I feel like you can't just assert that God created the universe as proof of God existing if the general scientific answer involves the big bang.
If you want to claim God caused the big bang I guess that's plausible, assuming God is real.
My post included a rebuttal lol.
Put in other words, I counter your claim by asserting that the big bang is proven by the universe existing. If the big bang didn't happen, nothing would exist. Since things exist, there was a big bang.
>"here's my rebuttal to your claim!" >*doesn't read the claim*
My post included a rebuttal lol.
Put in other words, I counter your claim by asserting that the big bang is proven by the universe existing. If the big bang didn't happen, nothing would exist. Since things exist, there was a big bang.
Why don't you state your claim in simple English, because trying to translate the OP image is giving me a stroke, and I don't think this is going to be argumentation worthy of debate anyway.
Alright then dude, then I stand by my original point. I can counterclaim that the existence of the universe is proof of the Big Bang, and since the universe exists, the Big Bang must be real.
That is perfectly equivalent with the argumentation I see you making (universe exists, therefore God exists).
For the record, the following text demonstrates some seriously remedial English skills: >Doesn't God too had to have caused the universe before he did? >No reason to as if its by God, then its neither just because it could nor did it have to. >But by choice which is under binding by a being who is eternal >So there is a God, a possibility where the contrary, no God, is impossible.
Work on your writing and read a book before you get condescending about English. You are correct that its written in elementary English, I guess, since this is definitely the approximate skill level of an elementary student.
The argument literally depends upon the big bang, aka the beginning of the universe.
And it argues the rest by the impossibility of the contrary.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Why don't you concisely state what you're exactly arguing here. Maybe I'm just slow, but it's grating trying to extract a straightforward argument from the image you posted. To me, it reads a bit muddled.
It's also very annoying to have to reference an image since I can't quote you by copy/pasting.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Why don't you concisely state what you're exactly arguing here.
I don't think it can get anymore concise, don't try to twist your lack of response into something else.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
You are insufferable and not nearly as smart as you clearly think you are. The big bang supersedes everything you typed. You can write word salad with God in it all you want, but nothing in your OP image presents a coherent argument.
If you feel like actually engaging in a discussion then by all means rephrase and clarify, maybe people will engage with you more then.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
The Big Bang is the earliest point known in the universe, not necessarily the beginning.
Underrated post. How do christcucks jump from "the universe must have come from somewhere" to "my retarded desert death cult is the absolute truth"? Why do they dismiss the much more complex mythologies of old as well as using magick to commune with said deities?
Then who or what created god? I aint against the "eternal" part or that a force beyond what we know today controlled the makings of the laws of the universe, im just saying that god, to me (a consciousness or /collective unconscious) needs creation before it. No natter how supreme the being things dont come from thin air, neither supreme beings.I can believe the universe to be fabricated by a "god", but i cant believe god simply exists, because it is so complex its not even funny how much you should take into account for it. Personally i think the laws of the universe were made to find "vessels" to allow the consciousness of (god) to populate the physical god, aka us, we are the gods, the universe is eternal and consciousness and the laws within it are the ines that keep an infinite machine moving. The lack of matter in the universe (only a small percentage of the universe is matter) is because we've already been through A LOT of loops. Physically and consciously. But thats just my interpretation do whatever.
If you assume something the size of the universe wasnt just created by nothing then how are you sure "the creator" isnt also created by something? I know it sounds quite stupid but i cant grasp infinity of a being so complex.
>who or what created god
Nobody will ever know that except for the triple OG upstairs on His throne.
Or, fuck it, ask the man yourself. I wouldn't expect an answer, though.
Ex Nihilo is the current default views god as the Creator while eternalism implies god as an Architect. While those who view god as an architect are often from non-Creed Christians, such as Gnostics, Mormons and Hermetists.
But it is also a false dichotomy for a philosophical view of God.
Infinity is foreign to monotonic view of the Abrahamic god outside of some sects believing in Adam-God retrocausality. Eternity and infinity are different; eternity is ever after but can have a beginning while infinity has no beginning nor end but there maybe bigger infinities than others through infinite cardinality.
