Who Made God?

[boatsnguitars]

It's a fair question to ask how a perfect Being, Omni in every (Good) way, and has all the attributes Theists claim simply happened to exist. The odds of this happening must be staggering.

In fact, imagine how a God - let's say God A - is exactly like OmniGod, but with one ounce of difference in their - oh, let's say sense of beauty. It's 99.999999999% perfect in establishing the objective measure of beauty, but not quite perfect. Would we know? Would we care? What if it was only 60% perfect?
What if anyone of it's attributes were less than 100% - would we know?

Then there are an infinite number of Gods: GodB, GodC.... each with just a little difference. - Yet, Theists can't know which, or explain how they would know if, say, God is Perfect in every way (which is problematic), or just really nice in a few ways that make us Apes very impressed.

I think Theists simply claim God is Perfect, and they try to convince us with an argument that goes: If you can imagine it, it's true. (Ontological Argument)

So, a couple things for Theists to ponder:

1. How do you explain the simple happenstance that a Perfect Being simply exists in it's Perfect, Full Form just as a matter of fact?
2. How do you know God is perfect? (No, claiming the Bible says it doesn't count)
3. How do you know - since God is timeless - that we aren't in the beginning stages of a God being developed. 15 billion years would be a mere blip in time for God, so how do we know we aren't part of God's Evolution? (After all, we have evidence that Evolution exists - not that Beings simply always existed.)
4. How is the answer "God is eternal and doesn't need an explanation" sufficient, but not the same answer for the Big Bang under atheism?

[Miles]

Perfect like God? Or, less than Gods perfection?

Our original design is that we are created perfect like God

So what happened to the original design? I ask because as of now there are more than 2.6 million stillbirths every year Worldwide, with 24,000 babies stillborn every year in the USA. Hardly something one would expect of beings perfectly created like god.
* source

.

[boatsnguitars]

Perfect like God? Or, less than Gods perfection?

Our original design is that we are created perfect like God

Then how could we be corrupted? And it was from the beginning - if we take the Bible seriously - the very first people God created ("in his image") failed. The average shoe maker has a better track record than your god.

(Also, let's just be honest. You are just holding a standard line - you really have no idea. You aren't a prophet, you aren't God, you are just - yet another - religious person spouting off what you believe and expect us to take you seriously).

[Adonai Yahweh]

So what happened to the original design? I ask because as of now there are more than 2.6 million stillbirths every year Worldwide, with 24,000 babies stillborn every year in the USA. Hardly something one would expect of beings perfectly created like god.

The original design has been corrupted by the choices of mankind . For an example I can you give you the best canvas , it has been perfectly designed with all the accurate measurements , then you decide to just throw it fire for fun ... and its destroyed. The issue wont be the design of canvas , but the fact that you didnt take it seriously and threw it in fire . The same is said about mankind , how many times have we heard doctors tells us to eat healthy and drink in moderation yet people do the opposite . Majority of stillbirths occur in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa places that the West continue to destabilize and steal resources to fund their own countries . An great example of this France steal billions of dollars in economic benefits from its former colonies in Africa every year. Or when the US and UK claimed there were weapons of mass destruction in Afghanistan and murdered many people . Stillbirths are caused by various of issues such as placental problems, infections, umbilical cord accidents, maternal health conditions, and certain lifestyle factors such as smoking or substance abuse. Healthcare access and quality of prenatal care is essential for preventing stillbirths . If humans decided to deny other humans basic healthcare access and quality of prenatal care on the basis of financial gain , the problem is the greed of humans not God .

[Adonai Yahweh]

Then how could we be corrupted? And it was from the beginning - if we take the Bible seriously - the very first people God created ("in his image") failed. The average shoe maker has a better track record than your god.

(Also, let's just be honest. You are just holding a standard line - you really have no idea. You aren't a prophet, you aren't God, you are just - yet another - religious person spouting off what you believe and expect us to take you seriously).

We become corrupted every time we sin , sinning is following your pleasure instincts with no regard for others . Adam and Eve failed because they choose to eat from the tree that would lead them to death in which God told them it would lead to death . They actually choose death . The actions of our forefathers does affect us , that's why even in genetics and psychology the state the behaviours of our parents , grandparents , great-grand parents can be passed on from generation to generation through genes or learned behaviour . That is why even with environment many people are focused on sustainable development . I'm not holding a standard line the bible is historical evidence and the teachings of the bible have worked for me and for many people . When you practice the principles you will see the difference in your life . And if it has worked for me why should I not share it with others , when their lives can also improve .

