Believe in God in 5 Minutes (Scientific Proof)

Watch PART 2 on KZbin: bit.ly/Proof_G...
Watch PART 3 on KZbin: bit.ly/IsEinste...
MIT Physicist Dr. Gerald Schroeder offers proof god exists and explains how, as a scientist, he believes in god. Schroeder explores scientific proof of god using the Big Bang theory and quantum theory.
Dr. Schroeder is a scientist with over thirty years of experience in research and teaching. He earned his Bachelor's, Master's, and Doctorate degrees all at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, with his doctorate thesis being under the supervision of physics professor Robley D. Evans. This was followed by five years on the staff of the MIT physics department prior to moving to Israel, where he joined the Weizmann Institute of Science and then the Volcani Research Institute, while also having a laboratory at The Hebrew University. His Doctorate is in two fields: Earth sciences and physics.
Find out more about Gerald Schroeder: geraldschroeder...
Like our videos? Check us out here:
Website: SinaiSpeak.com
Facebook: / sinaispeak
Twitter: / sinaispeak
Sinai Speak connects you with today’s cutting-edge Jewish speakers via short, inspirational videos. We create original video content with dynamic educators from around the globe, creating connection to the wisdom of Jewish tradition. Shalom & enjoy!

[@CosakiCulture]

God doesn't write in Letters, he writes in Math.

[@starcycle1]

Gematria ;-)

[@NatandGeorge]

&, just as computers calculate & render in binary, the numbers need to be translated into modern human languages, for humans to understand what's been said.

[@MARANATHA-AMEN]

God spoke the universe into existence!

[@ninjaflyguy8366]

Gods not a he nor she

[@misterllemos]

🔥🔥🔥

[@intox4953]

Except the Big Bang wasn't really the creation of the Universe, it was merely the expansion of it. All the energy was already there - the Big Bang just sort of stretched it out.

[@dt6313]

The big bang theory has no reason behind it, God has a reason behind Him.

[@han-huo]

I want to believe in God but I wanna ask. If God just was there, he didn't get made, then why couldn't the universe have "just been made?"

[@wegener1]

As he said this scientifically proves the "God of the Bible". So since it is the biblical God please explain scientifically why it took him six days to create the universe?

[@getinthevanihavecandy]

I love how there's people in the comments that think they're smarter than this guy too. Lol

[@Sloppy_McFloppy]

So, if everything was created in "6 days" then what were these days based off of if the sun was not created until (what was it? the 3rd day?) How was there a day/night cycle without the sun yet?

[@youmaycallmeken]

It wasn't "day/night", but as stated in Genesis it was "evening and morning" and of course even in current times "evening and morning" does not constitute a day (as a day/night cycle on Earth), and it certainly doesn't before the existence of Earth and the Sun. So obviously literal meaning of simple translation of the Hebrew does not suffice.

[@MaxElkin]

How can something predate the big bang? Time itself began at the big bang. Any notion of before or after cannot be said about a timeless time.

[@crabbylobster4411]

God is ETERNAL.. he does not exist within TIME. So, time is an invention of God. Like how the computer is an invention of man. WE are not bound by our computer, and have freewill to do what we please with it as it is our creation. Same with God and time.

[@MaxElkin]

Crabby Lobster I think you're missing the point. Mr Schroeder here is claiming that the laws of the universe predate the universe. The problem is is that you need time to predate something. Without time there is no chronological order of events. Since time and space are two sides of the same coin, and all space, and therefore time, began at the big bang, nothing can predate it. Whether or not god is eternal is eternal is irrelevant.

[@Sinaispeak]

Max Elkin I think you're getting too caught up on his wording. He means outside of time, beyond the dimension of time. He also isn't bringing any information that is new to the scientific community; all his claims are based on accepted findings.

[@crabbylobster4411]

But just because right now science does not accept that Nature is causal, doesn't mean they are right. For example, less then 10 years ago the vast majority of scientists believed that the Universe was eternal. It's not now, because it's proven it is not eternal. So, one day, we may see that natural forces are causal. But, possibly not.

[@PaulTheSkeptic]

***** I'd be more skeptical. I've heard a lot of people trying to fit their particular holy book with science. Muslims do it too. I always wonder, if you really think some ancient culture got it right, then why isn't someone trying to figure out which ancient book of myths best conform to our current understanding of science?

[@iamagodlover2010]

When God said, "Let there be Light." That was the Big Bang.

[@alyrajwani7928]

even if you accept literally everything he says in this video, you still don't reach the conclusion that god exists. you get that the universe has something that created it. you don't know if its a being, you don't know if there are multiple somethings which created the universe, and you certainly don't know that what created the universe was your very specific version of god which you only believe in because of your upbringing and what region of the world you were born in.

[@anthonyleonard285]

"There are many rooms in my father's house" as they say if you allow me to paraphrase a verse crudely etc...the more we learn scientifically man literally is constantly rewriting his certain science in ways where it is almost fluid when viewed over the span of time....when you take away sincerely the fear of how small we are in scope of large things like the known universe and also remove our personal pride and our fear of our mortality...you start to see all things from a sincerely beautiful and humble positon....you realize the vastness of all that is known and unknown materially pales to potential and breadth of the capability to.love and hope which is in our heart. That potential I suspect infinitely dwarfs the canvas of the known and unknown of existence so much that the physical universe really does not matter in the slightest. We are looking at the wrong things to prove God exists if you are only looking at how big physical existence is ...as physical existence is but on one plane and its rather the easiest plane to engage with and its still too much for our species to comprehend. The fact that I am taking this time and care to converse with you about this topic is literally evidence there is something else that cares about you with infinite love that is reaching out to you for no reason but to love you.

