just4athiests

**thelionheart** · November 02, 2009, 09:48 AM

Hello guys, this is the lion heart from lebanon ...

I have a question for the athiests but i don't want to argue, i just want to hear your answers

I know that matter doesn't need to be created, but you say that if god created the world then who created god? why does god under the same logic need to be created?
now again suppose that there was a creator of god, then that creator would have a creator, right?
when will this end.... Can't we suppose that there is something that ends the chain of gods, an ultimate god the creator of all?
In conclusion is the question who created god as illogical as who created matter?

**TWoxy** · November 02, 2009, 09:51 AM

Just a small caveat: its atheists, not athiests.

**Lord of Lost Socks** · November 02, 2009, 10:00 AM

"I know that matter doesn't need to be created, but you say that if god created the world then who created god? why does god under the same logic need to be created?"

Because, the religious parties tend to claim that matter has to be created, so the logical follow-up question is "Who created god then?"
The "atheists"(wrong term imo, but whatever) don't necessarily believe that matter has to be created.

"In conclusion is the question who created god as illogical as who created matter?"

Correct. Because "atheists" believe that matter wasn't created, and god doesn't exist.

**Tacitursa** · November 02, 2009, 10:56 AM

I know that matter doesn't need to be created, but you say that if god created the world then who created god? why does god under the same logic need to be created?

Because the religious concept of god is that he is the creator and he created everything. If matter does not need to be created then god did not create it and he is not the creator.

If matter does need to be created and god created it , who created god?

The flaw is in religion.

Can't we suppose that there is something that ends the chain of gods, an ultimate god the creator of all?

If your an ultimate god why would you create more gods to create stuff for you? We are talking about gods here. i.E Create anything with simple thought billions and trillions of universes could be created in a trillionth of a second. (Technically time does not exist for gods so it's not like they are pressed for time and need help)

Create friends to keep you company etc sure. But ultimate gods do not need help with anything assuming we share the same concept of a god.

In conclusion is the question who created god as illogical as who created matter?

The question of who created god does not help us atall.

Finding out where matter came from will help us a great deal in understanding the universe and our surroundings.

so no.

**thelionheart** · November 02, 2009, 11:28 AM

mister wizav85
i agree with alot of what u have said. but i didn't say that there was an ultimate god who created another god. I am merely saying that some atheists (whats the correct terminology again?) say that they don't believe in god because they then have to ask who created him. I am merely asking if its logical to say that if there was a god he needs no creator.

**Tacitursa** · November 02, 2009, 11:40 AM

I am merely asking if its logical to say that if there was a god he needs no creator.

Yeah you could say that but why not take 1 more step and say

The universe needs no creator.

The question then becomes

If God does not need a creator why does the universe?

And the answer to that is , It doesn't.

**thelionheart** · November 02, 2009, 10:10 AM

thanks, and actually English is not my native language

to make things in my question a little bit clearer, the question that atheists used to use to deny gods existence "Who created God?" is actually illogical.
(I am not stupid I know that the atheistic philosophy is based on better arguments and this is just to get to understand ur point of view)

**Cúchulainn** · November 02, 2009, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by thelionheart

I know that matter doesn't need to be created, but you say that if god created the world then who created god? why does god under the same logic need to be created?

Why do you need to go any further?

You have a sound logic statement that matter needs no creator.

Why suppose a creator? When it's evidently irrelevant.

It's like claiming angels hold you to the ground as well as gravity.

**thelionheart** · November 02, 2009, 10:30 AM

well my friend i believe in some sort of god, and that is due to personal experiences (which could be hulocinations

) "did i spell that right?" which i can't hold as evidence against you
but i want to learn a little bit more about philosophy and u guys sound very smart

btw I didn't say that matter doesn't have a creator i merely say as prof steven hawkins once said :
We don't know how to answer why... "A brief history of time"

Typo "i merely said :$"

**Cúchulainn** · November 02, 2009, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by thelionheart

well my friend i believe in some sort of god, and that is due to personal experiences (which could be hallucinations

) "did i spell that right?" which i can't hold as evidence against you

Well I must say that is a far better position than some others here.

Believe is believe, it can never be counted as evidence.

At least you acknowledge that.

Originally Posted by thelionheart

but i want to learn a little bit more about philosophy and u guys sound very smart

btw I didn't say that matter doesn't have a creator i merely say as prof steven hawkins once said :
We don't know how to answer why... "A brief history of time"

Well matter is the same as energy.

Which can neither be created or destroyed, Thermodynamics.

----

The idea of a god is a being that is either the creator of natural physics.

And as such is indistinguishable for natural physics being that it's actions are limited by natural laws, like ours.

Or uses some supernatural means which we could never possible detect or even comprehend.

