Why God Exists (Updated with Q and A at the end)
Created on: September 7th, 2006
WARNING: My comments are NSFW. Please evaluate and vote based on the merits and quality of the YTMND not based on your religious standpoint. If you have an objection, post below and I will address it in the YTMND at the end.
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| GendoIkari | $19.12 | Peterguy | $9.41 |
| stewie | $9.41 | ||
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $37.94 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (2.95) | 2,710 | 231 | 2,612 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 49,289 |
Inbound links:
Do not forget the cosmological argumen....All physical things come into being and go out of existence, no matter how long they last. Therefore, since time is infinite, there must be some time at which none of these things existed. But if there were nothing at that point in time, how could there be anything at all now, since nothing cannot cause anything? Thus, there must always have been at least one necessary thing that is eternal, which is God......that contradicts parts of your time theory. I still agree with you..feel free to rebute, o young man who thinks he is a genious..
Religions are created out of the fear of something. You cover something up that you can't explain with a belief. During this time period that should be completely ovbvious, therefore you lose. I can explain things, so I don't need a religion. So f*ck off. Oh, and YTMND is the wrong place for your bull-sh*t. Take it elsewhere. This YTMND sucks.
there are some fascinating things to the universe that cannot describe. but lumping those things together into the concept of a god is a cowardly way to approach the unknown. but it is cute how you Christian scientists capitalize your little postulates, like Causation or First Cause to swindle some validity.
I don't buy your arguement but you're smarted than the typical theist. I would counter simply that the jump from establishing that there is a first cause that is beyond time, space and other natural phenomenon to the statement that the first cause is god is not supported by your premises or your arguements. Why should that first cause be god and not something else? There is no evidence that first cause is sentient or omni-benevolent.
just so you know: when you refer to the "universe" and try to use it as a component in your argument for the existence of god, you're referring to a very shady scientific concept. When Christopher Columbus tried to convince the king and queen of spain that he could make it to India by traveling west across the atlantic ocean, not only was he making an assumption about the extent of land mass on the planet but he was also making an assumption about the dimensions of the planet. Both of his assumptions ended up being completely wrong. Is it fair to say that Christopher Columbus, a person with no scientific credibility, could be trusted with any of his arguments that were based on premises about the size and contents of the earth? what about the entire universe
The universe is a much more difficult region of space for scientists to map accurately. People have been arguing over the origin and the exact contents of the universe for hundreds of years, and we still haven’t been able to come up with a 100% certain description of it. I am currently working on my masters degree in physics, and as a person with several years of scientific background, I am not about to try and come up with my own description of the universe (its contents and its dimensions), let alone try to argue with people about where it came from (IF it came from anything). I wouldn’t even want to get into a discussion about the theoretical parts of astrophysics (black holes)...
in black hole physics it is often suggested that beyond the event horizon of a black hole there is a place that is completely disconnected from our universe. As of today, we do not currently know of any practical scientific experiments that we could do to prove OR disprove any mathematical theories about the characteristics of the universe (especially whether or not there are other universes and/or other dimensions in space that cannot be observed). You claim to be a 24 year old mortgage insurance salesman. I imagine that when you’re dealing with a client you’re expected to have credibility as a salesman. Well It works the exact same way when you try to make any kind of argument (whether it be about god or the weather)...
...based on philosophical concepts (philosophy would be an area that I have only studied for one semester…apparently like most of people here on ytmnd) and scientific principles (something that I have been studying for quite some time now). Therefore my suggestion is that if you intend to make an argument for the existence of god, the first thing you should do is completely abandon your use of the concept of the “universe” anywhere in your argument.
I still say, why couldn't the universe just be there? There was no time before matter, just as you say God is not bound by time. So couldn't the big bang be the first cause? The singularity was just there, just as you say God was. When the Big Bang occured, time began. There was no reason or creator of the universe, it just was.
Okay Whetstone. I'll bite. I'm not against this, but I have a question i'd really like on your site. You say that the debate about Square Circles is that it was in God's idea not to have square circles so if he were to make them he'd be imperfect. Right? Well, is this to say that his idea for the world was perfect? I mean, he made the world perrfect right since he is indeed also perfect? So why is their hate, murder, racism, war, disease, crime, death, pain? I mean, I'm sure that sounds cliche, but i'm serious..The world is far from perfect, why? Why would god make this? And don't tell me that it was us, because A: Most diseases aren't man made and B: If you believe in Predetermination and all of that jazz, he'd have to know we would do something wrong.
