Who Created God?

[True Faith]

Islamic Answer


First I ask you, can you count (do you know how to count)?
I give an example of numbers.
If we take the number zero (0) as the middle.
under the zero (0), it goes from 0 to -1 to -2 to ENDLESS,
do you know the begin under the zero? (or you can say the last (negatif) number under the zero)
and from zero (0) to above it goes from number 1 to 2 to ENDLESS.

conclusion: numbers have NO BEGINNING and NO END, just like Allah swt.
[Quran 57:3] He is the First and the Last, the Evident and the Hidden: and He has full knowledge of all things.


yes and just like god/allah numbers dont exist they are a man made creation!

THE SCIENTIFIC ANSWER

Actually this common question always gets it backwards. It would make more sense to ask: "How can something exist that has a beginning?" Things which exist are made of matter. Things can change in form but can not come into or go out of existence - the matter remains. You can form bricks from mud, then houses from bricks, and in time the house will again return to mud, but the matter involved did not have any "beginning" and can have no "end."

Anything and everything in the universe, whether a solar system, an electric toaster, or a Baptist Church is comprised of matter which was re-combined to form a toaster (or whatever) from always existing matter. If the Church burns down, the matter still exists (and fertilizes the soil).

When you freeze water into ice, the ice was not "created" from nothing - the matter just changed form. In the context of the matter of which things are made, nothing which exists had a beginning. The Universe is a sum total of all existants and all of the matter these existants are made of. The Universe did not have a "beginning," but like water and ice, it changes forms and arrangements of matter over time.

But if Nature and Natural Law are too boring for you, by all means create a God and say he did it all.

 

[Dan4reason]

Islamic Answer


First I ask you, can you count (do you know how to count)?
I give an example of numbers.
If we take the number zero (0) as the middle.
under the zero (0), it goes from 0 to -1 to -2 to ENDLESS,
do you know the begin under the zero? (or you can say the last (negatif) number under the zero)
and from zero (0) to above it goes from number 1 to 2 to ENDLESS.

conclusion: numbers have NO BEGINNING and NO END, just like Allah swt.
[Quran 57:3] He is the First and the Last, the Evident and the Hidden: and He has full knowledge of all things.


yes and just like god/allah numbers dont exist they are a man made creation!

THE SCIENTIFIC ANSWER

Actually this common question always gets it backwards. It would make more sense to ask: "How can something exist that has a beginning?" Things which exist are made of matter. Things can change in form but can not come into or go out of existence - the matter remains. You can form bricks from mud, then houses from bricks, and in time the house will again return to mud, but the matter involved did not have any "beginning" and can have no "end."

Anything and everything in the universe, whether a solar system, an electric toaster, or a Baptist Church is comprised of matter which was re-combined to form a toaster (or whatever) from always existing matter. If the Church burns down, the matter still exists (and fertilizes the soil).

When you freeze water into ice, the ice was not "created" from nothing - the matter just changed form. In the context of the matter of which things are made, nothing which exists had a beginning. The Universe is a sum total of all existants and all of the matter these existants are made of. The Universe did not have a "beginning," but like water and ice, it changes forms and arrangements of matter over time.

But if Nature and Natural Law are too boring for you, by all means create a God and say he did it all.

For time to be infinite, causality must be contradicted. That is the only conclusion. We have no evidence of eternity ever happening in real life. It can exist mathematically, but even in the mathematical sense, it contradicts common sense. You cannot simply add, subtract, multiply, or divide infinite number in most cases. An infinite number does not exist, but number do go for infinity.

 

[andys]

Dawkings would shudder at the futility of this debate. I know I am.

One side utilises rational arguments supported by empirically verified/verifiable assertions; the other side offers irrational arguments devoid of any empirically verified/verifiable assertions. No wonder nothing ever gets resolved.

It's like an adult engaging in an argument with a 4 year over the existence of Santa Clause. There is clearly no evidence to support the child's fantasy, yet the he/she forges ahead citing phrases from "The Night Before Christmas", as proof.

