Added: 4 years ago
From: davicles
Views: 2,241
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (101)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Nothing you have said is relevant...you deviate from everything that has been presented by posting a bunch of theoretical BS.

  • Nothing but double talk = BS!

  • Why does everyone think there had to be a beginning. Or a God. How about something was always here and it evolves forever. If we see time going forward infinitely then why cant we see it going backwards infinitely. I assume religious people are far too ignorant to grasp such things, that's why they use the easy answer of "faith"

  • @itsaninsidething The Creator of the universe cannot be preceded by non-existence; otherwise, He would need another god to create Him; and that god, if he is preceded by non-existence, would need another god and so on. Thus, we would have an endless chain of gods without reaching a **causeless cause* to be the source of the existence of the universe.

    Then we have to deny the existence of the universe. We would also have to deny ourselves because we are a part of the universe.

  • @1tabligh You argue that God was always here and I suggest maybe everything was always here and has evolved over time...no one knows, anyone who claims they do is ignorant. And you don't need to write some overly complex paragraph of nonsense to respond this time

  • @itsaninsidething His Existence is not coming into Being from non-existence.

    If in the course of developing the argument of the orderliness of the universe we attempt to prove the existence of a maker similar to the human maker, the divine maker will, in reality, also be a created being on the level of man; proving the existence of such a maker is an entirely different matter from proving the existence of the Maker and Creator of all being.

  • @1tabligh Learn to write more understandably. We are only talking about a creator of all being here. I feel you are making super complex and incoherent sentences, because you don't have a good answer for the question.

  • @itsaninsidething From a scientific point of view, the self-origination of matter is impossible; the theory that the material world is constantly evolving and advancing toward higher states is clearly contradictory to scientific data and the realities of nature. All development and motion in the mineral realm is due either to the intervention of a will external to matter or to attraction, interchange, and compounding with other bodies.

  • @itsaninsidething "Do they imagine that they've been created without any cause, or do they suppose that they are their own creators?" The Quran (52:36) "Have they created the heavens and the earth ? They have no certain belief in what they say" (52:37) Do they have a Lord other than God? No, it is not so; God is exalted above the partners they ascribe to him." (52:43) "Glorified be He in Whose hand is all sovereignty and Who has power over all things." (67:1)

  • @1tabligh Evolution is in line with the vast majority of scientific data...you are spreading complete lies. I feel the religious books you cite are all fiction...therefore no verses from them have any weight against my arguments.

  • @itsaninsidething Many new questions in regard to almost every principle mentioned by Darwin have arisen. For example, it is asked whether the appearance of a new organ or for that matter any other organic change, always results from the use of that organ and the attempt to adapt it to one's environment or it may be due to mutation or any other cause?

  • @itsaninsidething The acquired qualities are hereditable as a principle or genetic investigations have rejected this theory?

    The organic changes, whatever may be their cause, are always aimed at survival and evolution or sometimes they may be due to the inconsistency with the environmental conditions and may culminate in death and extinction?

    Natural selection is or is not like artificial selection which leads the existing generation to evolution?

  • He who assigns to Him (different) conditions does not believe in His oneness, nor does he who likens Him grasp His reality.

    He who illustrates Him does not signify Him.

    He who points at Him & imagines Him does not mean Him.

    Everything that is known through itself has been created, & everything that exists by virtue of other things is the effect (of a cause).

    He works but not with the help of instruments.

    He fixes measures ButNot with the activity of thinking.

    HeIsRichButNotByAcquisition.

  • Funny, technology starts off simple and gets more complex. Societies started off simple and became more complex. The same goes for life (evolution) the cosmos, etc. Things start off small and complexity builds up over time. Yet with God that is backwards, apparently everything started off drastically complex then trickled down. Dawkins is most likely right with his 'simple beginnings' assumption about ALL things being.

  • God is an eternal supreme being that needed no creator, because he is the beginner of all creation. When something is at a point of beginning that means it started at that place and prior to it there was no existence. Human intellect has not scratched the surface on the knowledge of God. it's amazing how humans speak as if they have even a speck of knowledge when all they know is what another man wrote.

  • Man created God in his image.

  • Superstitions in universities .. doesn't make sense ... maybe you teach "history of superstitions" .. that could be acceptable.