Incorrect! by your "logic" YOU HAVE TO PROVE WHAT CAUSED GOD. Get it? Quit repeating apologetic bullsh*t and stick to your own logic, idiot. While you're at it...why don't you glue it to the "Trinity"...since your fallaciously tried to sneak that in. Your YTMND fails, I gave it a 2 just for artistic value.
The vast majority of ytmnders are idiots so don't bother. To be honest I still don't complete understand what you and chichiri are saying. But atleast I'm not some smart *ss athiest that thinks he knows everything about theoretical physics.
Mankind will go extinct before he can comprehend the secrets of creation and c*cks.
let me remind you of what a ytmnd is: 1. picture 2. sound 3.text a singular focus. not a f*cking short film. i thought this site is one of the few places i could go in the world where religious debate wasnt present.. thanks a lot for stirring up arguments of religious rhetoric in which no one, especially not you, has an answer. im not saying god exists or that he doesnt, but either way, how could the human mind be able to comprehend the existence of a being so powerful that he created something from nothing. in other words, humans are just too stupid to understand. and leave NEDM out of this. u fail.
Haha some of the comments by naysayers here are quite interesting:
"Is it any wonder why christianity is
declining worldwide when you got *ssh*l*es like you making yourself appear
like a narrow minded person."
News flash, Christianity is the fastest growing religion in the WORLD. Faster than Islam. Faster than Hinduism. Faster than ATHEISM.
Anyways, the only reason this isn't 5 star'd is because the music doesn't last until the end. Put it on a loop or something.
Oh, and to all the other downvoters, and yes, even you, Max: IT'S JUST A THEORY. YOU CAN CHOOSE WHETHER OR NOT TO BELIEVE IT. For God's sake (lol, puns), do your own damn research.
I'll talk about a person which I've met when I was young. In 198X we've found Nazz's top secret
material called Abatros, a plan which never was put to practice. Imperial forces Generalissimo
Killt had never seen this plan, and decided to materialize this plan. The federation decided to
stop his attempt by sending our hero Super Joe, but llost contact with him. Our brave man (you
the player) was sent to the empire with a special mission to rescue Super Joe, this story
begins from here.
"Hey Max. YTMND can host site upon site about n*gg*rs, gays, countries we
may hate, websites we may despise, movies we like, more n*gg*rs, n*gg*rs
stealing things, people crushing the WTC, JFK getting his head blown off,
dicks, and countless other negative images, but you choose this persons to
post a picture of George Zimmer stroking a dick and call this person a
f*cking tool? You need to back off and analyze. Unbelievable and very
disappointing."
QFT
"Hey Max. YTMND can host site upon site about WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WTHIS SITE SUCKS BECAUSE IT USES FLAWED LOGIC WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWW
WWW
WWW
WWW
WWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
Can someone please explain this to me? I don't want to watch that again. Here's my problem. Causality holds that something, A, had to cause B. In order for this to be true, A would have to occur before B. "Before" is time-relative. Because the beginning of the Universe marks the beginning of time, (time is a part of the universe), there was no time "before" the universe began, so there is no "before the universe." If there is no time, there is no "before." It therefore seems naive to assume that causality is absolute law, and more naive still to use it as an argument for something existing "before" the universe existed.
Where do you counter the simple fact that "The first cause" might = Space/Time/Matter?
OOOPS.
You're entire arguement is this:
Everything came to be from something, so it must be god. What created god? You squash THAT arguement by saying "God always is. He's the first cause" Wow, great arguement, einstein. I could say my left nut was the first cause. Your whole arguement is based on nothing.
As many people have already pointed out against Aquinas's arguement - it;s a self defeating theory. Philosophically it boils down to God exists because something had to create the universe, but then you're left with the problem, who created God and you're back to square one. (Personally I prefer the watch arguement)but as a Christian myself I realize that its counter productive to Christianity to prove God's existence. If God is proven to exist that eliminates faith from the equation. You don't have a strong faith if you believe something based on emperical evidence. Faith comes from the heart, facts come from the mind. So please, Christians, believe but stop using old arguements as proof. You don't need facts to believe, and thats what its all about...
