Who created God?

If you ask an evolutionist what was there before the Big Bang, they’ll likely ask you who created God. Everyone knows that every effect must be preceded by a cause. This only applies, however, when time is a factor. The Bible teaches that God created the universe. The universe is comprised of space, matter and time. For God to have created the universe he would be required to be outside the universe–not part of it. We do not need to ask what was before God, because it is nonsensical to ask what was before what when before the creation of the universe there was no time by which to measure precedence. God is the uncaused cause. He has no beginning because he is outside of time.

The laws of thermodynamics tell us that the universe had to have a beginning. The 1st Law tells us that the total amount of mass and energy in the universe is constant, and the 2nd tells us that the amount of energy available for work is running out. If the total amount of mass and energy is constant and yet the amount of usable energy is decreasing, then the universe cannot possibly have existed forever, or all usable energy would be gone by now.

Everyone knows you can’t get something from nothing. If there was ever nothing, then there would never be anything. There has to be something outside the universe, i.e. supernatural, that brought it about. That something is God, and God has no beginning and no creator.

Further reading:

William Lane Craig on Divine Eternity (technical)
Who Created God (easy)

Be Sociable, Share!

11 Responses to “Who created God?”

  1. Kyle says:

    I find it funny when people like Richard Dawkins ask the question who created God. In fact, in a debate between Alister McGrath, who is awesome, and Richard Dawkins, who is a genius evolutionary biologist, Dawkins stated that it would be easier for him to believe in a God who evolved. It is interesting to see how hard it is for men like Dawkins to see God for who he is not what they can only accept. They need a God who was created, evolved, and has limitations. The word infinity is all to much for them and it is to them a easy way for Christians to avoid a problem, to them anyways, that need to be discussed.

    Video between Dawkins and McGrath- http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6474278760369344626

    McGrath’s website- http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mcgrath/

    Also just an add in:

    Why Is the Universe Growing So Fast?

    Einstein used math to explain how the universe works. There was just one problem. His math said the universe couldn’t stay the same. It had to be growing or shrinking. At the time, though, most people thought it was doing neither. So Einstein changed his math.

    It turns out Einstein was right in the first place. It was later found that the universe is growing. And it grows faster every day. A force known as dark energy could be the reason. It’s called “dark” because no one can see it.

    Sean Carroll is helping NASA. He’s trying to explain this unseen force. He wants to know what it is and where it comes from. Those are hard questions to answer. He says Einstein had the right approach to problems like this.

    “He learned as much as he could about what was already understood,” Sean said. “At the same time, he kept an open mind about new ways of doing things.”

    Link- http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/k-4/home/F_Einstein_K-4.html

  2. casey says:

    Yeah, I don’t really understand Dawkins’ point. I’m sure he is right that it is extremely improbable (impossible) for a God like the Christian one to come into existence, but if he is eternally existent, then the probability of God coming into existence is not the issue. The probability of me existing is 100% because I do exist. The probability of me coming into existence by random processes, on the other hand, is very small. That distinction can be made because I have a beginning. God does not.

  3. Kansas Bob says:

    Nice post Casey. I don’t think too many folks understand the implications of God existing outside of time. When the scriptures speak of eternity, and the ages of ages, I think that it is a reference to that timeless existence we will experience when we die … not that I understand it :)

  4. casey says:

    That’s what I’ve always thought, too, Bob.

  5. Alban says:

    Would God being benign really put anyone into space/time to exist for a sequence of whatever years? And then have him come back, when this existence ends in the death of the body, whatever that may be? This doesn’t make any sense. A perfect Creator could have nothing to do with such littleness. Thank God.

  6. Mulled Vine says:

    Great golden nugget post, Casey. For me, this is the strongest logical argument for God, that we need an uncaused Prime-cause that is outside the closed cause-effect system.

  7. Alban says:

    If God, as you say, created the universe of time, space and matter, is He then subject to these characteristics, too? Did He even lose His fundamental properties, because suddenly there is time telling Him to undergo changes? Why would He even think of such a ridiculous notion of seperating cause and effect by inserting time inbetween?

    But most of all, the question is this: Can anything eternal come up with something that is not eternal? How would He know of it? Obviously, if God is everything there is, and therefore the cause of everything, there can be no such thing as time, or time is above God. Therefore, your posts needs some clarification, I think.

  8. casey says:

    Sorry, Alban. You lost me. Yes, created things tend to provide insights into (or possess characteristics of) their creator, but you seem to be arguing the opposite. Why would God be subject to his creation? If I create a two-dimensional piece of artwork, I don’t become two-dimensional. I can do pretty much whatever I want to it, but it has no effect on me other than emotional. God does not become bound by time simply because he creates it.

  9. Alban says:

    I was saying that it is hardly possible that any creator is not subject to the same laws he sets up for his creations, most especially, if there can be nothing outside of an all-encompassing power and God. I don’t know if your example is a valid one. Are you really able to create a two-dimensional artwork. Virtually, maybe, but you can never see it two-dimensionally. All the materials you have available, are three-dimensional. There is no such thing as two-dimensional, is there? It is only an idea.

    You are saying God is outside of time and space. How is that really possible in your perspective? Is He not omni-present and all powerful? But suddenly you have a new power introduced by time and space that constitutes a new set of rules. It even takes his children away from him. He certainly cannot want that to happen. Is He now subject to laws He set in motion? Or, are you saying, everything that happens in time and space happens exactly as God wanted it to happen?

    Also, where did God get the idea of time and space? It seems like the idea of time and space is antagonistic to God’s qualities in every regard. Do you consider it reasonable that God would have such an idea, and even want its effects?

  10. casey says:

    I can assure you, Alban, that pencil drawings are two-dimensional. You can give them the appearance of being three-dimensional, but that’s the best you can do. I guess you either get the example or you don’t. Anyway, it’s beside the point. The point is that the created is subject to the creator, not the other way around.

    When I say that God is outside of time and space, I mean that he can exist without it. He created it, after all. That does not prevent him from being omnipresent.

  11. Alban says:

    Yet He does not exist without it. A cause is cause by its effects. There is no creator without his creation.

    An omni-present or all-encompassing God cannot set up a separate state. Everything will always be within Himself. You would have to explain how it would be true that ideas can leave their source, and take on qualities the source does not contain, becoming different from their own origin, apart from it in kind as well as distance, time and form.