If god 'created' us then who created god?

Question

many people think that god created the universe and everything inside it. there logic is that because the universe ansd everthing in it is complex something equally or more complex must have designed it. but by this logic the complec creator must have had an equally or more complex creator the result is a paradox of infinately complex beings. My intellectuctual equals will agree that the god hypothesis is nothing more than a fabrication to satisfy only the weakest of minds. Please just one logical explanation to proove me wrong maybe i missed some important fact as many do when commenting on evolution.

Answer 1

Some would say that man created God.

Answer 2

Even if you remove God from the equation, you will still arrive back at a point where matter either always existed or suddenly came into existence. God is one way of explaining this. Unless you have solved the GUT challenge which has baffled man since he stood upright then your theories hold no more water than any religion. Evolution and religion are in no way incompatible.
Incidentally, your arrogant reference to your "intellectual equals" would be marginally less risible if spelt correctly.

Answer 3

I believe god is a spelling mistake. In early cultures when really honest folk preach about bieng GOOD the guy that had to write it down wrote I believe in GOD' I believe in all things GOD, GOD is everywhere. Trust in GOD and all will be fine etc. you get my drift. And if you have ever watched The Life of Brian' where the people in the congregation at the back are asking 'What did he say?' well there's your proof!

Answer 4

God is just another word for sweat shop. Aliens far more intelligent than we will ever be decided to carry out an experiment and create us humans. They soon got bored and openened a sweat shop to keep the earth in a good supply of f'ed up people on a very tiny budget.

Answer 5

I find the whole question of who created us and who created the 'creator' utterly pointless, as do most Buddhists. Perhaps an even more difficult yet equally pointless question is "Why?". The bible, koran, buddhist scriptures nor science will ever be able to answer these questions. Regardless of who created us, the FACT is we are here.

Answer 6

God is, and that's it. That's why you can't understand it.

Answer 7

Even though there is nothing about it in the Bible I actually think that there is like an infinate paradox like God creates Himself in a massive loop or something. But there is also the possibility that God has just always existed which is the version that the Bible seems to imply without actually going into much detail.

Answer 8

Well heres a thought:

If all the scientists are right, then before evolution there was rock, before rock fire, before fire, big bang. Either man invented god, or god started it all, was incredibly patient for billions of years, saw the result and is now wondering why he bothered. Why don't you search history for the rich author who wrote the bible?

Answer 9

Its as simple as god is the atmosphere.....it's all around.....creates what we live in......god is what we chose to believe as a person.

Answer 10

PROOFS AND EVIDENCES OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

1

One of the proofs and demonstrations of the existence of God is the fact that man did not create himself: nay, his creator and designer is another than himself.

2

It is certain and indisputable that the creator of man is not like man because a powerless creature cannot create another being. The maker, the creator, has to possess all perfections in order that he may create.

3

Can the creation be perfect and the creator imperfect? Can a picture be a masterpiece and the painter imperfect in his art? For it is his art and his creation. Moreover, the picture cannot be like the painter; otherwise, the painting would have created itself. However perfect the picture may be, in comparison with the painter it is in the utmost degree of imperfection.

4

The contingent world is the source of imperfections: God is the origin of perfections. The imperfections of the contingent world are in themselves a proof of the perfections of God.

5

For example, when you look at man, you see that he is weak. This very weakness of the creature is a proof of the power of the Eternal Almighty One, because, if there were no power, weakness could not be imagined. Then the weakness of the creature is a proof of the power of God; for if there were no power, there could be no weakness; so from this weakness it becomes evident that there is power in the world. Again, in the contingent world there is poverty; then necessarily wealth exists, since poverty is apparent in the world. In the contingent world there is ignorance; necessarily knowledge exists, because ignorance is found; for if there were no knowledge, neither would there be ignorance. Ignorance is the nonexistence of knowledge, and if there were no existence, nonexistence could not be realized.

6

It is certain that the whole contingent world is subjected to a law and rule which it can never disobey; even man is forced to submit to death, to sleep and to other conditions--that is to say, man in certain particulars is governed, and necessarily this state of being governed implies the existence of a governor. Because a characteristic of contingent beings is dependency, and this dependency is an essential necessity, therefore, there must be an independent being whose independence is essential.