Cojafo, it is a protestant innovation to seperate logic and facts from religion. Catholics taught 'the faith' (meaning, the beliefs) and prots hundreds of years later took that word and twisted it to mean inspiration apart from reason. Religion is the study of our reality. That includes the study of science and logic, and the use of both to learn more. Read Aquinas or Augustine or any of the other religious philosophers.
Question: Your theory is that something that is beyond cause and effect, was the cause of the universe? Something, existing in a state without space/time/mass, and thusly have no concept of space/time/mass, created space/time/mass? Tell me, can you imagine something in your mind that doesnt involve space/time/mass in any way? Can you imagine something that is beyond our comprehension of existance? Can you imagine something, anything, that you dont know what is? Can you imagine something that you have no concept of? If you cant, then why do you think that something was able to create a universe with concepts that didnt exist before the universe itself did?
Ok, Look. This is what I think your saying (I could be totally wrong though) It seems you are saying since everything has to have a beginning it must have been god. But then if EVERYTHING must have a beginning, who created god? And please (not saying that you would) don’t respond with he just did because he is god or something close to that.
This “something” that exists beyond space/time/mass, must have, according to your theory, created concepts that are beyond the concepts of its own existence. By that logic, we too can create something that exists beyond our concepts of existence, but we would never be able to observe, to know, or to feel something that does not exist within our own concepts of existence. The same would be true for that “something” in your theory.
Edit: I rephrased the content of my previous comment to clearify what I meant:
This “something” that exists beyond space/time/mass, must have, according to your theory, created concepts that are beyond the concepts of its own existence. By that logic, we too can create concepts that exists beyond our concepts of existence, but we would never be able to observe, to know, or to feel concepts that does not exist within our own concepts of existence. The same would be true for that “something” in your theory.
Ok. I have to start by saying that this is a good theroy. But it doesn't prove anything persay. While it is a possibliliy, we can't say that it is fact. Why? For the simple reason that all science breaks down completely before the Big Bang. We can be one one millionth or so seconds after it and have some science to cling to, but before that, we're floating in a dark and unfamiliar place, and we have no flashlight. And we'll never get a flashlight. Now, I'm not saying you're wrong, or that anyone is wrong, I'm just saying we can't prove anything because of the lack of ways to prove things. And 5'd for good YTMND.
OK then, let's continue with Axiom 1: all things are the product of a cause. And, according to your analysis, there is a "First Cause" that created the universe. But, then, by extension, what is reponsible for this; i.e. what is the Zero-th Cause, if you will? By relying specifically from this axiom in further attribution, the pattern extends backwards infinitely, beyond one point. So, any defined "First Cause" becomes arbitrary, since something must have caused that by your own axioms.
So, by claiming the existence of a "First Cause", you inherently break your own first axiom. This leaves 2 options: There is some event which is excluded from your axiom, destroying your analysis, or that there is no original source, and any attempt to pin one can be traced back in an infinite reduction of cause-effect relationships. Well done, and bravo for intelligent discourse, but your seams are showing.
So what if this First Cause created Space Matter and Time? Many causes are simply accidents, and some are unconscious reactions. Why should I worship a "first cause" that could've sneezed out the universe during a bad spaceflu? Interesting reasoning, but does nothing to prove or even show INTENT or PURPOSE in the cause.
YOU F*CK! Intelligence comes from intelligence? Listen numb nuts, intelligence is built in. I ask you, who taught you 2hats 2+2? A teacher right? Well who taught that teacher? That teachers teacher? You can go back all the way to the first person to figure out whats 2+2, and no one taught them. It was already there and intelligence didnt breed it.
5. We may not know anything outside of time space and matter but there is something responsible for our existance and that is God. Call it what you want, go as far back in time as you want but there is an ultimate power somewhere down the line and that is what we as human beings should call God. From a religious standpoint, putting your faith in an idea that cannot be proven (by proven I mean visible by in the spectrum that our human eyes can see or believable by modern logical thought) and worshiping (feeling fear and gratitude) it is part of what seperates us from the other species on earth. Some people don't worship or think of God as a being that created us but I think a basic belief in a higher power somewhere is essential to every great human mind.
There's a problem with everyone else's arguments: you're assuming your working in the same rule system. The set-up involves a set of axioms that may or may not necessarily be true; you can't argue about triangles having 180 degrees outside of Euclidean geometry. To dismantle the system, you have to find INHERENT flaws, not flaws that depend on specific "truths" that the general axiom set does not account.