  • I am a stone cold atheist!

  • stop thinking and start seeing i have traveld around i have seen so much poverty so much domistic violence so many little girls sold in the sex trade so many fights in the street so many gangs shooting at each other stabing each other i have seen animals even totaly kill only to eat each other see this see all the killing all the wars to be born like a baby helpless to be killed in the womb is this the best god can do if u was god would you create this no u wouldnt no one would therefore no god

  • im going to say something that's going to make a lot of people thank. in quote from i, Rothril "if god was not created, how would he have and idea or the knowledge of how to create.

  • @rothril because his all knowing DAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! hahaha lol

  • GOD is a creation of man. not the overwelming force in the univers, i am talking about the idol we see on the cross or we belive i in heven

  • God's whatness is his isness... what??!!?

    and how convenient that God means "the one who creates" so he created all things and that's that

    I named my dog Hitler - that must mean my dog will rise and cause a mass genocide because I labeled him with name that means he will do it...

  • If there is a god then who created God ?

    is the same question as

    if there was a big bang who created the matter that created the big bang ?

    A God that wasn't created is impossible, everything has to be created.

    The answer is neither of the above. Life is an illusion and we are all God because we are all imagining it.

    Perhaps lol

  • Who created god?

    Well that's simple, man did.

  • True man created God thats why he only rules over Earth( Meaning that the only planet they knew of back then was Earth.) The Creator is a different story though. The Creator created everything ( Laws of physics, laws of gravity, laws of chemistry etc.) If you look back in history you will find God being born into human civilizations. Jesus became a god , before him it was the Greek and Roman gods , before them were the gods of eygpt. All of it is bullshit and man made.

  • Who created man?

    Well that's simple, God did.

  • sure, you can say that if you want to ignore the obvious evidence against it and have a closed mind because your fear of death.

  • Lets say at one time I did believe the Big Bang to be the best explanation for the cause of the universe. Now lets say some time has passed and I now believe it to be false. Why? Because I was open minded enough to see the alternative what I now call the Truth. Now your statement that I am close-minded would not be true it would be just the opposite wouldnt it. The question is why would I be convinced that evolution is not true by no evidence. Because we both know there is no evidence for a God.

  • By saying that what you now BELIEVE is also what you call the Truth, is not only close-minded, it's also quite the paradox. But I guess you're being hypothetical by your first statement. The big bang is supported by evidence we can see, and so is evolution, but I guess you not being closed-minded had nothing to do with you not knowing that. Believing in god and being ignorant of evidence isn't always linked to being closed minded, I guess.

  • Yes I was being hypothetical (hintlets say), and the believing statement is a paradox. The point I was trying to make is we are all close-minded, this is how we think critically. However, my questions for you are....How do you explain the causality of the universe? Why is there something, rather than nothing? I would just like to hear your thoughts.

  • @RefinersFire298 God is something too because he is something that created the Universe. So why is there God, rather than Science

  • How can God be created if he always Existed...

  • @jesica333 How is he always-existent?

  • Here's the basic fallacy:

    If every consequent has an antecedent then God must have a cause, a creator.

    The answer:

    We all agree that time and matter did not always exist (Big Bang). Time had a start.

    The law of causality states that every consequent must have an antecedent that precedes it (before it in time). So effect is a function of time and cause. Therefore that which existed beyond the created time cannot be bound by the law of causality thus does not have to be itself caused. Q.E.D.

  • @RealNazarene You said it. No time no cause, so no God.

  • WOW! Brilliant! Seriously, according to the Big Bang theory and the expansion of the universe most physicists agree that time had to have started some time ago, 14 - 20 billion years.  I'm saying that it makes no sense to infinitely regress a cause before time itself existed. Causality requires time as a medium but if time was to be created then its creator was not subject to causality now was he? It's ok, this concept requires some thinking outside the box. It's ok if you don't get it.

  • man is god.

  • who the hell created you?? who the hell created your creator... screw u man

  • Where is God from, He is from himself...that which he resides. He is spirit and unexplainable to what our universal wisdom allows. He is not a body like ours but something very much different and mysterious. Something very beautiful but in a way outside what we can even think with our wisdom of matter. Spirit is not matter but is before matter. God is Love, Faith, Light, Eternal, and wrath...to those who reject him.

