I forgot that I’m addressing a physicist. My modes of thought are historical-humanistic, and I apologize; I’ll try again—
Argument—
God exists, and He is unified, and there is no need for causality (non-duality).
God is eternal, and reality is eternal.
God exists within natural reality through two aspects, spiritual and material, in effect like a kind of coin with two sides.
Reality is an expression of God in nature and in man, and the “spiritual” part of God is found in a shared human consciousness.
Of course the words narrow down all the ideas stated above and below as well, but there is no other way to try to explain.
Premises—with regard to God:
God is eternal, and reality too is eternal; it had no starting point and no end.
The universe is expanding and may contract again, stop, or collapse, and so on repeatedly; even if in cyclical motion, reality is infinite.
From observing nature too one can see cyclicality and renewal alongside the conservation of matter.
Even if tomorrow the world explodes or a massive solar wave burns us all up, reality will continue to exist.
As for evolution (which of course exists), there are divine-consciousness implications, which I will elaborate on at the end.

Premises—with regard to a person striving for faith / belief:
A person can never arrive at knowledge that God exists.
He will always have to believe and not know, because there is no complete certainty in the world about anything (Descartes and others).
Regarding the existence of an intelligent Creator, I follow your path and others—rationalism, etc.—and accept the matter.
Regarding the expectation of revelation—you believe in the revelation at Mount Sinai, and I agree with the first part but not with the second.
That is, I agree that revelation is required by reality, but I do not agree with such a one-time revelation to the masses, or a revelation to one specific individual.
Especially when such a revelation is written in a book full of contradictions and errors, even if accompanied by some tradition or other (have you ever played “telephone”?)

Logic—
Part A—positive examination
Let us focus on the part about the required revelation—
Since the reality of God requires revelation, every person is “entitled” to experience “revelation,” without distinction of religion, race, or sex, in every generation, without intermediaries and without external aids.
Moreover, this “discovery” cannot require high intelligence or advanced analytical ability in one person over another; only one thing is required—
consciousness.
The reasoning: God created everything, and therefore everyone must be able to recognize Him directly and immediately.

So what would that path be?
If we return to the (accepted) premise that a person cannot arrive at certainty about anything in reality except the self-awareness of “I think, therefore…” (and I understand that even the “think” is not correct, since thinking itself is already taking place in the brain and not in the “mind,” and is tainted by perceptions, memories, emotions, etc.—that is, only the experience of “I” is the one and only experience in all natural reality about which a person can say “I know” and not merely “I believe”).
At this stage I assume that the ultimate truth to which a subject can arrive is distilled consciousness.

For a person to arrive at that knowledge and that experience of a distilled “I,” clean of every thought, perception, memory, etc.,
all that is required is a simple act of guided imagery or meditation for a minute or two (not an ashram in India, not a guru, and not secluding oneself in a forest).
During this experience, a person will always feel sensations of pleasantness, and also what we would call a kind of love.
Conclusion—
Since this experience, in my view, is a spiritual experience, because it cannot be proven empirically!
I of course distinguish between emotions and sensations that can today be mapped in the cortex or in other regions of the brain, or through chemicals or hormones secreted in the brain, and consciousness itself—that distilled feeling of “I” that is aware of all the sensations and emotions like a present external observer.

And therefore, the required inference in my view is that this awareness/consciousness is itself the required revelation!
Moreover, the revelation is not of a God external to reality, but of an active and unified God who is part of reality and part of man.

It is clear to me that this response often provokes mockery or an accusation of arrogance, but the opposite is true.
The understanding that you are part of God means that every person you meet is part of God!
This has deep and enormous implications!
The imposition of real personal responsibility, without evasion.
A demand to act toward nature and toward humanity with pleasantness and love.
To work for human unity and not separation, because God is unified.
And many other broad and varied conclusions whose purpose is to increase love and unity in the world.
But everything comes from a real and awakened inner recognition!

