• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Origin of god.

Status
Not open for further replies.

oldsage

Veteran
Nov 4, 2005
1,307
70
56
Pinellas Park, FL
✟1,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
yashua said:
I should have just went straight to the point in my other post.

Is God Un-Created.

Do all things in this universe have a first cause?

Then what is Gods first cause?

Where does God originate from?

God is an Eternal being, God doesn't exist in creation, meaning He isn't affected by space and time, God is what is called a non-spatial being, he isn't extened into space or time. Since God is Eternal and isn't affected by space and time he has no beginning. God is 'simple' meaning he has no parts, no divisions. Also since God is Eternal and isn't affected by space and time, he doesn't experience things, God can't learn.

When it comes to Creation, God is called the 'uncaused cause' and is that which 'causes' everything else, that is also saying he created everything ex nihilo (out of nothing)

Now this is just philosophical sputter, I can form this better if you need me to.

Chris
 
Upvote 0

yashua

Well-Known Member
Jun 18, 2005
769
20
54
In any cardboard box.
✟1,066.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
oldsage said:
God is an Eternal being, God doesn't exist in creation, meaning He isn't affected by space and time, God is what is called a non-spatial being, he isn't extened into space or time. Since God is Eternal and isn't affected by space and time he has no beginning. God is 'simple' meaning he has no parts, no divisions. Also since God is Eternal and isn't affected by space and time, he doesn't experience things, God can't learn.

When it comes to Creation, God is called the 'uncaused cause' and is that which 'causes' everything else, that is also saying he created everything ex nihilo (out of nothing)

Now this is just philosophical sputter, I can form this better if you need me to.

Chris
You Say:he doesn't experience things, God can't learn.

If God doesn't experience things why has He bound mankind to choose to love him? Does He need our attention?

If God Can't learn why does He say "It never entered my mind" speaking about sacrificing children unto molech?
Is this something that God did not forsee?
 
Upvote 0

ps139

Ab omni malo, libera nos, Domine!
Sep 23, 2003
15,088
818
New Jersey
Visit site
✟45,407.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Many times in the OT, the words used to describe God are in human terms. This is simply because our minds are finite, and when the Holy Spirit inspired the writers to write what they wrote - the main purpose was to convey a truth about God, or the world, etc.

So while our human language may be limited, at least we can understand some basic concepts by phrases like "it never entered my mind," or "God repented," or "The Lord forgets your sins."

If we took those all in the literal human sense, we take from God's omniscience, his omnipotence... but it is the best and maybe only way for most of us (short of a miraculous vision like Paul had) to learn about God.

Anyway, yes, God is the uncaused cause. He must be. This is the thought process that brough Aristotle to monotheism 300+ years B.C. ... though he was not revealed God's personal identity as the Jews were.

As oldsage said, God created space and time, and He is not limited by them. God IS. This is why the name of the Lord, YAHWEH, literally means "I AM WHO AM."

HE IS. Eternally IS.

It is hard for us to think outside of space and time, our minds are so limited, but through grace, God enables us to reason through some things to the "uncaused cause."
 
Upvote 0

Katarn

... an agent in the Army of Love.
Mar 7, 2006
104
6
The Great Southland of the Holy Spirit.
✟22,775.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Labor
yashua said:
I should have just went straight to the point in my other post. Is God Un-Created. Do all things in this universe have a first cause? Then what is Gods first cause? Where does God originate from?

Good question yashua, this has been covered quite well in the article Does God Exist? from the first chapter in "Answers Book of Answers" In Genesis. You'll have to scroll down a bit (over half way) till you get to the title "Who Created God?" They cover your question very extensive also talking about first cause and the first and second Laws of Thermodynamics.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Katarn said:
Good question yashua, this has been covered quite well in the article Does God Exist? from the first chapter in "Answers Book of Answers" In Genesis. You'll have to scroll down a bit (over half way) till you get to the title "Who Created God?" They cover your question very extensive also talking about first cause and the first and second Laws of Thermodynamics.

I don't pretend to know the "Laws of Thermodynamics" or any other such stuff. I use my Bible plain and simple. Genesis 1:1 says:

[bible]Genesis 1:1[/bible]

In the beginning, the beginning of what? The beginning of recorded time. When time came into being, God was already there. When time shall be no more, God will be there.

[bible]Revelation 22:13[/bible]

God was always there, the Alpha. God will always be there, the Omega. The first thing recorded in the Bible was that in the beginning there was God. And once we go to heaven to be with him and doesn't matter anymore, God will still be there, the Omega, the end. When time ends, God will be there.

