Who Made God?

I've come to realize that there are actually two interpretations of this question. The first is the one I'm most familiar with, which is the one coming from the atheist or skeptic who is not really seeking to know God, but to look for a quarrel, and the other is from the inquiring Christian. Since I'm not sure which interpretation I'm faced with, I'll go ahead and explain both.

When arguments from the First Cause are given to an atheist as an explanation of the universe, they try to rejoinder with, "Well, if God created everything, who created God?" and they do so with their nose held high in the air, thinking they've just presented me with some impossible question that I can't answer, and they've won this war with that knock down response. That is enormously far from the truth.

In most of the cases I've been in, it comes up in a discussion of the Kalam argument, and you'll remember that the first premise is "Anything that BEGINS to exist has a cause." Now, had it read instead, "Anything that exists has a cause" then yes, you could raise this as a valid objection. But God did not ever BEGIN to exist. He always was. So because God did not BEGIN to exist, then God has no cause, God didn't come from anywhere, no one made God.

If there is a set of upright dominos that is infinitely long, and every one knocked down represents a moment in time, will our current domino ever get knocked down? Or, will we ever get to the present moment? The answer is no because before our domino can be knocked down, there has to be an infinite amount of dominos that needs to be knocked down first, and we would have to wait an infinite amount of time. Yet here we are talking about it. This shows that there must have been a first cause.

So now that we have agreed that the amount of causes cannot be infinite in the past, can we seriously ask who created God? If you agree that there is no infinite chain of causes, then that must mean there is a cause which has no cause (God). But if you were still to ask, "Well, who created God?" then what you are really doing is saying, "I do believe that the past is infinite." Why? Because you are raising what's called an infinite regress, which basically means you can go on forever asking, "Well who created that, who created that, who created that, who created that..." on and on forever. There would be no stopping point. But since we already know that this isn't possible with the domino analogy, that means there has to be something which has no cause. It makes no sense to ask what the cause is of the First cause. If it had a cause, it wouldn't be the first. 

So who created God? No one. God is eternal, and we have good reasons to believe this. Now, for the Christian, this is quite easy to dismiss. If God does have a beginning, then he has a cause, where did he come from, who created him? So I ask, do you believe God began to exist? No, you don't. So why are we having this discussion? It's that simple.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Milo

Image
So I decided to go see Milo Yiannopoulos at UCSB yesterday. I was really hesitant to do so, and decided not to go, but a few of my friends wanted to go, and they're all losers who don't drive, so, I had to take everyone. I didn't know much about Milo, and I still don't, but I did learn some things. In some of the more, ahem, colorfully conservative pages of facebook that I follow, Milo has been something of an iconoclast, destroying the feminist narratives left and right. But I also know that he is an active homosexual and he is a rabid Trump supporter (even calling him "Daddy"). So, for those reasons, I was never interested in what he had to say. He was, to take a phrase from Lenin, a useful idiot. That was my impression. But I was wrong. A few days before the event, I had read somewhere on these pages I follow but wont name, that Milo believed himself to be a Christian, and a Catholic at that. I dismissed this immediately, and my opinion of him stoppe...
Read more

What Does The Bible Say About Birth Control?

From the early church up to 1930, virtually every church believed contraception was a sin. That fact alone should have us induce that contraception is in fact a sin. Yet, there are many Christians today, even in my own congregation, that will never entertain the possibility of contraception being a sin.
Read more

Is Canon 28 Binding?

In my previous post , I discussed Canon 28 of the Council of Chalcedon (you'll find the full text of the canon there). But I should have put an asterisk on the conversation because Canon 28 isn't properly part of the council. You'll remember from an earlier post , that what makes a council ecumenical is ratification from the Roman Pontiff. Canons are part of councils. And naturally, canons also have to be ratified. However, Canon 28 was not ratified by Pope Leo (Roman Pontiff at the time). So Canon 28 isn't part of the council and thus isn't binding.  If you are Orthodox, this may sound too convenient. I've already suggested why Roman Ratification is the correct theory in the previous link. However, I want to add two things. First, even Saints in the East agree with the Roman position, and second, a case can be made for Canon 28 not being problematic for Catholicism.  First, there are the sayings of Pope St. Gelasius (about 490 AD), and Pope St. Gelasius is...
Read more