It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Who Created God? This is the Ultimate Question.

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on May, 18 2010 @ 11:32 PM
Centurion is right.
We, the finite, cannot comprehend the Infinite. The title of the thread is a child's question, every child asks this. How can you explain to a child that there never was a beginning? In a world where all we have are beginnings and ends, the idea of endlessness cannot be contemplated.
Relax! It'll all work out.


posted on May, 18 2010 @ 11:51 PM
reply to post by Kaytagg

Yes, how dare he answer the question asked by the OP in a manner that does please you! He has some nerve. Perhaps a "god" is not needed per say, but if one exists what does it matter what we think is needed?

posted on May, 18 2010 @ 11:51 PM
[edit on 19-5-2010 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:14 AM
reply to post by tsi1991awd

I thought that was only a theory. I once watched a video, with this guy claiming that if this theory was proven to be correct, it would prove the existence of the afterlife, because '___' was a chemical which allowed you to go to the other side or something like that. Can't remember exactly what his argument was, but he used the theory of '___' flooding the brain as evidence for the afterlife.

The reason i believe that NDE's are a true experiences, is because my mom had one once, and she said she could read the minds of my grand parents while having the OBE, and even my extremly skeptic grandpa agrees that she was right on. He's stil an atheist though, and just thinks it was a extremly lucky guess. Which, of course it very well could be!! But then i see account of people born blind describing sight for the first time, a woman with all blood drained from her brain describing everything the Doctors and nurses were talking about, plus the tools they were using. According to the Doctor, stuff, she couldn't possible have known with no blood running to her brain. People who describe things and events in other rooms of the hospital.

If the '___' release is there to help us ease into death, wouldn't you agree that it would have to be a fairly commen phenomena, if it's some sort of defence mechanism, then why does only about 20-30%(Numbers i've read somewhere, can't remember where, but i'm pretty sure it's correct) of cardiac arrest survivors experience them, people from different cultures, with different genes, with no apparent similarities at all? If it's a defence mechanism, why the hell experiences?

Sorry to get off topic there!! But i believe that the "God" talked about in these accounts, gives a pretty good explaination as to why he/she/it doesn't need a creator.

I agree that some of my hope's for NDE's to be real are wishfull thinking. I could be wrong. I sure hope i'm not. Only time will tell. Maybe Sam Parnia's AWARE Study will reveal something!!

[edit on 19-5-2010 by JokerzReality]

[edit on 19-5-2010 by JokerzReality]

posted on May, 19 2010 @ 07:46 AM
reply to post by NorEaster

One question.

How can something that lacks matter, time and/or space affect matter, time or space? Only through shared context can two "things" interact. If two "things" do not share context - meaning that they don't exist in a relational sense with one another - then what is it that allows them the capacity to interact?

Does the mind consist of matter, space or time?
Are thoughts made of matter, space or time?

By thinking certain thoughts I can effect my heart rate, I can move my limbs, thereby having direct influence over matter, space and time, and yet thoughts are seemingly very intangible things.

What about even the intention to think, where does that originate from.
Can I think that I am going to create a thought, or is there something else behind the thought?

Can I be aware of the thought as I create it?
Is awareness a form of thinking, or is it beyond thinking?

God knows :-)

posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:55 AM
God is the end result of the emergence of the universe from the inter-dimensional void.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 03:38 PM
Easy, humans created the concept of "God", humans however, DID NOT create the force that created the Universe.

Also there is a deference between god with the little "g" and God with the big "G".

All I know is whoever created the Universe is very powerful and I know this force is NOT humans like us.

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:01 PM
God was Not Created but was the Discovery of The Self....

Known as Awareness, Consciousness, LIFE or The True Mind in the ancient writings..

One Ancient writing is called...

"The Thunder Perfect Mind"

which can be found on the net...

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:17 PM
What is God?

This is given in the Roman collection of Greek and Hebrew Writings known as the bible today....

In The Gospel According to John… K.J. version. Chapter 1 to 5 Quote;

1. In the beginning was The "Word",

( a "Word" is a String of Letters usually used in Communication)

and The Word was God.

So the "Word" referred to is spelt GODG, O, D.

2. He was in the beginning with God.

Who is the "He" that is mentioned here?