I personally do not need to know the "dynamics" of God's existance. All I need to know is that whenever time began to be recorded, God was already there, and when I get to heaven, God will be the last thing I see. To know that God always was, always is, and always will be is sufficent for me.
 
Upvote 0

Katarn

... an agent in the Army of Love.
Mar 7, 2006
104
6
The Great Southland of the Holy Spirit.
✟22,775.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Labor
Of course, Genesis 1:1 clearly implies that God is eternal and thus has no beginning and no end. Thus, He was not created.

The link that I provided, however, does not neccessarily just deal with the origin of God. The article follows the thinking patterns of a more sophisticated thinker, who might ask:

"If the universe needs a cause, then why doesn’t God need a cause? And if God doesn’t need a cause, why should the universe need a cause?"

This was hinted at in the original post. It is always good to be able to give logical and reasonable explanations for our faith as Peter says in 1 Peter 3:15. The first and second Laws of Thermodynamics can be used to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the universe must have had a beginning - which implies first cause and thus God as Creator.

The main reason why I included the link was that I thought that the link was relevant to the topic of discussion and that the author may find it rather interesting.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
DeaconDean said:
I personally do not need to know the "dynamics" of God's existance. All I need to know is that whenever time began to be recorded, God was already there, and when I get to heaven, God will be the last thing I see. To know that God always was, always is, and always will be is sufficent for me.

If you want to argue about the pre-exsitance of God and how He brought about everything, then that is fine. But as I said before:

DeaconDean said:
To know that God always was, always is, and always will be is sufficent for me.

Katarn said:
It is always good to be able to give logical and reasonable explanations for our faith as Peter says in 1 Peter 3:15.

Because God's word tells me so isn't reason enough?

"And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power." -Acts 1:7

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." -Isa. 55:8-9

"Behold, God is great, and we know him not, neither can the number of his years be searched out." -Job 36:26

[bible]Job 38[/bible]


yashua said:
Where does God originate from?

Debate until your heart is content, i personally do not need to know the mechanics of how God brought everything into being, to know that God was, God is, and God always will be is sufficent for me.

Katarn said:
"If the universe needs a cause, then why doesn’t God need a cause? And if God doesn’t need a cause, why should the universe need a cause?"

"For who hath known the mind of the Lord," -1 Cor. 2:16

Because the Lord wanted it that way. Why is it so hard for people to simply step out in faith? Why must people have to have everything spelled out to them? Don't bother answering that, it's a retorical question.
 
Upvote 0

Katarn

... an agent in the Army of Love.
Mar 7, 2006
104
6
The Great Southland of the Holy Spirit.
✟22,775.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Labor
DeaconDean,

I'm not [wanting to] arguing against you at all. I'm just merely saying that people don't generally believe God-orientated things on "just so" basis. This is the difference between our Holy book and other religious books. Ours is the truth and from that we can build convincing and defensive arguments, while others are falsehood which fail every time. Although I admire your faith in the Bible, I believe that we should show that it is relevant and true by defending it with logical and reasonable arguments. Thus showing that it can be trusted to the unbeliever.
 
Upvote 0

oldsage

Veteran
Nov 4, 2005
1,307
70
56
Pinellas Park, FL
✟1,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
yashua said:
You Say:he doesn't experience things, God can't learn.

If God doesn't experience things why has He bound mankind to choose to love him? Does He need our attention?

If God Can't learn why does He say "It never entered my mind" speaking about sacrificing children unto molech?
Is this something that God did not forsee?

I am not sure if you understand what I mean. When I say that God doesn't experience things, this means that God has already seen all that has and will happen. Being outside of time God sees are time as present. It is what we call the Eternal Now. Since all that was, is, and will be, is before God, He already know and sees everything. Meaning He can't experience things, because that are all in God's presence simultaneously.
It is early in the day here, so, I will not be able to completely get to the "It never entered my mind" part, until later this afternoon, but for a quick thought on it. Many times in the bible phrases are used like "Israel forgot God" or something simular, it isn't used in the since they forgot who God was but they turned away from. and that is how it tends to be used in the bible, I will give 'proofs' of this when I am back home this afternoon.

Chris
 
Upvote 0

yashua

Well-Known Member
Jun 18, 2005
769
20
54
In any cardboard box.
✟1,066.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
You Quote:
Ours (Christianity) is the truth and from that we can build convincing and defensive arguments, while others are falsehood which fail every time.

Do you know that muslims also believe theirs is the truth?
Muslims also declare us as a satanic nation, just as america declares muslims a satanic people.

"Ours" is the truth because you believe it to be the truth.

could you convince me that the easter bunny "Does not exist"? Is their any " convincing and defensive arguments" that you could use to show me that what I believe is not the truth?

