RE: Christian argued that everything must have a creator
December 5, 2015 at 6:15 pm
(This post was last modified: December 5, 2015 at 6:17 pm by athrock.)
(November 30, 2015 at 2:41 pm)jcvamp Wrote: I responded to a thread on Facebook about atheist morality. I expressed that I believe that religious people's belief reflects their morality and not the other way around. I gave Christians as an example, citing biblical teachings that modern Christians don't follow, and a Christian responded by arguing that everything needs a creator.
They said, 'Classic logic can bring one to the conclusion of a single God. We humans are contingent beings, that is, my parents had to make me, your parents had to make you, so on and so forth up the line. If any of that changed, I wouldn't be the same, or you wouldn't be the same. Going back and back it's not as if there can be some loop where two or hundreds or thousands are equally contingent upon each other, it must come back to one being who is not contingent upon any other being. That would be God. Now going from deism to a specific religion requires faith, but monotheistic deism is the logical way.'
This was my response, 'My parents made me using a natural biological process, and yes, their parents in turn made them. However, your logic falls apart at the point when you assume that this means a god must have initiated the process.
You postulate that everything must have a creator, then break your own postulate by saying that the first creator didn't have a creator. If your premise is that all things had a creator, who created god? You can't posit that everything requires a creator, but then say that your line of logic only works if that rule is broken. This leaves us with the postulate that some things require a creator and others do not.
If we follow this line of reasoning, my parents created me, and this extends back to a point where something came about without the need for a creator. Why can't that be the formation of organic chemicals (proteins, amino acids, RNA, and DNA) from inorganic material by chemical processes that we know to exist, and have reproduced in the lab?'
What's your take on this? What would you have responded? Do you agree or disagree with my argument?
The theist might respond this way:
Your parents created you, and your grandparents created them. Your great-grandparents created your grandparents, and so on. Keep going back in time. What created the "organic chemicals (proteins, amino acids, RNA, and DNA) from inorganic material by chemical processes that we know to exist, and have reproduced in the lab"?
The Big Bang Theory states that time, space, matter, etc. all began to exist at a single point in the distant past...approximately 13 billion years ago. Why? What caused or created the big bang? Did everything suddenly come into being out of nothing? If so, why don't we observe this phenomenon happening all the time? If you were to find a watch on the sidewalk, would you assume that is simply appeared there out of nothing, or would you assume that someone dropped it there? And would you further assume that there was a watchmaker who made it to begin with?
You have asked, "Who created god?", but the question reveals your misunderstanding of the theist Cosmological Argument which goes something like:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Theists call this cause "God". And since God is eternal, He did not BEGIN to exist; therefore, He has no creator or cause.
