Who made God?

[Rebel Crusader]

It would, however, be entirely possible in theory to have a programmer of our universe who was not eternal, timeless, uncreated or uncaused.

You can say "who created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer that created the programmer...etc etc" until you come to the inevitable conclusion through reason (reason doesn't require imagination) that the original "who" is eternal and timeless, and doesn't require any programmer underlings. If you're a programmer, are you really going to train someone to be a programmer to program something you want programmed? Even most people aren't that stupid. You'd just do it yourself. I'm sure the programmer of the universe wouldn't be that stupid given the complexity of His design.

 

[Pegasus]

reba,

Could you please summarise what this person states as I'm not on Facebook and can't gain access to the link?

Thanks,
Oz

Here's the YouTube video.

 

[Pegasus]

reba,

Could you please summarise what this person states as I'm not on Facebook and can't gain access to the link?

Thanks,
Oz

Here is the full over two hour debate:

 

[Pegasus]

A spin off of this question in discussions with a secularist is: Why couldn't the world have existed always? What explanations would you give to demonstrate that the world in which we live is not eternal?

That is, how do we know from the evidence in creation that the universe was created? I'm not asking for Bible verses because I'm talking to an Aussie atheist who has chucked the Bible out long ago.

Oz

That's one of the tactics of atheists. They make us fight on their ground. Every opportunity we must drag them back to the Bible. Why? God reveals Himself there and that is the reason they chuck the Bible.

It is not odd to ask the atheist why they chuck the Bible. The mere fact they impeach the star witness for no reason means they are unreasonable. Of course they will assert the Bible is full of errors and contradictions. The next step is to ask them for evidence for such. You will then find out how much they don't know about the solid manuscript evidence. Also most supposed contradictions are not so or a theological paradox.

You will find out that most atheists then enter into intellectual dishonesty after presented the manuscript evidence and end up taking a position no ancient history is real because of their extremist position on "proof." Which we know proof is subjective and evidence is objective.

Of course after this nice chat, you could always ask "if God Himself came down to your living room and there was no doubt in your mind it was truly God, would you submit to Him?"

I had three atheists tell me "no." Which brings us back to the Bible. The Pharisees saw the miracles of Christ, heard His Words and frankly knew Who He was. Yet they rejected Him even there in the flesh.

I think most atheists know God exists. I frankly think they just don't like Him and think God is some bully deity who gets in the way of their worldly "happiness."

So they set up a system of beliefs to deny God exists. And they actively proselytize their "faith" system.

Sorry for the long post, but the above has been my experience with atheists.

That is why I think dragging them back to ground favorable to you the Christian is important. Jesus preached from Holy Scriptures and so did the apostles. In Acts 17 Paul tries to reason with the Stoics and notice there were few interested. There was not a large following in Athens.

And we all know it is God who draws hearts and minds to His Gospel. So your efforts are good and noble. You never know which atheist encounter will end with a repentant soul coming to Christ!

 

[Corn Pop]

Because man can only explain the unexplainable to a certain point and especially ink on paper, and using the science of physics that says we are matter and energy and energy can never die. All i can see God as is some powerful invisible energy entity that has always been.

 

[OzSpen]

The LORD said, "before me no god was formed." Isa. 43:10 So there was no one, no god, to create Him; before Him there was no god and besides Him there is no god.
Isaiah 44:6
Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.

Mark,

So did God create himself?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Here's the YouTube video.

Pegasus, that was a brilliant response as he related the awesome, almighty God to time, space and matter.

 

[MarkT]

Mark,

So did God create himself?

Oz

Why would God create himself if he exists in the first place?

 

[OzSpen]

Why would God create himself if he exists in the first place?

That seems to be your presupposition that God 'exists in the first place'. In our contemporary society, you need to demonstrate that. Why don't you do that?

 

[MarkT]

That seems to be your presupposition that God 'exists in the first place'. In our contemporary society, you need to demonstrate that. Why don't you do that?

We have his word that he exists.

Isaiah 43:13
“I am God, and also henceforth I am He; there is none who can deliver from my hand; I work and who can hinder it?”
Isaiah 44:6
Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
Isaiah 45:5
I am the Lord, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I gird you, though you do not know me,
Isaiah 45:18
For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it a chaos, he formed it to be inhabited!): “I am the Lord, and there is no other.
Isaiah 45:22
“Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.
Isaiah 46:9
remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me,

 

[OzSpen]

We have his word that he exists.

Isaiah 43:13
“I am God, and also henceforth I am He; there is none who can deliver from my hand; I work and who can hinder it?”
Isaiah 44:6
Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.
Isaiah 45:5
I am the Lord, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I gird you, though you do not know me,
Isaiah 45:18
For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it a chaos, he formed it to be inhabited!): “I am the Lord, and there is no other.
Isaiah 45:22
“Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.
Isaiah 46:9
remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me,

Again that's further confirmation of your presupposition that God exists. That will not work in my country when dealing with secularists who disrespect the Bible.

