The above question pops up so often that I would like to
dedicate a thread to it, and if it can be made a sticky thread
(hello mods?) it would even be better!
This question is a major objection that atheists put forward to
justify their disbelief. Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), a famous
British philosopher, in his influential little essay, Why I am
not a Christian, put this forward as his first objection.
Today’s atheists repeat the objection, including Richard Dawkins
(The God Delusion).
One of the most established principles of logic / science /
reality is the principle of causality: something that has a
beginning has a sufficient cause. The principle is not, ‘Everything
has a cause’; Bertrand Russell misstated it. No, the principle is,
‘Everything that has a beginning has a sufficient cause’.
Just a moment’s thought confirms this—something which had no
beginning has no need of a cause. Furthermore, a cause has to be
sufficient, or adequate. ‘You were found in a cabbage patch’ is not
a sufficient explanation for your existence.
Today’s atheists, who like to use words like ‘rational’,
‘reasonable’ and ‘scientific’ in describing their beliefs, believe
that the greatest beginning of all—that of the universe—had no
cause whatsoever! Some admit it is a problem, but they claim that
saying ‘God did it’ explains nothing because you then have to
explain where God came from. But is this a valid objection?
The cause of the universe must have been non-material because if
the cause was material / natural, it would be subject to the same
laws of decay as the universe. That means it would have to have had
a beginning itself and you have the same problem as cycles of
births and deaths of universes. So the cause of the universe’s
beginning must have been super-natural, i.e. non-material
or spirit—a cause outside of space-matter-time. Such a
cause would not be subject to the law of decay and so would not
have a beginning. That is, the cause had to be eternal spirit.
Furthermore, the cause of the universe had to be incredibly
powerful; the sheer size and energy seen in the
universe together speak of that power; there had to be a
sufficient cause.
That sounds like the God of the Bible to me.
Note that the Bible says, “In the beginning God created the
heavens and the earth” (Genesis
1:1). Here God created time itself. Only One who
is outside of time, that is, timeless, or eternal, could do
this.
Now to ask
where someone who is eternal, someone who had no beginning, came
from (‘Who created God?’) is like asking, ‘To whom is the bachelor
married?’ It is an irrational question.
The above information is taken from http://creation.com/who-created-god
For more responses to the above question see the following
links:
http://creation.com/if-god-created-the-universe-then-who-created-god
http://creation.com/who-designed-the-designer-the-old-who-created-god-canard-revisited
I welcome anyone to dialogue on the above question without
sidetracking into other areas of theology or Biblical issues.