[@nickgri697]

Thats because the only reason you really know is if you experience him for yourself

[@JonathanSchattke]

The most important attribute of God is left out: volition. Without volition, you don't have a God, you just have forces, natural laws.

[@AutomaticUniverse]

The Creator is the One who divided into many, both as in spiritual units and particle units. God's was here before any choice and no law or force cannot exist if the prime energy force was not. A very long time ago, God desired to see self, thus created us, with freewill still intacted. God is invisible... well, not anymore... look around you and inside of yourself... your the second part of I AM that I AM... now you know.

[@DayZJ]

To create a universe you must exist outside it.

[@biekgiek]

I’m not convinced. Maybe as another commentator said, I’m not as smart as him. But it really seems to me like he’s coming from the conclusion that god exists and then fitting these discoveries to that conclusion.

[@Tsugua]

This is all well and good, but i feel like the typical understanding of the abrahamic god as described in the bible etc. has a few more attributes than the ones you listed. To me this seems like you are moving the goalposts so to speak.

[@6_SpeedGonzales]

How does this explain the omnipresent God people know today? How does it explain the omni-benevolent being who supposedly loves everyone so long as they believe in Christ? How is a hypothesis suddenly a theory? If you can establish that something can indeed come from nothing, then why has it taken supposedly 6 days to do, when your hypothesis explains that it was done in several billions of years. Also, if God were to see humans as so special, how do you explain the several hundred other planets that we've found to be in the right spot as earth is, but in their Galaxy, and still have the potential to support life? This isn't scientific proof of God existing, this is a scientific hypothesis for how our universe was created. Biblical definition of God: God is not a creature and never had a beginning point, being eternal: Deut 33:27; Isa 9:6; 1 Tim 1:17; Isa 44:6 I'm sorry if I'm missing it, but you contradicted yourself by stating that the universe did in fact have a start, in which God has no start, but if God has no start, then the hypothesis that something can come from nothing is invalid, meaning something came from something. So are you either saying that God made something come from nothing, or that something came from the behalf of God?

[@human932]

Imagine having researched this for so long and still not having any proof or basic research and instead just saying: "Well something should have started it"

[@Kal9222]

The point is the existence of a repository of rules/knowledge that existed before matter and is independent of humans, which acts upon ALL material. That is a settled understanding of cosmology

[@ohbenbeckman1089]

Are you a scientist by any chance? Is your education lv anything greater than highschool? This man actually has done the work and knows the data first hand you just repeat something you heard from a youtube atheist.

[@nasosorfanoudakis717]

@@ohbenbeckman1089 And you believe something you heard from a youtube theisis. By the way, if you are going to believe that god is or isn't real just from scientists and educated people then I present to you this fact: Stephen Hawkings and Albert Einstein are both atheists.

[@That_One_Kobold]

And where did god come? From nothing to create something from nothing?

[@coopertroy1308]

i wouldn't say this proves the biblical god. it proves that a non-physical force or consciousness may have created the physical universe from nothing. it doesn't prove that the god described in the bible is actually the force behind this creation. just because the bible says god created the world from nothing doesn't mean that everything that follows, including all the disgusting atrocities carried out by this god, are factual in any way.

[@72Yonatan]

Mr Wegener: Who told you that the six days of creation are 24 hour days if the sun and other planets were not yet created? It is obvious to any careful reader that these 'days' are metaphorical periods of time. Also, Jewish Oral tradition informs us that Genesis is not chronological when referring to objects or forces listed.

[@roland20002000]

I'd love to see a debate between Dr. Gerald Schroeder and Lawrence Krauss. That would be fun.

[@Scott2122232425]

We will never know the truth. Period.

[@Sinaispeak]

Agreed. The Torah is the "Menu not the meal." That which is truly truth cannot be expressed in words, but words can be helpful references. If I asked you to describe the taste of Chocolate, you probably wouldn't get very far in conceptualizing the experience of taste of the flavor of chocolate. So Torah for us is our way of approximating an understanding of He who can never truly be understood. And through that, help guide us to be able to truly experience Hashem in our lives, and to be able to recognize the experience.

[@NomadUrpagi]

Came here to Lol at theists. Wasn't disappointed.

[@miked412]

Misinterpretation of science. The bible says there was a beginning and from our current understanding of science, there was also a beginning to our universe; therefore, science proves the bible. That's essentially the definition of pseudoscience there.

[@emirhodzic2860]

This has so many dislikes, just because it has a different premise than the mainstream atheistic view. Nice video :)

[@jimmorrison2657]

So if god is just the forces of nature, why should people pray to the forces of nature. It would be an assumption or an act of faith to assume that the forces of nature have a conscience which is capable of hearing, understanding, and acting upon those prayers.

[@omar-ms3ip]

But in your opinion is God the forces or nature??

[@tylercain2737]

That is why we have the bible. God's letter to us.

[@preciousm6612]

We hear,understand, and we act on things everyday. And we also live and thrive in the forces of nature because we live on earth and the earth is in the universe.