Well, you've revised your argument and made a very convincing case that something did indeed create the universe. Allow me to express my utter shock at this revelation. Then you screw it up by saying, "It created the universe, so it's God, lol!" Just because something provided the impetus for the universe to form does not mean that it was directly involved in galaxies, DNA, and all the rest of it -- unless you're arguing simply that "The universe started with the speck at the beginning of the Big Bang; God made the speck."
Your answer to potential objections in the afterword, ironically, is much less sound. You say that since time did not exist before the universe, the first cause didn't have to "begin" because beginnings are impossible outside of time. Sorry, but that makes no sense. Also, even if it did, it would still not exclude the possibility that some other universe or reality with its own time created this universe. Sir, your argument, in this case, has been OMGWTFPWND.
This is a very unfounded and, for lack of a better word, bad argument. Just because you've discovered that "things generally have to come from something" doesn't mean that "god" exists. Please stop pretending that you have scientific credentials behind this - atheists have for the longest time understood cause and effect. The difference is that we admit that we admit we don't know what caused the universe; you, on the other hand, assume it must have been "god"; entirely possible, sure, but at this point it's just guesswork and you aren't capable of finding a shred of evidence to support that claim. I'm not going to downvote you because I didn't think it was a bad presentation, but if you bring this up in civil discourse your argument isn't likely to hold up.
Asserting that an entity called "god", which transcends space, time, and matter, was somehow the creator of space, time, and matter, is an inherent contradiction, because it would mean god does not reside in the knowable realm of space, time and matter, thus he himself is not knowable to us in the realm of space, time and matter, thus it is an assertion that one knows the unknowable, thus, the theory is invalid as inherently self-contradictory.
This is one of the more intelligent arguments, so nothing I say is bashing really. I do have one argument/question though. Let's rule out the universe as meaning time space and matter and instead as the expanding body that did indeed begin. Yes, the body began, but if it is expanding, would it not have to have something to expand into? The best analogy I have is to compare it to fire, but it's hardly sufficient. I don't claim to be knowing enough to truly take on your theory, but this was all I asked. By the way, although it's logical, there are multiple logical explanations to lots of individual issues, that doesn't make them right.
1) not sure it's a good idea to try and prove God's existence through any philosophical or cosmological argument. Give GOOD evidence, yes, but not PROVE.
And wow...Max, I'm gonna have to say that I lost worlds of respect for you. I think much less of you for that comment, and that nwsf image you put in a comments section. Tool.
5'd for managing to apparently piss off the entire internet with one ytmnd.
To the haters - you realize that he's arguing the fundamentals of causality in this YTMND, right? Even if you don't want to call it "God" you still have to deal with the concept of a first cause... especially when recent astronomy and cosmology has shown the universe is in fact NOT going to "reset" and start the cycle over again.
it isn't very logical to assume that there was nothing prior to the big bang, because the observeable universe to you starts at a single point does not mean that there was something before it, you are basing your "logic" as to the nature of the universe from a point within and completely missing what is outside our 4th dimensional world (time+3 spatial dimensions)
the growing acceptance of the birth of the universe being caused by the collision of 5th dimensional membranes or branes for short shows that there was no single point and that time existed prior to the big bang. your first cause wasn't god but a cosmic fender bender
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/bigbang_alternative_010413-1.html
I find your argument lacking to say the least. It was nicely displayed however. I must admit. Regardless, attempting to prove the existence of God is fruitless. This only defines the nature of the argument once more. I consider myself a Secular Humanist. In my opinion, the question of God's existence is unanswerable and unknowable. I do feel strongly that the Abrahamic version of God is highly suspicious. Forgive me, but I fail to understand why a God would "bless" humans with the ability to reason, and then condemn them to suffer in the afterlife for denying him by using the very gift that he granted them. I do not know if a deity exists, however I greatly suspect that you have no more proof or knowledge of that deity than I do. If we are to be condemned to Hell (or some such) for questioning our world, then I'll see you all there. Good day.
Though I find myself a believer in science and not in religion, most definetely not the Christian religion, I must say that was the most logical, well-thought out, and well-presented argument i've ever heard/seen/read/whatever. I hope you read this comment. I really enjoyed it and it is very well done. Didn't sway me to any religion, mind you, but gives one something to ponder, and not in the traditional form most religion arguments are (aka: "**** YOU!" "NO, **** YOU!!!")