Part B—negative examination
In my view, rationalism and games of logic are very important, but these are attempts carried out under laboratory conditions.
One cannot discuss faith / belief in God without examining historical and present reality, and therefore when I look at reality with the aim of understanding existence, I also examine history and current events.
And unfortunately we find that every religion that believes in a single and separate God produces believers in a God in its own image (human and even physical), and just as God is conceived as separate, so the religions are separate from one another and even internally divided. This applies to all religions, including Judaism.
The reason for this is twofold: that God is external to the world (Dad isn’t home), so we remove responsibility from ourselves, bring about horrifying results, and then concepts like original sin and the like enter; and because this God is not us, we project onto Him our own traits (God is vengeful, angry, loving, forgiving, punishing), all because we do not truly know Him.

Examples (of course, broadly speaking)—
Islam—God subdues; there is no relationship between God and man, only an absolute demand for submission = believers demand submission from themselves and therefore also submission from anyone unlike them (Shiites/Sunnis, and of course within the groups themselves they also try to subdue one another).
Christianity—original sin—there is no point, then, in acts of repair, because we are all sinners and Dad isn’t home; and in Christianity too, of course, there is much division: Catholics, Orthodox, and hundreds of Protestant groups.
The division is great, and wars are plentiful.
Judaism—Judaism has gone through many transformations and reforms, and God went through the reforms along with it…
The God of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) is not like the God of the first exile, and not like the God of the second exile, and not like the God of Religious Zionism; the God of Har HaMor is not like the God of Merkaz HaRav, and not like the God of Hasidism, and not like the God of the Mitnagdim, and not like the God of Shas, and not like the God of United Torah Judaism, and not like the Conservative God, and not like the Reform God.
The Jewish God is jealous, loving, vengeful, forgiving, fatherly—human traits! Which we projected onto Him, and therefore Judaism’s relationship with God too is one of obedience, prayer, love, ecstasy, fatherhood, etc.
In the end, a separate God = separation. Q.E.D.

Moreover, there is the paradox of the external causal God in all the monotheistic religions—redemption. For how can a causal reality suddenly become unified? Here too Judaism found a solution through kabbalistic-Hasidic acrobatics… and I ask: why? when the solution lies before us!

Despite everything, there is no doubt that Judaism has a special place with the unified God, and this emerges from watching historical reality—
My assumption regarding Judaism is that it has a role in the world generally: to awaken the world to recognition of the unified God.
And that is also the reason for the connection between the Jewish people (the eternal spiritual people) aspiring to live in its land (the material one), just as God lives within us and we must awaken and recognize this.

Further on this: the Torah was of course written by human beings, but it contains many seeds of the revelation of the unified God, and many people of high consciousness wrote in it, alongside many charlatans.
A few historical examples of the importance of the Jewish people—
Discovery of the unlimited God—Abraham
Values of freedom—Moses
(Regarding Moses, when Moses asks for God’s name, the answer given is the unified God at the height of His splendor: “I Will Be What I Will Be.”)
Government and society—the kings of Judah and Israel
Morality—the prophets of Israel
Corruption—the Second Temple period
Revelation of the unified God—Jesus
The Baal Shem Tov—a solution to hundreds of years of the Sages through a unified God who, in order to solve the paradox, contracted Himself…
Spinoza, Einstein, Freud, and 25% of Nobel Prize winners
(in physics and medicine the percentage rises toward 40)—the overwhelming majority of them almost entirely non-religious…
The paradox, in my view, is that religion is a political structure that constrains spiritual development!

*As for the evolution of consciousness—God exists in nature and in reality, and the quantum “Lego bricks” that make up everything led, through an evolutionary process, to the creation of life on earth, and later intelligent life, and at their peak, human beings with developed consciousness and awareness. By way of allegory, one can imagine a flower seed that was planted in the soil from the days of Genesis; its shoots came up after the first rain and already testified to its existence, and the stem grew and rose, but the flower bloomed only at a certain point in time, and the world was exposed to its beauty only at a certain moment… Further on this, it is clear that the flower will wither and die, but its seeds have been scattered in the soil, and new flowers will grow and bloom… and the rest—go and learn.
I would be very glad to receive your response to these ideas.
Many thanks in advance,
Mikha

What does this have to do with a physicist? I can’t read entire essays here accompanied by some general question about what I think of them. The responsa section is meant for focused questions, not for publishing people’s essays. I answer hundreds of questions here, and I don’t have time for this. The question of clarity of formulation is another issue too, but as I said, we’re not even there yet.