You'd need to start way before that point in building common ground (see Paul on the Areopagus , Acts 17).

Oz

 

[calvin]

Calvin here,
Fact #1
Hypothetical question by an atheist.

‘You claim that there is eternal life for all who believe. Who on earth made God? There's no point in going any further unless we can get a satisfactory answer to this question'.

Fact # 2

That seems to be your presupposition that God 'exists in the first place'. In our contemporary society, you need to demonstrate that. Why don't you do that?

There is no presupposition here, only quoted fact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OzSpen, you seem to have supplied an answer to your own original question...well done!

 

[GodsGrace]

In my sharing the Gospel in my secular Australian culture, I sometimes meet this objection when I begin discussing God: ‘You claim that there is eternal life for all who believe. Who on earth made God? There's no point in going any further unless we can get a satisfactory answer to this question'.

I'm coming at this from a view that these people have no respect for the Bible. To quote the Bible will get an automatic rebuff.

Leading Christian apologist Norman Geisler, in the book Who Made God? And Answers to over 100 Other Tough Questions of Faith (Zacharias & Geisler 2003), addressed the title of the book, Who Made God? (Zacharias & Geisler 2003) this way:

Who Made God?

“No one did,” he wrote. “He was not made. He has always existed” (2003:23).

But, wait! Is this credible? If the universe has a beginning (and modern science has concluded that it indeed DID have a beginning), then wouldn’t God need a beginning as well?

According to Geisler, “Only things that had a beginning – like the world – need a maker. God had no beginning, so God did not need to be made” (2003:23)

Sounds a little like a cop-out, doesn’t it? Not so, says Geisler. Here is more of his answer:

“Traditionally, most atheists who deny the existence of God believe that the universe was not made; it was just “there” forever. They appeal to the first law of thermodynamics for support: “Energy can neither be created nor destroyed,” they insist. Several things must be observed in response.

“First, this way of stating the first law is not scientific; rather, it is a philosophical assertion. Science is based on observation, and there is no observational evidence that can support the dogmatic “can” and “cannot” implicit in this statement. It should read, “[As far as we have observed,] the amount of actual energy in the universe remains constant.” That is, no one had observed any actual new energy either coming into existence or going out of existence. Once the first law is understood properly, it says nothing about the universe being eternal or having no beginning” (2003:24, emphasis added).​

In other words, the first law of thermodynamics does not require a cause or creator for God.

Moreover, if God IS, then He has supernatural power. And the very definition of ‘supernatural’ means that He stands OUTSIDE of nature. If God is God, then God needs no Creator.

As Geisler explained: “It is absurd to ask ‘Who made God?’ It is a category mistake to ask, ‘Who made the Unmade?’ or ‘Who created the Uncreated?'” (2003: 24).

Is this a reasonable approach to answering the question or do you have another and better approach to answering this question from secularists?

Oz

Works consulted
Zacharias, R & Geisler, N (gen eds.) 2003. Who made God? and answers to over 100 other tough questions of faith. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan.

Hi Oz,
Your thread caught my eye as I was logging off and I came back just to say this:

As we very well know, you cannot use the bible to prove anything to an atheist since they do not believe in the bible or its words.

Also, I think the title of this thread is a little off.
"Who Made God?"
If anyone made God, THEY would be God.

I'd ask instead: Where does God come from? Is He a thing, a person, an alien, a power, a force of some kind?

The answer is that he always existed. And here comes the first problem.
ALWAYS. ETERNAL. What's that?

Do we humans really understand what eternal means? No.
Do we really understand that the universe probably has no end? No.

The concepts of eternity, non-ending and no beginning is impossible for us to understand. So once you get through doing the questions and answers on thermodynamics and the watch maker and all that, you still end up with nothing.

This is what I've ended up with:

Atheists have a problem.
They don't believe in God so they believe that all we see around us came from nothing. Any scientist will tell you that something cannot come from nothing.

Christians have a problem.
They believe in a God that no one can understand how He came about.

So, basically all we have to do is to decide which of the two we believe in...

Do we prefer to believe something came out of absolutely nothing...
Or do we prefer to believe that SOMETHING SUPERIOR made everything.

I prefer the second. Then I just ask the person to think about this.
It may seem elementary, but it works many times. At least the atheist gets to thinking about something different.

Some time ago, I was in communication with a real atheist from Australia. We used to have such nice conversations. But they came to nothing, as I knew they would.
I felt like he was afraid of God.

My two cents...

 

[GodsGrace]

Calvin here,
Fact #1
Hypothetical question by an atheist.

