PullMyFinger
Member
...is the 1st step in this process? Is there any conceivable first step that wouldn't assume/ require God's existence?
If you've never made this argument, and have never even seen anyone argue this, then this question is not directed at you. But feel free to post your opinion, anyway.
@Carolina: "God creates himself" requires that God exists, just as "Jeff creates a birdhouse" requires that Jeff exists. Again, if you argue that God could have created himself, what would be the very first step?
@wouldn't you like to know: In order for God to create himself, he would have to have existed already. If some natural process created God, then he didn't create himself. Either way, your argument does not work.
@Carolina: Sorry, didn't expect you to respond, so I wasn't watching for it.
Still, it seems like there would have to have been a first time to start the cycle, in which case, you've got the same problem. If it's always been a cycle, I guess that "works," but it also seems kind of meaningless and improbable - circular reasoning in every sense of the word. It's like the old lady saying that the Earth was on the back of a giant turtle, and when asked what the turtle stood on, she said it was turtles all the way down. Most people don't find infinite regression to be a very satisfying explanation.
If you've never made this argument, and have never even seen anyone argue this, then this question is not directed at you. But feel free to post your opinion, anyway.
@Carolina: "God creates himself" requires that God exists, just as "Jeff creates a birdhouse" requires that Jeff exists. Again, if you argue that God could have created himself, what would be the very first step?
@wouldn't you like to know: In order for God to create himself, he would have to have existed already. If some natural process created God, then he didn't create himself. Either way, your argument does not work.
@Carolina: Sorry, didn't expect you to respond, so I wasn't watching for it.
Still, it seems like there would have to have been a first time to start the cycle, in which case, you've got the same problem. If it's always been a cycle, I guess that "works," but it also seems kind of meaningless and improbable - circular reasoning in every sense of the word. It's like the old lady saying that the Earth was on the back of a giant turtle, and when asked what the turtle stood on, she said it was turtles all the way down. Most people don't find infinite regression to be a very satisfying explanation.