Leaving us only with a god that is effectively us though its knowledge of the universe is greater. Nothing we couldn't achieve.

**thelionheart** · November 02, 2009, 11:12 AM

"Which can neither be created or destroyed, Thermodynamics"
hmmm... isn't that for things inside the system?
but a god would be outside the system right?
i mean i was once thinking the creation of complex chemical was possible because the sun was there, i mean organization came out of chaos due to the energy of the sun. then why can't we say that the organization of the universe is due to an external flow of energy.
(btw do u consider the universe organized?)

**Tacitursa** · November 02, 2009, 11:21 AM

(btw do u consider the universe organized?)

It doesn't have much choice. Gravity keeps it organized.

**TWoxy** · November 02, 2009, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by thelionheart

"Which can neither be created or destroyed, Thermodynamics"
hmmm... isn't that for things inside the system?
but a god would be outside the system right?
i mean i was once thinking the creation of complex chemical was possible because the sun was there, i mean organization came out of chaos due to the energy of the sun. then why can't we say that the organization of the universe is due to an external flow of energy.
(btw do u consider the universe organized?)

Now, these cosmological debates hurt my brain so I normally don't particpate, but I'll brush the water with my toes in this case to see if the water's as cold as it looks.

So, if the First Law of Thermodynamics states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed within the system, namely the Universe, how can an agency external to that system, in this case the mentioned god, provide a flow of energy to it without demanding that this idea depart from empirical evidence-based science and trespass on the area of magic and the paranormal?

Or was it your point more recently that science is limited by this materialistic basis and can't account for such occurences, if we take that the existence of a god is a given?

**thelionheart** · November 02, 2009, 10:54 PM

Originally Posted by Vollendung

So, if the First Law of Thermodynamics states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed within the system, namely the Universe, how can an agency external to that system, in this case the mentioned god, provide a flow of energy to it without demanding that this idea depart from empirical evidence-based science and trespass on the area of magic and the paranormal?

Well If I may ask, Is the universe open or closed? As far as I know we don't know yet

but my idea was If there is order in the universe then there must be a flow of outside energy. I never claimed that this was god

Originally Posted by Vollendung

Or was it your point more recently that science is limited by this materialistic basis and can't account for such occurences, if we take that the existence of a god is a given?

yes science explains things only in materialistic ways. Now materialistic explanations often or in general lead to correct results when it comes to predicting the next state given the initial conditions. But still this explains only how god (or nature) works not why and not if there even were a why

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ellsid you can't find god for the same reasons that i can find him, personal reasons

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
chriscase thanks for the video will watch it soon I hope and then post my reply about it if there were any.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sidenotes: If god is a personal experiance for you, then why did u open this thread?
well, I think it is a better way to introduce myself

**TWoxy** · November 03, 2009, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by thelionheart

Well If I may ask, Is the universe open or closed? As far as I know we don't know yet

but my idea was If there is order in the universe then there must be a flow of outside energy. I never claimed that this was god

How come?

**thelionheart** · November 02, 2009, 11:51 AM

well sir, what u said makes perfect sense
"If God does not need a creator why does the universe?And the answer to that is , It doesn't"
but how can we tell that
"The universe needs no creator." after all we don't know what matter is to tell how it came right?

**Tacitursa** · November 02, 2009, 12:05 PM

well sir, what u said makes perfect sense
"If God does not need a creator why does the universe?And the answer to that is , It doesn't"
but how can we tell that
"The universe needs no creator." after all we don't know what matter is to tell how it came right?

We dont know for sure.

But all the evidence from science tells us that it is the most likely outcome.

There is zero evidence for god.

**thelionheart** · November 02, 2009, 12:32 PM

"But all the evidence from science tells us that it is the most likely outcome.
There is zero evidence for god. "
but here are two important questions
aren't these theories just our materialistic explanation of the world?
I mean aren't we supposing that there is no god and searching for a way to explain the existence without him?
Is science abstract on that matter ? (not a rehtorical

)
and the other thing i was once thinking the creation of complex chemical was possible because the sun was there, i mean organization came out of chaos due to the energy of the sun. then why can't we say that the organization of the universe is due to an external flow of energy.

**Tacitursa** · November 02, 2009, 12:46 PM

then why can't we say that the organization of the universe is due to an external flow of energy.

That could be a possibility.

But why is that external flow of energy god? It could be one of a million things.

I mean aren't we supposing that there is no god and searching for a way to explain the existence without him?

No thats not true. Science includes all possibilities if evidence is present. God has not been a theory yet because science has found zero evidence of his existance. So instead of wasting there time they are focusing on the evidence they do have.

Whats your alternative explain our existence but ALWAYS include god even though there is no evidence? How stupid is that.