Is there anything more illogical than saying somebody had to make man, but nobody had to make God? Think about

Question

it, before you answer. Don't just rattle off some nonsense that you heard somebody say when you were being brainwashed.

Answer 1

Yes, the idea that God would have to appease himself by sacrificing himself to himself before he could forgive "sins" is more illogical, (or at least just as illogical).

Of course, both ideas come from the same religion, so it doesn't really matter which one is more ridiculous.

Oh wait, I've got another one -

Choosing to believe in something that makes no sense and has no evidence to back it up is a "virtue".

That's got to be waaay up there on the illogical scale.

Answer 2

Is there anything more illogical than saying that : the creator was created?when will you start the chain then?who created the one who created god?

can you tell me logically how does the world come to existence without agent? an intelligent power to govern the first event of world existence ?

it goes for us all to say that some people are thinking of your question then typing these words to answer ur Q more than saying that the words came together at once and made us all these answers ALONE??

Answer 3

How that is more illogical then saying energy has always existed and somehow created all matter. (The current theory being taught by Hawkings and most other scientist).

Either way you have something that "always existed" creating everything material.

The only difference is that if the "energy" is God, then there is a logics, reason and purpose to the universe, and not just random chance.

Answer 4

I just answered a similar question....
It is based on perceived "cause and effect" relationships. Everything can be thought of as an effect and attributed to a prior cause that, in turn, is attributed to a prior cause, and so on. However, we must remember that cause is only a hypothesis, for it has no objective existence. All that objectively exists is a particular sequence of circumstances that is often (but not always) repeated. If such a hypothesis is applied to existence, we cannot find a creator of the first cause, because each creator must have had a prior creator. The end result is a never-ending chain of creators.
The Creator must be Self-Subsistent and One, without like or equal. If any created being "causes" anything, that capacity was created within that being, for only the Creator is Self-Existent and Self-Subsistent. Only the Creator truly creates and determines possible causes and effects for His creation. Therefore, we speak of God as the Sustainer, who holds and gives life to all of His Creation. All causes begin in Him, and all effects end in Him. In truth, created things are "0"s that will never add up to anything, unless God bestows real value or existence by placing a positive "1" before the "0".
In the sphere of existence, what we call causes and effects have no direct or independent influence. We may have to use such words to understand how a part of creation is made intelligible to us and available for our use. But even this confirms our dependence upon God and our answerability before Him. God does not need causes and effects to create; rather, we need them to understand what He has created.

Answer 5

Yes there is something more illogical. it goes like this. Once there was nothing. then boom (thats the sound of the big bang) then everything just came together, and here we are!!!!!, of course that does NOT explain, why there is not life everywhere, or why not only did fish crawl out of the water and learnd to walk, but so did the trees, flowers, birds and all,

Now thats illogical.

Answer 6

It is completely logical that an existing series of causes and effects must have had an initial event. The universe is such a series of causes and effects. The concept of a series without an initial event is completely illogical. Further, the cause of the first event in a series, logically, must exist outside of and distinct from the series itself. Therefore it is fully logical to state that the cause of the universe must have pre-existed the universe, and exists outside of and distinct from the universe. Further, the promordial cause must be an uncaused cause, because otherwise it would not be initial, but only part of another series, which therefore would require another origin and another initial cause, ad infinitum. An infinite series of series, with no initial cause, is logically untenable. Likewise, an eternal universe with no origin and no cause is logically untenable. Therefore the only logical position is an uncaused, eternal, non-material primordial cause of all else that exists. I call this logically inescapable uncaused cause "God". What do you call Him?

Answer 7

Illogical, maybe. Impossible, no. I appreciate logic, but I think some of the smartest people are the ones who can admit that just because their mind can't fathom something or rationally explain it doesn't mean it's invalid.

Answer 8

No it is not illogical.

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It can be transmuted. Transmute energy into man. "make man"...same difference.

But no, it is not illogical.

Nor is it illogical to state that set A requires creation but set B does not. Take a logic class.

Answer 9

this is a genuine question you have... and i obviously dont have all the answers.. im sure theis question has crossed the mind of all christians, myself included.... but, we are supposed to view him as the supreme being... i mean, if you believe that everything came from something, where did this explosion ppl refer to as the "big bang" come from?? where did the apes somethink we evolved from come from?? so, if you believe something had to have created God, then why not think these other theories had to have a maker also?

Answer 10

You have to have faith that Jehovah God has always existed. I chose to believe that. If you do not believe that's your decision.
I read the Bible and applied what I learned in my life and now I'm truly happy.
The Bible is truly from God and I hope you really think about that.