    All we can say with our limited minds is that God is Awesome!

  • so is god made up of matter or is he just in your head, if you can see him, which some people claim,then he must be made up of matter.

  • and therefore he 'came from nothing'...an idea which religious people hate...or he was always there! if he was always there then still, he must have been the process of long evolution himself...you cannot say something infinetely complex was ALWAYS THERE.

  • imagine in the beginning there no colors but god and a thing that is like the wind which is invicible to us. then this makes that god couldnt see anything but feel something.who existed first colors or god?? colors are everywhere.i would like to breathe in the outer space to find out if there's a thing called the wind

  • god is like the wind. you cant see the wind but can feel it. who existed first the colors or god?? if they both existed in the beginning at the same time then god didnt create everything.we cannot imagine things without colors or god and the wind or something like that that cannot be seen but feel. so imagine this there was a place where colors didnt exist only god and a thing like the wind.

  • the guy in the beginning of this wideo is the master of awesome. and i think the catholic guy is still working on his puberty. and he's stupid talking about whatnessesses and isnessessesses.

  • hey maby nothing Created god

    and god is that nothing !!!! or something like that, nothing is something you cant have something with out nothing..........? AAAAAhhhhhhhhauuuauauauauauaua­hhhhh

  • Truey true true true ......true very true?!!!

  • your an idiot, this is completely absurd.

    Your assuming God truely has to have a creator, Our thought processes and the whole question itself is useless, God does not have to have a creator because he is, God. And since when is "Isness" a word? at least make yourself look smart before you trap someone in a whirlwind of meaningless babble

  • ... his whole point is that God DOESN'T have a creator. At least try to unerstand the concepts that you mock. Furthermore, he's speaking about Tomistic philosophy, where the word "isness" has been used for centuries.

  • human mind cannot understand the true and ultimate spectrum of god, god has ALWAYS been there infinitely, there's no point in trying to understand the concept of god ALWAYS being there, always has always will, there was no begining and there is no end to god, god exists outside of time, so don't trouble your mind with who created who, because it's beyond human conprehension.

  • god is your life who teach you and guide you talk that things and i want you to know that god has a name and no need a religions to seek god coz GOD IS YOUR LIFE,,,,

  • before i answer your question,i need to ask you some questions.and the answer must be honest,because if not,then it means that you dont want the answer of the question "who created God"or in other words you dont deserve an answer. agree..?

  • I created him.

  • Not one single human being knows how the universe was created. Therefore we can only go on what we know; and that is that the first form of LIFE was created from bacteria, which was created from molecules.. FACT! What created molecules? We haven't gotten that far yet, but that is the progression of science. We can't even try to comprehend something which is presently out of our capabilty to even theorise!

    Moral of the story: Face whatever happens when you die. In the meantime, LIVE!

  • The universe is not created, that would contradict the meaning of the word universe (a cause for the universe would have to exist also,and be already part of the universe).

    And since the universe isn't created, there is no need for a creator.

  • A word of advice; only open your mouth when you actually have something to say!

  • Dude, the universe you know of is not all there is. There are multiple universes and that is being proven right now with "string theory" (look it up). It is way beyond something we'll ever understand in our lifetime. Personally, I believe their is a higher power at work here, not pure chance. For example, the atomic mass for hydrogen is 1.007825 g.mol -1, if it was 1.007824 g.mol -1, then water couldn't form then either could life. If you think that is pure chance, then good luck with that.

  • War Is Peace... Freedom Is Slavery... Ignorance Is Streangth...

    Big Brother Is Watching You... Jack-Ass ; )

  • The universe is infinite.

    Energy is infinite.

    God is infinite.

    Could they all be the same thing?

  • the only problem i have with this idea that the question who created god is at 4:24 in the video. when he says those who invented the word and concept. if you need to invent it you disprove it. why would you need to invent a concept like a creator if it is real. when a child puts a tooth under his pillow they fully believe in a magical being leaving money under there pillow. they get the idea from the same place as 4:24. it is invented due to the ability to think. just on a bigger scale.