7

In the same way it is understood from the man who is sick that there must be one who is in health; for if there were no health, his sickness could not be proved.

8

Therefore, it becomes evident that there is an Eternal Almighty One, Who is the possessor of all perfections, because unless He possessed all perfections He would be like His creation.

9

Throughout the world of existence it is the same; the smallest created thing proves that there is a creator. For instance, this piece of bread proves that it has a maker.

10

Praise be to God! the least change produced in the form of the smallest thing proves the existence of a creator: then can this great universe, which is endless, be self-created and come into existence from the action of matter and the elements? How self-evidently wrong is such a supposition!

11

These obvious arguments are adduced for weak souls; but if the inner perception be open, a hundred thousand clear proofs become visible. Thus, when man feels the indwelling spirit, he is in no need of arguments for its existence; but for those who are deprived of the bounty of the spirit, it is necessary to establish external arguments.

Answer 11

You wanted a logical explanation for the existence of God and why God was not created.

HERE IT IS!

EVERYTHING THAT EXISTS MUST HAVE A SUFFICIENT EXPLANATION FOR ITS EXISTENCE. NOTHING CAN EXIST WITHOUT A SUFFICIENT REASON FOR ITS EXISTENCE. NOW, OBVIOUSLY THIS SUFFICIENT REASON MUST BE FOUND EITHER IN THE EXISTING THING ITSELF. OR IN THAT WHICH GAVE IT EXISTENCE. TO PUT IT ANOTHER WAY; IF A THING EXISTS THEN EITHER (1). IT IS SO PERFECT THAT IT MUST EXIST AND CANNOT BE NONEXISTENT, OR (2). IT HAS RECEIVED EXISTENCE BY THE ACTION OF SOME EFFICIENT CAUSE.
NOW IF A THING IS SO PERFECT THAT IT MUST EXIST AND CANNOT BE NON-EXISTENT, IT IS SELF EXISTENT. SUCH A THING CONTAINS IN ITSELF THE SUFFICIENT REASON FOR ITS EXISTENCE. AND SINCE IT MUST EXIST BY REASON OF ITS OWN ESSENTIAL PERFECTION, IT HAS HAD NO CAUSE, IT IS ETERNAL; IT IS NECESSARY BEING (i.e. IT NECESSARILY EXISTS), AND IS NOT CONTINGENT UPON THE ACTION OF ANY PRODUCING CAUSE.
IF A THING HAS RECEIVED EXISTENCE BY THE ACTION OF SOME EFFICIENT CAUSE, IT IS NOT A NECESSARY, BUT A CONTINGENT BEING, FOR IT DEPENDS UPON, IS CONTINGENT UPON, THE ACTION OF ITS PRODUCING EFFICIENT CAUSE.

