If God doesn't need a Creator, why does the universe need one?

Question

1) If we say that everything needs a Creator, who is the Creator of the God, and who is the Creator of the Creator of the God and so on?

2) If we say that God doesn't need to have a Creator, why does the universe need a Creator?

3) If God can be the first thing which occured, why can't the universe be the first thing which occured?

Thank you very much.

Please number your answers.

In the third question, I am not talking about the universe.
What I meant was the starting point.
I apologise.

According to the Big Bang, first there was a point with great density of energy.
It was just there.
And then the point started to expand and everything started to occur after that.

This point can be the "cause" and everything came after can be the "effects".
According to those philosophers, the point is the Creator, and everything else is the Creation.

You can't say "There is no beginning and there is no end because reality is a circle.".
Every circle has a beginning point and an end.
Try to draw a circle and you will see.

Answer 1

1. The creator of God is us. Not the other way around. We created God to explain the (at the time) un-explainable.

2. It does not. But, and here's the hard part, most people cannot wrap their head around something having no starting point. That's where religious 'faith' comes in - the pastor tells you to just believe it... don't ask any questions ('cause he can't answer them anyways) just believe it.

3. God was not the first thing that occurred (see above) we had to occur first. The universe then, by definition, occurs before 'God'.

Answer 2

Assuming you're serious, this could take a while. Mind you, I'm just covering some of the discussion I've read in various places -- this is one of those questions a lot of far better educated people than I USED to discuss...

And I'm not trying to persuade you about this -- I don't know how much of it I find convincing myself. I'm just trying to answer your questions the way people who believe in a Creator for philosophical reasons would. If I say something flatly, it's to save time. If I said "in the view of the Greek and Medieval philosophers" or "Aristotle said," or some such in every sentence this would be even longer than it is...

Also, I'm only looking at the philosophers' reasons. The religious reasons are sometimes similar, but not always; and
theologians take them a lot further than pure philosophical theory would.

--Background--
We'll start out by describing the ideas you seem to be referencing, more or less as the philosophers in question would describe them.

The rule isn't "everything needs a Creator," or even "everything has a cause" -- it's "every EFFECT has a cause." An effect is (roughly) something that has changed. Since everything we know of in the universe has changed -- indeed, is constantly changing -- everything we know of in the universe is an effect -- it is what it is because something else made it that way.

Something ELSE. An effect cannot cause itself. Something cannot "become" unless something else MAKES it "become."

Some people will say that each effect is caused by an earlier effect and the process goes on forever. But the philosophers I'm describing are like engineers -- they figure if an infinite number comes up in your arithmetic, you did something wrong. To them, "infinite regression" is a pretty term that doesn't mean much. If you go back in time far enough, they say, sooner or later (or sooner ) you will come to the first thing that ever changed.

So what could have made the very first change? Since an effect cannot cause itself, the CAUSE of the first EFFECT must have been something that had never itself been changed. Something that had never "become" anything. Something that had always been.

This "something that has always been" might be part of the universe, but it's not a part we've ever found. Everything we know of changes. Everything we know of is effect.

So what we're looking at is some kind of "Ultimate Fact." Something that "is," and never "becomes." In a sense, something that is more real than anything we can find. More real than ourselves, since what we are can change at any moment, the effect of any of a million different causes.

Notice we haven't tried to describe this "Ultimate Fact" or "Pure Being" yet. Some associate the idea with the God of a particular religion. Others say It is the Reality that what we try to describe with out so-called Laws of Physics. Or something else. Philosophy as such can't be that specific.

If you're really interested in the question, you can probably find all sorts of discussion on it. I'm just trying to put up a little background so you'll understand the answers these people might give to your question. So...

1)
Not "everything" needs a Creator. Just "everything that is created." The bedrock Fact behind everything was never created. It just IS.

2)
Nothing in the universe (that we have found) qualifies as the bedrock Fact behind everything. Everything changes. Everything is acted on by other things. Therefore, to account for the universe, you need something that acts on the universe, but that the universe does not act on.

3)
That bedrock Fact (Call It God if you want -- it's as good a name as any, and any other name you come up with will have stupid pictures associated with it, too [Admit it -- when I talk about a "bedrock Fact," you have some picture of a granite foundation or something in your head, don't you?])



To use the terms in your question, the people holding the position you're questioning would say:
the universe WAS the first thing to occur. God never "occurred." He (or She or It or Whatever) was already there. He CAUSED the universe to occur. There was not a time when He wasn't there. He is too real for that.

Hooboy. I probably gave you more of an answer than you wanted. And I still just scratched the surface -- I'm not a philosopher, just a bookworm. I just wanted to make sure you knew that people *have thought* about the questions you've raised. The arguments on both sides go back to Greek times, at least. It's not a bunch of people mindlessly mouthing party lines -- not entirely, anyway.

Answer 3

First comments on comments: Within my belief system. Yes, this world and all therein is but an illusion. Yes, the big bang is agreed by most scientists, finally, as what happened in “the Beginning," however, that does not empirically imply that was the Alpha or actual begining. Actually, one of three big bang theory's say the universe will stop contracting and start to collapse in on itself. This depends on the total amount of matter--resulting total gravity and there is debate here. If the expand/ collapse theory is correct then in REALITY there was no beginning---even in this the material world. Just cycles--like a circle of life as the Natives believe---all is " Circles of Life."

1) There is a great distinction here; There exists that which has been created and that which Creates. God is the Creator and all else is the created.

2) Reefer to above.

3) Reefer to above.

Ever heard, and I'm sure all have, “I am Alpha and Omega?"

IT all matters greatly for if by chance we are the created, then, is it not right we should search for evidence of the Creator? And His will.

Yes, of course the conversation of energy or matter (same thing) is a true law of physics but here is a thought: The Name Creator implies a creation, therefore, if God has always been then that necessitates a creation always, too! Non-existence cannot become existence---what is created is only that of changing forms--in this the world of FORMS--- in which we live.

Sorry so long.

Answer 4

Yes, you are correct except that we have good scientific evidence that the universe had a beginning, i.e. the Big Bang.

A number of scientists, including Einstein, opposed the Big Bang theory merely because it did support the universe having a beginning.

Answer 5

I honestly haven't heard the argument of "who created God" before :) My answer to all of you're questions are that you can believe in whatever you want to believe in and whatever happened first in your mind it what happened first. Honestly, I don't understand why people worry about how it came to be in the first place, does it matter? Does that knowledge change anything? No. If someone magically had the answer to which came first, God, the Universe, Evolution, or any devine intervention, so what? To what extent would that matter? It doesn't alter anything by knowing which way or other. We don't need to worry about which came first. People who argue and kill eachother over this are essentially arguing "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?".

Answer 6

The throy of a creator god is obsolete.

Let me speak about the Hindu Philosophy:

There is no personal God, there is no creator, and there is no identity after death. There is one ultimate reality, and we can not know that since it is infinite, and we are finite. It is neither he nor she, it can not be qualified, since it is beyonod qualities and so on. It is also called 'Tatjalan' to mean that from which everything came, that bywhich everything lives and that unto which everything returns.

Now to two laws in Physics, Law of conservation of energy and law of conservation of matter. Bothe eneergy and matter are neither creatd, nor destroyed. they simply keep changing forms, and this world and everything is their changing forms pattern.

The ultimate reality is also the same. it keeps becoming onand on, changing and becoming. This world, you and me are all in the run. That is why Sanakra calls this world as an illusion.

Answer 7

OK, if God exist, He is equal to all existing things..