No their is not one.
Why? because to believe in something is one of the most powerfull things in a human mind.
Many Men have murdered their wives because they believed in a Lie so stongly that it caused them to embrace the thought, and then an action that resulted in the death of another. All because of a belief in what they thought was the truth?

Men have also believed "In the name of Christ" they were to overcome their enemies by the sword, and torture.
Because of what they believed was the truth.

And so muslims Murder in the name of God,thinking they are overcoming their enemies as well.
Because they believe theirs is the truth.
 
Upvote 0

yashua

Well-Known Member
Jun 18, 2005
769
20
54
In any cardboard box.
✟1,066.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
oldsage said:
I am not sure if you understand what I mean. When I say that God doesn't experience things, this means that God has already seen all that has and will happen. Being outside of time God sees are time as present. It is what we call the Eternal Now. Since all that was, is, and will be, is before God, He already know and sees everything. Meaning He can't experience things, because that are all in God's presence simultaneously.
It is early in the day here, so, I will not be able to completely get to the "It never entered my mind" part, until later this afternoon, but for a quick thought on it. Many times in the bible phrases are used like "Israel forgot God" or something simular, it isn't used in the since they forgot who God was but they turned away from. and that is how it tends to be used in the bible, I will give 'proofs' of this when I am back home this afternoon.

Chris

You Quote:
Being outside of time God sees are time as present. It is what we call the Eternal Now. Since all that was, is, and will be, is before God, He already know and sees everything.

This is what I call theological doubletalk, to try and explain something that a person has no understanding in the first place.

Do you know that the egyptian god "Ra" and the greek god Zeus was also the God who "Was,is,and will be"

Omnipresent:Having no boundaries or limits.

Omniscient:One having total knowledge.

Omnipotent:Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force; all-powerful.

There is nowhere that God cannot be

The Christian God is defined as a personal being who knows everything. According to Christians, personal beings have free will.

In order to have free will, you must have more than one option, each of which is avoidable. This means that before you make a choice, there must be a state of uncertainty during a period of potential: you cannot know the future. Even if you think you can predict your decision, if you claim to have free will, you must admit the potential (if not the desire) to change your mind before the decision is final. A being who knows everything can have no "state of uncertainty." It knows its choices in advance. This means that it has no potential to avoid its choices, and therefore lacks free will. Since a being that lacks free will is not a personal being, a personal being who knows everything cannot exist.

Others will object that God, being all-powerful, can change his mind. But if he does, then he did not know the future in the first place. If he truly knows the future, then the future is fixed and not even God can change it. If he changes his mind anyway, then his knowledge was limited. You can't have it both ways: no being can be omniscient and omnipotent at the same time.
 
Upvote 0

oldsage

Veteran
Nov 4, 2005
1,307
70
56
Pinellas Park, FL
✟1,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Ok, I see you want to make this more than the question asked.

You Quote:
Being outside of time God sees are time as present. It is what we call the Eternal Now. Since all that was, is, and will be, is before God, He already know and sees everything.

This is what I call theological doubletalk, to try and explain something that a person has no understanding in the first place.
First this isn't 'theological double talk', this was an honest answer to the question you asked.

Do you know that the Egyptian god "Ra" and the Greek god Zeus was also the God who "Was,is,and will be"
No, this isn't true, for one, Zeus is known to be created by Chronos, who existed before him. Now my Egyptian mythology is a little rusty, but if I remember correctly Ra was also created. Both these mythos' gods existed in time and do not fit the concept of the Christians God.

Omnipresent:Having no boundaries or limits.
Your concept of this may be different than the Christian concept of it.

Omniscient:One having total knowledge.

Omnipotent:Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force; all-powerful.

There is nowhere that God cannot be

The Christian God is defined as a personal being who knows everything. According to Christians, personal beings have free will.
Not all Christians believe in 'freewill' but I do agree with it.

In order to have free will, you must have more than one option, each of which is avoidable. This means that before you make a choice, there must be a state of uncertainty during a period of potential: you cannot know the future.
No, this isn't a requirement for a choice. For instance, I know how a cheese burger and a pizza taste like, if I have to choose between the two doesn't mean I have any uncertainty. I can freely choose between the two choices knowing full well what the results of each will be.

Even if you think you can predict your decision, if you claim to have free will, you must admit the potential (if not the desire) to change your mind before the decision is final.
You are assuming that by making the decision there is a period of time before that decision isn't final. When God makes a decision it is final right then and there, He has no need to change his mind.
A being who knows everything can have no "state of uncertainty." It knows its choices in advance. This means that it has no potential to avoid its choices, and therefore lacks free will. Since a being that lacks free will is not a personal being, a personal being who knows everything cannot exist.
This is only true if the conditions you set forth are true, but as shown above they are in fact not true from the Christian perspective.

