Why would you assume that there has to be a creator?
344222
Well, it lacks of logic that's it. If everything in the universe needs a creator, then the creator needs a creator, since he's part of the universe, if something like god can exists without a creator, why can't the universe exists without a creator?\n\nIf the universe and its "order" requiere design, does that mean god as a being lacks of order? If there is order in him as a being, doesn't it means it needs a designer since order can't exist without a designer or, can it? If something like god, as a being, can have order without a designer, why can't the universe have order without a designer?\n\nIf nothing can't be created from nothing and the existance of the universe implies creation, does that mean the existance of god implies he had to be created? If god can exist without creation, can't the universe exist without creation? Who created god? If he needs no creator, why does the universe needs a creator?\n\nIf god has no begining and end, why can't the universe have no beginign and end and just being in constant change? Who really knows without basing his knowledge in ancient books.\n\nIt sounds to me like god is just a concept used to explain everything that lacks of logic or just can't be explained yet, since our knowledge is very limited. God violates logic and to me it can only exists through faith. If the world is too beautiful that it can't be an accident, does that mean god ain't beautiful? Because if he is, he needs a creator, I mean, beautiful things need a creator, don't they? Where does the logic lays?\n\nSometimes I think it's hard for some to simply admit "I don't know". Can the universe exists without a designer? Well, I don't know and I don't need to make fairy tales to explain its creation, because really, I don't know and those who claim they do, they sound highly suspicious... They do.
551677
Take a look at the amazing universe all around you - The galaxies, stars and planets... the beauty of mountains and trees and everything that lives, grows and breathes on the Earth.  No sane person believes that the great complexity of the natural universe in general and living organisms in particular could just exist fully formed with no cause and no origin.\n\nSo, how can any sane person possibly believe that all this amazing complexity is sourced in an intelligent designer who just exists fully formed with no cause and no origin?  That would be completely absurd.  The only possible explanation is that the universe had a natural origin, and that the order and complexity we observe in the universe has arisen over billions of years from simplicity and chaos by the effect of unthinking, undirected natural processes.  Science, in the form of cosmology and biology, shows us that this is indeed the case.\n\nThe idea of a creator god has no explanatory value - It is intellectual laziness, a non-answer, not a solution to the question of existence but a way of avoiding the question.  It should and will be consigned to history along with all our other naive superstitious beliefs.
1116103
Gremlin I have contemplated this question for many years. The conclusion I have come to is this. For the Universe to exist today one of two things that we deem to be impossible has to have happened. Either something materialized from nothing, or something always was. At that point that we call "the beginning" one of those two things was fact. Which one, we may never know. So for me, "In the beginning God created" is as good an explanation as any. It cannot be proved or disproved. Perhaps it may be stated that in the beginning God said "BANG!!!". Perhaps God's previous job was just being an idea. Perhaps it was being the Idea (logos). Then the idea exploded into being, and God said "BANG".
1003977
Have you thought of a wonderful god who doesn't have a creator?\nWhat about the beautiful creator who doesn't have his or her own creator as well.\nThe first cause argument is so old and lame.  If you need a creator to explain everything, explain where the creator came from, please.
242121
It takes what one would call 'faith'. I personally consider myself to have no religion, therefore I don't entirely understand why someone, rather most people in this world, would believe in a 'higher power', an 'intelligent creator', or 'GOD'.
999613
This sort of thinking should be based on observation. You can come up with any theory you like, but if it does not explain what is seen it is useless.\n\nOn this basis:\n\n1. the universe (and implcitly nature) had a beginning, about 13.7 billion years ago\n2. that beginning did not require a creator (though you may choose to believe in one - you just won't find him experimentally)
224782
Though I do agree with you, people who are atheists or agnostics will try to give a theoretical explanation as to how they believe the earth came into existence without God. They would, of course, be deceived because even if we boil all of the "what if's" down to the Big Bang theory, you still have one very important question, "Where did the molecules come from?" Even science has to admit that something can't come from nothing. So, there would have to be a something, or more accurately, a Someone, who is intelligent, creative, and powerful to have created our entire universe.