Tautological arguments don't require debate or responses.
but;
>Either something came from nothing
This is probably right. Quantum wave function collapse can create protons spontaneously in absolute particle-less vacuum. There's no reason to believe this would be different before spacetime.
>If the beginning of the universe happened just because it could, or because it had to, it would have happened before it did.
Incorrect and inherently flawed argument. There was no before. Spacetime itself was created with the universe, there was no before, time didn't exist yet. Infinite compressed spacetime, or rather infinitely compressed energy, does not yet have a time dimension or component to it.
It could not have happened before it did, because the concept of time was created at the moment it expanded.
This schizo-tier ranting in OP image is simply 'nuh-uh nothing more complex than gravity exists because I say so and anything complex that does exist is God.' which is nagger-IQ tier logic.
But lets be honest, nagger-IQ tier logic is the basis of Abrahamic faith, so I don't expect anything more.
Not OP but what are your spiritual beliefs? Do you think the world is deterministic and we have no control? If you think we have control, do you think it's possible to reverse engineer and manipulate the world to favor ourselves?
I personally believe the material plane is mostly unrelated to who we are, while it and its products are deterministic, we are not. As such while our human casing can make deterministic recommendations to us, and for some (NPCs/low vibration/whatever) those recommendations are the only thoughts they follow, we have the free will to take control and make our casing perform different actions than it naturally determines we should.
That being said the rules of the material plane make far more sense than 'hurr there's one creator-architect God and anything that threatens to discredit anything we've attributed to it is obviously impossible because just believe the magic israelite God'
you don't really understand what is outside the birth of a universe as per your comment on time. Quantum fluctuations are nothing? Atheism is a blatant argument from ignorance. You really want God to not exist, so you do not look and you make yourself into a repulsive individual that no one would bother to find. Frankly, you are extremely stupid to say something came from nothing. something did generate the universe. You can either argue sleeping god deism or normal deism.
>something came from nothing or the universe is eternal
Ah, the classic assumption pulled from the ass taken as proven fact. I don’t think I’ll read the rest.
The question of if there is a god is retarded. Of course there is a god. The more important thing to debate is whether god (the highest god, not any lower angels or demiurge) is wholly good, is evil, or is something beyond good and evil (i.e. outside of the universe of good and evil looking in at us, thus why we never experience god's presence).
lovecraft was also an autist. >christianity is a split off of judaism >therefore christianity must be israeli! >never mind that traditionalist israelites hate christians
Hate in the way you might hate a badly behaved dog. Like why didn't the master of that dog or dog's family treat it right? Why do there have to be dogs on the street? Why can't they all just be doing their jobs to glorify the farm and keep the sheep in line. Why can't the times come when we own everything and all have our own ten thousand dogs that are well behaved and subservient? Well no matter, the bad dogs on the street won't breed and the ones on the farm will all be good boys and will give their masters unconditional love as dogs do. I hope my dogs are all mutts btw.
If you had a god, you would innately know because they would have laid claim to you. This is proven false by the impetus to ask the question. Therefore you specifically do not have a god. But by all means sell your soul to anyone who promises you candy.
dude...you are a moron. No one is engaging because using your responses to your "impossibility" as "just because" and "the big bang should have happened sooner" shows how retarded and bad faith both your argument and your inability to understand things outside of your own terms.
If you want to keep deepthroating a bronze age desert cult that stole the majority of its stories then have at it. Leave the rest of us out of it.
The beginning of the universe is not evidence or proof. It could easily be an eternal loop, you just refuse to acknowledge that possibility (along with ascribing the fact that something happens must mean is was done intentionally and by another being). It's all so exhausting and the fact you can't see any issues with you've written IS the problem. Every other week it's some try-hard room temp IQ that use to eat crayons and feels like theyve got the "logical argument to why god exists". Give me a fucking break lmfao
Yo, has anyone asked the question: "Who gives a shit?"