THUS THERE ARE ONLY 2 KINDS OF THING POSSIBLE:
(1). ETERNAL, UNCAUSED, NECESSARY BEING, AND
(2). CONTINGENT BEING, WHICH IS EFFICIENTLY CAUSED.
FURTHER: CONTINGENT THINGS MUST BE TRACED BACK TO A FIRST EFFICIENT CAUSE, WHICH IS ITSELF NECESSARY AND UNCAUSED BEING. FOR CONSIDER: A CONTINGENT THING IS A CAUSED THING, ITS CAUSE PRODUCED IT. IF ITS CAUSE IS ALSO PRODUCED, SOMETHING PRODUCED THAT CAUSE, AND SO ON. IF (A) COMES FROM (B), AND (B) FROM (C), AND (C) FROM (D), AND (D) FROM (E), AND SO ON, THEN SOMEWHERE AND SOMETIME WE MUST COME TO A FIRST CAUSE WHICH IS ITSELF UNCAUSED, WHICH IS NECESSARY BEING. ONE CANNOT TRACE BACK THE CHAIN OF CAUSATION INDEFINITELY NOR TO INFINITY; ONE REALLY MUST REACH THE BEGINNING AT SOME STAGE. TO SAY THAT THE SERIES IS INDEFINITELY LONG AND TO LEAVE THE MATTER THERE, IS TO MAKE AN INTELLECTUAL SURRENDER OF THE WHOLE QUESTION. AN UNWORTHY COP-OUT. SUCH A SURRENDER IS SIMPLY A REFUSAL TO FACE FACTS. ON THE OTHER HAND, TO SAY THAT THE SERIES OF CAUSES IS INFINITELY LONG (i.e. HAS NO BEGINNING) IS TO ASSERT AN ABSURDITY. FOR AN INFINITE NUMBER OF FINITE CAUSES IS IMPOSSIBLE; FINITE ADDED TO FINITE CAN NEVER EQUAL INFINITE. REASON FORCES US TO THE CONCLUSION THAT CONTINGENT THINGS INVOLVE OF NECESSITY THE EXISTENCE OF AN UNCAUSED AND NECESSARY FIRST CAUSE.
NOW, CAN THERE BE MANY UNCAUSED AND NECESSARY FIRST CAUSES? CAN VARIOUS CHAINS OF CAUSATION BE TRACED BACK TO VARIOUS FIRST CAUSES? OR IS THE FIRST CAUSE NECESSARILY ONE CAUSE? IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE FIRST CAUSE IS ONE AND ONLY ONE. FOR A BEING THAT IS SO PERFECT THAT IT MUST EXIST MUST HAVE THE FULNESS OF PERFECTION, IT MUST HAVE PERFECTION IN A WHOLLY UNLIMITED MANNER. WHY? BECAUSE SUCH A BEING IS SELF- EXISTENT AND WHOLLY INDEPENDENT OF CAUSES. CAUSES DO TWO THINGS: THEY MAKE AN EFFECT WHAT IT IS, AND THEY LIMIT THE EFFECT SO AS TO MARK OFF ITS PERFECTIONS FROM THOSE OF OTHER THINGS. HENCE A BEING THAT IS INDEPENDENT OF CAUSES, AS A NECESSARY BEING IS, IS INDEPENDENT OF THE LIMITATION WHICH CAUSES IMPOSE. THUS THE FIRST CAUSE IS FREE FROM LIMITATION; IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS INFINITE. NOW AN INFINITE BEING IS UNIQUE; THERE SIMPLY CANNOT BE MORE THAN ONE SUCH BEING. FOR, IF THERE WERE MORE THAN ONE, THERE WOULD BE A DISTINCTION OF BEING BETWEEN OR AMONG THEM; THIS DISTINCTION WOULD BE ITSELF A LIMITATION, AND SO NONE WOULD BE INFINITE. SUPPOSE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THERE ARE ARE TWO INFINITE BEINGS, (A) AND (B). (A) HAS ITS OWN PERFECTIONS IN AN UNLIMITED DEGREE; (B) HAS ITS OWN PERFECTIONS, SIMILARLY UNLIMITED. NOW IF (A) AND (B) ARE NOT IDENTICAL [AND THUS ONE] THERE IS A DEFECT AND A LIMITATION IN (A), INASMUCH AS IT HAS NOT THE PERFECTIONS THAT ARE PROPERLY (B)'s. IN LIKE MANNER THERE IS A DEFECT AND A LIMITATION IN (B), INASMUCH AS (B) HAS NOT THE PERFECTIONS THAT ARE PROPERLY (A)'s. THUS UNLESS (A) AND (B) ARE IDENTICAL AND ONE, NEITHER IS INFINITE. HENCE, THE NECESSARY FIRST CAUSE MUST BE ONE AND INFINITE.

SUMMARY.
CONTINGENT THINGS DEMAND THE EXISTENCE OF ONE, NECESSARY, INFINITE FIRST CAUSE;

NOW THE UNIVERSE, AND ALL THINGS IN THE UNIVERSE, ARE CONTINGENT THINGS;
THEREFORE, THE UNIVERSE, AND ALL THINGS IN THE UNIVERSE, DEMAND THE EXISTENCE OF ONE, NECESSARY. INFINITE FIRST CAUSE.

THIS WE CALL GOD.