Fact # 2

There is no presupposition here, only quoted fact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OzSpen, you seem to have supplied an answer to your own original question...well done!

What was the stated fact?
I just came on board --- sorry.

 

[calvin]

Calvin here,
well fact #1 is a quote from the opening post, and since it is a quote, for the purpose of discussion, it is a fact.
Fact # 2 is from post # 49, and since it is a quote, for the purpose of discussion, it is a fact.

 

[GodsGrace]

Calvin here,
well fact #1 is a quote from the opening post, and since it is a quote, for the purpose of discussion, it is a fact.
Fact # 2 is from post # 49, and since it is a quote, for the purpose of discussion, it is a fact.

Calvin,
I still don't know the facts!!
I don't think there are any. Actually.
They'll be picked up, eventually...

 

[Free]

Calvin here,
Fact #1
Hypothetical question by an atheist.

Fact # 2

There is no presupposition here, only quoted fact.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OzSpen, you seem to have supplied an answer to your own original question...well done!

I don't see how the second quote answers the question in the first quote.

 

[JAG ..]

I had three atheists tell me "no." Which brings us back to the Bible. The Pharisees saw the miracles of Christ, heard His Words and frankly knew Who He was. Yet they rejected Him even there in the flesh.

That's right.

And in the case where the Lord Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, there were eyewitnesses to that miracle, and some of those eyewitnesses went to the chief priests, leaders, and Pharisees to assist them to kill the Lord Jesus and moreover they also tried to kill Lazarus [John 12:10] who himself WAS the empirical evidence that the Lord Jesus spoke the truth.

And Lazarus had been dead 4 days and they SAW the Lord Jesus raise him from the dead.

Talk about hard solid evidences!

Lazarus was the example of pure undiluted empiricism

empiricism
: verifiable by sense experience and sense observation rather than philosophical theory or pure logic

I have been on the web talking to atheists and secularist a long time and I have never met one (1) that favorably responded to any presented evidences.

Regarding all the activist atheists on the Internet (that I have met) my view is that if you could literally take them to Heaven for a 10 year vacation, where they personally met the Lord Jesus and all his apostles and saw all the beauties of Heaven and enjoyed it all for 10 years --- they still would not have saving belief in the Lord Jesus as their Savior.

When they returned to Earth, they would not be any different than they are now with regard to having saving faith in the Lord Jesus as their personal Savior.

But they would have head belief --- like the people that were eyewitnesses to the Lord Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead --- they had head belief too --- but they still wanted to kill the Lord Jesus and kill Lazarus who was the living evidence that the Lord Jesus was speaking the truth.

Head belief.

The same kind of head belief that Satan has. He was in Heaven with his fallen angles for perhaps trillions of "years" before he was literally kicked out of Heaven. Being there in Heaven was the strongest empirical evidence possible --- yet Satan and all his fallen angels had no heart belief in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

And they were kicked out of Heaven.

"I saw Satan fall like lightening from Heaven.""__ The Lord Jesus (Luke 10:18)

 

[calvin]

Calvin here.
Well I hope you can see that the quote from post # 1 was a hypothetical question with a presupposition that there exists a God who might have been created or made by some external entity.
If you can't then there would be no point continuing.
I hope that you can see that OzSpen in post #49 replied to MartT as I have quoted.
In that post (#49), the question/challenge seems to me to have been offered that a presupposition should be backed up with a 'demonstration' ie proof of fact.
My point is that reply to MarkT seems very appropriate to the original hypothetical question. ie that hypothetical atheist in asking for a demonstration that God exists in the first place, having presupposed that God exists, must demonstrate the validity of his presupposition.
But this whole exercise is fruitless. As has been pointed out previously, the question would propagate to infinity, who created God #1.... well who created the nth God?
I doubt that any atheist is really that silly. But they are up to make sport of Christians where and when they can.

 

[JAG ..]

An interesting quote from Craig:

"Dodwell argues that matters of religious faith lie outside the determination of reason. God could not possibly have intended that reason should be the faculty to lead us to faith, for faith cannot hang indefinitely in suspense while reason cautiously weighs and reweighs arguments. The Scriptures teach, on the contrary, that the way to God is by means of the heart, not by means of the intellect."__William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith, page 35

Later, Craig agrees with Dodwell:

"I think that Dodwell and Plantinga [Plantinga agrees with Dodwell] are correct that, fundamentally, the way we know Christianity is true is by the self-authenticating witness of God's Holy Spirit."__William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith, page 43

"The gospel [not philosophical argumentation] is the power of God that brings salvation"__Paul
(paraphrased)

Philosophical argumentation is cool. I like it. But its no more that conversation about, say, football. I mean if they want to talk about the NFL, I will talk to them about the NFL [or philosophical "proofs" for Christianity] --- so I can get the opportunity to tell them the simple gospel message of John 3:16