The Taylor Swift proof of the existence of a god

Random Fun
1

Just for fun, I developed this. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did creating it.

Taylor Swift exists. We can tell because there are photos of her. There are videos of her. You can listen to her music. You can attend one of her concerts.

Therefore, Taylor Swift exists.

God has concerts, too. Only we call them services, mass, and a bunch of other words. Only he doesn’t show up for them. The participants create their own concert … er … service, mass, etc. Some say they can feel his presence, but some say that might be the tingle you get when something exciting happens.

God also has music - sort of - 'cause we know the music was written by someone else. And … ah … he has a book. … that might have been written by someone else. … but there’s this book!!

There aren’t any videos. There aren’t any photos. That’s because he is invisible … except when he’s not. But that happened a long time ago, before people had cameras and smartphones. But there are these paintings and frescoes!! It’s the same thing - technology of the time sort of thing.

So he has all the same exact things that proves Taylor Swift exists.

Therefore …

2

I suppose that at some point via LLM-generated content that we will have videos of God, too. We already have a couple of prominent parody accounts cosplaying as God on social media, although so far, they are anti-theist in orientation.

Taylor Swift has recently gone over to the dark side and started promoting MAGA themes, I’m told. To their credit, a lot of her fans are pushing back, but this is another thing Taylor Swift and God have in common: they are both capricious and morally … shall we say, flexible.

It’s almost as if God is a creation of humans, with human foibles.

3

She does have a cult that actually worships her. It’s rather disturbing.

4

Salaam, CapriMark1! I enjoyed your humorous post, but I respectfully disagree with the comparison. As a Muslim, I believe in one God, Allah, and His existence isn’t proven like a human’s (like Taylor Swift) with photos or videos, because Allah is beyond physical form. Instead, we look at evidence like the universe’s order and complexity, which suggests a purposeful intelligent design. For example, the Quran mentions the expansion of the universe [Surah Adh-Dhariyat 51:47], which aligns with modern science. Unlike Taylor Swift’s music or concerts, which humans create, the Quran’s linguistic miracle and scientific insights couldn’t have been written by an unlettered prophet 1400 years ago without divine guidance. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this—why do you think these aren’t valid proofs of Allah’s existence?

5

Please define what you mean by “beyond physical form”.

For reference, I happen to have an English version of the koran here, and in this version the verse says

And the heaven we constructed with strength [with a footnote that says ‘Literally, “hands.”’], and indeed, we are its expander.

I observe that this is not the only reading of the verse, and that there are many different translations (and hence also many different interpretations and meanings). Here are some different versions I have found:

Transliteration Waalssamaa banaynaha bi-aydin wa-inna lamoosiAAoona
Literal And the sky/space We built/constructed it with power/support , and We (E) are extending/spreading (E) .
Yusuf Ali With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.
Pickthal We have built the heaven with might, and We it is Who make the vast extent (thereof).
Arberry And heaven – We built it with might, and We extend it wide.
Shakir And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.
Sarwar We have made the heavens with Our own hands and We expanded it.
Khalifa We constructed the sky with our hands, and we will continue to expand it.
Hilali/Khan With power did We construct the heaven. Verily, We are Able to extend the vastness of space thereof.
H/K/Saheeh And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander.
Malik We have built the heavens with Our hands, for We have the power to do so.[47]
QXP And it is We Who have built the Universe, and behold, We are steadily expanding it.
Maulana Ali And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and We are Makers of the vast extent.
Free Minds And We constructed the universe using matter, and We will expand it.
Qaribullah We built the heaven with might, and We widely extended it.
George Sale We have built the heaven with might; and We have given it a large extent:
JM Rodwell And the Heaven-with our hands have we built it up, and given it its expanse;
Asad AND IT IS We who have built the universe with [Our creative] power; [Lit., the sky or the heaven, which in the Quran often has the connotation of universe or, in the plural (the heavens), of cosmic systems.] and, verily, it is We who are steadily expanding it. [See note on the first part of 21:30. The phrase inna la-musiun clearly foreshadows the modern notion of the expanding universe - that is, the fact that the cosmos, though finite in extent, is continuously expanding in space.]

So we see that koran translators do not seem to agree on the exact meaning, which makes your assertion quite meaningless(*). Additionally, the expanding universe interpretation only gives meaning as a vague and contorted post hoc rationalisation to force-fit the verse into the discovery made by Edwin Hubble (a non-muslim, btw). Thus, it fares no better than Nostradamus readings.