Others will object that God, being all-powerful, can change his mind. But if he does, then he did not know the future in the first place. If he truly knows the future, then the future is fixed and not even God can change it. If he changes his mind anyway, then his knowledge was limited. You can't have it both ways: no being can be omniscient and omnipotent at the same time.
More problems with this, God who knows all things and has set things out in a plan that is unfolding just as he desires, he doesn't change his mind nor is his knowledge limited.
It has been shown that your logic is faulty because you assumptions have put you in a box. The Christian God can be Omniscience and Omnipotent at the same time. There is no conflict or problem with the position.

Now here are the attributes of the Christian God:
Incommunicable attributes: 1. Simplicity 2. Eternality 3. Immutability 4. Omnipresents 5. Aseity

Communicable attributes: 1. Omniscience 2. Omnipotence 3. Soverignty 4. Righteousness 5. Goodness 6. Love 7. Grace

This is what is necessary for the Christian God.

The Incommunicable attributes all have to work together, if one fails they all fail because they all rely on one another. If a god doesn't have any one of these incommunicable attributes, they are not a god but just a powerful being.

Maybe more later…
 
Upvote 0

yashua

Well-Known Member
Jun 18, 2005
769
20
54
In any cardboard box.
✟1,066.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
oldsage said:
Ok, I see you want to make this more than the question asked.


First this isn't 'theological double talk', this was an honest answer to the question you asked.


No, this isn't true, for one, Zeus is known to be created by Chronos, who existed before him. Now my Egyptian mythology is a little rusty, but if I remember correctly Ra was also created. Both these mythos' gods existed in time and do not fit the concept of the Christians God.


Your concept of this may be different than the Christian concept of it.


Not all Christians believe in 'freewill' but I do agree with it.


No, this isn't a requirement for a choice. For instance, I know how a cheese burger and a pizza taste like, if I have to choose between the two doesn't mean I have any uncertainty. I can freely choose between the two choices knowing full well what the results of each will be.


You are assuming that by making the decision there is a period of time before that decision isn't final. When God makes a decision it is final right then and there, He has no need to change his mind.

This is only true if the conditions you set forth are true, but as shown above they are in fact not true from the Christian perspective.


More problems with this, God who knows all things and has set things out in a plan that is unfolding just as he desires, he doesn't change his mind nor is his knowledge limited.
It has been shown that your logic is faulty because you assumptions have put you in a box. The Christian God can be Omniscience and Omnipotent at the same time. There is no conflict or problem with the position.

Now here are the attributes of the Christian God:
Incommunicable attributes: 1. Simplicity 2. Eternality 3. Immutability 4. Omnipresents 5. Aseity

Communicable attributes: 1. Omniscience 2. Omnipotence 3. Soverignty 4. Righteousness 5. Goodness 6. Love 7. Grace

This is what is necessary for the Christian God.

The Incommunicable attributes all have to work together, if one fails they all fail because they all rely on one another. If a god doesn't have any one of these incommunicable attributes, they are not a god but just a powerful being.

Maybe more later…

Those are good points, yet only from a "Theological perspective" will they stand. Theologians tend to overlook the fact that all that theology attempts to say are only assumptions not based on facts, but only theory's about God in which you nor anyone else for that matter cannot in the slightest degree even begin to bring fourth as a matter of Fact.

The terms in which "religion" has come to embrace on the "Attributes" of God are nothing more than man's attempt at explaining God.

Words like "spirit" and "supernatural" have no referent in reality, and ideas like "all-knowing" and "omnipotent" are self-contradictory. Why discuss a meaningless concept?

Theology say's that God did not create himself, because if he did, then he would be greater than himself.
So where did he come from?
Because as you and I know, everything has a beginning.
Nothing does not originate out of nothing. And something just does not exist because theology say's it exist's.


Take children for example, when you explain that God created everyone, the first thing a child will ask is "Who created God"

This in itself should be a "revelation" to those who study god.

Again nothing can just "Exist" as you say that God does.
That is theology's explanation to the Question of Where did God come from.
I know that something did not come from nothing, as you know.
In fact, what theology wants to uphold tends to give creedence to the "Theory of Evolution." Go figure that one out.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
yashua said:
The terms in which "religion" has come to embrace on the "Attributes" of God are nothing more than man's attempt at explaining God.

Words like "spirit" and "supernatural" have no referent in reality, and ideas like "all-knowing" and "omnipotent" are self-contradictory.

