Home

If God Created Everything, Who Created God?

Mon, 2008-01-28 20:32 — Acidgawd969
Question:: 
Aight, so Rich Deem says the following on his godandscience website... Introduction Who created God? It is an age-old question that has plagued all those who like to think about the big questions. Having grown up as an agnostic non-Christian, it provided me with a potential reason why there might not be any god. Various religions tend to solve the problem in different ways. The LDS church (Mormonism) says that the God (Elohim) to whom we are accountable had a father god, then grew up on a planet as a man, and progressed to become a god himself. Many other religions have claimed that gods beget other gods. Of course the problem with this idea is who is the first god and how did he get here? This problem of infinite regression Christianity's answer Christianity answers the question of who created God in the very first verse of the very first book, Genesis: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1) This verse tells us that God was acting before time when He created the universe. Many other verses from the New Testament tells us that God was acting before time began, and so, He created time, along with the other dimensions of our universe: * No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. (1 Corinthians 2:7) * This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time (2 Timothy 1:9) * The hope of eternal life, which God... promised before the beginning of time (Titus 1:2) * To the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen. (Jude 1:25) God exists in timeless eternity How does this get around the problem of God's creation? There are two possible interpretations of these verses. One is that God exists outside of time. Since we live in a universe of cause and effect, we naturally assume that this is the only way in which any kind of existence can function. However, the premise is false. Without the dimension of time, there is no cause and effect, and all things that could exist in such a realm would have no need of being caused, but would have always existed. Therefore, God created the time dimension of our universe specifically for a reason - so that cause and effect would exist for us. God exists in multiple dimension of time The second interpretation is that God exists in more than one dimension of time. Things that exist in one dimension of time are restricted to time's arrow and are confined to cause and effect. However, two dimensions of time form a plane of time, which has no beginning and no single direction. A being that exists in at least two dimension of time can travel anywhere in time and never had a beginning, since a plane of time has no starting point. Either interpretation leads one to the conclusion that God has no need of having been created. Why can't the universe be eternal? The idea that God can be eternal leads us to the idea that maybe the universe is eternal, and, therefore, God doesn't need to exist at all. Actually, this was the prevalent belief of atheists before the observational data of the 20th century strongly refuted the idea that the universe was eternal. This fact presented a big dilemma for atheists, since a non-eternal universe implied that it must have been caused. Maybe Genesis 1:1 was correct! Not to be dismayed by the facts, atheists have invented some metaphysical "science" that attempt to explain away the existence of God. Hence, most atheistic cosmologists believe that we see only the visible part of a much larger "multiverse" that randomly spews out universes with different physical parameters.1 Since there is no evidence supporting this idea (nor can there be, according to the laws of the universe), it is really just a substitute "god" for atheists. And, since this "god" is non-intelligent by definition, it requires a complex hypothesis, which would be ruled out if we use Occam's razor, which states that one should use the simplest logical explanation for any phenomenon. Purposeful intelligent design of the universe makes much more sense, especially based upon what we know about the design of the universe. Conclusion Top of page God has no need to have been created, since He exists either outside time (where cause and effect do not operate) or within multiple dimensions of time (such that there is no beginning of a plane of time). Hence God is eternal, having never been created. Although it is possible that the universe itself is eternal, eliminating the need for its creation, observational evidence contradicts this hypothesis, since the universe began to exist a finite ~13.7 billion years ago. The only possible escape for the atheist is the invention of a kind of super universe, which can never be confirmed experimentally (hence it is metaphysical in nature, and not scientific). How do you refute these claims?
Atheist Answer: 

What we have here is the most complex form of the cosmological (first cause) argument I've seen yet, but it's the cosmological argument nonetheless. It's worth dismantling this incarnation to show how easily new caveats can often be stripped away.

Firstly, the basic premise of cause and effect ain't what it used to be. Studies of quantum mechanics have revealed a system of particle movement which is probabilistic and, as far as we know, completely random. Anything with a cause is not truly random, only made to seem that way by the onset of chaos and entropy. It's just possible that these movements are genuinely uncaused, which would remove the need for a First Cause altogether. That said, let's accept the premise of cause and effect and move on.

Saying that any creator must have existed outside time and space is firstly trivial and secondly not guaranteed. Whatever resulted in the Big Bang self-evidently existed (or exists) outside of whatever space and time resulted FROM the Big Bang. That's not necessarily all the space and time there ever was.

Any precursor could have existed in an entirely different system of spacetime; another universe, or simply an exterior section of this universe. (Consider that the aftermath of the Big Bang may not constitute this entire universe. The "super universe" theory mentioned is a valid possibility.) The precursor, if any, is certainly not exempt from questions of origin.

If we assume completely linear time (which is far from certain) then it's true that an eternal universe or multiverse is required in the absence of an eternal or timeless deity. Why is that harder to accept than the deity?

A god which created everything directly is more complex than the whole of existence put together. Therefore if Occam's razor is applied, ANY other hypothesis is preferable to a god: multiple concurrent universes, consecutive universes, basic matter and energy occasionally catalysing into a self-contained universe, etc. An uncreated, uneducated superpower/superintelligence is quite literally the most unlikely thing in the world.

There's another reason why the multiverse theory (in quantum mechanics, the "many-worlds interpretation") in particular is preferable to the god hypothesis. We know beyond reasonable doubt that there is at least one universe - this one - but we do not know to anything like that level of certainty that there is even a single god.

Multiple instances of a known object are generally more likely to exist than an object with no precedent or evidence. Choosing God over a multiverse is like seeing a ravaged cabbage patch with one tiny rabbit in the corner, and asserting that Bigfoot ate most of the cabbages rather than that more rabbits might be hiding nearby.

With the central argument covered, I want to pick up on some other points.

1. What do "we know about the design of the universe"? The phrase implies a designer and begs the question, and the knowledge is not given but asserted.

2. Mark the phrase "the atheist", singular instead of plural. This is an old convention designed to belittle the subjects. Think back to "the Jew", "the Hun", "the savage" or "the infidel". It says to the reader, "They are all the same, and I've got them pegged."

3. Even if the argument were airtight and a Creator were proved absolutely, the author is all set to jump straight from that premise to the Creator's identity: the Christian God. This is a deist argument being used to push a theist view, and it will not go the distance. Refuting atheists is only the first step for this apologist. There's still every other religion to beat. But like those who use Pascal's Wager, Rich Deem's basic assumption is that there is only one possible God.

- SmartLX

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 2008-01-01 00:26 — pplimbuff

It must be God.

I hope you realize that when atheists ask "who created God", it is purely a HYPOTHETICAL question (remember atheists don't even believe in God). Atheists ONLY ask this if after theists try to pull the old, "If it exists, it must have been created" argument. Atheists are simply pointing out the circle of faulty logic that is started by this silly claim. The question "who created God" is a FAKE question that Atheists ask you, so they can watch you stumble and backpedal, trying to combine your magical fantasy with reality. And, I can see that you have done that very same thing. Weather the universe is infinite or not, you still have no proof, no evidence, and NO GOOD REASON to believe there is God. -peace