Do you believe in God?

[JKgo]

...That went relatively well. Which means it didn't.

Although, I did find the video posted by @Kevstah2004 rather entertaining to watch, particularly when that priest performed a superman punch so splendidly on another priest. Now that was divine.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I hope that behaviour was coming from a lack of knowledge rather than a genuine mental health issue as it's so hard to tell over the internet and all too easy to judge.

 

[Chris123]

All I know is that the supposed big bang didn't just happen by accident.

 

[Scaff]

All I know is that the supposed big bang didn't just happen by accident.

How do you know that?

 

[Chris123]

How do you know that?

How does a universe such as this just come about by accident, answer me that.

 

[Danoff]

How does a universe such as this just come about by accident, answer me that.

That's not necessary. You made the claim "it didn't happen by accident", you demonstrate evidence supporting the claim. This video should answer your questions.

 

[Chris123]

That's not necessary. You made the claim "it didn't happen by accident", you demonstrate evidence supporting the claim. This video should answer your questions.

You'll never be able to find actual 100% scientific proof that God exists, and that's not what I'm here to show. Apart from my own life experiences which aren't necessary to discuss, all I can say is just ask yourself what came before the Big Bang. To say there was nothing before it makes no sense, in my opinion of course there is clearly something that caused all of it. Whether you want to call it God or whatever is up to you, but whatever it is is something that exists outside of time and any other physical limitations that we know of.

 

[Famine]

All I know is that the supposed big bang didn't just happen by accident.

And how do you know this?

How does a universe such as this just come about by accident, answer me that.

all I can say is just ask yourself what came before the Big Bang.

It's not anyone else's responsibility to answer questions you've posted as "evidence" of something you say you know is true.

You know this, so share your knowledge and how you came about it.

 

[BobK]

All I know is that the supposed big bang didn't just happen by accident.

That's quite a claim. Care to share the evidence and/or sources behind that claim?

 

[TexRex]

This video should answer your questions.

That was awesome.

As an aside, I find it humorous that his response to the question asked of him was itself a question, and one of the first things said in the video that you offered as an answer was, "I have a question for you." Obviously the video went on to go into great detail and with absolute awesomeness regarding the fallacies behind the argument from improbability, but the sequence of events is funny.

It's also worth noting that he responded in half the time it would take to watch that video in its entirety.

Oh and I totally didn't expect even a second post from him.

 

[Liquid]

The idea that the existence of the universe cannot possibly have been something coincidental, happenstance, without intent, without a will and must have happened for a reason... it always boggles my mind.

It borders on arrogance, an ignorant arrogance, to project the human desire for a reason onto it, by which I don't mean asking the how it formed but demanding the why it formed, as though it's within your jurisdiction to demand that the entire universe acquiesce to our questioning.

Is it fun to think about sometimes? Yeah, sure. But don't let it eat you up or assume some fantasy god did it.

 

[Pupik]

How can the universe not be created by accident? It's literally full of accidents, most of which we've either defined, explained, or came up with coincidences to explain. (Though this mere planet and my experiences alone are part of an infinitesimal sample size.)

Chaos and disorder quite literally runs this universe, but it happens with enough frequency and verisimilitude that it's fairly normal after a few decades.

 

[Chris123]

That's quite a claim. Care to share the evidence and/or sources behind that claim?

Alright let me correct myself, I strongly believe in a God of sorts and that this universe isn't an accident. Unfortunately I don't have any irrefutable evidence and I doubt anyone ever will have.

 

[Pupik]

Alright let me correct myself, I strongly believe in a God of sorts and that this universe isn't an accident. Unfortunately I don't have any irrefutable evidence and I doubt anyone ever will have.

He went into way more detail about the food we shouldn't eat than the actual Creation process. I think He is trying to hide something, or burned the building plans and blueprints along the way.

 

[Scaff]

How does a universe such as this just come about by accident, answer me that.

We don’t currently know, that doesn’t mean you get to use the God if the Gaps logical fallacy.

You made the claim to know, it’s up to you to support that claim.

 

[zzz_pt]

Alright let me correct myself, I strongly believe in a God of sorts and that this universe isn't an accident. Unfortunately I don't have any irrefutable evidence and I doubt anyone ever will have.

Why not suspend judgment then?

As David Hume said, "In our reasonings concerning fact, there are all imaginable degrees of assurance. A wise man therefore proportions his belief to the evidence."

If there's no evidence at all for a prime mover, no one should believe it's real.

 

[Danoff]

To say there was nothing before it makes no sense, in my opinion of course there is clearly something that caused all of it. Whether you want to call it God or whatever is up to you, but whatever it is is something that exists outside of time and any other physical limitations that we know of.

This point is literally addressed in the video.

 

[Chris123]

This point is literally addressed in the video.