Self-contridictory? I'd like for you to explain that to me.


God is omniscient. He knows everything: everything possible, everything actual; all events, all creatures, God the past, the present and the future. He is perfectly acquainted with every detail in the life of every being in heaven, in earth and in hell. "He knoweth what is in the darkness" (Dan. 2:22). Nothing escapes Hs notice, nothing can be hidden from Him, nothing is forgotten by Him. Well may we say with the Psalmist, "Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it" (Ps. 139:6). His knowledge is perfect. He never errs, never changes, never overlooks anything. "Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in His sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him with whom we have to do" (Heb. 4:13). Yes, such is the God with whom "we have to do!"
"Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, Thou understandest my thoughts afar off. Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways. For there is not a word in my tongue but, lo, O Lord, Thou knowest it altogether" (Ps. 139:2-4). What a wondrous Being is the God of Scripture! Each of His glorious attributes should render Him honorable in our esteem. The apprehension of His omniscience ought to bow us in adoration before Him. Yet how little do we meditate upon this Divine perfection! Is it because the very thought of it fills us with uneasiness? How solemn is this fact: nothing can be concealed from God! "For I know the things that come into your mind, every one of them" (Ezek. 11:5). Though He be invisible to us, we are not so to Him. Neither the darkness of night, the closest curtains, nor the deepest dungeon can hide any sinner from the eyes of Omniscience. The trees of the garden were not able to conceal our first parents. No human eye beheld Cain murder his brother, but his Maker witnessed his crime. Sarah might laugh derisively in the seclusion of her tent, yet was it heard by Jehovah. Achan stole a wedge of gold and carefully hid it in the earth, but God brought it to light. David was at much pains to cover up his wickedness, but ere long the all-seeing God sent one of His servants to say to him, "Thou art the man! And to writer and reader is also said, Be sure your sin will find you out" (Num. 32:23).

Arthur Pink, Attributes of God, Chapter 3, The Knowledge of God

A highly simplistic definition of "power" would be that it is the ability to produce effects, or to accomplish what one wills. The Scriptures clearly affirm not only that God has such an ability but that he has it without limitations. Hence, we speak of God as being omnipotent, infinite in power.

His "power is vast" (Job 9:4). He is "the Lord strong and mighty" (Ps. 24:8), "great and awesome" (Deut. 7:21), "the Lord Almighty, the Mighty One of Israel" (Isa. 1:24). "Ah, Sovereign Lord, you have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and outstretched arm. Nothing is too hard for you. You show love to thousands but bring the punishment for the father's sins into the laps of their children after them. O great and powerful God, whose name is the Lord Almighty, great are your purposes and mighty are your deeds" (Jer. 32:17-19a). Creation is a testimony to "his great power and mighty strength" (Isa. 40:26). He is Lord, Owner, Ruler, and King of all creation, whom none can resist or overpower (Matt. 11:25; Rev. 1:8; Ps. 29:10; Jer. 10:7,10). He is "the Lord Almighty" (2 Cor. 6:18; Rev. 4:8; 11:17), "the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords" (1 Tim. 6:15). Nothing is too difficult for him; all things are within his power (Gen. 18:14; Zech. 8:6; Jer. 32:27).


B. Omnipotence. It is by removing all the limitations of power, as it exists in us, that we rise to the idea of the omnipotence of God. We do not thus, however, lose the idea itself. Almighty power does not cease to be power. We can do very little. God can do whatever He wills. We, beyond very narrow limits, must use means to accomplish our ends. With God means are unnecessary. He wills, and it is done. He said, Let there be light; and there was light. He, by a volition created the heavens and the earth. At the volition of Christ, the winds ceased, and there was a great calm. By an act of the will He healed the sick, opened the eyes of the blind, and raised the dead. This simple idea of the omnipotence of God, that He can do without effort, and by a volition, whatever He wills, is the highest conceivable idea of power, and is that which is clearly presented in the Scriptures. In Gen. xvii. 1, it is said, "I am the Almighty God." The prophet Jeremiah exclaims, "Ah Lord God! behold thou hast made the heavens and the earth by thy great power, and stretched out arm; and there is nothing too hard for thee." (Jer. xxxii. 17.) God is said to have created all things by the breath of his mouth, and to uphold the universe by a word. Our Lord says, "With God all things are possible." (Matt. xix. 26.) The Psalmist long before had said, "Our God is in the heavens; He hath done whatsoever He pleased." (Ps. cxv. 3.) And again, "Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that did He in heaven, and in earth, in the seas, and all deep places." (Ps. cxxxv. 6.) The Lord God omnipotent reigneth, and doeth his pleasure among the armies of heaven and the inhabitants of the earth, is the tribute of adoration which the Scriptures everywhere render unto God, and the truth which they everywhere present as the ground of confidence to his people. This is all we know, and all we need to know on this subject: and here we might rest satified, were it not for the vain attempts of theologians to reconcile these simple and sublime truths of the Bible with their philosophical speculations.