Wouldn't it be nice if there was a universally accepted rule that stipulated: "No assertions may be submitted into argument which are devoid of any empirically verified/verifiable evidence."

(Sorry, I couldn't resist...now back to the "debate".)

 

[EverChanging]

It is good logic to expose how one particular god-concept and one particular explanation for the universe is indeed not an explanation at all. It is a lack of an explanation. it does not explain a mechanism the god employed in creating the universe, nor does it explain the god itself.

But not all god-concepts fit the particular one Dawkins is seeking to expose as irrational, nor is that particular god-concept representative of traditional Christianity, or at least the traditional theology I have studied in depth. I acknowledge that the majority of Christians do not understand their theology, and I also understand the higher ups in many faiths are motivated by political power and greed. Still, I don't always agree with Dawkins' generalizations about religion, but I give him the credit of exposing fundamentalist Christianity and its' god-concept for what it is. He is not, however, knowledgeable about traditional Christianity's rather complex and nuanced theology as it evolved over the centuries. Theology, at its best, is not concerned with facts in the way that science is. This is largely, although not completely, a perversion of fundamentalism.

 

[Copernicus]

But not all god-concepts fit the particular one Dawkins is seeking to expose as irrational...

As Dawkins himself has repeatedly admitted at almost every turn.

...nor is that particular god-concept representative of traditional Christianity, or at least the traditional theology I have studied in depth. I acknowledge that the majority of Christians do not understand their theology, and I also understand the higher ups in many faiths are motivated by political power and greed...

That ad hominem argument strikes me as a very simplistic claim. Not every "higher up" is motivated by power and greed. Many hold sincere religious beliefs. But you seem to contradict yourself here. On the one hand you claim that "particular god-concept" is not representative of traditional Christianity. On the other you claim that the majority of Christians who determine that tradition do not understand their own theology. I honestly think it more likely that intellectuals understand how untenable the belief of the masses is, and they seek to put a more sophisticated spin on it. What sustains Christian faith over time is what the masses believe, not their intellectual apologists.

...Still, I don't always agree with Dawkins' generalizations about religion, but I give him the credit of exposing fundamentalist Christianity and its' god-concept for what it is. He is not, however, knowledgeable about traditional Christianity's rather complex and nuanced theology as it evolved over the centuries. Theology, at its best, is not concerned with facts in the way that science is. This is largely, although not completely, a perversion of fundamentalism.

It is easy to make blanket generalizations about people like Dawkins, but he has enough understanding of nuance to hold his own in debates with sophisticated theologians (see his Alister McGrath debate, which covers just this subject that you have raised).

 

[chinu]

Who Created God?

As the need of "Water" is created by "Thirstness", Of Man,
As the need of "God" is created by "Salvation", Of Man,

If you are a man than you can understand that "Thirstness" has created the need of "Water"
If you are a man than you can understand that "Salvation" has created the need of "God"

Truely saying for "Thirsty Man" there is a need of "Water"
Truely saying for "Man" there is no "Water"

Truely saying for "Man" there is no "God"
Truely saying for "The Man who is looking for Salvation" there is need of "God"

Are you man ?

_/\_
Chinu

 

[averageJOE]

As the need of "Water" is created by "Thirstness", Of Man,
As the need of "God" is created by "Salvation", Of Man,

If you are a man than you can understand that "Thirstness" has created the need of "Water"
If you are a man than you can understand that "Salvation" has created the need of "God"

Truely saying for "Thirsty Man" there is a need of "Water"
Truely saying for "Man" there is no "Water"

Truely saying for "Man" there is no "God"
Truely saying for "The Man who is looking for Salvation" there is need of "God"

Are you man ?

_/\_
Chinu

Is that you Yoda?

 

[chinu]

Is that you Yoda?

To me i am not known .


_/\_
Chinu