3. All things were made through Him,

Here the word “Him” is used again, and that All things were made through "Him"…

and without Him nothing was made that was made.

All was made Through "Him", that is “Himwho was with God.

4. In Him was LIFE,
and the LIFE was the LIGHT of Men

So The "Him" is LIVING... i.e. Alive, Aware, Conscious, or The True Mind.

Refer to an Ancient Book called...

"The Thunder Perfect Mind"

Easily found on the net.

5. And the LIGHT shines in the Darkness,
and the darkness did Not comprehend it.

The above would suggest that God comprises of 2 Components…

a. A "Word" in this case, the "Word" is spelt G, O, D. or God.

b. LIFE which is the LIGHT.

In the original Greek text, this is Sun LIGHT hence "The SUN of Righteousness" referred to, in the Book of MALACHI in the O.T.

These 2 Components Combined, form a 3rd Component...

On the Covers of old bibles and Hymn books was this…


The "I N Z" refers to the "Geometric Algorithm" that All was/is Created through.

a. The “I” refers to the First movement, "To & Fro" of the True Mind ("Consciousness", "Awareness" or The LIFE.)

b. The “N” refers to the "To & Fro" movement, but in 2 Directions (Up & Down, Left & Right Simultaneously. )

c. The “Z” is the Rotation of the “N”, The Second Function, "Rotation" of the True Mind (Consciousness, Awareness or The LIFE.)

Everything that exists is either straight (To & Fro) or Curved (Rotation) or the Combination of these 2.

There are No other shapes in existence.

So these 2 are the Geometric building blocks of All.

Because All is Created from Opposites, Found in the I N Z, it is Also known as "The Paradoxical Geometric Algorithm"…

The "I N Z" can be seen in every humans Face as well as many other Species...

Check it out... Look at others or at your own face in a mirror ???

The nose forms the "I"
The Eyes are in the top 2 triangles of the Word I N Z
And the mouth is the lower section of the Word.

Note the forming of the cheeks above the mouth, forming the Lower section of the "X"
formed by the "N" and "Z" in the Word I N Z ???

posted on May, 20 2010 @ 04:26 PM
Chuck Norris created God.

This is self-evident.

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 12:59 AM

Originally posted by tsi1991awd
...I do believe there was a man named Jesus that spread the WORD of God. Like many people do today.

His name is Yahushua which means Yah is Salvation as Mattit'yah 1:21 states not Jesus. They don't even have J's in Hebrew or Aramaic. And transliteration is a lie to cover up the true names of critical people and places. Even the Greeks and Romans of his day called him Yahushua because names are universal.

Elohim (God) is a force. He is energy. An energy that is the root of all energy beyond the comprehension of our feeble human minds. The problem is that we humans try to understand things that we were never meant to understand. Leave it alone or it will continue to play with your minds. Elohim told us that when we leave this life and if we make it to eternal paradise all of these mysteries will be revealed.

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 01:06 AM
reply to post by SunIsSon

reply to post by tsi1991awd

ver wonder why Religions say NOT TO QUESTION ANYTHING and to have FAITH?

And it says this where exactly? Where is YOUR evidence sir? All I see is a bunch of babbling and personal conjecture of God just like the rest of us.

t has been proven that once you start to die and your brain knows you are about to go, your brain will flood itself with '___' to help you "ease" into death. You won't feel much pain and you will hallucinate.

How does '___' ease you into death? It is the most powerful psychedelic known to man, it is not a pain killer. Morphine may 'ease' you into death but certainly not '___'. It might explain OBEs, but maybe not. How do you explain people who have experiences after being brain dead for several minutes.

[edit on 21-5-2010 by Centurionx]

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 01:08 AM

Originally posted by avatar01
Chuck Norris created God.

This is self-evident.

The Chuck Norris thing died years ago.

Totally not funny anymore, thanks for adding absolutely nothing to this thread.

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 02:17 AM
I think before wondering who created God, it would be kinda interesting to proof his/her/it's existence in the first place

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 02:33 AM

Originally posted by MrXYZ
I think before wondering who created God, it would be kinda interesting to proof his/her/it's existence in the first place

As I stated earlier, this thread automatically assumes God's existence.