Charles Hodge, Theology Proper, Part 1, Chapter 5, Section 10, subsection B, Omnipotience
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
62
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟107,834.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
[FONT=Times, Times New Roman][SIZE=+3]A[/SIZE][/FONT] number of sceptics ask this question. But God by definition is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the question ‘Who created God?’ is illogical, just like ‘To whom is the bachelor married?’
So a more sophisticated questioner might ask: ‘If the universe needs a cause, then why doesn’t God need a cause? And if God doesn’t need a cause, why should the universe need a cause?’ In reply, Christians should use the following reasoning:
  1. Everything which has a beginning has a cause.1
  2. The universe has a beginning.
  3. Therefore the universe has a cause.
It’s important to stress the words in bold type. The universe requires a cause because it had a beginning, as will be shown below. God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn’t need a cause. In addition, Einstein’s general relativity, which has much experimental support, shows that time is linked to matter and space. So time itself would have begun along with matter and space.
clockdistortion200.jpg
Since God, by definition, is the creator of the whole universe, he is the creator of time. Therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created, so has no beginning in time — God is ‘the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity’ (Isaiah 57:15). Therefore He doesn’t have a cause.
In contrast, there is good evidence that the universe had a beginning. This can be shown from the Laws of Thermodynamics, the most fundamental laws of the physical sciences.
  • 1st Law: The total amount of mass-energy in the universe is constant.
  • 2nd Law: The amount of energy available for work is running out, or entropy is increasing to a maximum.
If the total amount of mass-energy is limited, and the amount of usable energy is decreasing, then the universe cannot have existed forever, otherwise it would already have exhausted all usable energy — the ‘heat death’ of the universe. For example, all radioactive atoms would have decayed, every part of the universe would be the same temperature, and no further work would be possible.
So the obvious corollary is that the universe began a finite time ago with a lot of usable energy, and is now running down.
forestgreen200.jpg
Now, what if the questioner accepts that the universe had a beginning, but not that it needs a cause? But it is self-evident that things that begin have a cause — no-one really denies it in his heart. All science and history would collapse if this law of cause and effect were denied. So would all law enforcement, if the police didn’t think they needed to find a cause for a stabbed body or a burgled house.
Also, the universe cannot be self-caused — nothing can create itself, because that would mean that it existed before it came into existence, which is a logical absurdity.
IN SUMMARY
  • The universe (including time itself) can be shown to have had a beginning.
  • It is unreasonable to believe something could begin to exist without a cause.
  • The universe therefore requires a cause, just as Genesis 1:1 and Romans 1:20 teach.
  • God, as creator of time, is outside of time. Since therefore He has no beginning in time, He has always existed, so doesn’t need a cause.
OBJECTIONS
There are only two ways to refute an argument:
  1. Show that it is logically invalid
  2. Show that at least one of the premises is false.
Is the argument valid?
  • A valid argument is one where it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. Note that validity does not depend on the truth of the premises, but on the form of the argument. The argument in this article is valid; it is of the same form as: All whales have backbones; Moby Dick is a whale; therefore Moby Dick has a backbone. So the only hope for the sceptic is to dispute one or both of the premises.
Are the premises true?
  • 1. Does the universe have a beginning?
    • Oscillating universe ideas were popularized by atheists like the late Carl Sagan and Isaac Asimov solely to avoid the notion of a beginning, with its implications of a Creator. But as shown above, the Laws of Thermodynamics undercut that argument. Even an oscillating universe cannot overcome those laws. Each one of the hypothetical cycles would exhaust more and more usable energy.
