benefits and then to give thanks to the CREATOR who possibly exists so to leave no room for SOMEONE to be disappointed, ignored, or hurt. Lack of proof of God's existence is a rotten excuse to be an ingrate. In other words, choosing to be atheist or agnostic is immoral at the start because you have no God to thank to for all the free bounties you received. Freeloading without gratitude is the common trait of a sociopath.

[@zumzoz7245]

Stupid comment

[@patsprankcalls]

I wish this channel was more about science and less about religion.

[@johnnytass2111]

Why does what you wish others should do or not do matter?

[@patsprankcalls]

@@johnnytass2111 Because clearly I'm more sensible that all these religious people who believe that we had everything figured out thousands of years ago.

[@johnnytass2111]

@@patsprankcalls How will your wish come true?

[@patsprankcalls]

@@johnnytass2111 Well, my wish to have this channel make more videos about science and less videos about religion will come true if someone from the channel reads my comment and decides to change the channel accordingly.

[@johnnytass2111]

@@patsprankcalls But is it sensible to wish for things? Why not simply ask the creators of this channel for what you desire them to do? How is a wish any different than a prayer in a Godless world?

[@apparentbeing]

Agnostics believe in possibilities. No reason to deny something what we don't know. Atheists are different they believe or pretend that they know.

[@zumzoz7245]

Depends on the use of atheism as a word cuz people use it differently. Many "atheists" use it as "I am not convinced that god exists" and not absolute "God does not exists" cuz you can't prove that like you can't prove Russells teapot. Now I would be ready to outright deny existence of some specific deities but not of a whole god category

[@ChuckBrowntheClown]

Discern the truth. The Bible talks of discernment. Dispensationalism is a discernment. Dividing of sheep and goats is a discernment. Chastisement is a discernment. Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, is a discernment. Understanding is discernment. 2 Timothy 2:15 study to show thyself approved unto god, a Workman that needeth not to be ashamed, greatly dividing the word of Truth. Is a discernment. Knowing or not knowing is a discernment. To know him or not to know him. If you know him he knows you if you don't know him he don't know you.

[@somethingyousaid5059]

The source of all problems.

[@chrispeterson8781]

What's that background noise? Sounds like two people playing ping pong in the background.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

If exist is the ground or measure of reality, then existence and God can be the same?

[@projectmalus]

Perhaps, and time as a short curved efficient segment that can be used by the imagination, together it's what we call time. Co-creation unfolding the flower. The flower the closest the universe can come to the Pearl. The earth a flower.

[@xodyx7706]

I wouldnt go as far and say that there are evidences for god. This is just a subjective opinion without scientific backup

[@wrackable]

Science is just applied faith. It’s all requiring belief in a idea lol

[@stoictraveler1]

5:40 is not correct, you can find something Godlike if you sit and clear your mind completely, though it may take some time. Maybe years. Some seek nothing but purity of mind, and find God within.

[@ChuckBrowntheClown]

Not knowing is ignorant. So if you're not knowing of the Son you don't know the Father. So if you're ignorant of him he's ignorant of you. Yes there is evil but where has God done any action of evil? I believe all his acts have been holy, just, and righteous. God didn't make Eve or Adam eat the fruit, nor did he make Cain kill his brother.

[@ujjwalbhattarai8670]

Time

[@ingenuity168]

Gaslighting works too.

[@Daysdontexist]

What does gaslighting mean bud?

[@godthecreatoryhvh681]

I am (Potentia) also(Actual) I am a priori,generaly as the pre-condition of Human understanding, but merely as the spécial pre-condition of the exact science. Matter canot applied in physics. Also, I am the complementairy caractéristic of the electron (and the Atom) (Wave and Particule) . Thus I am potetial Beeing. Now it's OK, for all of you whant kind of GOD, I am. 😎

[@roxammon5858]

LePoidevin hardly looks away from Robert. Creepy. It must have been uncomfortable for him.

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Sorry dont sorry he is bizarre chalatan.

[@Ploskkky]

When it comes to gods any fantasy is allowed.

[@ajg3768]

Did see once, airplane going through very bad up and down tribulation. On I phone recording, every body was calling name of Jesus or O my God. Wonder what agnostic would call. O my Universe?.

[@Catonzo]

Agnosticism is to me a cop out I think even hard core religious people should just consider to be acceptable. Sure, they don't live by the rules to the letter, but they are generally conducting themselves as a way of "what if" at worst. They won't transgress any more severe than a religious person would (no matter how hardcore religious you are following the Bible for example is extremely difficult at best and you WILL sin in some way, shape or form) and any "sin" committed is a mere infraction at worst. I believe, but I do not know what to believe. The word of people? The word of the bible? The words of Jesus (which seems to me to have been a VERY lenient man and if he wouldn't condemn me to hell for working on a Sunday, then you certainly shouldn't feel the right to be able to do so either)? However I conduct myself regardless of there being a God or not in ways that would be considered "nice". If I were to be asked by God today "Do you deserve Hell?" I would, without a hint of doubt, ask him what the heck he was smoking to come up with such a question. Maybe not that straight question, but maybe be a bit less sarcastic and simply say straight up "Absolutely not". Even if I didn't go to Church on Sundays or the likes. It wouldn't be genuine of me to just go to Church because I want to err on the right side. I wouldn't magically start believing more than I do now.. I would just know more of the bible and its stories. It would still be stories even if told in Church. Real stories (to my knowledge), but still stories that don't do much in ways of convincing me any more than I already am. So.. if someone as a Christian wants to condemn me to hell for not believing strongly enough, just make sure to realize that you are assuming that you are allowing yourself of making decisions or wishes that only God himself would be able to do.. meaning you have extreme high self-image and you are already sinning. Even more so than me, in fact. You put yourself at the level of God and think you can decide on equal terms as him, just because you "believe" and know the bible. So, I believe in a God, I just don't truly know how to conduct myself and because there are so many options depending on who you ask, I choose to just say I believe and will just conduct myself in ways that don't hurt anyone, harm anyone or benefit me at the expense of other's suffering.

[@davenchop]

the universe existing is not in any way shape or form evidence of a god... is this guy serious just as evil in the world is not evidence their isnt a god

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Certainly he agnostic not show up evidence TRUE. He hasnt priciples or proof, so he has pseuscience . Therefore out proof or scientif evidence he hasnt agnostic. He Not has authorities in agnostic existence.

[@zerototalenergy150]

we are puppets.. who is pulling the strings ? W DO NOT KNOW !!!!!!!!!!!

[@tomorrowmaynevercome3171]

Allah is the Creator.

[@AtheistCook]

Can i meet your invisible friend? i would have to ask him personally

[@robertcreekmore4578]

Proof?

[@thomasridley8675]

Since nobody has a lock on the origin of the first cause. We have plenty of evidence on how easily we can be confused into believing some really ridiculous religious beliefs.

[@janklaas6885]

🇺🇳 4:19

[@NeverTalkToCops1]

Funny you don't even NEED alternative concepts to Harry Potter. Stop making up moot dialog. The Woo Channel.

[@drmontague6475]

If you have ever had a wet fart (esp. on a Sunday) then this proves there is no intelligent designer of the universe.

[@Dion_Mustard]

go away