Does Creation Require A Creator?

[illroy 0]

I have had discussions with this guy who says that people NEED to believe in God and that the process of Belief itself seems to be the undoing of Humanity, for example: the need to believe that there is life beyond physical death drives the daily lives of a significant portion humanity like the Christian right and Islamic extremists! I agree. However, my question to him was Who created all this incuding him and I? Don't get me wrong I don't believe in God but I also know that there is no way around the topic of creation of matter without at least entertaining the idea of a master creation system, entity or process. What say you?

[9block 0]

"Does Creation need a creator?" - Wow that is an amazing point of view and I actually like the concept. I don't believe a creation needs a creator. When a peice of grass grows from the ground, who is the creator? The seed? Who created that seed? A peice of grass that grew...Ultimately it is a cycle... and the obvious question everyone would ask now is how and who started the cycle? Well, why did someone have to start the cycle.We are all used to have an object and have an origin. You were the creation of two people. The tree was the creation of a tree's seed. The popsicle stick was the creation of a human farming a tree. Everything was created with purpose and an obvious creation. So who created it all in the beginning? Perhaps no one or nothing. We can now conceive the concept that it was just there. No beginning and no end.

[t3jem 0]

The idea that matter has always been there seems plausable only because something has to have been there before everything else. It is a very tough debate to find how everything was started. In my opinion, it was all started by God, who may not even be made of matter or energy, but merely an entity that can control the universe. I beleive in the big bang theory; however, I beleive it was God who enabled planets, gravity, life forms to occur. There is no way that the complex phisics we deal with today just randomly happened, it had to have been planned.

[salamangkero 0]

When a piece of grass grows from the ground, who is the creator? The seed?

Who created that seed? A peice of grass that grew...

Actually, what you are saying is "making" and not "creating" The primary difference between making and creating is that "making" is the transformation of raw materials into another, possibly more ordered, possibly more chaotic, but essentially different, object(s) Creation, on the other hand, entails the instantiation of an object out of absolutely nothing. This "nothing" does not refer to dark matter, anti-matter, dark energy or what other pseudo-science proponents might insist. It's just that, nothing, the absence of anything: no matter or anti-matter of any sort, no energy, nada.

 

The idea that matter has always been there seems plausible only because something has to have been there before everything else. It is a very tough debate to find how everything was started. In my opinion, it was all started by God, who may not even be made of matter or energy, but merely an entity that can control the universe. I believe in the big bang theory; however, I believe it was God who enabled planets, gravity, life forms to occur. There is no way that the complex physics we deal with today just randomly happened, it had to have been planned.

Your opinion is understandably human. Allow me to borrow a few phrases of Bill Bryson's book, A Short History of Nearly Everything. Imagine that, near a tree by a roadside, you see a twig. Of course, there's nothing quite strange about it. Now suppose, instead of just one twig, you see two twigs, lying on the ground, "joined" at their endpoints. Presumably, there is also nothing too strange. One twig must've fallen and another must've fallen above it.

 

Now suppose you see three twigs, again joined by their common endpoints, however, they have been joined in such a configuration that forms a tetrahedron. Undoubtedly, the most common inference would be, "Somebody made that." As a matter of fact, anything that is seemingly ordered always seems to be the end result of some intelligent design or, at least, a sentient material force. Most of the time, these deductions are correct, however, that does not mean that they are absolutely correct. In other words, concluding that something ordered is a product of intelligent design is more likely to be true, but not absolutely true.

 

Really, if we were to believe in the Big Bang, the world, and life, as we know it, exists only due to a lucky sequence of lucky breaks, as opposed to a series of unfortunate events Were gravity a bit stronger, we'd be living on rock, not gas, planets the size of Jupiter, if life ever began at all. Were it a bit weaker, matter would not have coalesced to form the galaxies we know today. The margin for error is quite slim but this is not, repeat, not definite proof that the universe today has been created, or, at least, orchestrated, by a supreme force.

 

However, allow me to point out that even this is not something validly analogous to creation. For one, while we have countless records of manufacture, we, as a race, have not ever documented a single creation event, apart from mythology. As such, we have completely no idea what to expect in a creation.

 

Ultimately, I'd have to say that, like the existence of God, whether creation requires a creator is a question to which the answer is inherently unknowable in our lifetime, if it will ever be. Then again, hardcore mythologists would most likely attribute it to faith or literary material supposedly written thousands of years ago :XD:

[eka_ys 0]

IMHO, we as human being are much more unique and complicated than rock, plants or animals. One proof is the ability to create something new out of nothing that is only possessed by human, while other species just do things merely to survive. Another analogy: If you have a simple calculator then you can operate it easily, but if you have a brand new hi-tech computer then you will need to read the manual book (which is written by the creator) to use it for maximum capacity & not abuse it. Because nobody knows better about the creation other than the creator himself. Do we need our creator? the answer lies within yourself

[veightar 0]

Looking and the amazing universe and all therein isn't it wonderful enough to need a creator in order to come by?Did our human body, the forest and the beautiful creatures come just by chance. I sometimes wonder who installed all the genetic codes inside human and animals.I think creations need a creator for their existance if not then we have no choice than to believe in Darwin and his organic soup which has no proof. I am saying without a creator then there is an evolution or the existance of smaller gods. In fact although I am a potential Scientist I don't and Have never believed in it because all it's Prooves are not justified. Creations have special effects and characters that wouldn't be possible without and intellectual creature. Think about this: Why is it that the right hand of about 90% human beings more effective than the left. Is it because of the use of left hand protein? Why does even wild animals submit to human authority wheras the bull can easily defeat human. How did all the amazing characters came about?Indeed there should and must be someone behind this. There must be a creator for creations to exists .Although there is some ambiguity about How God Almighty existed All we know and had believe is that he is responsible for our existance .Peace of thoughtThe hen and the chicken who is the first to appearWhy does life uses left hand proteinThe seed and the maize which possibly appeared firstOnly an intellectual creator like God can answer

