What created God?

Originally posted by RJHinds
It says so in the Holy Bible.

Where?

Originally posted by Agerg
The problem I'm having immediately with the OP's argument, setting aside any mathematical ambiguities is that if god creates itself then at any such moment of creation there exists no god to create anything (otherwise its creation would not be required), rendering its creation logically impossible

Lucky you and googlefudge and obviously every other person that supports evolution will agree on what you said. The problem here is that you are too technical about this and you are arguing on stuff you think is important in a environment that God has had to be created in.

You and every other evolutionist will have a difference in these logics cause you are arguing on the back-bone of a believe system which is false and proven false many times.

I just assumed you are an evolutionist...?

Originally posted by galveston75
Where?

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let
them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and
over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps
on the earth.” So God created man in His own image; in the image of God
He created him; male and female He created them. (Genesis 1:26-26 NKJV)

Originally posted by galveston75
Where?

By reading the Bible you come to realise how to refer in writing to the one true God. No one had to tell you that it is the way to write it, it was pure logic that it is the right way to do so. If you are not a Christian, you wouldn't understand it

Originally posted by Nicksten
Lucky you and googlefudge and obviously every other person that supports evolution will agree on what you said. The problem here is that you are too technical about this and you are arguing on stuff you think is important in a environment that God has had to be created in.

You and every other evolutionist will have a difference in these logics cause you ...[text shortened]... ystem which is false and proven false many times.

I just assumed you are an evolutionist...?

...and evolution, given a non-creationist definition/recasting of the term has been proven false when, and where, and by whom!??? 😕

Sorry Nicksten but if something fails the *is it logical?* test then it's game over. God creating itself is an example of such; indeed I could be raving, frothing at the mouth fundamentalist but so long as I submit to the basic principles of logic I am forced to conclude this line of argument is dead before it's even started.

Originally posted by Agerg
...and evolution, given a non-creationist definition/recasting of the term has been proven false when, and where, and by whom!??? 😕

Sorry Nicksten but if something fails the *is it logical?* test then it's game over. God creating itself is an example of such; indeed I could be raving, frothing at the mouth fundamentalist but so long as I submit to the basi ...[text shortened]... iples of logic I am forced to conclude this line of argument is dead before it's even started.

Maybe, you should go above the basic level of logic and learn the
intermediate level and then the advanced level of logic.

P.S. Do these lessons.
http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/courses/advlogic/

Originally posted by RJHinds
Maybe, you should go above the basic level of logic and learn the
intermediate level and then the advanced level of logic.

P.S. Do these lessons.
http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/courses/advlogic/

So if God is in possession of infinite greatness of attributes, there is an interesting implication.

From another post of mine: "In Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid, published 1979, Douglas Hofstadter uses the acronym GOD, 'GOD Over Djinn'. As a genie explains to Achilles, GOD stands for GOD Over Djinn, remarking that "GOD can never be fully expanded." (Wikipedia)

I like the following exercise from the first chapter of the logic course you recommended. It seems to relate to the problem of origins for God.

Here it is: "8[e]. Show that there are infinitely many formulas, no two of which have a common substitution instance. [Hint: let A 1 ,A 2 ,... be a sequence of formulas of increasing length whose sole sentence letter is p. Consider the formulas (pÚA 1 ), (pÚA 2 ), ...]"

(The Ú is a V-shaped symbol for disjunction.)

Compare this with that post I recently made about "GOD over djinn" where the word "GOD" is itself an acronym for "GOD over djinn." Ignore any demonic implications of "djinn", Ron. Douglass Hofstader used "djinn" because it works in the story he was telling. you might think of it as "GOD over deity" where 'GOD' is an acronym for "GOD over deity." So it becomes "God over deity over deity over deity...".

So as formal logic rolls up an infinite number of instances of formulas into itself, "God" rolls up an infinite number of instances of creation into Himself.

Of course this is all mumbo-jumbo while watching football, but that is the territory we are in.

Originally posted by RJHinds
If it is possible for God to raise Himself from the dead, then it is also
possibe He created Himself. All things are possible with God. But I
don't ponder such things, for to me God is and that is awesome
enough for me.

God always was, and always will be, with no birth, no death. God has no beginning and no end. Anyway that's what I learned in Sunday school. 😕

Originally posted by ChessPraxis
God always was, and always will be, with no birth, no death. God has no beginning and no end. Anyway that's what I learned in Sunday school. 😕

Yeah, that's what I learned too. Take it or leave it. And you better
take it if you know what's good for you.

Originally posted by JS357
So if God is in possession of infinite greatness of attributes, there is an interesting implication.

From another post of mine: "In Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid, published 1979, Douglas Hofstadter uses the acronym GOD, 'GOD Over Djinn'. As a genie explains to Achilles, GOD stands for GOD Over Djinn, remarking that "GOD can never be fully exp o-jumbo while watching football, but that is the territory we are in.

Yes, but I doubt we can really figure it out. Maybe we will just have to
take the word of our Sunday school teacher, that is, if we know what's
good for us.

