ChatterBank9 mins ago
God Is A Mind
19 Answers
https:/
God is a mind. The undeniable origin and first cause of what we think of as reality.
Without God we have no reasonable explanation for the origin of information, the very basis of all that exists, most notably DNA.
This short 25 minute video begins to scratch the surface of the new sciences that support this conclusion.
Max Planck gets referenced here, as well as many others.
The bottom line is that the materialist worldview is well and truly redundant.
In the light of this, do you question your atheist reality?
God is a mind. The undeniable origin and first cause of what we think of as reality.
Without God we have no reasonable explanation for the origin of information, the very basis of all that exists, most notably DNA.
This short 25 minute video begins to scratch the surface of the new sciences that support this conclusion.
Max Planck gets referenced here, as well as many others.
The bottom line is that the materialist worldview is well and truly redundant.
In the light of this, do you question your atheist reality?
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Is a short 25 minute video over quicker than a long 25 minute video ? As mentioned previously, if one had a decent point to discuss it's best to bring it and discuss first hand. Links to optional videos are fine, those that wish to invest part of their day watching may do so whilst those not wishing to be told they should before contributing need not watch.
What are the main points you wish to claim supports your view of reality ?
What are the main points you wish to claim supports your view of reality ?
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Interesting video, but much of the general thoughts were known to me. An eternal now and here, whilst our experience of space and matter is emergent. IMO all mathematic tools have to represent (roughly) something in reality in order to be useful. The issue with the video is how it's all been jammed together.
One can view everything as information if one chooses. There are many valid viewpoints. That we could be holographs has been around for a while. its just one view.
Comparing making a decision with the collapsing of waveforms seems suspect to me. There's a danger of applying equivalents where there are merely similarities. This is a weak part upon which cosmic mind references are built. Quantum affects will inevitably be everywhere as it is our view of the basis of everything, but one ought not assume coarser effects are just from quantum causes.
"Can be modelled on", doesn't make things identical. Doesn't make it the same. Things are being put together as if they support each other when they are different areas. Easiest done when pulling together cutting edge thoughts in different areas as we presently have insufficient understanding to identify the flaws easily. Time will bring knowledge and clarity.
Start with data as a basis then you develop a data theory. Start with something else, you get something else. Information theory has been around a long time, but it's a stretch to claim this supports the concept of a diety. IMO arguably an abuse of the science.
But such a long video is inevitably difficult to discuss, one needs to debate each point, each step at a time. But I see no need to believe a conscious mind is behind it all. That smacks to me of starting by having a belief one hopes to prove and arranging anything to try to support a leap of faith.
One can view everything as information if one chooses. There are many valid viewpoints. That we could be holographs has been around for a while. its just one view.
Comparing making a decision with the collapsing of waveforms seems suspect to me. There's a danger of applying equivalents where there are merely similarities. This is a weak part upon which cosmic mind references are built. Quantum affects will inevitably be everywhere as it is our view of the basis of everything, but one ought not assume coarser effects are just from quantum causes.
"Can be modelled on", doesn't make things identical. Doesn't make it the same. Things are being put together as if they support each other when they are different areas. Easiest done when pulling together cutting edge thoughts in different areas as we presently have insufficient understanding to identify the flaws easily. Time will bring knowledge and clarity.
Start with data as a basis then you develop a data theory. Start with something else, you get something else. Information theory has been around a long time, but it's a stretch to claim this supports the concept of a diety. IMO arguably an abuse of the science.
But such a long video is inevitably difficult to discuss, one needs to debate each point, each step at a time. But I see no need to believe a conscious mind is behind it all. That smacks to me of starting by having a belief one hopes to prove and arranging anything to try to support a leap of faith.
1 to 19 of 19