No, really, who gives a single flying fuck WHY reality exists?
God, no god, who cares?
What does that change on a practical level in your day-to-day life?
I don't have to be an atheist to tell you why you're retarded.
The problem with the argument is the premises are false. For one, there is no such thing as "nothing." Nothing presupposes a contrast of thingness which in itself is a thing, hence something exists even in positing nothing. The meaning of "nothing" often implied and used is actually a logical confusion similar to proposing a square circle, it is nonsense. In other words, by default there was always something.
And two, the mixture of causality and time. While there must always be a preceding cause, in this case the notion of temporality is being required a cause so the "oh, well things had to be maxed out" only applies to what lies within the set of temporal activities, not to potential explanations for the existence of time. It is a mistake to seek causes within the set of temporal events to explain the set itself, you need to look outside the set and for that there is no real evidence of a proper explanation. The universe is multi-dimensional, and our understanding of causality breaks down after temporal preceding is taken out of the picture, yet such states must by necessity exist. So both "first temporal event" and "first cause" break down here and we must shift focus into "explanation" rather than "cause." It is a large mistake at all to even talk about first causes in the first place, as once you go past time there is no before and after, no cause, but there IS explanation. And none of those arguments address "explanation." In fact, they obfuscate explanatory power.
Consciousness cannot exist prior to time and space. God has to be a conscious agent that exists prior to time and space to make the decision to create time and space. Therefore "God" doesn't exist.
An atheist can still have a creator without relying on theology, which is pretty much the only thing atheists reject. Also, people will call anyone an atheist when most of them are really agnostics.
As for religious people, i find that they get stuck in semantic holes, as i said, the only thing atheism truly rejects is theology. They can give the creator role to something but they won't call it "God" and religious people can't get over this for some reason.
I’d say the universe is eternal. His only counter to that idea is just a word salad. At the end of the day, there’s no compelling reason why something couldn’t have always existed. Not an atheist, though.
the big bang theory was created by the catholics to specifically make room for the existence of god in modern scientific times. Eternal universe is looking more likely with recent findings or its at least much, much older than we thought
>the big bang theory was created by the catholics
It's a theory primarily based off of the work of a variety of different types of Christians, israelites and atheists and it came as a result of seeking truth, not trying to "save God". Despite the mental gymnastics Christians use, TBB does contradict Genesis and at the very least should be skeptical just from the fact that The Big Bang was completely omitted from the Bible in place of something that sounds like what the ancestors of Arabs and israelites thousands of years ago would have thought to be plausible.
>Either something came from nothing or the universe is eternal >The former is immediately discarded as a possibility
What? I want to say "stopped reading there" because it was so stupid, but I'm a masochist. How can you just discard that as a possibility? There are also non-materialist forms of atheism which this poster completely ignores. >If the beginning of the universe happened just because it could, or because it had to, it would have happened before it did.
There's no reason to believe this is necessarily true. >This impossibility can be avoided if the event is by neither, but God
So you're not just arguing against atheism, but pagans, Hindus and basically anyone who doesn't believe in the Abrahamic God. >No reason to as if its by God, then its neither just because it could nor did it have to, but by choice which is under binding by a being who is eternal
This is a completely meaningless distinction.
I skipped the rest because whoever made the post put no effort into making a coherent point and he hasn't give a reason for me to put in the effort to decipher it.
?si=Yz1bh5w3tq-JCwpf
Mald.
I feel like you can't just assert that God created the universe as proof of God existing if the general scientific answer involves the big bang.
If you want to claim God caused the big bang I guess that's plausible, assuming God is real.
Didn't read the rest, its a lot of word salad.
Irrelevant opinion, I just want to see rebuttals.
My post included a rebuttal lol.
Put in other words, I counter your claim by asserting that the big bang is proven by the universe existing. If the big bang didn't happen, nothing would exist. Since things exist, there was a big bang.
where did the matter from the big bang come from?
>"here's my rebuttal to your claim!"
>*doesn't read the claim*
Based retard.
