Disproving Theism in 20 seconds (while actually making an argument)

For the record, I'm not saying this is a real argument against theism. It's an argument against the argument that "something cannot come from nothing, therefore God did it."

So easy, a caveman can do it. And yet, you still got it wrong.

Video to which I'm responding:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufpetTsb-Sg

Category:

Education

Tags:

• atheism
• theism
• what
• were
• you
• thinking
• facepalm

[TwistedLemniscate]

Because math applied to noumena isn't flawed at all...

[ericleb01]

@MoskowFreak1111 Lol, no. Life started from particles fusing into each other, eventually becoming molecules and evolving into RNA. THEN they evolved into double-stranded DNA.

Evolution is not random, you bum.

[erasmusso]

Something cannot come from nothing. So the universe came from the big bang and the big bang came from nothing. So the universe can't exist.

[cjdabes]

@Christianrockrockz

Something could not have just always existed. God is said to be both Omnipotent and Omniscient. This would mean God existed INSIDE and OUTSIDE the universe. But the universe IS the sum of all existence, so if God existed, he would have to be INSIDE the universe. Alos, god is suppose to be both invisible and immaterical. This means he contradicts himself. Immaterial(non-existence) and invisible(existence) are opposites. Genesis 1:3 proves God is NOT all-knowing, read it! :P

[F012TYF0U12]

@ericleb01 Wow. Thats insane. A follower of youtube has figured out the origin of life!.....Are you really so naive to think you can make such a claim without anything to back it up?

[Christianrockrockz]

God didn't come from nothing. He has always been there. There was no "before him" period of time.

[lolasogm]

@ericleb01 isn't nature so perfect?? and it is not random, it is planned by God

[flyinj1000]

No evolution isn't random. It's decided by natural selection.SELECTION!!!!!

[sinnersavedbygrace7]

God is outside of our physical realm and therefore not subject to the same laws as us. That is akin to a fish saying nothing can live on the land simply because it could not.

[310245535]

Mark Twain said: "Education: that which reveals to the wise, and conceals from the stupid, the vast limits of their knowledge."

[Trynottoblink]

Whoever made this video is an excellent troll.

[DelMarrrrr]

@colourfulwithaU

Bah....stole the words right outta my mouth. Either way, SOMETHING has to have already been here. Whether it's God or the universe or perhaps something else, there's literally no way that this could have come from nothing. I it was created with purpose or merely formed out of chance, and neither side really has a "better" argument.

[Blackmark52]

@MasterBallatWetpaint Dont' be absurd. How intelligent can a being that exists in a complete and utter timeless void be? The problem with your historical perspective is that these things that were KNOWN, came from religious teachings, not science. Neither is astrology science. The ancient Greeks, employing scientific reasoning, not only came to the conclusion that the world was spherical, but managed to estimate its circumference to within a respectable percentage of it actual girth.

[MasterBallatWetpaint]

@Blackmark52 You think it absurd only because of the theories scientists spout out their rear-ends today. Remember, philosiphers, physicisns, doctors, etc., hundreds of years ago KNEW the Earth was flat. They KNEW the universe revolves around us.

Now, years later, we see that this just is not true. Who's to say what we think we know now isn't how things really are? Because our science backs up up? Remember, astrologers also had science to back up their theories hundreds of years ago.

[colourfulwithaU]

Uh...this video only proves that you don't understand exactly why that argument for theism is invalid. So here's why:

Theists argue that something cannot come from nothing, and therefore God exists, as though God is the exception to that rule. But that argument fails because even we accept that there has to be an exception to that rule, we can accept that the universe itself came from nothing (as it was the exception to the rule...right, theists?).

[Blackmark52]

@Embrigh Not really. It's just the flip side of the common theist argument that nothing can come from nothing, and frankly it makes more sense from an atheist perspective. I find it absurd to think that the first thing to exist was a sentient being. It is even more absurd to think of this sentient being existing in the eternal void before creation, with no energy or matter to act upon, no time or space to relate to: nothing. What could a such a sentient being be sentient of?

[InaneRex]

Works for me!

[Embrigh]

What...? Alright for all those theists and atheists watching, please go watch a different video because this is a terrible argument.

[Moshikashitenai]

0 times 0 does not equal one, but there's already a one, you have to understand that.

[proginosko]

You seriously did not make that argument did you? The law of causation applies to the physical universe that had a beginning. It does not apply to something that is eternal and not subject to the physical universe, like God. How about energy? The second law of thermal dynamics states the conservation of energy. Energy can be transfered from one form into another but cannot be created or destroyed, thus not subject to causation. oops...God just might exist.

[TheAlexallthetime]

Sorry, but even as a Atheist this is a very weak argument because your using secular tactics to prove something that is supposedly completely nonsecular to be false. The rules of man would not necessarily apply to a "God force"

[TheNickatnight123]

0x0 does not equal 1 therefore nothing can exist because something does not come from something (argument against evolution). The stupid hypothetical nonsense can go both ways.