[@SkylerDawn1123]

Well interestingly that is the basis of paganism and prayer, and also used in alchemy. It's called the law of attraction, pretty much if you put your mind to something with great concentration you can manifest. That's why prayer can be effective if you really believe. It's because everything in the universe is consciousness, vibrations and math that can be manipulated. In our current state we are pretty weak though. I would guess that the reason for the bible was that when men fell, they needed something to keep them in line and stop them from finding out so soon (hense the great hatred of paganism). It can be pretty powerful, and involves tuning into different dimensions to harness and bond with energies. Sounds nuts I know but I'm pretty sure thats kinda the point of the revelation/apocalypse (the unveiling of what was kept secret) "everything you thought you knew was a lie" for atheists and religionists alike. Surprise!

[@thatonegamer9547]

Jim Morrison he’s not the forces of nature, he works through them

[@wheatgerm]

"The Bible got it right." The only thing that the Bible got right about the beginning of the universe was that there was a beginning, and it had a pretty good shot of getting that right by just guessing.

[@shadowblaze97]

It is written, "For the invisible things of Him are clearly seen even His eternal Power and Godhead so that they are without excuse.

[@bigflamarang]

Could you give me with an example of one of these "invisible" things?

[@shadowblaze97]

bigflamarang For one, have you ever asked yourself that how Israel and the Arab nations cannot have peace together due to their highly differing views on the Abrahamic relation and their quarrels lasted for years with no end in sight? Secondly, you may have not been spiritually awakened but there are spiritual influences in this world but have you ever suffered from sleep paralysis? But the final one, consider the stars, the constellations around our planet. What are they held by, what are we as a galaxy is keeping us together and not slipping out into another galaxy or even the sun, while the asteroids and comets can move freely..There is only one answer for it all King YHWH himself.

[@bigflamarang]

shadowblaze97 Great questions! The conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors is a dynamic and complex issue with many contributing factors, some of which have to do with religious beliefs. People have written entire books about this and I don't think I can adequately answer your question without it being long and drawn out. I will say, however, that to this day I have never heard a respected authority on the matter invoke anything supernatural to explain it. That being said, why do we need to invoke the Judea-Christian God to explain how long the conflict has lasted? I have experienced sleep paralysis, however we have a well-established natural explanation for the phenomenon that doesn't require any supernatural intervention. Are you aware of any cases in which sleep paralysis was beyond a reasonable doubt caused by something supernatural? It has been well-established that the force responsible for everything mentioned in your last example is gravity. That being said, why is any supernatural force, let alone the very specific God of the Bible required in order to account for the phenomena you mentioned? And by the way, our galaxy IS "slipping" into another galaxy as it is well-established that the Milky Way will collide with the Andromeda galaxy about 4 billion years from now. Toodles!

[@rodennyyrodennyy-rodennyy5380]

shadowblaze97 very good

[@bigflamarang]

shadowblaze97 rodennyy rodennyy-rodennyy ***** If you guys would like, I'd love to tell you about what a great moral guide it is too!

[@iranpop80slover]

did he just conclude that the laws of nature are God itself ? like gravity is god , or electromagnetism is god ?

[@robertollier3085]

This conflates the idea of natural laws as 'GOD' being equivalent to the notion of a 'person' that created the universe. They are very different notions. The rational argument that 'laws' must have predated the matter they act on does not prove the myth of an entity in whose image we are allegedly created and with whom we can have a personal relationship. Science can infer one, but not the other.

[@anotherwayplease]

God of Gaps. As usually. "I don't know, therefore - God!" :)

[@555usher]

Why God of the gaps?

[@Kal9222]

The point is the existence of a repository of knowledge that existed before matter and is independent of humans, which acts upon ALL material. That is in fact what we do know

[@chialeux514]

@@555usher The term "God of the gaps" describes some people's tendency to interpret the Bible litertally, as if it was a science book. They'll assign divine causes to any poorly understood phenomenon. For instance, when someone got struck by lightning, it was believed it was the Wrath of God - that's until research on electricity in the 18th century revealed it was a natural phenomenon. Same thing for graviity, quantum physics, chemistry, relativity and on and on. If one keeps assigning God to anything they don't understand, it means they'll eventually be painting Him in a corner, so to speak. Same thing with this fellow : what will happen to God if/when physicists develop an understanding of what caused the Big Bang ?

[@ExNihiloNihilFit319]

You are not alone, friend. Walk into a church and talk with the people in there, you'll be surprised. God wants you to meet him. God bless you.

[@ohbenbeckman1089]

This isn't a God of gaps at all. A God of gaps is we don't know therefore God. This man is saying we know something therefore God. He is simply giving his interpretation of what the data concludes. Anyone who looks at this data will come to a conclusion, many will say God many will say nature.

[@junevandermark952]

If a scientist is asked the question ... "Do you believe that the universe was created by a God?" and the scientist answers "Yes" ... that is not science ... that is religion.

[@profesnol5552]

Leave put the part where he misunderstands the big bang, where instead of being a "beginning" it is just the point where our understanding of existence stops. It could easily be the point where we get the illeged something out of "absolute nothing" but there is just as much evidence for that as there is for, say a magical unicorn farting out a rainbow that then collapsed on itself and then exploded again and became the universe

[@tacocat2425]

I clicked on this video thinking it'd be fun to read angry comments, but this was very well put and well explained. I myself am an atheist and I was genuinely shocked (the good kind) at his unique approach at explaining the existence of God, especially the way he used actual scientific evidence. This did raise some questions for me though, like why many Christians still see the Big Bang Theory as something that contradicts God, and why there always has to be a fight between religion and science. (The scientist in the video was capable of bypassing both, respect) I don't see this as something that "disproves" atheists though, because from another perspective, the reason this similarity (4:23) is there may just be because both (God and the laws of the universe) happen to be a regulator of what we cannot explain or even perceive (outside of the universe, before the universe, etc.) Also, even though the Biblical God matches these observations of the Laws of Nature, it still seems like a jump in logic since assigning God as the Laws of Nature, while it makes sense, still doesn't validate what was stated in the Bible (for example, flat Earth, Genesis, etc.). I'm not saying that the existence of God is bound to the validity of the Bible but I do think it's a factor in being convinced, which is what's important.