  • If you suppose God to be "eternal" you might just as well suppose the universe to be eternal, always changing like a sea in the storm, but eternal. So this "God is eternal but everything else is not"-thing does not work.

  • If a God does NOT NEED a creator, then neither does the universe.

  • And therefore there is no creator of the universe....

  • The fallacy here is ofcourse that the question "Who created god?" is a grammatical conceptual linguistical confusion, and that the question is therefor illogic. It is not. The problem is that your definition of God - that his "whatness" is his "isness" and he therefor is eternal ect - is just supposition and not a statement of fact. You need to prove that your definition of God is FACT and not belief otherwise it's just a restatement of belief.

  • YIDII:

    What do you use to CREATE THOUGHT with" Your brain or your ass?. Since we CREATE gods with our brains, anyone one accepting a god jesus, allah, mahoma, cows, snakes, pigs..as an intelligent designer, as REAL needs to see a neurologist. Religious folks reason not unlike the schizophrenic and the mentally retarded. They believe 2+2=6 which is no different than believing people RESURRECT, save with blood, and create the universe in 6 days. Please see a neurologist.

    Get well soon.

  • Did you bump your head? Hey retard there is not such a thing as spirituality, zombie Jesus or other imaginary friends, God is a product of our brains. We are not in the Middle Ages as you insist. We are in the 21st Century. Faith is always inversely proportional to knowledge and information of the person infected with it. Get educated you are extremely ignorant. , please go to churches where retarded folks like you are. By by and take with you your pathetic god

  • "Hey retard there is not such a thing as spirituality" Many people smarter than you disagree. you talk of education as if you have one. Evolution, big bang, natural physics ect. have few conclusions that do not require faith. Some scientist claims a thing and you repeat it and think that makes you a scientist. Which you obviously are not. You don't seem to have the mental capacity to grasp the concept of non physical existance.

  • futcitizen, you seem to be convinced that you're really smart. Maybe you can help me understand something. Your comments indicate that you think people should reason logically if they wish to arrive at true beliefs. Can you explain why you think this is necessary?

  • larrycastle:

    I'm not convinced; any fool can be convinced to believe in anything

    I'm just getting highest education.

    ...to arrive at true beliefs????????????? See that's your biggest problem with you.

    How can be a belive be true, how can be a black be white.

    Believe is santa claus, fary tales, jesus, god devils.......

    True is something with logical, scientific and matematical explanations

  • futcitizen, I'm talking about the basic dictionary definition of belief:

    belief |biˈlēf| (noun) - an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

    Substitute the word understanding if you like. The question remains, "You think people should reason logically if they wish to arrive at true understanding. Can you explain why you think this is necessary?"

  • This is one of the oldest, most recycled, and pathetic atheistic questions: Who Created God? I asked myself that when I was agnostic. One Word: Eternal. One Phrase: Occam's Razor. Few people to look into: Fransis Collins, Alister McGrath, and Stephen Hawking - all people who believe in some sort of God or diety that sparked the existance of the universe. They will answer this question alot better than I can. 8dogknight Summed up pretty much what I would say.

  • This person talks too simple, he's just your average athiest

  • The guy in the orange sounds like he's talking in circles or reading from a grammar book exercise. In otherwords, he's spewing bullsh1t.

  • Man created God to control the masses through fear and repression.

  • Sounds like classic George Orwell "double speak" to me.

  • Ok, this is an incredibly stupid argument dressed up in a smart language. The word "god" might mean what Davicles says, but its meaning in terms of the general populous is not the same. At the same time when most people say "god", they mean higher power. So when people argue that a higher power doesn't exist, the word that higher power is simplified and understood as the same is "god".

    This is an evolved version of the idea that since we have a concept of "god", there must be a "god".

  • big word big word big word big word big word in conclusion really big word

  • I CREATED GOD

  • Stephen Hawking has calculated that the creation of the Universe was so precise that if the Universe's rate of expansion during the first second of its existence had deviated by as little as 1/100,000,000,000,000,000th of a second, the Universe would have collapsed into a fireball - let there be life!!!

    Also recent studies of human mitochondrial DNA show that all modern humans can trace their ancestry back to one woman in Africa around 200,000 years ago. Scientists nicknamed her Eve!