(*) This opens up quite another can of worms. I have often heard that the koran can only be understood correctly in the original Arabic. But given the claim that allah is all-powerful, why would he dictate this book of poems in such a way that they are untranslatable and subject to quite different and conflicting interpretations? One would expect that an all-mighty being should be able to write and dictate his poetry in a way that would be unambiguous and that could be translated to and understood in all languages. But the koran is not there. The only logical conclusion I can see is that the koran is the work of a delusional man (or just a con-man) posing as a prophet.

3 Likes
6

This seems to be a theme with Muslim apologetics in general, at least that of Muslims I have seen online. I am not sure of the dynamic that produces this, but it seems even more “vague, contorted”, limited and unconvincing than Christian apologetics, which I would not have thought possible if I hadn’t seen it.

7

Hello @jobayer, Welcome to AR. I hope you enjoy your time here.

But I need to warn you that many of the folks who are active on this website are quite good at picking apart arguments. Have a thick skin. This is the internet after all.

Rather than pick apart your post, I’m going to focus on one thing:

The first question I have to ask is how do you tell the difference between Nature and the supernatural. Thus far, I haven’t been able to. The only thing I know is that Nature exists, but I don’t know the supernatural exists. I would need to be able to distinguish between the two to be able to answer your question. The validity of the proof depends on this.

1 Like
8

No it doesn’t, you’re just making an assumption.

No it doesn’t, and again that’s just an assumption.

“We built the universe with ˹great˺ might, and We are certainly expanding ˹it˺.” Is pretty vague, and unsupported by any objective evidence, what’s more we know how the universe formed, and the explanation is understood as an entirely natural phenomenon. So no, that claim does not “align with science”. It’s also an objective fact that humans, like all living things, evolved slowly over billions of years. That fact doesn’t “align” with the creation myths in the Koran or the bible.

Circular reasoning argument, and humans write books, we have no objective evidence deities exist or are even possible, and there is nothing in the Koran that couldn’t be human in origin.

See above, can you demonstrate any objective evidence that any deity or deities exist? Your claims are no different than the ones other religions make for their religious texts.

1 Like
9

Complexity arises spontaneously (with entropy), the more complex something is, the more sure you can be that it was NOT designed. So when you tell us the opposite…well I’m assuming you are just innocently repeating lies of others. These lies are designed to fool people who don’t know the subject. They were literally crafted to fool people like you. I know this is probably hard to accept, and for that I’m sorry.

3 Likes
10

For one, he didn’t write it. The Quran was passed down by word of mouth for a time before it was actually transcribed.

For two, Muhammed worked in a job where he encountered people from different cultures, with different stories and beliefs, etc. It’s no surprise he would be able to vocalise things that would end up in a book like the quran.

For three, what independent source validates such claims about the quran? The quran can’t validate itself, so when it is claimed to have been a transformative work, we only have the quran and associated Islamic materials attesting to it. We only have the quran attesting to Muhammed’s lack of skill with words, but the hadiths seem to suggest he had quite a way with words (although the hadiths themselves indicate no one saw fit to preserve the non quranic speeches Muhammed gave - just short paraphrased excerpts.

For four, especially when taking the above into account, what truly sets Muhammed and/or the quran’s author(s) apart from exceptional literary figures and/or works, like Shakespeare, Homer, the epic of Gilgamesh, and even other scriptures?

If one strips away the uncertain claims that are made within the quran itself, and focuses on independent evidence that is reasonably accepted by scholars, the quran doesn’t come across as the unmitigable miracle it’s claimed to be. It’s a work of art, certainly, but putting aside the claimed impact that is dependent on Islamic sources attesting to such (which cannot avoid obvious bias), it’s not at a higher level than numerous other literary works. For something claimed to be directly divinely authored, something claimed to be a miracle and intended to be indisputably so, it falls far short in my view.

Even the claim that some make about the quran uniquely having a combination of language, impact, and prophetic insights (science, etc.) doesn’t hold up. I contend that the Simpsons tv series - an obviously non-divinely sourced medium ticks all three boxes, and its claims to prophecy are much more specific and accurate.

1 Like
11

Having watched several videos about her and been someone who has long admired the lyrical content of her songs, I have serious doubts that that’s true.

Granted my knowledge of her music largely ended with the “Reputation” album (on account of my youngest leaving home at that point) but I’ve heard nothing since that would easily persuade me she’s “promoting MAGA themes” and, given American culture, personally I like her. Also, haven’t listened to it yet, but I just inherited a copy of her recent CD so I’ll find out for myself :slight_smile:

UK Atheist

12

Yeah this is just claims and arguments on social media at this point and I don’t care enough about her music to sort it out personally, so let us know what you think.

1 Like