[@the_coding_show]

Give me back those five minutes...

[@ΑναστάσιοςΒρεττόπουλος]

one day mankind will have the same reaction to people who believe in god as we do now to people who believe in flat earth . The sad thing is i will probably not be here when this discovery will be made

[@dianenguyen3979]

Αναστάσιος Βρεττόπουλος Exactly!If only I could be alive to witness that..

[@needhealing2228]

But the premise of the flat earth being as biblical was false, please do some more research. The Bible is a book that still is a bestseller and is dominant today over millenniums. Isaiah 40:22 "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in. " A spherical Earth, from the perspective of God, who is above, the Earths shape is like a circle from any angle he views it from. Hence, a globe. Job 26:7 "He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing." An accurate representation of space we now know today. If anything, the Bible was ahead of its time, not before. See Jordan Peterson, a well known Canadian Psychologists video on God: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nF7aiHV9pJuUaNk See C.S. Lewis, the author of Narnia and other best selling books on God: kzbin.info/www/bejne/d3vYYaKPq85gmbs

[@tiburon7141]

intox, Look up "def of big bang theory" it states that the universe may have been created, it says nothing about there being energy before the big bang, The big bang is stated to be the creation and expansion of the universe.

[@DrMustacho]

"God" implies intelligence awareness and intention All we have is a beginning that's not really a beginning Which is practically the same as the universe has always been First earth was the world Now the universe is the world Once we break the next barrier i bet you're going to ague god made that too

[@-_Nuke_-]

One can mean anything with the word "God" that doesn't prove his existence tho. Only way to one day prove or disprove God is to 1st settle down and agree to a single scientific definition to the word "God". If we don't do that we can never claim that whatever God means exists or not.

[@michaeldriggers7681]

Just because it's outside the diagram doesn't mean it's nothing and just because we don't know where the universe came from doesn't mean it was god. Redefining god also doesn't mean it was the biblical god. This is more god of the gaps 🐂 💩.

[@instantaneousdeath2418]

not just the bible but the quran, torah, guru granth sahib, etc. all speak of God like in the bible. So which God is it huh? why are you assuming it has to be the God of the Bible

[@PGBurgess]

... the biggest flaw i see is the assumption that the 'laws create'. I think the general view would be that they describe. In this case an QuantumField without any forces are standard particles. The theories he seems to refer to, almost explicitly, deny anything like an 'act of creation'. They describe instabillity of virtual particles in 'nothing'... no agent required, no time, no forces at work at that moment.. Given his four main points: a) in a sense the 'nothing' is a physical system (there are virtual particles) b) there are no real forces at work that act on anything (no causal chains) c) the physical universe could enfold out of this d) it doesn't 'predate' since there has no time.. but that almost seems more a matter of linguistics So... God would the describtion of the QuantumState of 'nothing'. Though i am not an expert .. this is (pretty much) the representation the scientists that did the research actually give... and it diverges rather far from this in ways that seem quite essential to the train of thought he tries to make.

[@davewhitney1455]

The black spaces around the edges of the diagram to which Gerald Schroeder refers are indeed “nothing”, but not in the sense in which he uses the term. Everything is contained within the gridlines. The black spaces are merely the margins of the diagram, and do not represent a physical reality. Schroeder says that the laws of nature are not physical. This is indeed true. They are abstract representations of nature created by human beings. Humans observe the cosmos (or “nature”) and represent the interactions they observe as “laws”. It seems to me that Schroeder’s assertion that the laws of nature “act” on the physical world is incorrect. A law of nature is not nature, and it does not act on nature. It is an abstract representation of the behaviour of nature. Nature acts on nature. Schroeder claims that the laws of nature predate the universe. There is no evidence that the laws we know have always applied, nor that they will always apply. This video does not provide scientific evidence for the existence of God.

[@joegoze7284]

It is almost always the case that "scientists" who believe, have believed before they scienced, they are trying desperately to justify the conclusion they started with, which is not scientific

[@ChaZacIsa]

God and science can co-exist on the same plane. Science is an interpretation and explanation of all that God has designed and created.

[@NBACoDGaming]

But that would require god to be proven to exist.

[@decsto9568]

Sorry, science doesn't work that way. Science doesn't start by concluding that god is the reason behind a phenomenon or whatever that is being studied.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

God is a man made assumption that is 100% free of proof. Proof would be Yaweh's or Jesus' or the Holy Trinity's grand appearance in a demonstration of supreme power that would blow everyone away. There would be no room left for the endless debates we are having. Science is based on observation and testing with tangible results that produce reliable products. God and science cannot co-exist on the same plane.

[@Peterwhitlock]

NOOOOO! MOTION is by all science and truth 1st cause not god! like it or not god has no place and motion does it all and has no need of any god lying it is the creator when it is not. we now know how infinity worked multibverse and Universe and MOTION is 100% 1st cause and 1st potential was the form of the infinite as a structure and then weakness error imperfection and snap a moving part and presto chain reaction (Most probably unzipping effect) to cause more and more motion and chain reaction toll changes took place...clusters gravity light infinite changing from non motion to motion spreading and presto all happens even out universe...no gods needed to lie they are also part of the story something as simple as motion started and runs to this day and will till nothing moves and that is probably never. with Jesus 100% exposed as copied cherry picked parts of older stories put into 1 person to make a story AGAIN with less bad part and more compassion parts but all copied story even conversations and names like Lazarus and just another language as proof copied stories from OTHER GODS so the story of Jesus is as pagan as it gets.