He describes God as if it were a singular entity or intelligent creator, however I don't define God like this. When I say God I think of infinite possibilities existing at once. He even quotes Sagan in saying why don't we assume that the universe has always existed. I don't know much about that but I'm pretty sure that there has always been existence as opposed to non existence. Think about it, if existence has a beginning point then what was there before it? The answer in my opinion is that there has always been existence, a more simpler way of saying it is that there has always been God.

 

[Grand Prix]

We're quite an inquisitive species. If there is a perceived mystery to be solved, we want to solve it. We can't help it. Blanks need to be filled, either through the scientific method (or something resembling it), or even just pointing up to the sky claiming, "God did it."

Whenever we read a book, or watch a film, we want to see how the story unfolds. When we find a fossilized animal, we want to know how it lived. When we mix an acid and a base, we want to see happens, even when we're told what should happen from people who have done it before. We love solving mysteries, it's a trait that has been quite beneficial for our survival as a species.

Some mysteries, such as "why does the universe exist?," or "does a God exist?," are not so easily solved. They might never be solved. I also suspect, that even if humanity ever reached a point where we did figure out the answers to these pertinent questions, we would be left asking yet more questions. It's just what we do. The day we stop trying to solve mysteries is the day we become stagnant, humanity will probably cease to exist not long after that.

 

[Danoff]

He describes God as if it were a singular entity or intelligent creator, however I don't define God like this. When I say God I think of infinite possibilities existing at once. He even quotes Sagan in saying why don't we assume that the universe has always existed. I don't know much about that but I'm pretty sure that there has always been existence as opposed to non existence. Think about it, if existence has a beginning point then what was there before it? The answer in my opinion is that there has always been existence, a more simpler way of saying it is that there has always been God.

So why not always a universe? That's the simpler thing to assume. That's the question you dodged from his video and you dodge again right here in this post. And please don't pull that "god is the universe" thing, because words have meanings and those two words don't mean the same thing. Inserting a god only raises many many more questions. Its answers nothing.

You give yourself a little too much credit when you assume that there must always have been existence. See, to even frame that question you're assuming that time is continuous. But the big bang shaped spacetime. Spacetime formed and evolved throughout the big bang. As you look backward approaching the big bang, our understanding of physics gets stretched significantly, to the point where we have trouble even tracking what spacetime is anymore. So asking what came before the big bang is a fairly nonsensical question. It's at least nonsensical in terms of our everyday understanding of time.

To really understand the universe, you need to understand that time is a part of it. It's not something that exists outside the universe for the universe to exist in. It is molded and shaped, along with space, in lots of ways. In the presence of gravity, and in light of quantum entanglement, in terms of probability. So when you understand that time is a part of the universe, asking what came before the universe is like asking where the universe was before the universe existed.

Asking when something occurred is very much linked with asking where something occurred. What you're asking is like asking where the big bang happened.... the only where we know of, or understand, is inside the universe. The universe occurred everywhere, and nowhere. And the universe occurred forever, and never.

 

[UKMikey]

Asking when something occurred is very much linked with asking where something occurred. What you're asking is like asking where the big bang happened.... the only where we know of, or understand, is inside the universe. The universe occurred everywhere, and nowhere. And the universe occurred forever, and never.

In order to accept a premise like this, one has to let go of dogma and doctrine and adopt a mindset that is readily willing to accept new concepts (like no-time and no-place) that can’t be readily demonstrated in the physical world.

I get the feeling that religious education (as far as Abrahamic religions go, at any rate) are not big into encouraging people to free their minds and accept non-conventional explanations. It's called indoctrination for a reason.

 

[Dotini]

My opinion is that the physical universe was generated and is maintained by a higher consciousness. Some call this God but I don't.

 

[Chris123]

So why not always a universe? That's the simpler thing to assume. That's the question you dodged from his video and you dodge again right here in this post. And please don't pull that "god is the universe" thing, because words have meanings and those two words don't mean the same thing. Inserting a god only raises many many more questions. Its answers nothing.

You give yourself a little too much credit when you assume that there must always have been existence. See, to even frame that question you're assuming that time is continuous. But the big bang shaped spacetime. Spacetime formed and evolved throughout the big bang. As you look backward approaching the big bang, our understanding of physics gets stretched significantly, to the point where we have trouble even tracking what spacetime is anymore. So asking what came before the big bang is a fairly nonsensical question. It's at least nonsensical in terms of our everyday understanding of time.

To really understand the universe, you need to understand that time is a part of it. It's not something that exists outside the universe for the universe to exist in. It is molded and shaped, along with space, in lots of ways. In the presence of gravity, and in light of quantum entanglement, in terms of probability. So when you understand that time is a part of the universe, asking what came before the universe is like asking where the universe was before the universe existed.

Asking when something occurred is very much linked with asking where something occurred. What you're asking is like asking where the big bang happened.... the only where we know of, or understand, is inside the universe. The universe occurred everywhere, and nowhere. And the universe occurred forever, and never.

