we are creation of god, then who is the creator of god himself?? Can it by chance??

Answer 1

If this is a truly reasonable, rational conversation using logic rather than simple "faith" or quoting scriptures, then I'll give it a shot. If not, then I'll simply offer what I have, and search out another possibly rational sincere question.

1) Your second question. Mathematicians note that the probabilities for Each individual remote statistical blind chance, culminating in the final end product of our civilization today? That "mathematically" it passes beyond 10 to the 60th, of statistical possibility; into the realm of impossibility.

What I mean by culmination of certain things that must occur. First, you have, for some unknown reason, a first moment. (Scientists prefer the term "First Moment". Big bang has become somewhat of a layman's term) I believe in the theory of this first moment, billions of years ago. I think it is a current theory with a LOT of good science behind it. The confirmation with the rise of the X particle uniting two forces of nature seemed to nail that theory down for me.

That first moment, we have no idea WHY it occurs, but I'm not going to try to convince anyone of God, because that is not the stated purpose of this line of logic. The question was: "Can it by chance?" I have provided references by mathematicians (Who usually are the ones who have severe problems with "chance" being the reasons") below.

Next, not only the "First Moment" of this universe, but then, you have the precision of the laws of the universe, the four forces, all counterbalancing each other PRECISELY in the mathematical ratios that they do. If they were off by a trillionth, the universe would have either a) Closed in on itself immediately b) Not given rise to the universe that we now today. Supernova's would not be possible, thus ending the spreading of elements throughout the universe, which affects have a billion other processes. In addition, Gravity and Electrogmagneticsm have a precise ratio they must keep, otherwise you can't have suns, galaxies, planets, etc. It simply wouldn't work, and then you couldn't have electrostatic discharge in our primordial atmosphere. I could go on and on here. Or c) The universe would have remained in existence, but flung wildly out of control, and then ended soon thereafter as there would not be enough mass to keep it in check, due to it's great size.

Then you come to our star system, being in the right type of Galaxy. High Odds, but it probably happens all over the universe, since there are enough bar arm galaxies, and enough of them located away from other galaxies as ours is. But then those odds are compounded by the odds of being in the right place in the right type of Galaxy, in the right size. Again, there are plenty of other stars like ours (Same type) in our bar arm of the galaxy. But then you compound that, by having our star, (Mid range Yellow G type Star), but even within that sequence, it contains many, many differences from other G Type Stars, many neccesary for life.

Then there is our planet which must have 1) Right size 2) Right distance from that star, 3) Right atmospheric makeup, 4) Proper electromagnetic field strength, 5) Proper mass 6) Made of the proper elements. 7) Stable enough to last this long, and be geologically sound enough.

See, each of those has a mathematical possibility with it. I'm not saying that each is not possible, and no doubt probable to some extent. What I'm saying is that one must mathematically compound the possibilities as they all must stack within the same subset. Then the probability diminishes mathematically, as, for lack of a more scientific coefficient term, the "chances" reduce.

Then we come to evolution, given that all of those probabilities line up. Which, in my view, they do. There are no doubt many primordial earths out there. The universe has too many stars (Note, I DID NOT say the universe is big enough, but there are enough stars. That is a neccessary statement when dealing with the mathematical rationale's of the probabilities) But I believe there must be a few.

Now we arrive at evolution. Each occurence must stack ONTOP of the mathematical statistical probability equation of the universal probabilities. One has affected the other. Before we even get to the "mechanics" of evolution, you have the statistical probabilities of ALL the correct amino acids being present. In other words, life uses only what are termed "Left handed Amino Acids" for the construction of life. There are over 100 amino acids, but only 20 are needed for life's proteins. They have the two shapes, right-handed, and "left-handed". There is no known reason why either shape should be preferred in living things.

Physicist J.D. Bernal acknowledges: "It must be admitted that the explanation stillr emains one of the most difficult parts of the structural aspects of life to explain. We may never be able to explain it."

Then we come to greater problems, before even getting to the next step.

The main drive for years behind Evolutionary Theory, was the concept of Mutations. Mutations resulting in evolution? Well, evolutionists themselves realize there must be a new method by which their theory must work, because this process alone could not do it, and they have created Neo-Darwinism.

An evolutionist, George Miklos states: "What then does all this encompassing theory of evolution predict? Given a handful of postulates, such as random mutations and selection coefficients, it will predict changes in gene frequences over time. Is this what a grand theory of evolution out to be about?" Thus, Neo-Darwinism was put forth, but I won't go into that here. It'd require a book.

