Who/What created God?

I disagree - I think my statement's still valid, because there's a difference in creating God and creating the idea of God. In your example, the peron who created the Easter Bunny doesn't think the Easter Bunny is real - no reasonable person does. But the person who believes in God absolutely believes God is real.

 

i NEVER thought I'd hear that coming from you.

 

As I understand it, God created time. He is therefore not subject to it's constraints. To say that 'God had to come from somewhere', is to say that He is also subject the rules of nature and of the physical realm that He created. The sequencing of events in this physical realm do not pertain to Him because He is not physical and is the creator of all.

 

the sole point was that you can have a creator for something that doesn't exist. (you even refer to the creator the easter bunny, which sort of invalidates your own claim)

language is contextual. in the context of the question of god's existence, asking who created him of somebody who doesn't believe he exists is basically asking who created the idea.

 

it's not placing the same restrictions on him as we do nature so much as recognizing that our demand to define natural rules as easy to handle pieces is itself lacking.

as i see it, using god as the answer to "where did we come from?" is really just a matter of taking all the stuff we don't understand and putting it in one box that we all agree we won't try to understand. it's a self-defining mystery.

if you believe in it, then you'd probably have to recognize that natural selection is really only geared towards solving problems that are presented to the entity in question. as products of our reality, humans are geared towards understanding things on that level. our brain is well adapted to our world, but not so well adapted to completely foreign concepts like thinking in 5 dimensions or imagining a 4th primary color. our world is finite and ruled by cause and effect, so that's what we expect from everything.

i think some things are simply beyond out capacity to understand.

 

.

 

no, my point is that you don't need to a supernatural entity to be mysterious and beyond our grasp. reality can be mysterious enough.

by that, i assume you mean it's wrong for people to use the "who created the universe" line of reasoning as proof of god, yes?

i mean god works in mysterious ways because we take all the mysteries and ascribe them to god. it's self-defining in that sense.

not sure i follow.

not entirely, but kind of. the difference between this and the god version is god. he's superfluous.

 

The great irony in this is that you look down on pretty much everybody who posts on this board as having limited intelligence, while at the same time trying to prove your own. And I never talked about Christianity specifically, other than to say I believe the Bible is good for teaching morals and ethics, so I don't know where that last part is coming from...I think you're losing your edge.

I know you can do better than this.

 

i didn't mean it to directly refute your statement so much as just add my $0.02. you said god created time and was therefore not bound by its constraints, which in my mind opened up the topic of our limited ability to comprehend those constraints.

okay, i wasn't sure. some people reject the idea of leading people to god by scientific reasoning, so i wasn't sure if that was what you meant was wrong. i agree we should seek out answers to life's big questions, but i don't think "common sense" answers are going to necessarily greet us.

yeah, expecting everything to act like it does in our scale is really a major stumbling block. i think part of that is rational and part of that is just plain wiring.