[salamangkero 0]

Hmmn... I see that posts in this thread have taken a much more emotional turn.I'd like to point out that, however advanced we, as a civilization, may be, it is still quite beyond our powers to create anything "new" out of nothing. For example, to make a calculator, you would need metal, different metals, as a matter of fact. Probably plastic too, if you want a nice casing. Whether it is an ubiquitous arithmetic calculator or an uber-powerful scientific calculator, the fact still remains that the human who made it is merely a "Maker" and not a "Creator"As for the other post, if we assume that something "wonderful" or "beautiful" has to have a creator, then I'm afraid this debate has devolved into a petty prayer meeting or artist's workshop. For one, the major flaw in that argument is that the basis of how wonderful or beautiful something is is highly subjective, even wildly so. Also, the animals didn't submit to us.Really now, don't you find it totally conceited to foolishly believe the universe was created for the human race? The animals, or generally speaking, the wilderness did not submit to humanity. Rather, we hacked and slashed our way that those who resisted had died in vain. Anyone who tells me humans are this planet's most intelligent specie will get a faceful of guffaws and laughter.Humans, don't flatter yourselves too much. You can't create anything and the universe is not created for you either.

[truefusion 3]

Rather, we hacked and slashed our way that those who resisted had died in vain.

Not necessarily, for with a little love, the animal itself can be your friend. Even the wildest beasts can be tamed in this fashion. It depends on how they are raised, i suppose. Sure when tempted they may become wild again, but hacking and slashing is not necessary. But if everything was chaotic, i highly doubt this would be possible.

IMHO, we as human being are much more unique and complicated than rock, plants or animals.

I must agree to an extent, for i find some people impossible to understand at times, while these other things are far more easier to understand or fully understandable.

[Plenoptic 0]

Well, being the humans that we are, we want to know about things, where they came from, what they are for, why they are there. Despite your religion or feeling, suppose there was a creator of everything. Why did he create it? How did he create it? Who created him? If not who, how was he created? You are never really going to have an answer to that if there is a creator because you can't really explain everything. There is always going to be an endless cycle. Lets talk about the "Big Bang", how is it possible to expand all that much, where did all this matter come from? What was it like before the big bang? Why did the "big bang" occur? There is a limitless possibilities of questions wondering what and how we came to be and me may not ever know the answer to that because it's an endless cycle. We assume everything must have come from something, it's rather mind blowing to think about such an endless cycle because if you go back far enough you are gonna be creating something out of nothing, but how?

[truefusion 3]

Who created him? If not who, how was he created? You are never really going to have an answer to that if there is a creator because you can't really explain everything. There is always going to be an endless cycle.

Not necessarily, for since they are usually in a different dimension, that dimension doesn't mean they are bound to creation. Just like they are not bound to time, so may they be not bound to creation. Some religions don't include their gods being from another dimension but in the very dimensions that we're in, nor do they mention or imply that they are capable of going beyond this dimension; some even attribute their gods to creation itself (e.g. a carved piece of wood). This fact would put an end to this "endless" cycle, while still remaing believable.

[salamangkero 0]

I'd like to observe that asking, who created the creator is very much as pointless as the paradox, "If god can do anything, can he make a wheel so large that he can't lift it?"See, we are dealing with hypothetical entities. Be it God, gods or goddesses, the Atom (the seed of the Big Bang. It's not called the Atom but, for simplicity's sake, let's just assume it was), whatever, we are thinking of a Creator that we have yet to see in tangible, empirical form. Isn't it unfair to equate them with everything else?In the God's wheel paradox, isn't it quite unfair to assume that God has the same limitations as man, specifically, the inability to move something of dire mass? Analogously, isn't it a bit imprudent to assume the Creator (whoever or whatever it is) also need to be made or created?True, true, the laws of physics state that matter (and energy) cannot be created or destroyed. How sure are we that such "laws" are absolute? Even assuming the laws are immutable, why the need to assume the Creator is matter (or energy)?I'm tempted to lash out, "Give it a rest, people," were it not for the interesting ideas and insights I come across. Keep 'em coming people :XD:

[mojoman 0]

Well in my opinion, something or someone has to set everything in motion. You cant get something from nothing imo really.

[Forbez 0]

Does Creation Require A Creator?Does food need a chef?Yes it does, both science and religion both believe that there is a creator. Whether that be god, or whether that be scientific reason. To answer you question, yes there is a creator of this place we call home.

[truefusion 3]

Does food need a chef?

Unfortunately, this "rhetorical" question is capable of being answered with a, "No." For food does not need a chef, especially simple things like regular fruits and vegetables. Perhaps if you went with, "Does a child need a parent?", then you might have something there.

... "If god can do anything, can he make a wheel so large that he can't lift it?"

A wheel, eh? There's something slightly different, i'm used to hearing it being a rock.

[Dooga 0]

I find this discussion very interesting. Is it possible to not believe in God, but believe in Creationism? Well I think there must be SOMEONE or something to create another thing... because I don't think something popping out of nowhere is believable, at least, for me. Personally I still believe in more of a scientific explanation, yet does creationism mean that something spiritual happened, or could it even be explained in the scientific point of view?I guess I'm not very knowledgeable about creationism, as I was raised believing in evolution, which was what all preliminary textbooks say.