Mathematicians over the years have complained that the numbers don't add up. Information theorist Hubert Yockey argues that the information needed to begin life could not have developed by chance. He suggests that life be considered a given, like matter or energy. (That's a Given in his mathematical subset. So it's a FREEBIE, not an arrived at conclusion mathematically). Arguing against this irrational thought, mathematician Stuart Kauffman of the Santa Fe Institute (Leading in the field of complexity theory) stated that mathematically, he could not accept that all the pieces fit yet. So yes, it is a theory, though he still claims to believe it

"Darwin and evolution stand astride us, whatever the mutterings of creation scientists. But is the view right? Better, is it adequate? I believe it is not. It is not that Darwin is wrong, but that he got hold of only part of the truth".

When all of these sets are combined (Which they were incidentally, trying to prove evolution)this is the mathematical result when we arrive at life arrising, not in human form, but to the result of a single celled organism?

10 the 113th - (See references below that I've marked as such) That's 10, with 113 zeroes after it. But this is my question.

In mathematics, anything that has just a 10 to the 50th power is considered a mathematical impossibility!!! As astronomer Frederick Hoyle notes, that 10 to the 113th is larger than the number of total molecules in the known universe!!! The entire universe would have to be filled with a primordial soup. The number is just that big, that's why we have to express it as a scientific notation. Over one google worth of numbers there is the possiblity.

So my question is, how can anything be BEYOND the scientific, mathematic possibility of happening, yet still be believed by the some of those people who worked out the numbers. Is this not "faith"? Indeed, they say they have no explanation, but they still believe it. Is this not faith?

And that's before we even get into the mathematical odds revolving around building something from a single celled organism, to a full human living in the 21st century. Mind you, I don't accept Creationists view. I accept the Bible's view, which is quite different. The Bible says those creative days are quite long, and that we are STILL within the seventh day. That's before understanding how it was possible for a man that lived so long ago (Whether you believe it was Moses or not) to overcome the mathematical odds, and get the order, from 1 to 10, of the sequence of what life appeared in what order, correct. (In other words, he's working blind, but how did he know that the earth was covered by a formless watery void, next came the land. Next came, etc. etc. How did he get the order right?) That's other scientific probabilities that MUST be explained, in addition to the above subsets.

So scientifically, rationally, logically, it seems that "chance" has no ability to be the cause of everything we see around us. I encourage you evolutionist, non scientists to LEARN the facts for yourselves, from evolutionists themselves, regarding the mathematics. It's eye opening.

* * *

Your first question is "Then who is the creator of God himself"? That is a metaphysical question, and does not address the scientific. That goes beyond the realms of "IS there a creator". Because lets face it, if you are shown scientifically, rationally, according to the process, even as a young child that you MUST have had parents, then it does NOT neccessarily follow (Unless given further facts, which you accumulate) that they must have had parents. That is a seperate question to be addressed. But you can address the first, before proceeding to the second.

My own spiritual questions (Different from the scientific method, but no less logical) is that I would ask in turn is: "How could we possibly know?" If we're dealing with a creator who could design a universe, then we are discussing a being who is beyond a) Matter and b) Energy. Matter and Energy is all we know. That's it. That's our universe. If we are discussing someone that created both matter and energy as we know it, then you are going "pre-universe" and the same "rationale's" do not apply. He indeed COULD BE a being who has no limit to his existence. Who has always existed. It is not illogical, or unreasonable to deny such a possibility.

Before anyone Else gives a thumb down, I ask you this simple challenge:

LOGICALLY, SCIENTIFICALLY, RATIONALLY, WITHOUT RELYING ON SOMEONE ELSES BELIEFS (In other words. "I believe it because scientists say so) RESPOND TO THESE PROBLEMS OF STATISTICAL MATHEMATICAL PROBABILITY CITING YOUR PUBLISHED, CREDIBLE SOURCES.

I am willing to hear the science and logic of a counter view. If you cannot do this, then I can only assume you believe it, despite not looking up the facts yourselves. And that, THAT, I call blind faith. Accepting the dogma of someone else. I accept no one's dogma on blind faith. Not someone who believes in creation, nor someone who believes in evolution. I mean, do I accept some "Preachers" version simply because he has a "diploma" from a Seminary University? No. Then why should I accept someone elses version, simply because they have another diploma? I'll give a thumbs down to a guy who quotes "Science" as his source, just as much as I'll give a thumbs down to someone who quotes a scripture as their source. That's just not logical. I'll give a thumbs up to the question though, because the asking of the question MUST be done. As thinking creatures, we should ask that question, and try to find a way to arrive at the conclusion.

I believe in looking up the facts yourself. Heck, I give thumb downs to fellow folks who believe in creation and intelligent design, but just quote a scripture to do so. That's not rational or logical. Do it RATIONALLY! Look it yourself!

After years of study, the only logical explanation I can possibly arrives at, that fits Ocams Razor, that fits the logic, the science, the mathematics, the facts is:

An eternal, always-existing God, who has always been, created, Intelligently, directing everything in our universe. Such a being would be so much higher than us, that only a written record that is complete, rational, and logical would prove to me that he's interested in what I think, love, or care about.