      This means every cycle would be larger and longer than the previous one, so looking back in time there would be smaller and smaller cycles. So the multicycle model could have an infinite future, but can only have a finite past.2
      Also, there are many lines of evidence showing that there is far too little mass for gravity to stop expansion and allow cycling in the first place, i.e., the universe is ‘open’.
      galaxystars200.jpg
      According to the best estimates (even granting old-earth assumptions), the universe still has only about half the mass needed for re-contraction. This includes the combined total of both luminous matter and non-luminous matter (found in galactic halos), as well as any possible contribution of neutrinos to total mass.3
      Some recent evidence for an ‘open’ universe comes from the number of light-bending ‘gravitational lenses’ in the sky.4 Also, analysis of Type [FONT=courier, serif]Ia[/FONT] supernovae shows that the universe’s expansion rate is not slowing enough for a closed universe.5,6 It seems there is only 40-80% of the required matter to cause a ‘big crunch’.
      Incidentally, this low mass is also a major problem for the currently fashionable ‘inflationary’ version of the ‘big bang’ theory, as this predicts a mass density just on the threshold of collapse — a ‘flat’ universe.
      Finally, no known mechanism would allow a bounce back after a hypothetical ‘big crunch’.7
      As the late Professor Beatrice Tinsley of Yale explained, even though the mathematics say that the universe oscillates, ‘There is no known physical mechanism to reverse a catastrophic big crunch.’
      Off the paper and into the real world of physics, those models start from the Big Bang, expand, collapse, and that’s the end.8
    2. Denial of cause and effect
    • Some physicists assert that quantum mechanics violates this cause/effect principle and can produce something from nothing. For instance, Paul Davies writes:
      … spacetime could appear out of nothingness as a result of a quantum transition. … Particles can appear out of nowhere without specific causation … Yet the world of quantum mechanics routinely produces something out of nothing.9
      But this is a gross misapplication of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics never produces something out of nothing. Davies himself admitted on the previous page that his scenario ‘should not be taken too seriously.’
      Theories that the universe is a quantum fluctuation must presuppose that there was something to fluctuate — their ‘quantum vacuum’ is a lot of matter-antimatter potential — not ‘nothing’.
      Also, I have plenty of theoretical and practical experience at quantum mechanics (QM) from my doctoral thesis work. For example, Raman spectroscopy is a QM phenomenon, but from the wavenumber and intensity of the spectral bands, we can work out the masses of the atoms and force constants of the bonds causing the bands. To help the atheist position that the universe came into existence without a cause, one would need to find Raman bands appearing without being caused by transitions in vibrational quantum states, or alpha particles appearing without pre-existing nuclei, etc.
      If QM was as acausal as some people think, then we should not assume that these phenomena have a cause. Then I may as well burn my Ph.D. thesis, and all the spectroscopy journals should quit, as should any nuclear physics research.
      Also, if there is no cause, there is no explanation why this particular universe appeared at a particular time, nor why it was a universe and not, say, a banana or cat which appeared. This universe can't have any properties to explain its preferential coming into existence, because it wouldn't have any properties until it actually came into existence.
Is creation by God rational?
earth150.jpg
A last desperate tactic by sceptics to avoid a theistic conclusion is to assert that creation in time is incoherent. Davies correctly points out that since time itself began with the beginning of the universe, it is meaningless to talk about what happened ‘before’ the universe began. But he claims that causes must precede their effects. So if nothing happened ‘before’ the universe began, then (according to Davies) it is meaningless to discuss the cause of the universe’s beginning.