[Kevin King]

1. How do you explain the simple happenstance that a Perfect Being simply exists in it's Perfect, Full Form just as a matter of fact?

By applying the principle of causality , cause-effect , if the effect is perfect then the cause if perfect . The big bang perfectly occurred in a way that the earth was formed . Living organisms and non-living were perfectly created that they would naturally evolve with the environment .

2. How do you know God is perfect? (No, claiming the Bible says it doesn't count)

We judge the designer by the perfection of the design . Big bang perfect , evolution perfect , plant and trees perfect , animals perfect etc ... everything designed has a natural order

3. How do you know - since God is timeless - that we aren't in the beginning stages of a God being developed. 15 billion years would be a mere blip in time for God, so how do we know we aren't part of God's Evolution? (After all, we have evidence that Evolution exists - not that Beings simply always existed.)

We are not in the beginning stages we are at the end stages , and we can tell that through our the environment is decaying meaning that in the inhabitants of the environment will also decay and die . During the prehistoric period the dinosaurs biodiversity was already declining before the asteroid hit . The earth has had very very near attempt of meteors hitting the earth

4. How is the answer "God is eternal and doesn't need an explanation" sufficient, but not the same answer for the Big Bang under atheism?

God created the big bang compare genesis 1:1-3 " In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. " Compare that with what they said about how the big bang started ... it sounds similar .

If you have time check out this video .

[media]https://www.youtube.com/live/CFYswvGoaPU?feature=share[/media]

We judge the designer by the perfection of the design . Big bang perfect , evolution perfect , plant and trees perfect , animals perfect etc ... everything designed has a natural order[/quote]


How do you believe this approach where does it come from?

Humans are known to be imperfect so we cannot know what perfection is.

[William]

[Replying to Kevin King in post #25]

Humans are known to be imperfect so we cannot know what perfection is.

If we can know what imperfection is, then we can know what perfection is.

or.

If we can know what perfection is, we can know what imperfection is.

or

We cannot know either what imperfection or perfection is.

[William]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #1]

Who Made God? It's a fair question to ask how a perfect Being, Omni in every (Good) way, and has all the attributes Theists claim simply happened to exist.

The question brings with it The Problem of Infinite regress, a known philosophical paradox.

I think Theists simply claim God is Perfect, and they try to convince us with an argument that goes: If you can imagine it, it's true. (Ontological Argument)

Oversimplification. Characterization of the Ontological Argument as "if it can be imagined, it's true" is not an accurate representation of the argument itself. The Ontological Argument is a complex and debated topic within philosophy, and it doesn't boil down to a simple equation between imagination and truth.

So, a couple things for Theists to ponder:

1. How do you explain the simple happenstance that a Perfect Being simply exists in it's Perfect, Full Form just as a matter of fact?

I think that your choice of wording implies something which suggests an accidental quality re the question of perfection of an eternal being. It appears to be a leading statement.
This phrasing could be seen as leading the conversation towards considering the idea of a Perfect Being's existence as if it were a happenstance event, which might not accurately reflect the theological or philosophical positions of those who believe in the existence of a Perfect Being.

2. How do you know God is perfect?

The answer would have to go along the lines of “we do not know in any objective way as to what “perfect” means, so we cannot know whether a God is perfect, and can only depend upon our individual ideas as to what perfection is - to answer the question posed - for ourselves. It cannot be answered by someone, for anyone else.

3. How do you know - since God is timeless - that we aren't in the beginning stages of a God being developed. 15 billion years would be a mere blip in time for God, so how do we know we aren't part of God's Evolution? (After all, we have evidence that Evolution exists - not that Beings simply always existed.)

The question about whether we might be in the beginning stages of a God being developed is a thought-provoking one. It involves exploring the nature of time, the concept of God's existence, and the potential for divine evolution in relation to cosmic evolution.
One is the organization of mind (God) while the other is the organization of matter.

4. How is the answer "God is eternal and doesn't need an explanation" sufficient, but not the same answer for the Big Bang under atheism?