Why don't you state your claim in simple English, because trying to translate the OP image is giving me a stroke, and I don't think this is going to be argumentation worthy of debate anyway.
I don't think it could any clearer and simpler, it's literally written in elementary English so I don't know how to help you any further.
Alright then dude, then I stand by my original point. I can counterclaim that the existence of the universe is proof of the Big Bang, and since the universe exists, the Big Bang must be real.
That is perfectly equivalent with the argumentation I see you making (universe exists, therefore God exists).
For the record, the following text demonstrates some seriously remedial English skills:
>Doesn't God too had to have caused the universe before he did?
>No reason to as if its by God, then its neither just because it could nor did it have to.
>But by choice which is under binding by a being who is eternal
>So there is a God, a possibility where the contrary, no God, is impossible.
Work on your writing and read a book before you get condescending about English. You are correct that its written in elementary English, I guess, since this is definitely the approximate skill level of an elementary student.
The argument literally depends upon the big bang, aka the beginning of the universe.
And it argues the rest by the impossibility of the contrary.
Why don't you concisely state what you're exactly arguing here. Maybe I'm just slow, but it's grating trying to extract a straightforward argument from the image you posted. To me, it reads a bit muddled.
It's also very annoying to have to reference an image since I can't quote you by copy/pasting.
>Why don't you concisely state what you're exactly arguing here.
I don't think it can get anymore concise, don't try to twist your lack of response into something else.
You are insufferable and not nearly as smart as you clearly think you are. The big bang supersedes everything you typed. You can write word salad with God in it all you want, but nothing in your OP image presents a coherent argument.
If you feel like actually engaging in a discussion then by all means rephrase and clarify, maybe people will engage with you more then.
The Big Bang is the earliest point known in the universe, not necessarily the beginning.
Monotheism is retarded
Underrated post. How do christcucks jump from "the universe must have come from somewhere" to "my retarded desert death cult is the absolute truth"? Why do they dismiss the much more complex mythologies of old as well as using magick to commune with said deities?
Then who or what created god? I aint against the "eternal" part or that a force beyond what we know today controlled the makings of the laws of the universe, im just saying that god, to me (a consciousness or /collective unconscious) needs creation before it. No natter how supreme the being things dont come from thin air, neither supreme beings.I can believe the universe to be fabricated by a "god", but i cant believe god simply exists, because it is so complex its not even funny how much you should take into account for it. Personally i think the laws of the universe were made to find "vessels" to allow the consciousness of (god) to populate the physical god, aka us, we are the gods, the universe is eternal and consciousness and the laws within it are the ines that keep an infinite machine moving. The lack of matter in the universe (only a small percentage of the universe is matter) is because we've already been through A LOT of loops. Physically and consciously. But thats just my interpretation do whatever.
>Then who or what created god?
Disregarding your oxymoron which is your whole argument, that's still nonetheless a loaded question.
If you assume something the size of the universe wasnt just created by nothing then how are you sure "the creator" isnt also created by something? I know it sounds quite stupid but i cant grasp infinity of a being so complex.
>who or what created god
Nobody will ever know that except for the triple OG upstairs on His throne.
Or, fuck it, ask the man yourself. I wouldn't expect an answer, though.
>The beginning of the universe is evidence/proof of God
wrong
>if there's a God it has to be my book
Lole
Not atheist btw. Am a gnostic Druid.
Ex Nihilo is the current default views god as the Creator while eternalism implies god as an Architect. While those who view god as an architect are often from non-Creed Christians, such as Gnostics, Mormons and Hermetists.
But it is also a false dichotomy for a philosophical view of God.
Infinity is foreign to monotonic view of the Abrahamic god outside of some sects believing in Adam-God retrocausality. Eternity and infinity are different; eternity is ever after but can have a beginning while infinity has no beginning nor end but there maybe bigger infinities than others through infinite cardinality.
I'm not an atheist, just highly doubt we were created by an almighty god 🙂
Tautological arguments don't require debate or responses.
but;
>Either something came from nothing
This is probably right. Quantum wave function collapse can create protons spontaneously in absolute particle-less vacuum. There's no reason to believe this would be different before spacetime.
