"Blogging from Chicagoland to the Nations about the Hope and Wholeness of Jesus Christ!"

Follow codytibm on Twitter

The Uncreated Creator and the Atheist's Response

     In my previous post,  I presented four major principles taught by the Bible with respect to the doctrine of Creation.  I want now to reflect a bit further on these ideas. 

 

1.   The source and cause of the created world is an uncreated God who is thus supreme and sovereign over all creation (cf. Gen. 1:1ff; Ps. 89:11, 104:24, 148; Isa. 40:25-26, 42:5; Eph. 3:9; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2; Rev. 4:11).

 

     I won’t spend much time on this idea because I feel like I’ve already addressed it to some extent.  The bottom line is that if you push them far enough, Darwinists find it impossible to get around the need for an intelligent designer.  As I said previously, they just can’t get the evolutionary engine running without someone turning the key.  Or, if you prefer, they can’t roll the Yahtzee. 

     Now, what ends up happening, is that the atheist will almost always respond to this dilemma by asking who created God.  The rationale is that if the complexity of a protein molecule requires an intelligent creator, surely the greatly more complex creator needs an even more intelligent source.  It seems that the attempt is to make the teleological argument for the existence of God seem unreasonable. 

     I have heard Christian apologists respond to this, but I haven’t found their responses all that compelling.  To me,  all this question does it require us to assume that the ultimate source of creation must be itself eternal and self-existent.   Maybe I’m missing something, but I do not get why that doesn’t make sense to the atheist.  It is completely reasonable to assume that there is an intelligence that is responsible for the origin of the universe and that this intelligence is eternal and has aseity.  And it just so happens, that the Bible describes God as having those attributes (e.g. Ps. 90:2).

 

     Have you encountered other arguments that you find difficult to respond to?  Post in the comment section and we’ll talk.

 

Blessings!

2 comments (Add your own)

1. trimtab wrote:
"To me, all this question does it require us to assume that the ultimate source of creation must be itself eternal and self-existent."

That sounds good, but you'd need evidence to back it up. Also, your assumption doesn't explain much.

"And it just so happens, that the Bible describes God as having those attributes (e.g. Ps. 90:2)."

It's in the bible, therefore it's true?

January 18, 2009 @ 1:03 AM

2. Cody wrote:
TT:
"That sounds good, but you'd need evidence to back it up. Also, your assumption doesn't explain much."

Just responding to the question that is sometimes posed. Demonstrating that the question rather misses the theological point of God's aseity. The question posed is a theologically speculative one (who created God) and thus, I don't think requires a lab experiment, but rather a logical answer.

TT:
"It's in the bible, therefore it's true?"

You said it, not me.

Really, I'm just pointing out that the logical point - God must be eternal, uncreated - is what the Bible testifies about God. If the Bible said differently, then, okay, I'd have a hard time answering the "who created God question."

January 18, 2009 @ 3:32 AM

Add a New Comment

Enter the code you see below:
code
 

Comment Guidelines: No HTML is allowed. Off-topic or inappropriate comments will be edited or deleted. Thanks.


Click here to see all TIBM recommended books, films, and music.


If you are South Asian young adult in Chicagoland, help us out by taking this quick survey.

The Ramblings Archive Month by Month