The first thing to be clear about is that atheism is a simple position which in and of itself has no definition except “lack of belief in God” and is not responsible for the formation of scientific enquiry and interpretation of scientific evidence.
For that, it can be argued that any such “atheistic” interpretations of empirical/material evidence which exclude notions of mindful organisation of the universe, has to do with being under Materialist Philosophy and any subsequent explanations re the evidence which form consensus beliefs proclaiming a mindless process re the organisation of matter, are derived from those influenced by the evolution of Materialist Philosophy, not simply “atheists”.
Atheism is commonly defined as the lack of belief in gods or deities. It's a position that addresses one specific aspect of belief—namely, the absence of belief in supernatural entities.

Secondly, since the Big Bang theory claims the Universe had a beginning, an explanation is required. Whereas no explanation is required for something which never had a beginning.
Thus, "the same answer" cannot logically be given to both theories.

Secondly, since the Big Bang theory claims the Universe had a beginning, an explanation is required. Whereas no explanation is required for something which never had a beginning.
Thus, "the same answer" cannot logically be given to both theories.
This observation aligns with the philosophical principle that different types of entities or phenomena might require different kinds of explanations based on their properties and characteristics.

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #1]

Who Made God? It's a fair question to ask how a perfect Being, Omni in every (Good) way, and has all the attributes Theists claim simply happened to exist.

The question brings with it The Problem of Infinite regress, a known philosophical paradox.

Only if one thinks the term "God" must be defined as the Prime Maker.

I think Theists simply claim God is Perfect, and they try to convince us with an argument that goes: If you can imagine it, it's true. (Ontological Argument)

Oversimplification. Characterization of the Ontological Argument as "if it can be imagined, it's true" is not an accurate representation of the argument itself. The Ontological Argument is a complex and debated topic within philosophy, and it doesn't boil down to a simple equation between imagination and truth.

It's not that complex, or greatly debated.

So, a couple things for Theists to ponder:

1. How do you explain the simple happenstance that a Perfect Being simply exists in it's Perfect, Full Form just as a matter of fact?

I think that your choice of wording implies something which suggests an accidental quality re the question of perfection of an eternal being. It appears to be a leading statement.
This phrasing could be seen as leading the conversation towards considering the idea of a Perfect Being's existence as if it were a happenstance event, which might not accurately reflect the theological or philosophical positions of those who believe in the existence of a Perfect Being.

I still think it's a fair question. How else does one explain the existence of a God? God are defined as being "eternal, uncreated" (whether this is true or not, we don't know) - but it certainly appears that this describes God has having all the properties of God right from the beginning.

How does this happen?

For example, how does God say "Light" and the Universe knows what the word means? How does God speak "Light" and it manifests? (these are metaphors)

How does God think, if there wasn't a structure to think in? So this structure must have been concurrent with God's existence.

I think I get stuck on the idea that imagine your existence can't be explained. You just find yourself born. The whole process of sperm-egg, etc. is all unknown. It just happened.
Now, you have a certain brain and body. You have no ability to change your dna. If you were born with ADHD, or some mental disorder, you'd have no choice over the matter. But, you find out that you can cry "light" and a light turns on. So, you devise a plan to create planets, stars etc.
Meanwhile, you still had no control over your psychology. You could be a psychopath, or whatever - certainly not perfect (what are the odds!)

That is, if a God exists, it simply is what it is - and there was no God to create it to be perfect - it just always existed as it existed - flaws and all.

It seems a profoundly inane and impotent religious claim to say God has a Good personality - nay, IS Good. Is Perfect in whatever sense they mean it.

God would be whatever God was (and think of all the alternatives) because there is no option for God. God can't change (or maybe can - who knows) so how could a God improve if it found a flaw within itself?

The whole thing, honestly, is so utterly incoherent. Theism - the idea that there was a Perfect Mind that simple existed when nothing else did, is a religious fairy tale.

2. How do you know God is perfect?

The answer would have to go along the lines of “we do not know in any objective way as to what “perfect” means, so we cannot know whether a God is perfect, and can only depend upon our individual ideas as to what perfection is - to answer the question posed - for ourselves. It cannot be answered by someone, for anyone else.

Or, is there something that is perfect - to everybody and everything? Maybe it's not a God - maybe its a sea of undifferentiated energy or something...

3. How do you know - since God is timeless - that we aren't in the beginning stages of a God being developed. 15 billion years would be a mere blip in time for God, so how do we know we aren't part of God's Evolution? (After all, we have evidence that Evolution exists - not that Beings simply always existed.)

The question about whether we might be in the beginning stages of a God being developed is a thought-provoking one. It involves exploring the nature of time, the concept of God's existence, and the potential for divine evolution in relation to cosmic evolution.
One is the organization of mind (God) while the other is the organization of matter.