>If the beginning of the universe happened just because it could, or because it had to, it would have happened before it did.
Incorrect and inherently flawed argument. There was no before. Spacetime itself was created with the universe, there was no before, time didn't exist yet. Infinite compressed spacetime, or rather infinitely compressed energy, does not yet have a time dimension or component to it.
It could not have happened before it did, because the concept of time was created at the moment it expanded.
This schizo-tier ranting in OP image is simply 'nuh-uh nothing more complex than gravity exists because I say so and anything complex that does exist is God.' which is nagger-IQ tier logic.
But lets be honest, nagger-IQ tier logic is the basis of Abrahamic faith, so I don't expect anything more.
Not OP but what are your spiritual beliefs? Do you think the world is deterministic and we have no control? If you think we have control, do you think it's possible to reverse engineer and manipulate the world to favor ourselves?
I personally believe the material plane is mostly unrelated to who we are, while it and its products are deterministic, we are not. As such while our human casing can make deterministic recommendations to us, and for some (NPCs/low vibration/whatever) those recommendations are the only thoughts they follow, we have the free will to take control and make our casing perform different actions than it naturally determines we should.
That being said the rules of the material plane make far more sense than 'hurr there's one creator-architect God and anything that threatens to discredit anything we've attributed to it is obviously impossible because just believe the magic israelite God'
you don't really understand what is outside the birth of a universe as per your comment on time. Quantum fluctuations are nothing? Atheism is a blatant argument from ignorance. You really want God to not exist, so you do not look and you make yourself into a repulsive individual that no one would bother to find. Frankly, you are extremely stupid to say something came from nothing. something did generate the universe. You can either argue sleeping god deism or normal deism.
"take dat atheists!!! some schizo rambled on /x/, now muh relijun makes sense!!"
>it’s impossible for something to come from nothing
Prove it
but you excuse yourself from proving the inverse?
Yes because he's not making the claim nor is he making the counter claim.
>something came from nothing or the universe is eternal
Ah, the classic assumption pulled from the ass taken as proven fact. I don’t think I’ll read the rest.
The question of if there is a god is retarded. Of course there is a god. The more important thing to debate is whether god (the highest god, not any lower angels or demiurge) is wholly good, is evil, or is something beyond good and evil (i.e. outside of the universe of good and evil looking in at us, thus why we never experience god's presence).
Death cult time!!!!
lovecraft was also an autist.
>christianity is a split off of judaism
>therefore christianity must be israeli!
>never mind that traditionalist israelites hate christians
Hate in the way you might hate a badly behaved dog. Like why didn't the master of that dog or dog's family treat it right? Why do there have to be dogs on the street? Why can't they all just be doing their jobs to glorify the farm and keep the sheep in line. Why can't the times come when we own everything and all have our own ten thousand dogs that are well behaved and subservient? Well no matter, the bad dogs on the street won't breed and the ones on the farm will all be good boys and will give their masters unconditional love as dogs do. I hope my dogs are all mutts btw.
If you had a god, you would innately know because they would have laid claim to you. This is proven false by the impetus to ask the question. Therefore you specifically do not have a god. But by all means sell your soul to anyone who promises you candy.
free will you pseudo intellectual homosexual.
Free will yourself a better retort, your dick ain't small just because you were made in someone's image cuck. Maybe simp a better imaginary god.
dude...you are a moron. No one is engaging because using your responses to your "impossibility" as "just because" and "the big bang should have happened sooner" shows how retarded and bad faith both your argument and your inability to understand things outside of your own terms.
If you want to keep deepthroating a bronze age desert cult that stole the majority of its stories then have at it. Leave the rest of us out of it.
