This is the biggest four-letter word.
This is the best! I like this!
Well said Barmaid! I love short pithy answers. They have a way of deflating the questioner…
this is so good!
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Anthony Cunningham , author. author said: New comic: this http://www.jesusandmo.net/2010/08/20/this/ [...]
Very simple and profound too.
Author, you are moving beyond comedy into profundity. Beautiful.
I had a friend once, who would tell Me “God” created everything.
I would ask for evidence.
He would point out the window.
I would say, “I see the occasional bird, the college, dirt, power-lines, trees, and tract houses.”
That was thirty-plus years ago. “God” and/or “the Big Bang” has yet to send Me a message, so I still operate using the proposition that we may believe as we wish—the Universe is what it is, not what we project upon our perceptions of it!
(One sees power-lines, not cars, from the third floor!)
Why does J think that without a god this universe HAD to come from nothing? Couldn’t it come from a non-god? Say a black hole in another universe or two higher-dimensional branes meeting or even a massive computer simulation? All three theories has more proof behind it than either J/M can provide for their own ideas.
Zen koan-like simplicity. <3
You should add a http://www.flattr.com button so we can click on it, show our <3 and make you rich.
As we say in Van Nuys, “Ex Nihilo, Nihil”.
But then, Nothing’s always good.
@Alverant “a massive computer simulation” is actually a plausible premise, as it is one hundred percent in keeping with Quantum Mechanics, and with the entanglement phenomenon. Carl Jung’s universal unconscious is then easily explained, too.
I like the line in Rebecca Goldstein’s 36 Arguments about theists’ question on why there is something rather than nothing, “And if there was nothing, they still wouldn’t be happy”.
Vic Stenger was good in The Failed Hypothesis showing how as far as he can tell, many attributes of the universe are such that this is what it would look like if there was no god, so he’s happy to be a 7 on Dawkins’ scale.
Why would nothing become something unless something caused it to? Is something the absence of nothing or nothing the absence of something? Far easier to complain to an deity than admit that everything is nothing to begin with untill becoming something.
“Why would nothing become something unless something caused it to?”
We are not even sure that it did but even assuming that this is a valid question, why would the something that caused it to have to be a god?
and using the same logic, wouldn’t that same god-something have to have come from something? After all, you just argued that something can’t come from nothing.
Theists have a problem with the idea of a universe that came from nothing.
Atheists have a problem with the idea of a god that came from nothing and then created everything.
Either way, the Bible is a load of old arse. FACT!
@Nassar. Why assume nothing became something? Maybe it was always here.
Maybe time has no meaning without matter.
Incidentally author- allow me to add my praise. Succint and well put cartoon.
You highlight the real difference between atheists and theists- the world just looks different to us. Because we are grown-ups.
(“Cute” enough for you Nassy-baby?)
And Parmenides said more than that: Why assume something became something other?
It reminds me of something I heard once… ‘people used to think that the Sun, planets, everything revolved around the Earth, because they saw them rise in the east and set in the west.’…’What would it look like if the Earth and the Planets went around the Sun?’ … ‘This’.
@DragonsDream said, “wouldn’t that same god-something have to have come from something?”
This has been My feeling on the subject for a few decades now, with no sign of changing:
1) A god created the universe—What created the god?
2) The big bang created the universe—What created the big bang?
[The question is rhetorical. It exists to separate the grups from the juvies.]
@Mater David Goodman: I care. I care passionately. Not that it matters.
This is good enough for me!
what a brilliant retort there is literally no way to combat such a compelling and eloquent argument
This has to be the funniest ever. I am still laughing even after reading all the previous deep comments.
funny how the god-people never seem to consider how god came into being then
and how ridiculous the idea of an eternal being is when all the examples we see around us is a cycle of birth, existence and death
>>What created the god?
Just to throw it into here, but the argument “what dreated God” has the answer “He was not created, as He is the creator of time.”
Atheists on the other hand cannot point to a timeless world since the world and universe are deemed not eternal and therefore had to have a beginning.
from nothing, you get nothing. Since this is the case, if you had nothing prior to the big bang, then the big bang just wouldn’t occur unless you have an outside agent to start it off. If you contemplate the “massive computer simulation” or “alternate universe” you should also contemplate a timeless deity. Whether that be the Christian God or some other god is for you to work out!
>>the argument “what dreated God” has the answer “He was not created, as He is the creator of time.”
That’s not an answer, that’s just an ad hoc redefinition.
Scott, please explain how a deity outside inseparable parameters of time and space may create something, i.e. change the predicate “nothing” into “something” in absence of a state of spatiotemporal existence. Then explain how this deity’s mind exists in absence of substrate or even the time necessary to generate rudimentary thought.
Make sure you accompany your explanation with evidence and the proper mathematical work.
Seriously, “making stuff up” and passing it as fact is bad enough. But to crib nonsense from people you think were clever is worse when you’re doing it without ever considering the existing refutations, or the fact that all those people have simply been cribbing off predecessors in the same fashion, all the way back to one fantasising ignoramus who was just cunning enough to make a living by “explaining” the universe to his tribe fellows.
[...] I never fail to admire the barmaid’s ability to cut through nonsense to the heart of the matter. [...]
What if the answer to “who created God” was Jeffty Jeff, whose Jeffness was born on the first of Jeff, nineteen-Jeffty Jeff?
Does assigning a label help us at all? Do we know anything about Jeffty Jeff’s purpose, means, mechanism, etc.? Does this have explanatory value? Can we make predictions based on it? Or are the wills and ways of Jeffty Jeff mysterious as well?
This is what I love about CFI’s slogan on their brochure:
“You’ve Got Answers? We Have Questions.”
I’m not at all uncomfortable with the concept of infinity & eternity in scientific & universal terms. In a way, I entertain the notion that the scale of planets, galaxies, etc wraps around to subatomic particles (an idea I formulated for a cartoon I never illustrated, ironically). Once again I suggest that theists aren’t comfortable with such infinit scale because they can’t wrap their minds around the concept (what’s to wrap around, it’s just infinity), and they turn instead to easy “answers” that they can relate to the immediate world around them which is filled with beginnings, middles & ends.
NOTE: This comments section is provided as a safe place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.
NAME — Get an avatar
EMAIL — Required / not published
Jesus & Mo is licensed under a Creative Commons License:
Feel free to copy for noncommercial purposes, under the same license.
Please provide a link back to jesusandmo.net
Hosted by NearlyFreeSpeech.NET.