I don't know much about the universe I even said that, its scientists who claim that the universe had a beginning so I just go with that...
As far as existence goes again you're missing my actual point, you can't seem to see beyond the possibility of this universe. Time is basically the measurement of change from the moment of the big bang up until now. Time has already been proven to be somewhat of an illusion by physics, what I'm suggesting is that time is flat out not even real. Time is a limitation subject to this universe that we experience as something real, however I'm suggesting that existence is something that applies outside of the limitations of time and space. You don't agree that it could be possible for something to exist beyond this universe?

It's a very simple thing that people like you tend to overlook and over complicate. If there is existence, then common sense tells you that there must have always been existence and that existence applies outside of time itself, time is only something that applies to this current universe. Like I said, if existence had a beginning point, then what was there before that point. I bet you you can't just straight up answer that without realizing that the common sense approach kind of covers the bases. Again I can't ever give you the empirical evidence you guys seem to crave so much, all I can do is put forth my opinions up for debate.

 

[Famine]

Think about it, if existence has a beginning point then what was there before it? The answer in my opinion is that there has always been existence

Which is rather circular.

Time has already been proven to be somewhat of an illusion by physics

Which is tripe. Perception of time varies, according to frames of reference, but time itself is part of the fundamental framework - called "space-time" - upon which this universe hinges.

It's a very simple thing that people like you tend to overlook and over complicate. If there is existence, then common sense tells you that there must have always been existence and that existence applies outside of time itself

How are you defining "existence"?

 

[UKMikey]

Like I said, if existence had a beginning point, then what was there before that point. I bet you you can't just straight up answer that without realizing that the common sense approach kind of covers the bases.

You're telling us that the universe can't have always existed because everything has a beginning but go on to suggest that it must have been put there by God who has always existed. He is a base that hasn't been covered by your theory.

Like the guy in the video said, if existence has a beginning point and God exists, then he had a beginning point too, so what was there before that point? I bet you can't straight up answer that question, but common sense would suggest that your worldview and universe view are straight up bullpucky.

 

[Chris123]

You're telling us that the universe can't have always existed because everything has a beginning but go on to suggest that it must have been put there by God who has always existed.

Like the guy in the video said, if existence has a beginning point and God exists, then he had a beginning point too, so what was there before that point? I bet you can't straight up answer that question, but common sense would suggest that your worldview and universe view are straight up bullpucky.

But of course you conveniently ignore my actual point that I made several times, that existence must always have been and that existence itself applies outside of the limitations of time. If you go by the approach you guys seem to take in that there must have been a beginning, then the whole of existence makes no sense. It only makes sense to assume that existence applies outside of the limitations of time and this actual universe. You ask what was there before the beginning point of God, I've already said that there is no beginning point. God is existence itself and that time does not apply to it, it has always been and always will be

"You're telling us that the universe can't have always existed because everything has a beginning but go on to suggest that it must have been put there by God who has always existed" Where did I actually say that.

How are you defining "existence"?

As in the only ever possibility, non existence is merely a concept that can't even be properly explained. There has only ever been existence and there only ever will be existence, or rather there has always been something as opposed to nothing because to define nothingness is still defining something. How would you define it?

 

[Dotini]

IMHO, consciousness has no known explanation or physical existence. Consciousness transcends all physical properties* including time. Prior to the birth of the physical universe, only consciousness existed. So consciousness can be equated, even if incorrectly, with non-existence of the physical universe.

 

[Famine]

As in the only ever possibility, non existence is merely a concept that can't even be properly explained.

Non-existence is a concept that is intensely easy to explain. It's the lack of existence.

There has only ever been existence and there only ever will be existence, or rather there has always been something as opposed to nothing because to define nothingness is still defining something.

How do we know if something exists or if it does not exist?

 

[Chris123]

Non-existence is a concept that is intensely easy to explain. It's the lack of existence.

That still doesn't really explain what non existence is though. That's like saying darkness is the lack of light, yet there is still some degree of light in darkness. The closest way you could describe non existence is by saying it is equivalent to zero, but try to imagine what absolute zero is actually like. You can't, it's merely conceptual. I guess it's similar to trying to imagine what absolute infinity is like, however since I'm aware of my own consciousness actually existing, I'd say its more likely that infinite possibility is the true nature of reality as opposed to total non existence.

How do we know if something exists or if it does not exist?"

Well like I said, I guess the only thing we can ever be sure of existing is our own consciousness or awareness. Anything else we experience is up for debate, but what can't be debated is the actual process of experiencing something itself. Try to imagine what experiencing absolute nothing is like, it's just not possible.

 

[Scaff]

That still doesn't really explain what non existence is though. That's like saying darkness is the lack of light, yet there is still some degree of light in darkness. The closest way you could describe non existence is by saying it is equivalent to zero, but try to imagine what absolute zero is actually like. You can't, it's merely conceptual. I guess it's similar to trying to imagine what absolute infinity is like, however since I'm aware of my own consciousness actually existing, I'd say its more likely that infinite possibility is the true nature of reality as opposed to total non existence.

What was it like for you before you were born?

Serious question, as that's non-existance.