852226
You've opened up the box of mirrors. If you ask, "Who created humanity?", then state it must be God, the only logical follow-up question becomes, "Who created God?" Then who created that creator, and that creator, and that creator, ad nauseum. It's the "God of the Gaps" argument. If there is something we don't understand, it must be God. Well, in fact, there is no compelling reason to believe it "must be God."\n\nI don't believe in God, and I've thought this out fairly carefully.\n\nFirst, you have to define the term "God." The problem with most theists is that this term is a moving target.\n\nIn addition, because there is no evidence either for or against the existence of God, you cannot use deductive logic (a+b=c; therefore c-b=a). You can only reach a conclusion by inductive reasoning using the balance of evidence (90% of A is also B; C is B, so the chances are 90% that C is also A). \n\nSo everything stated hereafter is based on inductive reasoning. I believe it to be true, but it is not certain. However, it is even certain to assert that God exists, based on my statements below.\n\nI will assert (and others may shoot this down) that the only RELEVANT definition of God states that he intervenes to circumvent natural laws.\n\nIf God circumvents natural laws, then it is impossible to understand natural laws. All scientific findings would have to include the stipulation, "it is also possible that these results are an act of God, a miracle, thereby making our research meaningless."\n\nHowever, since we have been able to expand our knowledge of natural laws (evidenced by every appliance in your kitchen), the scientific method works in this discovery. And the likely conclusion is that God, at least the intervening kind, does not exist.\n\nAdditionally, if God is defined as all loving, all powerful, and all knowing, then it is impossible to explain suffering. Either God is not all loving (he acts sadistically), not all powerful (he cannot prevent suffering), or not all knowing (he created suffering by mistake because he didn't know the consequences of his actions).\n\nIf God is less than these and/or does not intervene in our existence, then he is either non-existent or irrelevant. The classic argument is that I cannot prove that a china teapot is or is not orbiting the sun directly across from the earth's orbit. But while I cannot prove this is not true, the evidence against it is compelling.\n\nThe evidence against God is equally compelling, and while it is not possible to prove beyond any doubt, it makes more sense to live your life with an assumption that there is no God.\n\nIt is more compelling to me that humans have invented God to reflect the thoughts of the ruling powers in a particular time. Events happened, and in a pre-scientific age, people hadn't a clue regarding the causes. No one could explain disease, floods, earthquakes, or lunar eclipses. Because humans are always looking for reasons, when none are found, it was the natural inclination to declare the cause to be "God" (or gods). As the faith grew, miracles and laws have been ascribed to this Divinity, and an orthodoxy grows up around it.\n\nSuccessful religions over the long run also are accompanied by some level of economic well-being to the populace. Unsuccessful ones are seen as false because they don't lead to improved lives.\n\nNow it seems unhelpful to believe in such superstition. The only matters that aid in our ongoing well being are work, location, health, sustenance, and pure, blind luck.\n\nSo, that's why I find God unbelievable. And you know what? It's okay if you do believe God does exists.
337877
i think there might be a god, but i'm not sure. i don't think a god would be as judegmental as christians make him out to be. what would really make me a believer would have to be a personal experience of some kind.
655235
I also belive in creation. Mant of these questions are answered in the book : A Case for a Creator.  That book has increased my faith alot.
1063270
There is a creator.  Without intelligent design, we would be.... what?  EVERYTHING is evidence of intelligent design.  Even a worm cannot be made by a man.  That tells you something, right? Even a person who has not read Genesis can figure out that they cannot 'create' anything.  We can only take the created raw materials and mix and match them around to make something... but never CREATE anything.  God is not a creature... he always WAS, so that is why he can create.
492205
You make a very interesting argument, and you write far better than I have become accustomed to reading around here.\n\nHowever, you are omitting one crucial fact. There is still a dearth of evidence supporting this claim. Design implies a designer. I have yet to see evidence supporting the existence of said celestial draughtsman. For every instance of, "look at how elegant this is," there are thousands of "if this is a matter of design, it was a very poor choice."\n\nYour claim is certainly possible, then again, so is the idea that we are all brains in jars in some laboratory in the 1890's. It is, however, based on the evidence available, so improbable that I can comfortably say that it is not a viable explanation.\n\nThat said, I am very happy to see someone trying to work with new worldviews when it comes to a discussion of creation, rather than trying to conform the known universe to fit the molds cast in the scriptures.