Great job.
The world should be all about science and not about religious crap like this! The bible was written by people! People made up stupid stories and put it into it! You are a religious nut whetstone! you have become so obsessed with religion you have to put stupid sh*t like this up on ytmnd! There is no such thing a god becuase there is no SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO PROVE SO!
even after all those words and deduced 'logic' that you've made you still have done the same thing that everyone since organized religion has done...explain the unknown as the cause of god. as the scientific community becomes more and more enlightened god is responsible for less and less of the worlds happeneings. that and almost every book detailing a god is historically inaccurate but i mean...i guess we can look past that as well
I have lost a lot of faith in the YTMND community lately. Out of all the people here, no one knew of the Kalam Cosmological argument (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalam_cosmological_argument)
It is apparent that you have not taken a REAL philosophy class, because if you did, you would have found out that this argument has been ARGUED TO DEATH, with the final result being that YOU CANNOT PROVE THAT GOD EXISTS OR DOES NOT EXIST IN THIS MANNER.
In conclusion, THIS ARGUMENT HAS BEEN PROPOSED ALREADY AND IT IS A DEAD END, GO FIND A NEW ONE.
No offense of course.
But the cause is not necessarily God. Could be anything. We simply CANNOT know what did it, ever, at it is outside the laws that we trust and can measure. Plus, even if there is a definite cause, what makes that cause a sentient being with intent? Why worship what caused the universe? *And* it's not completely out of the question that something else could cause the creation of a universe. Maybe the universe was created as a result of something that happened in another universe? Who knows? We'll NEVER know. So why speculate? Or even believe in anything concrete?
You have proven that, according to scientific beliefs currently agreed upon, something outside of our current space, time, and matter trinity "caused" our universe.
However, you have not proven that the cause of the universe is a conscious all knowing God. That's jumping to conclusions.
There could very well be a physical process outside of out current space, time, and matter that served as the cause for our universe. According to String Theory, there probably is.
Wow, all I can say is I'll still inhabit YTMND and range around...but geez, no offense Max. But Don't be such a dick. The fact is you attacked this because you are Athiest? Evolutionist? Blah, whatever the reasoning obviously you have the manners of a goat since you attacked this site. I think this YTMND was just an opinion and valid point brought up. Prior to only seeing your pictures and seeing a couple of your ytmnds I immedietly thought you were a dick. Then your news updates were actually solid and not full of asshatery...well, back to being a dick you are Max, Good one Mate!
Your argument doesn’t stand up. You use too much inductive reasoning and you have no proof that says that god is the first cause, anything could be the first cause you could say a magical fish was the first cause. You could then say it was before the universe and time and matter so those rules don't apply to it. Also you made up the criteria for cause number 1 to fit what you believe god to be. In reality there should be no criteria for cause number 1 according to what you’re saying because the rules of physics and time and space don’t apply to it because it was the one that made all those rules. Therefore there may be a cause before the universe that made it but you can’t go off and say its god.
Hello. Your argument presents interesting points and it has piqued my interest. I am a believer in God, but a man of science. Science does not rule out the possibility of God. However, when something cannot be disproved or proved it is irrelevant to Science. Many people present philosophical or mathematical arguments to science thinking they can somehow still apply. However, science follows fact, and fact can defy logic whilst changing it. If one were to simply assess the universe in a logical sense, there would be no development in science because the scientific method is experimenting and observing. Causality assumes that an effect has been observed and implies that a cause must be present. Such is the basis of how all scientific experiments are carried ou
However, one cannot imply that creation has occurred without observing it. It is much like seeing an apple in a tree and an apple on the ground. You cannot prove scientifically that the apple fell from that particular tree or even fell from anything just because your scope of the world dictates logically that apples don’t sprout from the ground. It could be a special mushroom. You must view that apple falling to actually scientifically show that the apple fell from the apple tree. Such a trivial fact like that is up for debate in science, and the universe is up to far more scrutiny. What this leads to is that there may be evidence of the universe existing and expanding, but this is viewed in eyes that are bound to particular laws. Our eyes are not able to se
see anything except photons and our brain is bound to a certain electrochemical speed that dictates our passage through time as we know it. We are not aware of our own beginning or ending, much less the universes. Everything is relative. Space is relative to our size, time is relative to our speed through space, and existence is anything we define it as. Trying to prove the universe began through a philosophy that created science is not proof of creation. Seeing creation itself is the only proof of creation. Creation in itself is irrelevant to science because it cannot be proved or disproved and so is God. Therefore the two do not belong in the realm of fact and should be relegated to personal beliefs. It is non sequitor to say otherwise.