Originally posted by Agerg
...and evolution, given a non-creationist definition/recasting of the term has been proven false when, and where, and by whom!??? 😕

Sorry Nicksten but if something fails the *is it logical?* test then it's game over. God creating itself is an example of such; indeed I could be raving, frothing at the mouth fundamentalist but so long as I submit to the basi ...[text shortened]... iples of logic I am forced to conclude this line of argument is dead before it's even started.

I thought i read it just wrong but it looks like i haven't as you have written it again....refering to God creating "itself", you probably mean "Himself"... But that is another argument.

I too follow the basics of logic but it is obvious that we see something different. Something that just happens like the creation of God or the earth can not be "fixed" by throwing logic into the picture here. We can use logic, science evolution etc and none of it will or can explain the start of this all. Evolution wants you to believe that it all started from a dot as big as this . That exploded into a perfectly balanced universe we are in today.

Logic here says that an explotion causes destruction.
Logic says that something as big as the universe could possible not fit in a dot.
Logic says that life can only come from life.
Logic says that almost every thing in evolution just darn aint logic.

I'm not in the mood to type a whole list now, but to me it is as clear as day that there was a creator whom created us. It explains the perfectly created universe and every thing in it. That is logic.

Edit: when, and where, and by whom has evolution being proven false....just type in google "evolution proven false" and you will see common logic from different kinds of people and not creationists which will point out almost every thing in evolution to be false....and that by just using pure logic, and we're not even near technical yet 😉

Originally posted by RJHinds
That's the neat thing about God, He can transcend out logic.

He isn't transcending logic, logic is attempting to trancend Him. At any point in spacetime is creation(the beginning) and there is an infinity before and after this that is also creation(the beginning). People just think that "the beginning" is parallel to space-time and thus happens at a specific point.

People hold that logic moves in straight lines even though they can't see point B from point A. For example, imagine a continuous road that stretched around the earth's equator, you didn't know this, and you are on this road. You would think that you are going in a straight line from point A to point B to point C etc etc and thus are making progress but to someone watching you from space it would be apparent that you are moving in a circle or elipse.

Nothing is wrong with this and as far as we can tell everything moves this way. The earth orbits the sun in our solar system and the sun orbits the black hole in the center or our galaxy... we can't see far enough to know if the galaxies are orbiting anything but I would think that you would be safe to assume that they, just like everything else, move in circles.

Realizing this why can't existence/creation "move" this way? Afterall, just because time seems to move in a straight line doesn't mean it does. If it is circular, then something creating itself would make sense since there is no beginning or end to a circle and creation would always come back to creation thus creating itself.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I don't think there is any escape from circular reasoning in posing that you need a first cause,
calling it god, then claiming god had a cause, and that god was god's cause.

I don't think there is any solution to what the 'first cause' is in a finite line of causality.

And putting god in the mix doesn't help at all.

So if you have no answer to ...[text shortened]... be fantastic to link
here if I could find it...
Must remember to bookmark things....

"Calling it God"


Why is this a problem? If I define God as being everything that ever is and was then ther IS proof of God existing. You are living proof, breathing proof, seeing proof, standing on proof. The question then is not "does God exist" it is "Does God have sentience?" and if you asked me this I would ask you "Are you sentient?" assuming you say yes I would then ask you "Are you a part of everthing that ever is and was?" how would you answer this? You can't say no but of course saying yes means that there is a God and he does indeed have sentience.

Originally posted by tomtom232
He isn't transcending logic, logic is attempting to trancend Him. At any point in spacetime is creation(the beginning) and there is an infinity before and after this that is also creation(the beginning). People just think that "the beginning" is parallel to space-time and thus happens at a specific point.

People hold that logic moves in straight lines ...[text shortened]... end to a circle and creation would always come back to creation thus creating itself.

....or God created it all.

I like your explanation given. I just see God's hand in all of it.

Originally posted by mikelom
The problem I have is that the opening post makes the immediate assumption there is a God, and too many people fall for assumptions..........

-m.

Saying there isn't God is also an assumption. But in no way can God not exist... it is just a language trick. If i define God as that pencil you bought from the store then God exists. Language is confusing as words don't really have "meanings" they just invoke memories in your mind so they are just a medium for communication.


True understanding isn't explainable it comes from within oneself. Everybody is trying to "get" something to fill a need that they have. Some turn to religion, some turn to science, some turn to money, and some power etc. These things are all outward and as this need everybody has is inward you will only satisfy it through meditation/prayer. Just entertain the idea that you're mind/conscience/spirit goes on for eternity even if there is no God. In this life say you get a dog and you have this dog for fifteen years and love this dog more than even yourself and would sacrifice yourself for this dog... after this dog dies you would feel intense emotional pain correct? So, if you're mind/conscience/spirit continues for eternity these materials that you have that you are so happy with will be ripped from you when your body dies... what do you think that would feel like? Everything outward is gone... just gone.. and all you have is yourself.