Not too thought-provoking. After all, it's musing about something that may no even exist, so unless one was creating a religion or writing a Sci-Fi novel - I'm not sure what the musing gets us...

4. How is the answer "God is eternal and doesn't need an explanation" sufficient, but not the same answer for the Big Bang under atheism?

The first thing to be clear about is that atheism is a simple position which in and of itself has no definition except “lack of belief in God” and is not responsible for the formation of scientific enquiry and interpretation of scientific evidence.
For that, it can be argued that any such “atheistic” interpretations of empirical/material evidence which exclude notions of mindful organisation of the universe, has to do with being under Materialist Philosophy and any subsequent explanations re the evidence which form consensus beliefs proclaiming a mindless process re the organisation of matter, are derived from those influenced by the evolution of Materialist Philosophy, not simply “atheists”.
Atheism is commonly defined as the lack of belief in gods or deities. It's a position that addresses one specific aspect of belief—namely, the absence of belief in supernatural entities.

Secondly, since the Big Bang theory claims the Universe had a beginning, an explanation is required. Whereas no explanation is required for something which never had a beginning.
Thus, "the same answer" cannot logically be given to both theories.

This observation aligns with the philosophical principle that different types of entities or phenomena might require different kinds of explanations based on their properties and characteristics.

I worded it clumsily.
The question is, couldn't the conditions that caused the BB be considered eternal and not in need of an explanation? My understanding of the physics is that the BB was created in an eternal and endless expanse of undifferentiated energy. As with all things unformed, chaotic and random, there are pockets of orgnaization, or peaks and valleys of energy concentration - one of which lead to the BB.
This undifferentiated sea of energy seems to be all we need to explain the BB. The undifferentiated sea doesn't need an explanation (or may not need one).

[William]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #28]

The question (who Made God) brings with it The Problem of Infinite regress, a known philosophical paradox.

Only if one thinks the term "God" must be defined as the Prime Maker.

Have you come across any definition which excludes that?

I still think it's a fair question. How else does one explain the existence of a God? God are defined as being "eternal, uncreated" (whether this is true or not, we don't know) - but it certainly appears that this describes God has having all the properties of God right from the beginning.

The question is fine – but since there is no support for the idea that such would be “happenstance”, use of such a specific word can be misleading, causing problems with reasoning.

How does this happen?

This is exactly the problem with using such words to attempt to explain an eternal quality.
It did not "happen" as an eternal thing is by its very nature, something which has always existed, and thus couldn't "happen" as the word implies something which wasn't and then was.

For example, how does God say "Light" and the Universe knows what the word means? How does God speak "Light" and it manifests? (these are metaphors)

Re the Natural Philosophy I am developing, "God" is the mindful elemental which existed in a timeless state devoid of any organized matter, and sound/frequency has something to do with organizing matter into functional forms.

How does God think, if there wasn't a structure to think in? So this structure must have been concurrent with God's existence.

Exactly. That is appropriate reasoning. Matter must be eternal and even indistinguishable from Mind - therefore Mind should be regarded as material, rather than "immaterial" as how else could a "God" mind organize matter into functional forms?

This implies that organized matter "happened" but unorganized matter always existed and will always exist, as per the hypothesis that our universe had a beginning and will one day come to an end.

The "end" in this case is the organized matter reverting back to it quiescent timeless state whereby the Mind (God) could and likely would create some other universe. Essentially this hypothesis allows for beginnings and ends as well as timeless intervals which mark both. It also allows for the idea that such an overall process is an eternal one, even that universes (organized matter) are temporal.

I think I get stuck on the idea that imagine your existence can't be explained. You just find yourself born. The whole process of sperm-egg, etc. is all unknown. It just happened.
Now, you have a certain brain and body. You have no ability to change your dna. If you were born with ADHD, or some mental disorder, you'd have no choice over the matter. But, you find out that you can cry "light" and a light turns on. So, you devise a plan to create planets, stars etc.
Meanwhile, you still had no control over your psychology. You could be a psychopath, or whatever - certainly not perfect (what are the odds!)

I think it is important not to conflate human experience with the Universal Mind Experience.
This conflating has come about through the way you used language to construct your questions and the idea that the God-Mind came from an unconscious state into a conscious state isn’t able to be aligned with an eternal state.
I acknowledge the difficulties involved with us humans trying to conceptualize an eternal state, since we have knowledge of having “happened” – coming into a state of awareness from a state of non-awareness, but I also appreciate that with a little work, one can overcome that type of thinking.

