Proving the existence of the eternal God

[NYCmuslim]

Check out this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TevkzHQhh0

This dude uses very good logic to prove the existence of God. Although he is christian and mentions a "christian" God, we as muslims know that Allah is the same God that he is talking about.

Peace.

[thydavidcome]

His other videos insult Islam, and show Allah as a liar and batman...

[NYCmuslim]

Hmmm...interesting. I didn't see the other videos he had. Its a shame that he doesn't know that the christian and muslim God is the same.

[Whatsthepoint]

Hmmm...interesting. I didn't see the other videos he had. Its a shame that he doesn't know that the christian and muslim God is the same.

For most christians it isn't.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Whatsthepoint]

The Five Ways

The existence of God can be proved in five ways.

The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

The second way is from the nature of the efficient cause. In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now in efficient causes it is not possible to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several, or only one. Now to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any intermediate cause. But if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.

The third way is taken from possibility and necessity, and runs thus. We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, since they are found to be generated, and to corrupt, and consequently, they are possible to be and not to be. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which is possible not to be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence---which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God.

The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But "more" and "less" are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently, something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Metaph. ii. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.

The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.

Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)

[wilberhum]

So sad, some still think a valid argument is proof.
Good logic is not proof either.

IMHO that some see this as proof, is only proof that there is no limit on what humans will believe.

YouTube the source of all new and great knolwledge. :giggling::giggling::giggling::giggling::giggling: :giggling:

[root]

Oh right, he begins counting at zero. He may have an infinate ammount of counting available to him, but why did he use zero as the beginning since he has an equally infinate counting before he reaches zero!

Who said zero is the beginning? -3 outside think I will go put ma heaters on :okay:


Strawman logic

[ranma1/2]

god is only a arbitrary terminator to an infinite regress.
what created god.. well he always existed....
but if everything needs a cause.....
well god always existed....
sigh....

[snakelegs]

god is only a arbitrary terminator to an infinite regress.
what created god.. well he always existed....
but if everything needs a cause.....
well god always existed....
sigh....

translation:
what can enlightened people like us do with the simple-minded morons who persist in believing in god? (sigh)
sort of a new version of "the white man's burdern"? ;D

[Isambard]

Id say the fact there are people like the guy in the vid, that God doesnt exist.

LOL

[guyabano]

Check out this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TevkzHQhh0

This dude uses very good logic to prove the existence of God. Although he is christian and mentions a "christian" God, we as muslims know that Allah is the same God that he is talking about.

Peace.

hmmm, I guess, he spoke about the "muslim" God. How silly, isn't the "christian" God not the same as the "muslim" God ?

PS: You will never be able to proove the existance of "any" God, unless he see him

[guyabano]

The Five Ways

The existence of God can be proved in five ways.

The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

The second way is from the nature of the efficient cause. In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now in efficient causes it is not possible to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several, or only one. Now to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any intermediate cause. But if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.

The third way is taken from possibility and necessity, and runs thus. We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, since they are found to be generated, and to corrupt, and consequently, they are possible to be and not to be. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which is possible not to be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence---which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God.

The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But "more" and "less" are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently, something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Metaph. ii. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.

The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.

Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)

I can give you at least 50 prooves, that God does NOT exist !

[Trumble]

This dude uses very good logic to prove the existence of God.

His does nothing of the sort. His (far from original) argument makes a whole series of assumptions that involve the necessary properties of God; i.e. in arguing that God must exist he relies on the assumption that He does.

Aquinas actually has the much better arguments in that at least he doesn't assume what he is trying to prove.

[Umar001]

I never knew this guy could actually sound like he is making sense!

[al-muslimah]

Well he uses logic but it really doesn't have a point the Qur'an is enough as a proof and if they don't accept its divine evidence then indeed Allah guides whom he wills and leads astray whomever he wills right.Allayahdeehum.

[wilberhum]

There is no PROOF.

[guyabano]

I never knew this guy could actually sound like he is making sense!

hmmm, maybe muslims should better investigate more about his videos, before making such statements, because VenonFangX is Anti-Islamist. He also has videos like 'Anti-Christ Islam' or 'Adam and Eve and the serpant(Islam)' in his collection.

One of his statements on his webpage:

Christians & Jewish martyrs say; "I will die for what I believe". A Muslim martyr says; "you will die for what I believe"....

Specially Videos like that will make change your opinion about him

[al-muslimah]

If his videos are anti-islamic then why would we need to investigate there's the proof he is against is Islam.Is he an evangelist or an athiest?
Well he is wrong because Muslims martyrs say" we fight in the path of Allah until the word of Allah is highest " this man switched the words around." Jewish and Christian martyrs "? Thats funny what are they shuhada somewhere in hell??!!

[tetsujin]

If his videos are anti-islamic then why would we need to investigate there's the proof he is against is Islam.Is he an evangelist or an athiest?
Well he is wrong because Muslims martyrs say" we fight in the path of Allah until the word of Allah is highest " this man switched the words around." Jewish and Christian martyrs "? Thats funny what are they shuhada somewhere in hell??!!

What you have stated is also misleading.

A believer is not to take martyrdom lightly or for political reasons, other than in the strictest sense of necessity, as he/she would already believe that the word of Allah is the highest. Transgressors and opressors of Islam are mislead in their belief and martyrdom is not the route to winning their hearts.

Sacrificing your own life for your beliefs does not prove you are right. It proves you have strong beliefs.

[al-muslimah]

Actually in Islam it does.Infact the Prophet (saw) said " deeds are based upon intentions."

[al-muslimah]

The word of Allah will be the highest inshallah when Islam(its laws) govern the world and Islam prevails over all religions and their are no more trials and tribulations left on earth.Martyrdom is for religious reasons definitely not political.Sorry if u got confused.

[tetsujin]

Actually in Islam it does.Infact the Prophet (saw) said " deeds are based upon intentions."

So are you trying to say that martyrdom proves you are right?

There are people of other faiths and beliefs who have died for their convictions and they believe that they should sacrifice their lives for the good cause (as they see it). If they choose to be martyrs, do you think that makes them right?

Sacrificing your life for your beliefs does not prove that you are right, it only shows that you have strong beliefs. If you believe that sacrificing your life will grant you divine favours in return then that is an incentive for you. The outsider may not believe you, what he or she sees is a person with strong beliefs.

The word of Allah will be the highest inshallah when Islam(its laws) govern the world and Islam prevails over all religions and their are no more trials and tribulations left on earth.Martyrdom is for religious reasons definitely not political.Sorry if u got confused.

That's not going to happen according to the Qur'an:

030.055 On the Day that the Hour (of Reckoning) will be established, the transgressors will swear that they tarried not but an hour: thus were they used to being deluded!

030.056 But those endued with knowledge and faith will say: "Indeed ye did tarry, within Allah's Decree, to the Day of Resurrection, and this is the Day of Resurrection: but ye - ye were not aware!"

030.057 So on that Day no excuse of theirs will avail the transgressors, nor will they be invited (then) to seek grace (by repentance).

Al-Qur'an, 030.055-057 (Ar-Room [The Romans, The Byzantines])

Indicating that disbelievers are, even if a minority, a significant population.

Even with Islamic rule on earth, nothing would indicate that the trials and tribulations would vanish as there are indications that Islam itself will have more sects. Although only one will be the true/original one, who is to say that the believers of those sects will not create unrest as is the case now when there are arguably only two sects.

[barney]

Al Muslimah, Are you sure Allah actually leads people astray?
I cant find anything in hadiths or quran that even hints that Allah leads people astray. Isnt it people choose to go astray?