What created God?

'Many Roman emperors were deified after their deaths.
So you see there is a precedent of gods being created.'

Well

Cha bu ghaisgeach Alasdair mor
No Caesar thug an Roimh gu geill;
Oir ged a thug iad buaidh air cach,
Dh' fhan iad 'nan traill d'a miannaibh fein

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeingaBunny

Well I did a bit of research on the old web. The christian concensus seems to be that God cannot be created, and that he doesn't need to be because he is outside of time. That said, he also created the universe and created time inside of it.

If god is outside of time, where there is no before and after, then he could not have created the universe - because creating anything simply indicates before and after, before universe and after universe, which means that god must be affected by time in his "realm" - at least henceforth from creation. The only way God wouldn't be affected by time is if he did not create the universe and god merely exists outside of it, neither creating the other.

Therefore it is impossible that god, from this aspect, created the universe, unless he is affected by time. In which case, where did he come from?

---

don't even bother with those silly arguments about time and inside/outside... they have all the counter-arguments lined up waiting...the church fathers did a nice job, and aquinas too. I say stick to your first line of reasoning---I found it refreshing to read here.

A VERY silly and invalid question. My nerves are twitching no end and my blood is boiling. Never would want to comment on this. IT WILL NEVER END and I don't wanna make enemies.

(WHAT created GOD?)

Sheesh.

And to the one who created this thread, PLEASE use the first letter of the pronouns pertaining to God in CAPITAL LETTERS. It is most REVOLTING and insulting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Laindessiel

A VERY silly and invalid question. My nerves are twitching no end and my blood is boiling. Never would want to comment on this. IT WILL NEVER END and I don't wanna make enemies.

(WHAT created GOD?)

Sheesh.

And to the one who created this thread, PLEASE use the first letter of the pronouns pertaining to God in CAPITAL LETTERS. It is most REVOLTING and insulting.

---

I find the word "god" revolting but i'm not moaning about it and imposing religiosity with your capital letters on the person who created this site. mind your business about how people want to address...him, him, him, him. actually i think god is a woman. :banana:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeingaBunny

One problem I have with the idea of God is that, as an answer to life, it doesn't solve anything. I mean, if God created us, then what created God? It solves the question of our own existence and creates the same question of His existence - solving nothing. It merely moves the same question to another subject, which I daresay is rather fallacious.

That said, if God presides over our universe, outside of what we have here, entropy must be going on somewhere because God obviously came from something somewhere. Or - what? - he just poofed in?

The answer that he is omnipotent and can do whatever the hell he wants just isn't very satisfying or realistic. I mean, if he did create our universe, he must have an objective. Why would an omnipotent being have or need an objective?

I haven't read the Bible or any other religious texts. I prefer to follow my own beliefs and ideas. But if anyone can give a decent answer to this, I'd be interested in hearing it.

---

Yes it's very clear you've never read any religious text.

On the whole, I do not believe God has a sex and the fact that God is referred to as Father is an expression of respect. When it says, We are created in the image of God, this is not implying a physical image (ie. eyes, ears, mouth) but a spiritual image.

As for the belief that the idea of God solves nothing and you question what created God, well I find it hard to understand, and hope you can enlighten me, on why it is harder to understand the existance of God having always been in comparison to a physical substance (such as our universe) always has been around.

Now in response to this, the most believed theory on the universe is that at some point in time, there was a big bang (some theories expand this to multiple big bangs). But regaurdless of a single or multiple explanation, it all comes down to the fact that at sometime, there was an occurance that caused the entirety of the universe to expand from a point of singularity.

Now how did this point come to be? Did this point always exist?

It comes down to one thing. Faith. Do you have more Faith in a creator who has existed for eternity or do you have more faith in the idea that the physical world has existed for eternity. Personally, I do not have enough Faith to believe in the second.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turk

Yes it's very clear you've never read any religious text.

---

Did religious texts create god or do people create religious texts? Or is the only way for people to know god through religious texts? Or maybe reason allows us to think about god without the smelly dogma. It's very clear that you haven't thought through these issues very much...Turk.

Texts. Well most of us here are readers so we have some reverence for these. But we're mainly not idolatrous about it.
The Creation which like the texts we interpret in different ways.
Personal experience which though often similar is never identical but which often directs us to similar and identical conclusions.
Something else. Ah too vague I know but what's that word for it ....

I believe the following; Mankind created God when they needed a reason for civilization to behave. Seriously, were I an ignorant, uneducated beggar in that period and they'd walk up to me and say; if you live a sinful life, you'll go to a place where you'll burn for all eternity, I'd freak out. And then they'd say; Lead a good life and God, our Heavenly Father, will send you to Heaven - paradise. It's a great way to manipulate criminals into changing their wicked ways. And since people wanted proof, they wrote the Bible. Conveniently enough, no one knows for sure whether it documents the truth. But let's not get into that.

