Does God negate the need for his own existence?

Only something which is created needs to have a beginning. Since God by definition was not created, He needs no beginning.

Let me attempt to rephrase your question more concisely.
Why do the conditions(observed reality or theory) allow for a universe such as we know to exist without the characteristics of a God Who is personally interested in humanity? Does that sum up what you are asking?This message has been edited by Phat, 03-31-2006 09:24 AM

---

Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart, and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. Even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained; and even in the best of all hearts, there remains a small corner of evil. --Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

Thats like saying that the two choices are that God always existed (thus foreknowing us) or that human wisdom is for all practical purposes the only reality that we can draw on as an origin of explanative wisdom. (Our mental universe)Its odd to me how we humans on this dustspeck of a blip in the known universe can have the audacity to attempt to explain a theory of everything and yet so grandly dismiss God as an illogical concept! For the reason that we quite plausibly do not know nor can know the entire reality of the universe, yet we can quite plausibly begin to know God, in which case He makes plausibility an attractive option!
Of course, boolean, I am not suggesting that God is any easier to figure out than the universe! A scientist may say that while God gives no clues that verify His reality, the Universe is slowly yielding clues about its reality.A Theologian may counter by saying that ultimate truth will never be figured out while God, once encountered, begins to richly and faithfully complete His image within you and that by allowing this process, we DO come to know and understand Him.Perhaps the issue is this:
Do we seek to understand God personally, or do we seek to understand natural reality scientifically and impassionately?

...And I mean that for me, the choices are not equally logical. To me, God is logical since I believe in Him. He would be logical even if I were not to believe in Him. I see Him as a necessary absolute, but of course my bias is that I believe in Him. You may see it differently. You may see Him as an un-neccessary hypothesis and a non-absolute. In a sense, yes. I am proclaiming God as an absolute whether or not we believe in Him. ...and what I mean't was that its odd how human wisdom can grandly theorize a distant past and point of known origin, operate quite nicely in a present that need not contain God, and hypothesize a future in an empirical, unbiased way. (But I will admit that science is safer than the Left Behind series of books! And from your perspective, this may make pefect sense.It just seems odd to me when you say that there is no reason to choose.

I suppose that if you are as honest as you can be about the need to form a personal relationship with Jesus then you will not be judged for appearing (to me) to be indifferent about the matter. I mean, after all, who am I to suggest how you should think??I guess that I should be more worried about my own relationship with God and that perhaps I am projecting my own insecurities onto you in order for me to feel better about myself.

Man! It takes Mr. Dictionary, Mr. Sherlock Mike, and Mr. Encyclopedia to keep up with these $20.00 words that you so casually toss about like discarded chewing gum wrappers! and then I had to look up reductio absurdum
Although the fine tuning would bring that word into this:So Mike! Why don't you just say that the intellectual giants insist that God is nothing more than an interpretation of what is not human or personal in terms of likely implausibility or anomaly? You just knew that I like to look stuff up, did'nt ya, Sherlock! Again with the concepts! *sigh*I need to know this stuff anyway, I guess!Let me speculate: Lazy Thinkers =Biblical Creationists> That is quite elementary, my deer Watson! Intellectual Eggheads= "parsimonious razor" Now I gotcha, Mike! Why the name change? Are you stalking poor innocent little deer?

In summation, to even ask a question such as "Does God negate the need for His own existance?" is a question that we not only don't know but can't know. I suppose that from a theological perspective, God could suddenly talk to us through a donkey! Im not sure if He could actually make Himself not exist, unless He were to express the belief through us.Perhaps that is why it is blessed to not see and yet believe!