But the philosopher (and New Testament scholar) William Lane Craig, in a useful critique of Davies,10 pointed out that Davies is deficient in philosophical knowledge. Philosophers have long discussed the notion of simultaneous causation. Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) gave the example of a weight resting on a cushion simultaneously causing a depression in it. Craig says:
The first moment of time is the moment of God's creative act and of creation's simultaneous coming to be.

Some skeptics claim that all this analysis is tentative, because that is the nature of science. So this can’t be used to prove creation by God. Of course, sceptics can't have it both ways: saying that the Bible is wrong because science has proved it so, but if science appears consistent with the Bible, then well, science is tentative anyway.
A final thought
The Bible informs us that time is a dimension that God created, into which man was subjected. It even tells us that one day time will no longer exist. That will be called "eternity." God Himself dwells outside of the dimension He created (2 Timothy 1:9, Titus 1:2). He dwells in eternity and is not subject to time. God spoke history before it came into being. He can move through time as a man flips through a history book.
Because we live in the dimension of time, it is impossible for us to fully understand anything that does not have a beginning and an end. Simply accept that fact, and believe the concept of God's eternal nature the same way you believe the concept of space having no beginning and end -- by faith -- even though such thoughts put a strain on our distinctly insufficient cerebrum.

[SIZE=-2]Paul S. Taylor, adapted from author Ray Comfort[/SIZE]​
[SIZE=-2]
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
References and Notes
[SIZE=-1]
  1. Actually, the word ‘cause’ has several different meanings in philosophy. But in this article, I am referring to the efficient cause, the chief agent causing something to be made. Return to text
  2. Novikov, I.D. and Zel’dovich, Ya. B., "Physical Processes Near Cosmological Singularities", Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 11:401-2 (1973). Return to text
  3. Schramm, D.N. and Steigman, G., "Relic Neutrinos and the Density of the Universe," Astrophysical Journal, 243:1-7 (1981). Return to text
  4. Watson, A., "Clusters point to Never Ending Universe," Science, 278 (5342):1402 (1997). Return to text
  5. Perlmutter, S. et al., "Discovery of a supernova explosion at half the age of the universe," Nature, 391(6662):51 (1998). Perspective by Branch, D. Destiny and destiny. Same issue, pp. 23-24. Return to text
  6. Glanz, J., "New light on the fate of the universe," Science, 278 (5339):799-800. Return to text
  7. Guth, A.H. and Sher, M., "The Impossibility of a Bouncing Universe," Nature, 302:505-507 (1983). Return to text
  8. Tinsley, B., "From Big Bang to Eternity?", Natural History Magazine (October 1975), pp. 102-5. Cited in Craig, W.L., Apologetics: An Introduction (Chicago: Moody, 1984), p. 61. Return to text
  9. Davies, P., God and the New Physics (Simon & Schuster, 1983), p. 215. Return to text
  10. Craig, W.L., "God, Creation and Mr. Davies," Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 37:163-175 (1986). Return to text
[/SIZE]Author: Jonathan Sarfati, Answers in Genesis. First published in: Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal 12(1):20-22, 1998.
 
Upvote 0

woobadooba

Legend
Sep 4, 2005
11,307
914
✟25,191.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
ps139 said:
Many times in the OT, the words used to describe God are in human terms. This is simply because our minds are finite, and when the Holy Spirit inspired the writers to write what they wrote - the main purpose was to convey a truth about God, or the world, etc.

So while our human language may be limited, at least we can understand some basic concepts by phrases like "it never entered my mind," or "God repented," or "The Lord forgets your sins."

If we took those all in the literal human sense, we take from God's omniscience, his omnipotence... but it is the best and maybe only way for most of us (short of a miraculous vision like Paul had) to learn about God.

Anyway, yes, God is the uncaused cause. He must be. This is the thought process that brough Aristotle to monotheism 300+ years B.C. ... though he was not revealed God's personal identity as the Jews were.

As oldsage said, God created space and time, and He is not limited by them. God IS. This is why the name of the Lord, YAHWEH, literally means "I AM WHO AM."

HE IS. Eternally IS.

It is hard for us to think outside of space and time, our minds are so limited, but through grace, God enables us to reason through some things to the "uncaused cause."

:amen:
 
Upvote 0

oldsage

Veteran
Nov 4, 2005
1,307
70
56
Pinellas Park, FL
✟1,833.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
yashua said:
Those are good points, yet only from a "Theological perspective" will they stand. Theologians tend to overlook the fact that all that theology attempts to say are only assumptions not based on facts, but only theory's about God in which you nor anyone else for that matter cannot in the slightest degree even begin to bring fourth as a matter of Fact.

The terms in which "religion" has come to embrace on the "Attributes" of God are nothing more than man's attempt at explaining God.

Words like "spirit" and "supernatural" have no referent in reality, and ideas like "all-knowing" and "omnipotent" are self-contradictory. Why discuss a meaningless concept?

Theology say's that God did not create himself, because if he did, then he would be greater than himself.
So where did he come from?
Because as you and I know, everything has a beginning.
Nothing does not originate out of nothing. And something just does not exist because theology say's it exist's.


Take children for example, when you explain that God created everyone, the first thing a child will ask is "Who created God"

This in itself should be a "revelation" to those who study god.

Again nothing can just "Exist" as you say that God does.
That is theology's explanation to the Question of Where did God come from.
I know that something did not come from nothing, as you know.
In fact, what theology wants to uphold tends to give creedence to the "Theory of Evolution." Go figure that one out.

Well, I have to agree with what DeanconDean posted. I also want to add that the universe also has to have a beginning because we know that it is impossible to transverse an infinite series of moments. So, if the universe didn't have a beginning we would never be able to reach the present. You have to have an Uncaused Cause in order for there to be anything. Since time didn't exist at one point God isn't in time, since God is simple he exist outside space and time and thus not affected by the results of either. These are necessary things not just idea s of thought. Facts in conversations like these are highly subjective. If is a fact that you need an uncaused cause, it is a fact you can't transverse an infinite series of moments, it is a fact that the universe had a beginning, it is a fact that time had to start somewhere. It is a fact that law of nature, laws of science, and laws of logic exist. How can you explain any of these without resorting to the supernatural? The Christian God of the bible explains all these concepts and gives adequate proofs for it.

I really can't improve on what DeaconDean posted, so for now I will leave it at that.

Chris
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.