[@otopian1606]

So true

[@nowimnothing1983]

"I believe in god, only I spell it nature." - Frank Lloyd Wright..

[@harleytheapothecary7849]

So... according to this guy... God is real because there is a vague idea that time is linear and not circular? You can have linear time without a sentient creator lol, and then you go on to specify the "biblical God" even if there was a god, how do you know it's your god and not some other god? Even if there was 100% proof that time was linear and a sentient creator pre-dates the laws of nature, we still know nothing of theists' insistence that the supposed creator has a will for us, is aware of us, or even cares. Like, seriously, "there might be proof of a creative force {sentient?}" and "Sky Daddy hates abortions and gay people cause this cryptic book says so" aren't the same thing.

[@hosseinheydari385]

So the bible just calls the universe "God" that's it.

[@juniorsamaguey6270]

God is real he loves us all so be glad we have i loving God

[@benbula5038]

This guys is not thinking clearly for a scientist...first of all ...science isn’t claiming that the universe came from nothing ...but it is saying that’s where our understanding sort of like end ...we don’t really understand what happened before that singularity...also just coz you don’t understand something doesn’t mean you should make bold assumptions like that ...”we don’t understand it ...therefore God”

[@kaiofficial7168]

It's not proof but it's a very good argument

[@cnault3244]

Does the physicist define god clearly before presenting his "evidence"?

[@lamdawave]

Dear Sinai Speak, At 4:58, Gerald says "the opening Chapter of the Genesis says...." (1) Can you tell me what exactly the Genesis says; (2) Where can I find that verse in the Genesis? (3) At 4:31 he also mentions "that is the Biblical definition of God...."; and (3) Where can I find this definition? Thanks a lot.

[@ohno2706]

Pikachu created the universe. Disprove me 🤣🤣🤣

[@johnhiggs325]

Wait just a second! The universe had a “beginning,”therefore “god?” Umm... there’s so much missing! I am unconvinced.

[@gabrielchattaway1663]

My question: if God used the Big Bang and created the world using 'science' or metascience/pseudoscience/quantum physics or whatever better terminology we can use... Why does He state in His word that the universe was made over the course of six days? I have often heard this is just to introduce the week to people, but its very hard to tell because it's quite cryptic. Any thoughts or ideas, or better yet, information based on knowledge and evidence?

[@BennyBattaglia]

This is just a god of the gaps argument. It’s not real proof. You can’t just say science found the answers to a point so the rest must be god. You need evidence for that god. And for the record, the universe having a beginning is the end of the true things in the creation account.

[@djhwty8725]

The second I heard the word “creation”, I already knew this was gonna be silly. His train of though was basically 1) The CMB is leftover energy from an earlier universe---> 2) The universe had a beginning and therefore was created at some point ----> 3) The Bible got it right. Typical “universe had a beginning, therefore god” argument with so many errors I don’t even know where to begin

[@FireyDeath4]

Nevermind the fact that the theory also fits pretty much endless other potential gods, descriptions or explanations (thanks, QualiaSoup and CosmicSkeptic), I'll just tell you what's really going on here... So, to summarise (since otherwise this comment would be a wall), the universe is a mathematical structure (so it exists for the same reason 1+1=2) and the point existing before the Big Bang was an initial/post-iterative state. The forces in the universe are probabilistic constants that influence how quanta fluctuate every Planck instant. And now to clear some things up. First, we don't really know if the Big Bang is really the beginning because people also think it could've been an infinite series of Big Crunches or black hole consumptions. Also, it doesn't necessarily point to intelligent design because any randomness is subjective since there are probably infinite universes like this with different quantum fluctuations or initial constants (and besides, if you're working with mathematics, no finite numbers are really considered large (yes that includes Rayo's number, BIG FOOT and sasquatch). You can quite definitely have WAY more intelligent and meaningful life with way larger numbers of particles and objective (Planck) lifetime. Humans have flaws, like the appendix obviously, not to mention megalomania pretty much destroying the world from way too much intelligence and greed from the relief of the burden of survival. Everything biologists and evolutionists have studied about life points to evolution being a fluke. And yes, I am insinuating that you all think you're so good, when really you're not (although morality is subjective) and you just can't bear the idea of how meaningless and chemical you are). If there is a God, God constitutes all of mathematics without bias (so even though you don't have free will, you're God. Congrats for reading this comment). God wouldn't be so biased, anthropomorphic or so demonstrably biased in their specific morals. God wouldn't even be making any decisions: they'd just exist timelessly. I mean of course can you imagine 1+1=2 having any dimensional sense to it other than real finite positive integer space in it? And yes. You probably think I think I'm so good when really we both know I'm not. It's mostly just that for whatever reason, humanity is dumb for a number of realistic, logical, social and psychological reasons. So yes, here's the truth you've all been waiting for. Now to put myself in the depths of the comment section and see if people will fish me to the top...

[@freddan6fly]

"I don't understand cosmology therefore god" - I am not convinced.

[@Kal9222]

The point is the existence of a repository of knowledge that existed before matter and is independent of humans, which acts upon ALL material. That is a settled understanding of cosmology

[@ohbenbeckman1089]

So you understand cosmology better than him? Ok, Id like to see any proof you are any greater than a highschool dropout. Your not convinced because you rejected the premise from the start. Also, this isn't even a God of the gaps.