You are an awesome person and God has obviously blessed you with the ability to see, comprehend, retain, and present complex logical principles without flaw. Keep up the good work and stay true to God Almighty. Remember, we win if we are rejected in His name. We win if others laugh and mock us. We win when people say we're lunatics and curse us in His name. We win.
You ask us to judge this based on its merits as a YTMND not on our beliefs. For that it gets a 1 alone since this fails the funny test by a mile. Unless we are supposed to laugh at the fact ath EVERY point you make has been thoroughly and accuartely debunked by previous posters so I won't go into it.
Sorry, but I can tear down that logic very easily. You say that God must exist because what else could have caused all that we know to come into being? But then where did God come from? If you are going to answer by saying that God always existed and was not brought into existence through any cause, well why not just save a step and say the universe always existed even when it was just emptiness?
Also
"how can something exists outside time space and matter yet still effect
time space and matter?"
Is a good point. We cannot describe this 'God' beyond immaterial. If we cannot define this entity at all, appearance or ability, then it is impossible to label it and furthermore, pointless to argue, especially if you want to attach it to a religion.
-3 for fatal error when assuming that entropy, which means to disperse energy over an increasing distance means that energy disappears. I'm sorry friend but energy does not disappear it simply changes form and is PERFECTLY conserved 100% of the time. Please read the FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS before quoting the second.
wow great job there buddy "god is outside of time" so that explains why god has always been there exactly wow omfg blowing my mind here well in rationality insted of a god couldnt it just be a single molicule that had a random process of dividing itself and multipling and through random events creating life wow gg im not impressed at all and the theory of god in itself is a creative of man to give yourself answers to that is not known the equivelent of greek myths so good job on wasteing your time. the thought of a single being that has been around forever and has always just been there is has no logic to it and is just a way for you to sleep safe at night not pondering a real answer to the question "how did we come to be?"
YTMND is not a place for religion, ppl here do not want to listen to anything that involves religion, we believe what we believe and why can't you religeous ppl understand that? why can't you stop making YTMND's about it? we respect your views now respect ours. Also trying to use sience to explain your views when religion and sience are deeply opposed makes me wonder about the sanity of the world.
All you are doing is simply identifying that there must be a 'First Cause' and putting a name to it with all that your simple human mind can relate to. God is an imaginary term coined by humanity on earth. No-one even knows what God is or anything, so saying 'God' exists in the first place is meaningless. Humans cannot observe or see or understand enough to discuss this. You are just taking science and then just saying this 'God' thing is all behind it.
Just a heads up. This argument, the Kalam cosmological First Cause, has been argued to death. In fact, it ultimately started with Aristotle and has been regurgitated ever since in many different variants. It continues to be discussed to this day. The point is, you're more than welcome to make these ytmnds (just don't call it "art" please) but try not to get excited and feel as if you're contributing to the field of Metaphysics. This particular argument for God's existence (whatever "God" means in that context) gets me personally sick to my stomach, as a student of Philosophy, and your 5 second explanation of Causation didn't help. But to be honest, why choose ytmnd of all places for this?
"Claptrap. Mysticism will die out. There's nothing you can do to stop it."
LOL that's a rational thing to say. Sounds more like a prediction, or an anti-religious religious prophecy...
"In the meantime, stop trying to teach people to believe in magic. That's the sh*t that gets people to launch crusades and fly planes into buildings. Please die before you breed. Thanks."
Religious extremists =/ religion. Grow up.
VERY nice. You do miss the point that nothing may have created something though. It's like a mobius loop. Nvm... Thing is, you're right. But you still are far from proving God, since people define God as a being, with a conciounce.
If that definition is not met, it's far from a God in my eyes. Nice YTMND though.
