The Big Bang, first theorized by theoretical physicist and Catholic priest Georges Lamaitre, states the universe sprang into existence 13.7b years ago; it was not eternal as previously thought.
And we know from observation that everything that begins to exist has a cause for its existence.
This suggests that the universe was caused. Since the universe can't cause itself, its cause must be outside of the universe. It must be immaterial; not made up of the stuff of the universe. It must be timeless and not governed by the laws of the universe. And it must be exceedingly powerful to create all the energy that kicked off the expanding universe with its billions of spinning galaxies, stars, and planets.
A powerful, immaterial, timeless force outside of the universet that caused the universe to exist. This points to God.
You follow the extremely common logical fallacy that because you want there to be a reason for the universe and you wanting there to be something before the universe then that means there has to be a god?
A big leap based on unproven assumptions.
Who says time does not extend outside the universe? Where's the proof that a universe can't cause itself? Why can't it be governed by the same laws?
Science does not claim to have all the answers but just then jumping to the conclusion that there has to be a god? Nah.
What if there indeed was a God but is now gone? What makes you assume that he cares about us and our morals? What would he think of people that claim he has spoken to them? Why would he create all the sickness and pain in the world? Would it mean there's some extremely sick and perverted being out there that just likes to watch innocent women being raped? Clearly he could prevent that. But then again why do religions assume that their god is good willing? Clearly he can't be that with all the shit going on because if he willed it into existance then all that is on him.
What we observe in nature. Everything in nature that begins to exist was caused by something else. (Some have suggested quantum exceptions to this rule, but even those claims are tenuous at best.)
The best observable evidence we have is that everything that begins to exist must be caused.
While atheist philosophers like Bertrand Russel once believed the universe was eternal -- and therefore didn't need to be caused -- it was the Big Bang theory that proved otherwise. The universe had a beginning, therefore it has a cause. My conviction, then, is that God really does exist, and the he caused the universe to exist.
> "Clearly he could prevent that...clearly he can't be [good] with all the shit going on"
You're entering territory that philosophers and theologians have been discussing for millenia. I won't pretend to have the real answer for you, but one answer I've found reasonable is that if God prevents evil, He also prevents free choice; free will. It is better to exist in a world with free will -- even if it means some people abuse that for evil -- than to exist in a world where free will doesn't exist.
On the same theme of evil and suffering, what is more problematic is if God doesn't exist, then evil is subjective. Only if God exists and right from wrong are legislated by God do we have a grounded morality, one where we can definitely say what is good and what is evil.
> What we observe in nature. Everything in nature that begins to exist was caused by something else. (Some have suggested quantum exceptions to this rule, but even those claims are tenuous at best.)
> The best observable evidence we have is that everything that begins to exist must be caused.
Einstein explained that nothing can move faster than light but the universe seems to be expanding faster than light so clearly the universe itself can follow different rules and of course anything theoretically outside of it could do pretty much anything for all we know (since we don't know anything about it).
> While atheist philosophers like Bertrand Russel once believed the universe was eternal -- and therefore didn't need to be caused -- it was the Big Bang theory that proved otherwise. The universe had a beginning, therefore it has a cause. My conviction, then, is that God really does exist, and the he caused the universe to exist.
> You're entering territory that philosophers and theologians have been discussing for millenia.
> I won't pretend to have the real answer for you, but one answer I've found reasonable is that if God prevents evil, He also prevents free choice; free will. It is better to exist in a world with free will -- even if it means some people abuse that for evil -- than to exist in a world where free will doesn't exist.
You called people doing evil an abuse of free will. But why is it abuse if god wanted it to be like that? Doesn't it mean that god wanted evil to exist? Otherwise he'd create a system with free will but with evil excluded. We would never know about evil being missing since he completely removed it from our reality. In the same line of thinking how would we know if we have true free will? What if there was a third thing next to good and evil? How can we know we have free will? And how can we say it is better to have free will than not? If I gave you the choice of living a life in which 100% of days you are happy or a life in which on random days you will be unhappy, which life would you choose?