That is, if a God exists, it simply is what it is - and there was no God to create it to be perfect - it just always existed as it existed - flaws and all.

It seems a profoundly inane and impotent religious claim to say God has a Good personality - nay, IS Good. Is Perfect in whatever sense they mean it.

I cannot say that the Universal Mind has "flaws" because I have nothing to base the judgment upon.
Examples would have to be provided by you re this, that I can contemplate more fully what your reasoning and argument is.
In what sense do you mean imperfection or for that matter, perfection?

God would be whatever God was (and think of all the alternatives) because there is no option for God. God can't change (or maybe can - who knows) so how could a God improve if it found a flaw within itself?

The whole thing, honestly, is so utterly incoherent. Theism - the idea that there was a Perfect Mind that simple existed when nothing else did, is a religious fairy tale.

Again, I cannot say either way how a mind which created this universe can be shown to have flaws or not, without judging the universe as having flaws or not.
The idea of judging in this manner seems peculiar to human thinking/minds and I suspect that this has much to do with why humans act out/overact in their response to existing and having a beginning and being in a situation where they know next to nothing about and how this can be considered a "design flaw" and attributed to the Universal Mind - thus the UM must be flawed because of the design flaw.

Generally this is argued against by certain branches of theism as something of a purposeful flaw in the design in order that "free-will" can occur, so in that case, the design is "perfect" for the intended result, which of course leads to the Problem of Evil as the question then asked is how such a God-Mind can be omni-good while allowing for one particular aspect of its creation to be autonomous (within the relativity of the limits the environment places upon humans) and how to come up with an answer which satisfies the question and provides a solution is a difficult thing to achieve.

2. How do you know God is perfect?

The answer would have to go along the lines of “we do not know in any objective way as to what “perfect” means, so we cannot know whether a God is perfect, and can only depend upon our individual ideas as to what perfection is - to answer the question posed - for ourselves. It cannot be answered by someone, for anyone else.

Or, is there something that is perfect - to everybody and everything? Maybe it's not a God - maybe its a sea of undifferentiated energy or something...

Yes. Perhaps the timeless state between the organization of matter – but why organize matter if said state was perfect?
Thus, we can observe our universe as it has and continues to unfold, and see if we can identify any feature which provides an answer to the question “why create things/why organize matter?”
Or perhaps “perfection” isn’t the objective? Perhaps creativity and adventure are? Certainly, the universe provides for both, and could be viewed as “perfect” re that.

Not too thought-provoking. After all, it's musing about something that may no even exist, so unless one was creating a religion or writing a Sci-Fi novel - I'm not sure what the musing gets us...

Are you dropping "3. How do you know - since God is timeless - that we aren't in the beginning stages of a God being developed. 15 billion years would be a mere blip in time for God, so how do we know we aren't part of God's Evolution? (After all, we have evidence that Evolution exists - not that Beings simply always existed.)" from your list of musings?

I worded it clumsily.

Sure. Who can say they have never been guilty of that?

The question is, couldn't the conditions that caused the BB be considered eternal and not in need of an explanation? My understanding of the physics is that the BB was created in an eternal and endless expanse of undifferentiated energy. As with all things unformed, chaotic and random, there are pockets of orgnaization, or peaks and valleys of energy concentration - one of which lead to the BB.
This undifferentiated sea of energy seems to be all we need to explain the BB. The undifferentiated sea doesn't need an explanation (or may not need one).

This is like how the Natural Philosophy explains it too - only it tells that the unorganized matter is mindful and has been eternally. There must be a reason for why something which happened (the organization of matter) happened and simply hypothesizing that it was a spontaneous accident isn't an explanation but more a case of being a hand-waving non-explanation, similar to magical thinking.
Having mindfulness as part of that eternal "undifferentiated sea of energy" does away with the magical thinking and also solves the hard problem of consciousness. As well as this, it also does away with the “necessity” that some “supernatural” element has to exist in order to explain why our own universe exists.

[boatsnguitars]

There must be a reason for why something which happened (the organization of matter) happened and simply hypothesizing that it was a spontaneous accident isn't an explanation but more a case of being a hand-waving non-explanation, similar to magical thinking.

Yet, you seem to believe a Mind (which is, by definition, organized) could exist without any reason - and you also don't have evidence of this Mind.

I think your Natural Philosophy is incoherent.