This site is dedicated to the advancement of Atheistic Humanism

And a New Enlightenment in which mankind is free from ignorance, superstition and fear!

REJECTION OF THEISM - redirecting; please wait!

For the most part all religions believe that some sort of god or gods created all or part of our universe. The Abrahamic religions, of course, believe in a single god that created everything and to whom all persons must be obedient. Other religions believe in multiple gods with perhaps one being supreme. For others, god or the gods are somewhat ill-defined. And, of course, I reject God, any other god or gods or any type of spiritual being.

Now, I realize that proving that something does not exist, especially considering the vastness of space and time, is a substantial challenge, but to say that you are an atheist requires that you be able to make a plausible argument that a god does not exist. To express any type of ambivalence about the existence of a god makes you an agnostic.

When I explain to people what I believe, some, of course, completely reject my beliefs and rely instead upon the Bible or whatever their sacred document is. Others will listen and admit that much of what we believe about god and religion is pure mythology.

Unless a person is an atheist, however, they will nearly always express belief that some higher power must have created this universe, generally indicating that "all of this", i.e., the universe, could not have come into existence without a creator. They look at the vastness of the universe and complicated nature of its composition and assert that it could exist only if an intelligent entity created it. Generally, they will then choose a complex manmade item, for instance a watch, saying that a watch must have been created by an intelligent entity, else it would not exist. The universe is a complex entity and, therefore, it too must have been created by an intelligent force, they argue.

The purpose of this article is to examine whether a supreme entity was necessary for this universe to exist and frankly, as humans, it is a question that can overwhelm us.

First, in the topic "Putting things in perspective" in the section on Our Human Perspectives, I outlined three areas which allow our logic to become skewed. First, I pointed out that we humans look at our universe from a very limited perspective, both in terms of space and time. Second, we humans are makers and builders of things – tools, structures, art – you name it and some human has either made it or wanted to do so at some time. Third, we confuse the natural world with our manmade world. I think it is important to consider those points when we examine the concept of God or any other supernatural entity.

WHO CREATED GOD?

The Abrahamic religions believe that God created the universe. Other religions may have a similar belief, but we can certainly say that the Abrahamic religions believe that the universe is divinely created. For me that raises the question: Who then created God?

As stated in the Introduction, we humans are so accustomed to creating things ourselves, we therefore, require in our minds that everything right down to the universe must be created. But, what about God? If the universe needs a creator, should not God need a creator, also?

Astoundingly, many Christian exempt God from the necessity of being created. They believe that as the creator, God has no beginning and no end and needs no creator.

I am sure that there has been much written on this subject, but I would like to analyze an article entitled If God created the universe, then who created God? Answering the Critics by Jonathan Sarfati found on the Answers by Genesis Ministries web site.

First, the very title makes an assumption that needs to be proved and not assumed. It states: "If God created the universe…" which is not a proven circumstance and which I, as an atheist, reject.

Then, the article begins by stating: "But God by definition is the uncreated creator of the universe, so the question 'Who created God?' is illogical…" Well, first, I do not accept idea that God is the creator of the universe by definition and reject the idea that God even exists, so the question does in fact become logical. What the article fails to realize is that the reason atheists and others ask the question about the origin of God is because we feel that one must adequately answer the question about the origin of God to justify the very existence of God. If you cannot determine the origin of God, then that is some evidence (perhaps even all of the evidence) that you need to prove God does not exist. You cannot answer a question by defining the premises so as to do away with the question which is what this article attempts to do.

Sarfati then moves on arguing that it is provable that the universe had a beginning and all things with a beginning must have a cause for their creation, the universe included. He says: "God, unlike the universe, had no beginning, so doesn't need a cause." Furthermore, Sarfati argues that God, as the creator of the whole universe, created time and "therefore He is not limited by the time dimension He created, so has no beginning in time…"

After arguing that the universe had a beginning and trying to prove it with an analysis of Laws of Thermodynamics, he argues that "the universe cannot be self-caused" and that "nothing can create itself, because that would mean that it existed before it came into existence, which is a logical absurdity."

He summarizes his points as follows (these are quotes):

• The universe (including time itself) can be shown to have had a beginning.
• It is unreasonable to believe something could begin to exist without a cause.
• The universe therefore requires a cause, just as Genesis 1:1 and Romans 1:20 teach.
• God, as creator of time, is outside of time. Since therefore He has no beginning in time, He has always existed, so doesn't need a cause.

Now, I do not question the argument that the universe as we know it today had a beginning. I do not know where it came from and doubt that there was any purpose in its origins as purpose requires an intelligence to establish the purpose. I do question the idea that God created the universe. Sarfati's article does nothing to establish any type of proof in that regard, because all of the "proof" offered is in the form of predefined assumptions and premises that God exists and did create the universe.

I agree that something cannot create itself, but it is as logical to believe that the universe came into existence on its own as it is to believe that God came into existence on his own. If you remove from Sarfati's argument the unproven assumption that God, as the creator, has no beginning or end and is uncreated, and require that God have a beginning and a creator, then you arrive at the same conclusion he has of the universe, i.e., that "nothing can create itself, because that would mean that it existed before it came into existence, which is a logical absurdity."

As I have stated elsewhere on this web site, most of the sacred documents are self-proving documents – if you already believe in what the Bible says, you will find plenty of proof in it for your beliefs. Thus, when Sarfati quotes Biblical passages he is offering no proof whatsoever. The existence of God and God as the creator of the universe must be externally provable. Passages from the Bible are not external proof and worthless in terms of evidence.

CONCLUSION

So, how did the universe come to be? I must admit that I have no idea and frankly the concepts of infinite time and infinite space are probably the two concepts that I find most perplexing. Whether I know the answer or not, every other question that I confront seems to have a logical answer, but the fact that time and space may be infinite is beyond logic to me.

What I do know is that the universe operates based upon the interaction of energy and matter in ways that never vary when the same set of circumstances repeat themselves. Particles, planets and stars interact in identical ways given identical circumstances. There is absolutely no evidence of the intervention of an intelligent force in the interaction of the planets, stars and galaxies.

I, further, know that the requirement of a creator introduces absurd concepts into the universe. If we must have a creator of the universe, then we must have a creator of the creator. If we must have a creator of the creator, then should we not then have a creator of the creator of the creator, and so on ad nauseam?

The universe exists and operates without intelligent intervention. Is it not logical then that it came into existence without intelligent intervention? Are we to believe that the creator started all of this and then just left it to run without the creator's further intervention? I see substantial evidence of the universe; I see no evidence of a creator. It is much easier for me to believe that the universe that I can see and somewhat define came into existence on its own than to believe that a creator that I cannot see or define came into existence on its own and then created the universe.

My conclusion then is that the universe did not need a creator, did not have a creator and there is no God!!

Of course, I am well aware that most religions believe that their god or gods do interact with them on a day to day basis. The purpose of this essay is to consider the "necessity" of a creator of the universe, not the alleged involvement of a god in our human lives. The latter subject is dealt with elsewhere on this web site. However, I must say that my belief is that the day to day involvement of a god in our human lives is, to say the least, pure fabrication and based upon the imagination of the human brain.