The beginning of the universe is not evidence or proof. It could easily be an eternal loop, you just refuse to acknowledge that possibility (along with ascribing the fact that something happens must mean is was done intentionally and by another being). It's all so exhausting and the fact you can't see any issues with you've written IS the problem. Every other week it's some try-hard room temp IQ that use to eat crayons and feels like theyve got the "logical argument to why god exists". Give me a fucking break lmfao
Ok, a god made everything, why is it specifically yours or another one? How do we know god didn't make all of this then immediately kill himself?
Yo, has anyone asked the question: "Who gives a shit?"
No, really, who gives a single flying fuck WHY reality exists?
God, no god, who cares?
What does that change on a practical level in your day-to-day life?
It changes everything on a practical level. If you need to ask why there's no point for you to engage in this discussion. It's clearly beyond you.
I don't have to be an atheist to tell you why you're retarded.
The problem with the argument is the premises are false. For one, there is no such thing as "nothing." Nothing presupposes a contrast of thingness which in itself is a thing, hence something exists even in positing nothing. The meaning of "nothing" often implied and used is actually a logical confusion similar to proposing a square circle, it is nonsense. In other words, by default there was always something.
And two, the mixture of causality and time. While there must always be a preceding cause, in this case the notion of temporality is being required a cause so the "oh, well things had to be maxed out" only applies to what lies within the set of temporal activities, not to potential explanations for the existence of time. It is a mistake to seek causes within the set of temporal events to explain the set itself, you need to look outside the set and for that there is no real evidence of a proper explanation. The universe is multi-dimensional, and our understanding of causality breaks down after temporal preceding is taken out of the picture, yet such states must by necessity exist. So both "first temporal event" and "first cause" break down here and we must shift focus into "explanation" rather than "cause." It is a large mistake at all to even talk about first causes in the first place, as once you go past time there is no before and after, no cause, but there IS explanation. And none of those arguments address "explanation." In fact, they obfuscate explanatory power.
Consciousness cannot exist prior to time and space. God has to be a conscious agent that exists prior to time and space to make the decision to create time and space. Therefore "God" doesn't exist.
An atheist can still have a creator without relying on theology, which is pretty much the only thing atheists reject. Also, people will call anyone an atheist when most of them are really agnostics.
As for religious people, i find that they get stuck in semantic holes, as i said, the only thing atheism truly rejects is theology. They can give the creator role to something but they won't call it "God" and religious people can't get over this for some reason.
I’d say the universe is eternal. His only counter to that idea is just a word salad. At the end of the day, there’s no compelling reason why something couldn’t have always existed. Not an atheist, though.
lifecycles, but whatever. Atheists on x are just trying to push off their guilt for gay sex with superficial arguments against deism.
the big bang theory was created by the catholics to specifically make room for the existence of god in modern scientific times. Eternal universe is looking more likely with recent findings or its at least much, much older than we thought
Is that why atheists ran with it for a while?
>the big bang theory was created by the catholics
It's a theory primarily based off of the work of a variety of different types of Christians, israelites and atheists and it came as a result of seeking truth, not trying to "save God". Despite the mental gymnastics Christians use, TBB does contradict Genesis and at the very least should be skeptical just from the fact that The Big Bang was completely omitted from the Bible in place of something that sounds like what the ancestors of Arabs and israelites thousands of years ago would have thought to be plausible.
>Either something came from nothing or the universe is eternal
>The former is immediately discarded as a possibility
What? I want to say "stopped reading there" because it was so stupid, but I'm a masochist. How can you just discard that as a possibility? There are also non-materialist forms of atheism which this poster completely ignores.
>If the beginning of the universe happened just because it could, or because it had to, it would have happened before it did.
There's no reason to believe this is necessarily true.
>This impossibility can be avoided if the event is by neither, but God
So you're not just arguing against atheism, but pagans, Hindus and basically anyone who doesn't believe in the Abrahamic God.
>No reason to as if its by God, then its neither just because it could nor did it have to, but by choice which is under binding by a being who is eternal
This is a completely meaningless distinction.
I skipped the rest because whoever made the post put no effort into making a coherent point and he hasn't give a reason for me to put in the effort to decipher it.
>x is impossible because of word salad and my human mind can't wrap my head around it
🙂