[@daithiocinnsealach1982]

"science has in fact discovered God and you can talk to the hard-line atheists and they will say" it looks like science has indeed discovered God." Urm... I haven't met any hard-line atheists who have said this. And I haven't met anyone except for yourself sir, who use this diagram to say that science has proven God.

[@KevinLuWX]

Your scientific proof made me believe in flying spaghetti monsters.

[@amvCBG]

Does this work with other gods?

[@DaveRossignol]

A really smart person but just like the rest of us - without a clue how it all started.

[@angelmanuelvilar]

I wonder which of the gods he is talking about...just curious. Oh yeah so sorry... the bible god!!of course!!! silly me!!

[@afonsocouto2633]

Quantum fluctuations aren't made of nothing. If you study physics you'll learn that the so called quantum fluctuations in the vacuum (quantum foam) are made out of virtual particles (if I'm not wrong, QED says that it's like static noice in the flies of each particle) it doesn't mean creating something out of nothing. It means creating something out of a very small something

[@Well_possibly]

It is illogical to say that a few coincidences mean an entire book is correct. Often times, I have 4 to 6 coincidences in a single day with my own ideas. Does that make my thoughts anymore special than anyone else's? Does it mean I am divine? If another holy book also described their god with coincidences confirmed by science, does that mean we have two legitimate gods and religions?

[@robertbien3888]

according to this prof,he states that the universe was created from nothing....except for the laws of nature.since the laws of nature are something,the universe did not arise from nothing.

[@thinkboutit]

We don’t know if there was a true beginning. It could have happened a million times.

[@MichaelBrown-bi5ks]

I believe in the Heavenly Father .

[@kennorthunder2428]

What if we are actually operating on an metaphysical equation? Thusly: From dependence flows the need to trust. For trust to properly function, it need to have genuine and righteous truth. The proper harmonization of trust and truth is the basis for love, and, it's the measuring stick for justice when the equation get's violated. The proper harmonization of trust and truth is also recognizably good by non-malevolent people. You cannot imagine a universe where properly functioning trust can operate on a lie (the opposite of truth). Therefore this equation is eternal, and preceded our material universe. God has described himself as the way, the truth and the life. He has also described himself as just and loving. In the creation narrative, God was basically saying to Adam and Eve: Do you, as creatures dependant upon me for your existence, consider me truthful enough in order to trust me enough, so in that in following through with this metaphysical equation/law that is a reflection of who I am, (as well as you being created in my "image") you will not only love me, but obey me, and you will flourish in so doing, but, you will become both evil and good if you don't, as well as suffer evil? This is why hell is eternal... because we temporal creatures are operating on an eternal equation.

[@needhealing2228]

Truth is a reasonable explanation as to why it is true, faith is the belief that the explanations are true. Nothing can be truly supported in this world, as we can only conceive and make ideas out of this reality. Everyone has faith in what they believe in, no matter how small. This is why bias is so important to ones worldview. Here is the supposition of an Athiest: Here is a box, with paper origami inside the box. If I were to observe purely things in the box, I could come up with a reasonable explanation as to how they were in the box. This is the explanation: the origami came from a piece of paper, in which it folded itself to create intricate and complex shapes. However, that requires faith, that there wasn't a force folding the paper to make the shapes, as well as the faith that the paper came from nothing. If they only observe things from within the box, they cannot possibly know that that explanation is true. They take science in materialistic aspects with holes in it and say that explains the world. Yet in the theory of evolution itself, if one is to believe that, nothing is true, as everything is up to time and chance. And with the proposition, they cannot say that anything is true, such as the theory of evolution. “But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind? " Charles Darwin There is a line of thinking one could make to question if anything is true: 1. How can I know what I have been told is true? To most people, the truth that they get is from the people they think have experience and authority. Those people tell you what is true, and give an explanation as to why it is true, but you must have faith to trust in that person's explanation. 2. How do I know if my senses are what they say they are? You know and process everything from your sensory organs, but how do you know that they can see properly? 3. If my senses are wrong, then how do I know if this reality Im living in is even correct? What if this is a simulation? If left unchained to this reality, people are prone to doubt even their existence. Living each day, they have faith that this reality must be true, or they could be having an existential crisis everyday. There is another explanation to the Universe, which does take in accounts from things outside of this reality. That is found in Christianity, where the entire religion is based on a miracle, which is an occurrence that cannot be explained by this reality. That miracle is the raising of the dead. Now, if that miracle is proven true, then what the man who has been resurrected must be true, hence, Christianity. Here is where bias comes to play. People who don't want any influence in their life, no rules, no moral law to be subjected to, believe in Athiesm. They say everything is meaningless, so nothing you do really matters, and you can do whatever. With that, they can live their lives however they want. The reason they do not want to believe in Christianity, is because they are naturally inclined to do evil. That in itself is a proof for why Christianity is true. To some, to be an Athiest is to recognize the natural inclination to do evil, and believe in a reasonable explanation as to why they should and can do evil without consequences. To others who are more deeply embedded in the belief of Athiesm is when they actually believe that nothing matters, and go into either nihilism or hedonism, where they dont care about anything, or they know that nothing matters so they only do what gives them pleasure. Another belief is Agnosticism, where they just put out the supposition that it is impossible to know the why and how for reality, and live on with their lives. These are the people who don't want to go into religion because they think it won't help them. They think that if I devote my life to that religion and it therefore proves to not be true, I have wasted my life for nothing, thus they label the world as impossible to determine, and go on with how they want to live their life. Then there is the Christian, where it has faith in the afterlife, a hope to come. They have a bias towards a purpose in everything in this world. They believe in a world created based on Love. They believe in good and evil, and they know judgement exists. However, the Christian does not pursue good by their own means. The Christian is based on miracles, such as the miracle of the changing of their intention from evil to good, not of their works, but of the works of the savior who has done that for them. Since they believe in miracles, they have faith in healing through prayer, etc. They have faith that the material world is not the truth, but only a glimpse of it.

