My Rebuttal to Dawkins Argument

[LastPoet]

First up, welcome to the forums.

Secondly, sorry, but anyone can make such claims to promote and support their religions or beliefs.

I can claim that the Eternal Teddybear, in all His Plushness, has always existed, is the creator of everything, and is outside our universe and beyond our understanding.

The claims of such things does not mean it's real.

If there's something in the universe beyond our understanding and that isn't testable, then there's no need to believe in it.

And, if such a being exists and wants the fleas upon the face of the Earth known as Humans to worship it, then it needs to show itself.

Well a manufactured product always come with a manual or a guide, you never see the manufacturer.

Hahahaha. Please be a poe.

[The Valkyrie]

First up, welcome to the forums.

Secondly, sorry, but anyone can make such claims to promote and support their religions or beliefs.

I can claim that the Eternal Teddybear, in all His Plushness, has always existed, is the creator of everything, and is outside our universe and beyond our understanding.

The claims of such things does not mean it's real.

If there's something in the universe beyond our understanding and that isn't testable, then there's no need to believe in it.

And, if such a being exists and wants the fleas upon the face of the Earth known as Humans to worship it, then it needs to show itself.

Well a manufactured product always come with a manual or a guide, you never see the manufacturer.

yes, but most guides or manuals make sense.

Assuming they were written by a supreme being, all perfect, all knowing, the manual would not only make sense and be clear.  And if the being wanted its people to follow it's instructions it would come down and slap it's followers about the head if they misinterpreted, intentionally or not, the words.

[Alex K]

I am still waiting for a sensible definition of what you mean by god living in a "different dimension"

[Edwardo Piet]

It means he's the godly equivalent of Ace Rimmer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sZsTzNmrlE

[paulpablo]

Hello, 

Greetings to you brothers and sisters in humanity,

I would like to refute Richard Dawkins argument " If God created man, then who created God? "

The answer to this question is very simple, and I would like to discuss it in detail:

1. The Creator is called The Creator, so how can the Creator have a creator if he is The Creator?

2. The question can be turned around, which will allow me to ask: " If the universe created man, then who created the universe? "

3. Only do things in our galaxy and universe and space-time, require a creator. God is obviously out of space and time, and the galaxy and universe, in another dimension, in which we do not understand.

4. This is like saying that an explanation requires an explanation, which would lose you in an infinite regress, which is clearly contradictory to the bases and fundamentals of science.

5. Antony Flew in his book states:

Now, clearly theists and atheist can agree on one thing: if anything at all exists, there must be something preceding it that always existed. How did this eternally existing reality come to be? The answer is that it never came to be. It always existed. Take your pick: God or universe. Something always existed

The refutation has faulty reasoning.

If you disbelieve things because they go against the basis of science then why do you say it's obvious that a creator exists outside of space and time and creates things and does things but we can't understand.

It goes against science to just assume another dimension exists, that actions can be done outside of space and time.

I'd like to add that the point of the question is to show an infinite regression. There's nothing wrong with the question who created God.

Basically this argument goes a bit like this

Man1) I can fly

Man2)how?

Man1) that question goes against science because the human body can't actually fly, what I'm obviously doing is going into another dimension, turning invisible, stopping time, then even though time is stopping I'm still moving because I'm in this other dimension that I can't prove exists. This is how I managed to build the pryamids in ancient Egypt, either prove I definitely didn't do it or I'm right and I did do it.

[Brakeman]

Now, clearly theists and atheist can agree on one thing: if anything at all exists, there must be something preceding it that always existed. How did this eternally existing reality come to be? The answer is that it never came to be. It always existed. Take your pick: God or universe. Something always existed

No. NO. No! The word "Always" has no meaning outside of time.

Let me say that a second time for you, The word "always" has no meaning outside of time and time began as matter began. There is no "before the singularity."

All of the existing, creating, and god magic occurred exactly 0.0000000 seconds before the universe existed, meaning it didn't happen.

[robvalue]

Once you've hidden God outside of space and time, there can be no evidence of it. That's exactly why it's hidden there, to account for the fact that it's nowhere to be seen.

Even if there is something out there, attempting to show some old book just happens to have accurate information about it is make-believe.

If your belief makes you happy, great. I'm afraid you're not going to convince anyone here with the special pleading argument we've seen hundreds of times before. So I hope you'll stay and chat with us about other subjects

[Jehanne]

The concept of God is self-contradictory ("if God is omniscient, does he/she/it have free will?"), but more importantly, the concept of God contradicts everything in our human experience; without exception, everything that we observe comes from that which is simpler.  God is not simple, in the sense that God is more complex than Us, his creation.  So, why believe in something for which there is no evidence, which is self-contradictory and which contradicts everything which we do observe?

"Take your pick: God or universe. Something always existed" -- the Universe, because it is simpler!

Well the universe is complex because we as humans cannot make a similar universe. Many things are not understood in the universe, not a lot has been found also. So how can you say that they aren't complex? To us as humans that have evolved, it is of course complex.

The Universe came from that which is simple:  Population III stars gave rise to Population II stars which gave rise to Population I stars, which gave rise to Us:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallicity

[ignoramus]

I beleev god lives in the fiff dimenshen!
He is undet... undetecti.. You can't see him!

[Reforged]

I don't think any atheist ever made claims an eternal anything has to exist.
I think most would merely state that by fabricating a God you only push the problem back one with an unconvincing, unproven theory.
How are you not getting that?