Answer 2

the mistake is thinking in terms of "who".

God is not a who, but a Process. the Process of Life itself, with Consciousness. There is no beginning and no end to this Process. the One always was, and will be forever more.
Infinite. Omnicient. Omnipresent.

God is bigger than what our human terms can descibe accurately. that is why there are so many "theories". none capture the whole picture, but can only point towards the Truth.

in the beginning there was only Oneness. This One Consciousness divided into millions and trillions of individuations of Consciousness, creating relativity. the purpose is for the One to know and have experience of itself. It can only do this through the illusion of seperation.

this can be seen as either the Big Bang, or the Creation from the Unmanifested, or the "birth" of the universe. it's all perspective.

We are not seperate from the One, or each other. we are humans Being. we are a part of the Collective Consciousness, or the One, we just aren't fully aware of it. (but some are)

like i said...these words aren't the Truth, but do point towards the Truth.

Answer 3

God is all powerful and can create any way the Creator sees fit.

The creation stories held by different cultures are exactly that, Stories, No human was there at the time of Creation; so the Crestor teaches us spiritual truths according to our level of understanding.

Answer 4

Let me explain the creation of the universe, there was the big bang, then only mass and energy for around 100,000,000 years. Then the first three elements, hyrdogen, helium, lithium, were created. After that due to the heat which was extreme high all the other non-synthetic elements were created. After a billion years or so of cooling more mass started to combine and eventually created planets, stars, and asteroids. After that the basic building blocks of life, such as hyro-carbons, came from space when there was much more debris let over from the big bang. After that the first organisms formed which started ther Pre-Cambrian age and evolution started to occur. Evolution occurs when a species learns a new ability and it is declared different enough, scientists will declare a new species. An example of this would be when ape learned to reach up high for food they started to walk upright which left there hands open for using other items, such as tools. The usage of tools let to an increase of brain size. Then after several thousands years, and many false beliefs (religions), we Homo Sapiens exist today.

Answer 5

I always get a chuckle when I see God haters ask this question. They believe that the elements are eternal. That they can't be created nor destroyed. Yet you insist that God was created.... Why? Why can't there be an eternal creative intelligence? The way that proteins and even DNA are built require such a being... Yet you deny science and believe this fairy tale of spontaneous life generation... You are so gullible... Jim

Answer 6

Sorry for the rudeness, but have you been living in a cave? God is the Alpha and Omega. The beginnging and the end - He has always been here and always will be. He says so in the Bible many times. God is God. He told Moses that He is "I AM", meaning He is, always has been and always will be. God wasn't not created, He has no 'parents'. Think about it -- GOD -- God is the Almighty, the All Powerful, capable of doing anything and anytimes for any reason. Why wouldn't He have always been here?

Answer 7

Nobody knows.Nobody will ever knows.If you are really keen into this then i suggest you see a religious leader who knows the real story behind all the gods.There are lots of gods here on earth that different people worthship.It's up to you which god you want to believe in.

Answer 8

no christian can give a straight answer because they only believe such a thing exists...but really they don't even know if he exists. I think that the idea of god was created by some moron with a few sheets of paper in which he wrote a book...that another moron believed was true!

Answer 9

Mr. and Mrs. God Sr. his parents. Then there were the Great Grand Gods, the First Gods, the Gods that created them and their parents and the great God creating machine that was built by the pan dimensionl mice.

Answer 10

However far back you go in space and time, there is something that in one form or another has always existed. If you're religious you call it god. But if you look at the universe logically, you call it the cosmos.

Answer 11

"So perfect and comprehensive is His creation that no mind nor heart, however keen or pure, can ever grasp the nature of the most insignificant of His creatures; much less fathom the mystery of Him Who is the Day Star of Truth, Who is the invisible and unknowable Essence. The conceptions of the devoutest of mystics, the attainments of the most accomplished amongst men, the highest praise which human tongue or pen can render are all the product of man's finite mind and are conditioned by its limitations. Ten thousand Prophets, each a Moses, are thunderstruck upon the Sinai of their search at His forbidding voice, 'Thou shalt never behold Me!'; whilst a myriad Messengers, each as great as Jesus, stand dismayed upon their heavenly thrones by the indiction, 'Mine Essence thou shalt never apprehend!' From time immemorial He hath been veiled in the ineffable sanctity of His exalted Self, and will everlastingly continue to be wrapt in the impenetrable mystery of His unknowable Essence. Every attempt to attain to an understanding of His inaccessible Reality hath ended in complete bewilderment, and every effort to approach His exalted Self and envisage His Essence hath resulted in hopelessness and failure."