[@wachyfanning]

Ah yes, the tired ex-nihilo argument. The universe started, therefore it must have been created by a perfect being who loves us and also commits genocide and loves Israelites more than other people.

[@belindaviljoen8654]

where do you get genocide and loves israelites from? he gave free will. people who start genocides are not in a relationship with God. saying you are a christian and having it your religion and it being a religion isn’t relationship with Christ. God is not what you send for him to be. he’s not a person but a personal spirit. satan is alive too, not in anyway the same level or powerful as God, but he has free will and if you give him a gateway into your life then you welcome him and his demons too. the spiritual realm is real. choosing God means there must be an opposition. i’m praying for you

[@ExNihiloNihilFit319]

God sent to kill the cannanites because of their inhuman sins, that's justice and I don't understand why people rant to God when he makes justice and also rant when he doesn't directly intervene. If you see the act of death in a judeochristian perspective, the death is a change of position and not the erasing of a human existence. Also he's the only one that can give or take the life, that's why murdering is a grave sin. Jews are the first people that trusted and loved God and lived by faith, why shouldn't he love them back? He also doesn't love only Jews, he loves everyone and that's the reason he sent Jesus to death. You won't perish as long as you truly meet Christ. God wants you to meet him so you can experience his love and his blessings, after all, you are his beloved kid, he knows you since before you were conceived. Come back home, God will show you the way with the light of truth. God bless you.

[@potentialpolitics7769]

@@belindaviljoen8654 lol found the guy that’ll “go with the flow” during the next genocide

[@LifeForUndead]

Yes God created.

[@LifeForUndead]

OBVIOUSLY

[@OFFICIAL863JLS]

Talk about reaching

[@moth5799]

Except there's no evidence the laws of nature are sentient, or have a personality. So there's no reason we should pray to them, there's no reason to believe in the afterlife.

[@AVENGEDSINGATES]

So if he does exist then why hasn't he said anything?

[@onerandombruh]

I am not totally convinced, yet I do respect the ideas expressed by this man.

[@geofdowdell2108]

Who or what created God?

[@stefanfroehlichdev6680]

Big bang was not an explosion as he described it. Do I need to dig deeper?

[@davebrokenshire1086]

His whole argument relies on one vast unsubstantiated claim: that the laws of physics predate the big bang. He seems perfectly willing to accept the standard model, that spacetime started with the big bang, yet he tries to sneak in the notion that there was a time before the beginning of time. That's more than bad science, that's a con.

[@codynewtonn]

Plot twist: We are acually in a simulation and the people making the simulation is in a simulation and its a never ending simulation loop

[@renecaron6409]

If God is outside of time then he can't do anything. This guy needs a dictionary.

[@tonymartial1575]

So this guy seriously think that over 2000 years ago, they predicted right? They predicted, they didn’t do research, just predicted?

[@alexd3132]

(Regarding the comment from the Karate club a bit further down) Salisbury Karate Club God is the one thing that doesn’t require being made. All things that we make come from us or the earth, but atheists don’t know what made the earth *or* us God is the source of all good In Genesis (probably one of the most famous parts) it describes how God created the universe, with the Big Bang merely the explosion from him saying ‘let there be light’

[@contezw]

if you actually think about it, "The Big Bang" is actually how one would expect a God who says 'let there be light' to create the universe...

[@pietdezwart2271]

why should the bible be relevant? and do not use a logical fallacy. i.e. because you dont have a better explanation, therefore god.

[@ExtantFrodo2]

We don't know what made the universe, but you don't know either. You assert a god did, but you can't even say for sure that your claim is valid. Assertions are not explanationd.

[@malamutekid8871]

@Kundai M Neither you or anyone else has any way of knowing what to expect from god. There is no way to justify saying that.

[@malamutekid8871]

You seem to be implying that atheists have their own science, and that it’s somehow different from a theist’s science. Atheists that I’ve heard or talked to, and myself as well, accept what science says because it is so reliable as a method of finding what is evident, and uncovering that which isn’t. The difference between creationists and other people is that only a creationist would shoehorn their favorite god into a gap in knowledge, whereas other people (atheists and some theists) don’t find it honest to use such arguments from ignorance.

[@mantotomato]

I guess this doesn't explain about religions' claim that God have consciousness... And even if it did, there's still no proof that God cares about us humans. The thing is the definition of God in religious context is different from the "God" that this video explains.

[@lebogangjr1286]

Is this a proof ?

[@ChilledfishStick]

So... were there any 5 minute conversions?

[@refuse2bdcvd324]

The bottom has fallen out of atheism/ Darwinism/ evolution. No one has ever observed the transition of one kind of creature to another kind of creature (ape to man, etc.). However, many people throughout history have interacted with God. Choose recorded history (the Bible), not hypothetical atheistic conjecture; choose Christ!