A different thread would be required to debate whether God even exists or not.

As previous posters seem to believe, humans created God. However, this still means that God exists.


posted on May, 21 2010 @ 03:36 AM
reply to post by TarzanBeta

Well, not necessarily. Humans could have created God just like they created Harry Potter, as a part of their imagination, to fill the gaps in knowledge of things they don't understand. Let's face it, we don't know why we exist, so creating a arguably fictive character who we can attribute our existence too is comforting to some people.

That doesn't mean he/she/it exists though...humans are able to create something that doesn't really exist. Harry Potter doesn't exist, his movies still have moral statements though. The bible mentions God, and makes a lot of moral statement, but that doesn't automatically mean God exists.

But yeah, you could argue that humans created God...

But like you said, this is not the goal of this thread, and I accept that.

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 03:47 AM
reply to post by MrXYZ

Doesn't mean he/she/it doesn't exist as well. That sword cuts both ways. You can't really gauge the existance or non-existance of such a entity that way. Humans have a documented ability for embelishment. Heck, look at some of the history on what people thought about animals now known to be real, save not as fantastical as the stories about them said before it was confirmed they exist. To use that ability for embelishment as a excuse to declare something true or false is unrealistic at best.

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 04:37 AM
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows

Oh, I completely I'm not an atheist, I'm agnostic. I admit I just don't know. I was just responding to the previous poster's comment that some people apparently believe humans created god...which is a possibility for the reasons I stated. It doesn't proof/disproof his/her/it's existence, and that wasn't the point I was trying to make.

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 05:18 AM
reply to post by MrXYZ

Oh ok. I was just addressing what I felt was an uneven by omission statement. Plenty stop at "doesn't mean it's true" as a prelude to "it's not true". I assumed this was another case of that. Glad to see that is not the case though. I apologise.

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 05:21 AM
As with all threads asking the question, "Who created God?", the answer is entirely philosophical and the question over whether God exists or not is entirely irrelevant. If God does not exist, there is no point in debating it within the context of the OP since the OP assumes that God does exist. Unless you're on a real mission to convert people to the belief that God does not exist, such statements are entirely pointless within this debate.

Since the existence of God is not provable by fact, we have to rely on an interpretation of the supposed spiritual nature and the physical reality we apprehend as 'the universe'.

Within this context, the question as to the progenitor of God raises certain hierarchical questions which are wholly dependant on the initial definition of God, again, an entirely subjective contention.

At one extreme, we have God as the absolute pinnacle of all existence where the deity entity has always existed even if outside of the scope of time and space. In this case, there is no creation although God is distinct from the creation that he has infused with the Holy Spirit, as the New Testament suggests and as accepted as a point of orthodoxy by the Catholic Church.

At the other extreme, we have God as a spiritual being who is one of many spiritual beings and is not necessarily at the pinnacle of the celestial hierarchy, as the Old Testament would suggest in terms of the nature of God as a desert dwelling entity (i.e. more of a pagan emphasis).

From a philosophical perspective, we might say that a 'supreme' deity has no creator and so has always existed, or creates itself in a continuous action of renewal and demise. We might say that the issues of contextual interaction (i.e. between the spiritual existence prior to and post the creation of 'the universe) may evidence a 'conversion' of God from a spiritual plan to a material plane which is, of course, against many religious orthodox views - that is to say, God is not distinct from creation but the very essence of it. This corresponds in many ways with an Alchemical view of the universe.

Regardless of these simple expositions, we might better off defining the nature of God before we ask whether such a deity is 'created' or not. This debate can never reach a conclusion without a common ground for comparison and debate. We may as well compare "sh*t and Shinola" for all the good it will do us except when it comes to polishing our shoes.

These circular debates are so frustrating since there is never a consensus for points of debate, although admittedly, I try to abstain from posting but throw in the towel eventually and just have to write something.

If nature shows us one thing, it is that physical creation is emanatory, so I tend toward this definition of God, however, the nature of God deity in the pre-creation state of being is wholly undefinable since it has no physical attributes that we can comprehend and so itself does not need to have been emanated from a distinct entity in itself.

Our experience of God must be through the universe that has been created and which we can comprehend and experience.

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in