Who Created God?

For fun, I thought maybe I would Google this question. You know—refresh myself on the arguments most Christians assume exist, but seldom bother to look into. This mystery never troubled me as a believer, either. Because as a Christian I knew the correct answer to this question is, and has always been: We don’t know. I had faith, and that was enough.

This is one of those mind-altering rabbit holes, like concentrating on how the universe never ends. You can’t imagine a thing without end…and yet, you can’t imagine the end, either. But you know it can only be one or the other. So it is with God. Or no God. Because either way, there had to be a beginning. But what happened before that? And before that, and before that….

Don’t worry. If there is one thing we can count on from Christianity, it’s that it will always have an answer. But how good is that answer, really? And why are they always trying to fill in the blanks with things they cannot possibly know? So let’s take a look at my search results for the question “Who created God?”

First up? Don Batten over at Creation.com:

 

The cause of the universe must have been non-material because if the cause was material / natural, it would be subject to the same laws of decay as the universe. That means it would have to have had a beginning itself and you have the same problem as cycles of births and deaths of universes. So the cause of the universe’s beginning must have been super-natural, i.e. non-material or spirit—a cause outside of space-matter-time. Such a cause would not be subject to the law of decay and so would not have a beginning. That is, the cause had to be eternal spirit.

Furthermore, the cause of the universe had to be incredibly powerful; the sheer size and energy seen in the universe together speak of that power; there had to be a sufficient cause.

That sounds like the God of the Bible to me.

 

Does it? Because all I hear is “I don’t know, but it must have been something beyond our understanding.” Which, even if we were to jump to conclusions and call it God, still leaves the details about that god pretty vague. He is basically telling us that because he cannot explain what could have created the universe, it must have been supernatural; therefore anything early Christians, specifically, claimed to know about God is absolutely true. But how did he connect those dots?

Next up is this conclusion by Rich Deen, found on the site godandscience.org:

 

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 God’s 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 ~13.8 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).

 

Right. Since I guess we somehow know that God exists either outside of time or within multiple dimensions of time….then clearly he did not need to be created. Which is the obvious conclusion because he says so. Got it.

Next we have Christiananswers.net:

 

Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time. Therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created, so has no beginning in time God is the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity (Isaiah 57:15). Therefore He doesn’t have a cause.

 

So obvious! God created everything, including time, so the word “beginning” is irrelevant to him.

Are you convinced yet?

Atheists have unanswered questions, too. We don’t know everything. But even if we erase all science and theology, the difference between an atheist and a theist is that atheists have the luxury of endless possibilities (while theists have, you know—just the one). But using this vague information as a way to support your theory on what God is like? It doesn’t connect. Atheists know we can be proven wrong over and over again and still be light years away from it meaning the Bible is true.

A Christian recently told me I am being dishonest, if only to myself, when I claim not to see the work of God all around me. And how could I possibly believe there is no purpose? 

As if proof of creation is somehow proof of purpose.

Christians like to say: “There must be a creator because the alternative is so absurd.” But how do they know it’s absurd? As far as the Christian is concerned, the alternative might be a trillion different things they have yet to even imagine. And that is what I cannot wrap my mind around. How can someone be so bold as to claim they already know every other possible answer, even the ones we have yet to understand, are all absurd?

You know, it’s okay to not have all the answers. If you feel there must be a creator—fine. But don’t tell me you know its plan for us. Don’t tell me you know anything at all about eternal life and God’s purpose and all that… because you cannot possibly know. I am aware that your book says I cannot see the “obvious” truth because I am blind and rebellious toward the God I know is there; but common sense will tell you that it really isn’t so obvious, and it is perfectly logical for someone to not believe such a story without any help from a supernatural villain. Maybe that part of the book is wrong. Maybe the person who said it didn’t want you to listen to an opposing point of view. Is that so far-fetched?

I find it impossible to look at any theology and decide it isn’t greatly made up of humans attempting to fill in the blanks. Of course it is. Of course it is. Filling in blanks is what we do. Creating gods is what we do. If there is a real god, we know nothing about it; and any argument that is seeking to prove otherwise will always sound dishonest to me.

 

4 thoughts on “Who Created God?

  1. Always wonderful to read your thoughtful posts LAD, welcome back!

    As I was reading this I just kept thinking what a circle of illogic all these explanations end up being. I have thought this many times when debating with Christians, “Well the Bible proves that there is a God, and we know God, because of the Bible, and well even though the bible was written by men, God was working through them…” Well how convenient it all is then. These explanations you’ve posted are of the same variety. “God exists, but he lies outside of the realm of physical proof, so that’s that.” It’s kind of like saying “don’t ask questions”. But of course God was quite present in our physical realm during creation, and can certainly work his way into our medium…I mean he could do anything, but somehow we have to accept that he can’t be measured through empirical observations, and even though he created existence and he exists, he also exists outside existence and that’s that. It gives me a headache. God shouldn’t need a bible. We should be able to burn away the bible and any memory of God and the Bible and we should be able to discover the bible word for word again. Just like what would happen if we did the same to the First Law of Thermodynamics or the Universal Law of Gravitation. If God exists it shouldn’t rely on deductive reasoning, it should also be derivable through inductive reasoning.

    1. Yes! I love how the Christian God is supposed to be so obvious all around us, but we also require a book we had to write ourselves. It’s a very strange thing how the human mind works, and our extraordinary ability to make the pieces fit in a way to move our thinking forward; or in some cases, to keep it standing still. Thank you for your thoughts.

  2. Are there unknowns and paradoxes in our hypotheses? Certainly; but this is not something that is limited to atheists. Creationists, too, have a great many problems in the logic of what they posit. God is outside of time, but any creation is, by definition, something that was planned and implemented (both of these requiring, and existing within, time). Every creation requires some form of medium; God however, created ex nihilo–with no medium whatsoever.

    There are a number of naturalistic hypotheses about the origins of the universe, and although many of these admittedly are not testable, they do show that we can come up with ideas on how this may have happened. We’re still working on a lot of this, and we may never have a full understanding of it, but so long as we can point to naturalistic ways this is possible, I see no reason to conclude that magic is necessary.

    1. We cannot possibly have all the answers, but how silly to imagine the Bible is the beginning and end of all necessary knowledge. There are those who do not want to wonder, because the answers they have been taught feel familiar and comfortable. Their belief in the Bible’s magic protects them against any otherwise reasonable objection to what comforts them, and even goes so far as to explain how the rest of us fit into that box. So the rest of us search on without them….

      Thank you for your thoughts!

Leave a Reply