[@tomnanD3]

Even if I accepted this hypothesis, it still is leap of logic to get to the gid of the Christian bible. A deistic god maybe, but only that. Besides...he assumes this force is an agent if some kind and likens it to the biblical god. It might not be a "who" but a "what." Just another argument from ignorance. Well, at least this man is a thinker and he is not a young earth creationist.

[@joshualaird6167]

If we were told to believe in any number of ideas,but none were true and we never knew we were limited,then how do we now know that we r not?

[@mid5503]

Clickbait

[@yournarrator6428]

Science has nothing to with god 🤦‍♂️

[@Sinaispeak]

You're right, and Jews don't believe in "god." God is a word that has been dragged through the mud, picking up associations and connotations from countless random sources. The Torah introduces us to Hashem (which literally means 'The Name'), the ultimate Source of existence Who transcends the realm of existence. We understand Hashem to be immanent within our reality as expressed through His name Elokim, the name that connotes plurality and natural order. We also understand Hashem's transcendence AKA the realm of 'nothingness' in the video to be expressed through his ineffable name YKVK. The ultimate Jewish goal is to reveal the truth (that quantum physics now recognizes) that All is One. Despite the illusions of separation in our world, we are all ultimately part of The One Self of which each of us is an emanation.

[@gtkingly8127]

You guys are so blind Yahweh calls you how can you believe a man can explain the universes creation in a 13 min video when a book written thru 1500 years explains it and you guys won’t read it please wake up

[@lknow3300]

We Can Call This.... "Stand Up Comedy".

[@apexwar_]

So how did god himself come about?

[@truebeliever6440]

Non-sequitur. This is Ontology. If God exists, then by definition, God must be eternal. If something created God, then that would be God. Without an eternal cause, an infinite regress would occur, which is logically incoherent. It is necessarily true that an all-powerful, eternal, cause of the universe exists.

[@TimothyNyota]

How do you think? Watch the video

[@ethanjonas7044]

That’s what makes God, God. God is infinitely perfect

[@joejoe8043]

When we know more about our own nature and our universe we might ask questions about God

[@thenotoriousgigachad3455]

There is no way to know that!!!

[@philbrown3944]

Okay; there is a god. Who among us is communicating with it? How do we know what it’s wishes are? If it is a singular entity, and there are so many interpretations of it’s intent, who is the ultimate authority? What if there is a god but our creation is a result of randomly determined parameters? To think that we, as individuals, are known with such intimacy and that our actions are of such import to this creator of all things, are going to earn benefit beyond what is natural for our species by following certain rules. Who makes those rules? Is there more than one acceptable set? Is it a benevolent god or does it kick ass and take names? I think that if there is a benevolent god it better start paying a bit more attention cause we’re fixin’ to ruin the place.

[@volrag]

I thought that you could only create something out of nothing as long as the energy of the creation multiplied by the time of its existence was less than the plank constant (or was it the plank constant / (2* pi)? )? Beyond that, if you could create something out of nothing without restriction, why wouldn't it be creating constantly? Why do we think energy cannot be created or destroyed if it can be created in this manner? Even then, what makes these forces a god and not nature? Is there proof of sapience, or any form of intelligence? What makes it the biblical god, rather than any other god, let's say Zeus? Also, perhaps this is just my ignorance talking, but how does the idea that forces are not physical in themselves work with the virtual particle theory? As in, if infinite forces such as gravity are carried by massless particles (lets call them gravitons, and they must be massless to be created infinitely without energy, and exist indefinitely), then doesn't this mean that gravity as a phenomenon has a physical manifestation? The other fundamental forces also have carrier particles, and thus are they not physical manifest? Is your explanation that there were forces that didn't exist physically, that did affect physical objects (that didn't exist yet), but ceased to exist after the big bang?

[@albinajeta8882]

This video proves nature is god.

[@Necrodzentelmenel1]

This proves nothing tho.

[@GoalkeeperzTM]

Nature has no volition. Suppose the cause of the universe has existed eternally. Suppose further that this cause is not personal: that it has given rise to the universe, not through any choice, but simply through its being. In that case it is hard to see how the universe could be anything but infinitely old, since all the conditions needed for the being of the universe would exist from all eternity. But the universe cannot be infinitely old. That is a scientific fact and it is also absurd to think an infinite set of events happened before reaching today. You cannot count down from infinity to 0. But we exist. So the hypothesis of an eternal impersonal cause seems to lead to an inconsistency. If the cause is eternally present, the effect must be eternally present. The only way for the cause to be timeless and for its effect to begin a finite time ago, is for the cause to be a personal agent, endowed with free will, who has the ability to spontaneously create a new effect without any antecedent determining conditions.

[@waldenh7668]

Romans 1:25 " They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served creating things rather than the creator-who is ever praised."

[@talkfootball1667]

There was no nature nature was created

[@malamutekid8871]

Better start bowing to trees.

[@malvoliosf]

This is just equivocation: he collects a set of properties and calls them “God” - but it has no similarity to the “God” of the Bible or of the popular imagination. It is not self-aware, it does not care about humans, it does not have a plan, or moral laws, or really anything but the ability to create and host the universe. If this is your personal conception of god, you should vehemently reject all religions, and any notion of faith or spirituality, as arrant unsupported nonsense.

[@stussysinglet]

I would say everything is God... God experiences all possible perceptions and experiences possible... I don't think there is anything more spiritual than that

[@Onlyishan369]

Science are divided into several parts, religions are divided into several parts,humans are divided .....just see equally everything... you'll find a new Universe 💥💥💥....

[@ibeam7124]

There was energy and, as it's says RIGHT THERE quantum fluctuations.