> On the same theme of evil and suffering, what is more problematic is if God doesn't exist, then evil is subjective. Only if God exists and right from wrong are legislated by God do we have a grounded morality, one where we can definitely say what is good and what is evil.
Good and bad are actually subjective. Muslims will find me eating pork as bad. For christians it wouldn't be bad. For christians it would be really bad if I had multiple wifes while muslims would be OK with it. Who is right and who is wrong? If you pick either one then you claim that some religions are correct and others wrong. How did you decide which ones are the correct ones? It also means there can only be one final true religion because if there are two religions then they must differ in something and both can't be right at the same time.
You say god legislates what is good and bad. Ignoring that different religions as outlined above disagree about what is good or bad, how exactly do we know for sure that the claimed laws have been handed by god? That someone pronounces so is not good enough.
Do animals who seem to also have a system of good and bad have religous believes? My dog feels really guilty when he makes a mess. Who told him about god and that he shall not make a mess?
Which is why we rely on the honest news. Prophets like Muhammad, Jesus, and Moses Prayers of God be upon them all proved that they came with a message. They performed miracles, and their character is well known. It's basically an inductive proof.
If one man claims that god said to him “such and such”, he may think that god has spoken to him, but I’m not obliged to. All I can say with certainty is that he is a person who thinks god spoke to him and subsequently told me about it.
Of course it's evidence. We have prophecies made thousands of years ago and they're coming true in our very lifetimes. E.g. http://www.provingislam.com
Holy leap of faith, batman, such a non-sequitur. The former I'd agree is plausible but then you just go headlong into a big assumption or in your case, ironically and paradoxically, you state it as a certainty in a thread about our uncertain universal beginnings. I could run with the former in that perhaps some kind of force outside it caused it but what caused that force? Also there is nothing pointing to this force being some intelligent anthropomorphic entity aware of our existence (as generally believed) other than a few religious texts that, some argue, spawned from other polytheistic religious texts that had entirely different views of the gods.
>There is a great deal of evidence, philosophically and rationally, for the existence of God.
And evidence against if you really want to learn about philosophy in a more well-rounded way. And "rationally"? Many views can be rational which can be pretty subjective, just not logical or true.
We actually never observed everything, cause there is a great shadow far in the past. We just launched yet another space telescope to look a little farther, btw.
This suggests that the universe was caused. ... A powerful, immaterial, timeless force outside of the universet that caused the universe to exist. This points to God.
Or to a multi-dimensional coffee machine which farts universes as a side product every multi-morning and its owner doesn't even know that. It doesn't point to anything and even less so to a conscious creator who decides where "you" go after your brain runs low on oxygen for a while.
There is every reason to believe our present theories are presently insufficient because this is a very hard topic and no reason to believe that the universe is caused by something immaterial or timeless much less something with volition and purpose. There are multiple theories that you could read about if you wish that require neither cause nor volition.
And it's not a straw man argument. God in Islam cares about foreskins and sex and if you disbelieve in him he sends you to hell for eternity.
Don't send videos tell me your arguments, you can speak for yourself.
You expect a detailed and nuanced response in 1 paragraph on HN?
If you are so sure then let's discuss it.
I think you're just scared, if not email me. : )
We have proof. We know about the state of the world back then. We have history, archeology, the knowledge of that era, and much much more. Even English author and historian Tom Holland had to admit that the Quran had too much nuanced knowledge about Jewish and Christian texts that, instead of submitting, he had to come up with a completely illogical and provably wrong story that Makkah was not in present day Saudi Arabia, but on the outskirts of Jerusalem.
Even the non Muslims admit and are in awe of what happened.
https://www.reddit.com/r/islam/comments/hxn276/here_are_some...
> That does not prove that what is written in Qran is correct
He proved that what's written in the Quran correct, discoveries made just a couple of hundred years ago.
> We know about the state of the world back then. We have history, archeology, the knowledge of that era, and much much more.
> Even the non Muslims admit and are in awe of what happened.
> He proved that what's written in the Quran correct, discoveries made just a couple of hundred years ago.