1008153
Take a look around you from where you sit. You will notice that everything in the room is ‘made’: the walls, the upholstery, the ceiling, the chair where you sit, the book you hold in your hand, the glass on the table and countless other details. None of them happen to exist in your room of their own accord. Even the simple loops of the carpet were made by someone: they did not appear spontaneously or by chance.\nA person who is about to read a book knows that it has been written by an author for a specific reason. It would not even occur to him that this book might have come into being by chance. In the same manner, a person who sees a sculpture has no doubt whatsoever that it was made by a sculptor. And not just works of art: even a few bricks resting on top of one another make one think that they must have been brought to rest just so by someone within a certain plan. Therefore, everywhere where there is an order – either small or big – a founder and protector of this order must also exist. If, one day, somebody came forward and said that raw iron and coal came together to form steel by chance, which in turn constructed the Eiffel Tower again by chance, would not he and those who believed him be regarded as insane?\nThe claim of the theory of evolution, the unique method of denying the existence of Allah(God), is no different than this. According to the theory, inorganic molecules formed amino acids by chance, amino acids formed proteins by chance, and finally proteins formed living creatures again by chance. However, the probability of a living creature being formed by coincidence is less than the probability of the Eiffel Tower being formed in the same manner, because even the simplest human cell is more sophisticated than any man-made structure in the world.\nHow is it possible to think that the balance in the world came about by coincidence when the extraordinary harmony of nature is observable even with the naked eye? It is the most unreasonable claim to say that the universe, each point of which suggests the existence of its Creator, has come into being on its own.\nTherefore, there should be an owner of the balance visible everywhere from our body to the farthest corners of the inconceivably vast universe. So, who is this Creator that ordained everything so subtly and created all?\nHe cannot be any material being present within the universe, because His must be a will that existed before the universe and created the universe thereupon. The Almighty Creator is One Whom everything finds existence, yet Whose existence is without any beginning or end.\nReligion teaches us the identity of our Creator Whose existence we discover with our reason. Through what He has revealed to us as religion, we know that He is Allah, the Compassionate and the Merciful, Who created the heavens and the earth from nothing.\nAlthough most people have the capability to grasp this fact, they spend their lives unaware of it. When they look at a landscape painting, they wonder who its painter is. Later, they praise the artist at length for his beautiful work of art. Despite the fact that they face numerous originals of that painting the moment they turn around, they still disregard the existence of Allah, Who is the only owner of all these beauties. In truth, not even a lengthy research is needed to understand the existence of Allah. Even if one had to live in a room from the time he was born, countless pieces of evidence in this room alone would be enough for him to grasp the existence of Allah.\nThe human body so overflows with evidence that it could not be contained in many \nmultivolume encyclopaedias. Even giving a few minutes of conscientious thought to it all is enough to understand the existence of Allah. The present order is protected by Allah and maintained by Him.\nThe human body is not the only food for thought. Life abides in every square millimetre of the earth, be it observable by men or not. The world overflows with many l
515163
If god existed he had to be made of something. What???\nAtoms, Energy, or maybe some thing beyond our imaginations.\nIF IT WAS ENERGY or ATOMS THEN WHY IS HE SO DIFF RENT FROM US.\nNOW IF he was MADE OF SOMETHING EVEN BEYOND OUR IMAGINATIONS then there has to be someone who created those things which make god up.\nAND IF YOU BELIEVE THAT GOD JUST HAPPENED TO EXIST, BELIEVE THAT GOD IS FUNDAMENTAL, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU what is the problem with treating the universe the same way ???
102517
Whether or not there is a God I can't believe He spends all\nHis time basking in the worship of His followers,punishing\nthe sinful,and dreaming up natural disasters to test or\npunish Humanity. A Creator of the Universe might not even\nbe aware of our existence. If He was,we could seem like nothing more than microscopic beings,of no real interest.
202067
a straight answer? God wasn't created. He has just always been (existed). He is the author of all life, so He can't be created by anthing else.
1131537
How convenient.  "You shall know I exist by those who ask whether I exist."\n\nThen again, your question is generalizing and is thus pointless.