  • Pt II

    No one created the Designer, because creation is a chronological construct applicable only to objects subject to the natural laws of the universe. Scientists have discovered outside the universe is a timeless realm, something we cannot conceive. It has no past, no future, only an enduring present. No gravity, no electromagnetic forces etc., therefore our natural laws came into existence for the purposes of this particular universe.

  • Part I of II

    TIME answers this question. Time only exists within the four walls of our universe - not outside. The rules and laws of physics, chemistry, biology and time do not apply to those outside of this universe. Most people when asking who created the designer think on an evolutionary scale, which presumes time. Evolution is a linear concept, implying change over time. If there is no progression of time there is no evolution.

  • Can't we just call it a mystery, and just be happy to be here, however we, and God, came into existence! We're so vain! We like to think and act like we know it all! Is there an english translation for this video! Just kidding!

  • dude you are totally confused and dont even know what you are talking about,and i think you are reading evrything you say from somwhere. but look you just sayed god is not somthing that have been created. well if something havent bean created IT NEVER EXISTED. you got it?

  • Interesting. Have you put up a video on the subject of why the universe as a whole needs a cause? I mean, I realize that the word "God" MEANS a being who doesn't need a cause. But why should the universe as a whole need a cause? Couldn't the universe have always existed?

  • It is true that the universe might always have existed without a cause. But how does this explain evolution from the simple to the complex or what Stephen Hawking explains as phenomenal fine tuning? A gigantic, meaningless, infinite coincidence? This too requires much faith.

  • You make a good point. However, what you're referring to is the argument from design. What's at issue here is the cosmological argument. The argument from design might very well be sound. However, I wasn't denying the existence of sound arguments for a "classical" God; I was simply pointing out that God, if defined simply as an uncaused cause, could BE the universe.

  • A bit of fallacy there. The "who created god?" question is usually used as a counter to the necessity of god as a creator. That is, that god must exist, as the universe does. The flaw here is that if god doesn't need a creator, why must the universe? Once the universe no longer needs a creator, which makes more sense to start with: The simplest of all matter (from which live evolved), or the most complex being ever possible? You don't start with complexity and go down.

  • You have misunderstood. I didn't here seek to prove that God existed, but that God wouldn't need a creator if He existed. To ask "Who created the Creator?" is like asking "What caused causality?" or "What gave birth to birth?" That is, it is to treat the precondition for a whole set of possibilities as something itself susceptible to the possibilities of which it is the precondition. As such, this was not a proof of God, but a disproof of bad arguments against God.

  • Davicles, you missed his point, and you missed the point before the video. Most people respond "Who created God?" when answering a standard theist claim "everything needs to have a creator." You were attacking the argument differently, in a near straw man sort of way.

  • Dear BlasphemyChallenge, as davicles stated, he is not attempting in this short video to give proofs for the existence of God, but just clearing up why the question "Who created God" is not a proper question. One could disagree whether or not such a being exists, of course.

  • God has no creator. to say that God has a creator means that creator had a creator. and that creator of the creator of the creator has a creator. it's an irrationale and ignorant question. the only way that a creator can exist is if he has no creator

  • LOL, no, what is irrational and ignorant is to use linguistics and semantics to say that a creator is somehow outside of creation but offer no explanation for how.

    I created this post, do I not have a creator? Did I just poof into existence? Or did my parents create me?

    You are also making an assumption that a creator exists. Unfortunately, there is no evidence to prove that a creator exists. If there were, I would believe.

  • there wouldn't be any evidence that a creator exists if he does(wich he does).

  • Well isn't that just bloody convenient.

  • "no, what is irrational and ignorant is to use linguistics and semantics to say that a creator is somehow outside of creation but offer no explanation for how" If you missed the explanation or can't grasp the concept then perhaps this debate is too complex for you. Maybe a debate about what taste better, Coke or Pepsi would be more suited to your skills.

    Good luck to you.

  • It is interesting that the who created God is the centrepiece of the Dawkins bestseller the 'God Delusion' assuming that the Almighty were he to exist could only possibly be partly mighty. But even by stating that the Universe might be uncreated as God has always been seen to be still begs the question of how the simple became complex. If God didn't create something out of nothing then did the inanimate create the animate out of itself?

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more