My mind's in a knot... (Re: Who/what created God?)

quote:

---

Ultimately, asking who/what created God would already make God NOT God, as it becomes a contradiction. This is where atheists suffer from a lack of understanding of Jehovah/Yahweh, perhaps, in that they will not spend time considering a sovereign God as a genuine answer to the problem.

---

Your argument is fundamentally insane. Your question in no way creates a contradiction. In polytheistic religions Gods were created all of the time. Merely asking how one new God was created didn't make that God a contradiction. The thing about this question is that it completely shows how weak the "everything must have an origin, therefore God" argument really is. If God does not need an origin, then nothing else does. Users of that asinine argument either have to logically abandon it or use fallacies such as special pleading. There is no logical or rational way of using the origin argument for God's existence.

quote:

---

From a neutral standpoint, God makes a lot of sense, which begs the question; then why question God? Which allows us to conclude = because the person dislikes God being an answer to the problem. So ultimately it comes down to the person's disbelief being a problem, rather than the creation, which declares the glory of God.

---

Again, insane. God doesn't make a lot of sense. Omnipotence makes God not only illogical but completely nonsensical. God could make the flavor Purple triangle despite purple being a color and triangle being a shape. Nonsensical is by definition the opposite of sensical. And merely because things make sense does not mean we don't question them. Under your logic, the entire branch of organizational efficiency should be tossed out since a lot of things 'make sense' even if they aren't working as efficiently as they could. People question God for the same reason they question everything else.And you can't hate or dislike God if you don't believe in it. I don't hate or dislike Goblins because they aren't real.Your argument is truly nuts.

Aside from that Straggler has disproved your point you just refuted the very argument you're trying to make.God exists because all things need an origin, yet God doesn't need an origin. That's special pleading. You just proved what I argued!

quote:

---

How is that an absolutely solid axiom anyway?

​

The observable needs an origin. The natural world, and it's components, by observation, it can be determined that they require a cause

---

Alright,

quote:

---

It takes a fallacious LEAP to then apply this to the transcendent supernatural.

---

No, you have changed the argument. Instead of all things, you've modified it to observable. That's raising the bar.

quote:

---

The bible, which existed before these arguments, tells us that the invisible created the visible, the eternal the none-eternal.

---

And the holy book of the invisible pink unicorn says the bible is a load of lies. Good job on failing to understand what citing such books generally results in poor arguments.

quote:

---

Checkmate.

---

Not at all. You used the fallacy of raising the bar.