That and people are trying to understand things they'll never understand. Why is the universe infinite? When was it created? Where do we come from? Humans are curious. And since the beginning of time, they've had theories. Theories are fine, as long as you don't condemn those who disagree with your beliefs.

Trouble with that as a theory is that it clearly didn't, doesn't and will not work. Granted my future tense is based only on historical experience. Most 'criminals' won't become good through threat of Hell but of course this 'they' you refer to is really not the third person plural but the first person plural and the beggars and criminals are all of us or. if you prefer, people like me.

Ps being condemned by a theory is not exactly likely to induce shaking in the shoes for most of us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ennison

Most 'criminals' won't become good through threat of Hell.

---

2000 years ago, things were different. Mankind has evolved. I think they might've viewed those holy people as truthful or enlightened. Religion influences people. It just does. I know millions of people lead good lives because they fear hell. Even those who don't really believe in God are afraid to stop going to church, etc because if they're wrong, they'll go to hell. I've heard many people say so. Religion is all about power and fear.

Just think about the middle ages when heretics were burned at the stake. If society doesn't allow atheism, you feel a lot less inclined to openly support their (lack of) religion.

The strange thing here is that the non believers are sure that God was created, i see most say that man created God with his own mind in order to find solution for his existence. Doesnt seem wiered a little bit? i mean why you applicate the concept of creation on God and agree that he was created while you refuse the idea that this universe was created, you are talking like you are sure that the idea of existence of God is created by man himself, in other terms you are talking in the same way that believers do but in the other side (contrary), in other way you believe in the existence of abslute thing and for you its the non existence of God.
As i said once if we relate the action CREATE to someone then we cant applicate it on him especially when when we relaite him the absolute meaning. The things that need something to be existed need someone to make it exist, and if we relaite the existence of every thing to God then we cant relaite the existence of God to any thing, in other words every thing need God to be existed but God doesnt need anything to exist, he was and will be always. The believers of creation believe that every thing was created by God, such claim doesnt leave any place for the question "who created God?", its obvious that the question contraddict with it self, the question in other words (without the nomination of the creator) is: "who created the creator of everything?" or "who created the only creator?" as you see its "stupid question", we give God the absolute meaning of a word and then we ask like we didnt give the absolute meaning of the same word. Again the claim is of us is God created every thing, he is the only creator, or you discuss the accuracy of this claim or not, or to agree or t refuse.
Another thing, God existence is not prooved only by texts, but by every thing you see arround even by your self, its not a discussion of accuracy of verses or texts, so refusing texts doesnt mean God doesnt exist, God didnt talk only but he founded everything.

Leading a good life is not quite the same as not being a criminal. Religion will save no one and it is false belief that tells people that. Leading a good life is not enough either for various reasons. One of which you have spotted. If it's done out of fear it's not genuine - it's hypocrisy. So Hell wins again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shield&Sword

The strange thing here is that the non believers are sure that God was created, i see most say that man created God with his own mind in order to find solution for his existence. Doesnt seem wiered a little bit? i mean why you applicate the concept of creation on God and agree that he was created while you refuse the idea that this universe was created, you are talking like you are sure that the idea of existence of God is created by man himself, in other terms you are talking in the same way that believers do but in the other side (contrary), in other way you believe in the existence of abslute thing and for you its the non existence of God.
As i said once if we relate the action CREATE to someone then we cant applicate it on him especially when when we relaite him the absolute meaning. The things that need something to be existed need someone to make it exist, and if we relaite the existence of every thing to God then we cant relaite the existence of God to any thing, in other words every thing need God to be existed but God doesnt need anything to exist, he was and will be always. The believers of creation believe that every thing was created by God, such claim doesnt leave any place for the question "who created God?", its obvious that the question contraddict with it self, the question in other words (without the nomination of the creator) is: "who created the creator of everything?" or "who created the only creator?" as you see its "stupid question", we give God the absolute meaning of a word and then we ask like we didnt give the absolute meaning of the same word. Again the claim is of us is God created every thing, he is the only creator, or you discuss the accuracy of this claim or not, or to agree or t refuse.
Another thing, God existence is not prooved only by texts, but by every thing you see arround even by your self, its not a discussion of accuracy of verses or texts, so refusing texts doesnt mean God doesnt exist, God didnt talk only but he founded everything.

---

To quote Cervantes:
"Over conceits of this sort the poor gentleman lost his wits, and used to lie awake striving to understand them and worm the meaning out of them; what Aristotle himself could not have made out or extracted had he come to life again for that special purpose."

The original text is much more beautiful, it loses all of its charm with the translation to English, too bad...