Half the downvoters are either too ADD-ridden to watch the whole thing, or are too immature to post something that isn't along the lines of "OMFG gay!". I found it to be enlightening, giving me something new to ponder about. I thought I might throw something into this huge brainstorm:
What if the universe repeats? Time, space and matter. Time exists, even without the other two. If there is no time, then space and matter cannot be born. So let's say hypothetically, space and matter disappear, then the only way they can come back is time. Basically, for space and matter to exist there must be time. Also there probably should be space for matter to exist in, right? Where else would it go? Thanks for giving me something to think about! 5'ed!
"KingD: Remember, we win if we are rejected in His name. We win if others laugh and
mock us. We win when people say we're lunatics and curse us in His name. We win." EXACTLY PROVING MY EARLIER POINT. It's always about PRIDE, PRIDE, PRIDE. It's not really about learning and doing what's best to help your fellow man, is it? In the end, you follow your faith because you want to WIN. You say you help other humans because you're good, but the reality is clear: You do it because you believe you will be rewarded for it in an afterlife. Because it would be stupid to help others if you don't get something in return, right? :/
Very intelligent reasoning. Oh, and isn't it also close minded to just hear the word "God" and automatically debunk it in your mind without taking the time to really and I mean REALLY think about it? This isn't ultra-conservatism or anything like that, He's being too intelligent and actually using reasoning.
I watched the whole thing, and it's retarded honestly that your reasoning for god to exist is because of something you cannot comprehend. Just like hundreds of years ago when it was beleived the world was flat. They beleived it because they couldn't comprehend the science behind it. Which should say a whole lot because it's not really that scientific to see that the f*cking earth is round.
Good music. Loved the NEDM reference. And thank you for being mature about it (more than can be said for Max). I have to agree with critics that the "Uncaused Cause" still sounds shaky (That's the simplest you can make it? o.O), but this is a step in the right direction for Internet Christians everywhere. It beats 'ur going 2 hell u f*** sry its teh truth'
12 year olds can't come up with this stuff... *ahem* anyway. This owns, except i dont believe in any christian stuff.. Also, when it comes down to it, there is no such thing as time, it's just a measurement, so saying that "before universe" was timeless... isnt thatkinda incorrect? Also, saying that "some thing beyond space/time/matter, without cause or reason, created the universe" is the EXACT same thing as saying "Well he exists just cuz he exists." Both statements have no logical reasoning, it's just saying it's there becasue it's there and nothing else. BTW, it's the big bang that created the universe (i think), so it shoulda been "what caused the big bang". ALSO THIS WENT WAYYY TO FAST, SLOW IT DOWN
"Time" actually exists because space is multi-dimensional, and being as there are more than 4 dimensions it's quite possible that something acted outside of them. At the same time, it's more likely that quantum fluctuation inside the cosmic egg (the big bang singularity). The primordial egg had no real seperation between space and time, and changed it's geometry around once about every 10^-43 seconds. It was when three of the fundamental forces de-unified (around 10^-44.5 seconds after the big bang) that time probably first came into existence.
BTW, think back to when christianity and 'god' where created back in the 1100's or whenver the f*k it came to be... they had no idea about any of this "before universe" stuff, so it's just coincidence that, today, we have 'god' and these facts to pair together. If christians believed in a monkey, we would say "monkey created the universe", bottom line is, god is just a belief, the thing that started the universe is 'something', or else we wouldnt be here right? ... uhh, basically what i'm trying to say is (and will prolly fail), the Catalyst of the Universe goes beyond christian beliefs. Something can't exist, and have done everythign that poeple claim it did, just becuase human people said so.
You bring up a very well argued point, and one that as a dedicated atheist I fully agree on that science has as of yet totally failed to supply an answer to.
I do not agree with your conclusion that the event that started the universe is necessarily divine in nature, but I fully support your pursuit of furthering a discussion on the matter.
Not that YTMND might be the best place for that. An appaling number of atheists are starting to grow so arrogant in their faith that they are almost getting as bad as the the fanatical believers they oppose. "LOL U R WRONG" arguments are for catholics.
Max doesnt deserve to run this site. He opens a site where poeple can post moving images and sound, but than he comes and complains like a child when someone posts something he doesnt like... and to overkill the whole situation, posts some gay picture of some gay guy. you probobly do it just to see all the "MAX FTW" messages. what are you doing with those pictures anyway -_- (IT'S NOT A PUBLIC SITE WHEN YOU CONTROL WHAT PEOPLE CAN/CAN'T POST)
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link