A R C H I V E S
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board
| Who created God? |
|---|
| Anonymous |
| 03/28/04 at 01:06:45 |
| Assalamu alaikum, This is a very nice site, mash'allah. I have a question which I wonder if anyone might be able to help with. How do you answer the question "If everything was created, who created God?" When trying to prove the existence of Allah, several examples can be given e.g. the wonders of nature in the world around us, verses from the Quran confirmed by modern science, etc, etc. But when you manage a convincing theory that everything was created by an all-powerful creator, and the person you're talking with says "Ok, I accept everything has a creator, God, now who created God?" I believe that Islam teaches us to search for knowledge and therefore everyhting can be proved by different signs. But how do you answer the "who created God?" question. Any ideas? Jazakallah |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| jannah |
| 03/28/04 at 01:32:07 |
| [wlm] Everything was created Except God. I mean if they don't accept that, they haven't understood the concept of God. Since we are all 'creations', there are obviously some things we will never be able to conceptualize or understand. We will never have the same All-knowing All-understanding capability as God. Maybe you can use the example of someone creating a robot. (Allah is above metaphors but as an example for learning) You can program all the information, feelings, ideas you want, but will it ever have the same understanding of the universe as you as the creator of the robot does? It will always have some diminished capacity because it is NOT the creator of the robot. That's the point... so who created God.. no one He is Eternal. He was always there and always will be. If we cannot conceptualize that it is our diminished capacity, it doesn't make it any less true because we cannot visualize it. |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| sohuman |
| 03/28/04 at 02:14:13 |
| [slm], I was thinking sist amkamb's Islamic Boot camp does a fine job of explaing the answer to that question. in fact this is one of the questions she likes to pose to people. |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| Mossy |
| 03/28/04 at 08:03:43 |
| Salams, With regards to the first question, this would rely on God not being a transcendental being.. If there is a God-like being, which was the cause of everything.. It would also be the cause of space, which is directly linked to time.. What came "before" time? Hmm. The ideas you have put forward are a combination of the teleological and cosmological (to use broad categories) proofs for the existence of God.. In my opinion, this is something that cannot be proved, which is why a degree of faith is necessary.. The "discussion" between al-ghazali and ibn rushd on this is particularly interesting.. But that is a discussion for another time methinks.. So yeah, indicate that if there is a God, then he would be transcendental in more ways than one. Indeed, he exists outside of time as he is a multidimensional being. Creation exists within time, so if he exists outside of time, he cannot be created.. That has some holes, but eh.. Now the real question is whether the Qu'ran was created. Oops. :runsaway: ws :) Mossy |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| UmmWafi |
| 03/28/04 at 23:24:22 |
| [wlm] Bismillah God is not what He Created neither is His Creation in any way like Him. In order for us to question any aspect of God, we must first know the essence of God-hood. The question of the existence of God has been discussed by the Muslim philosophic theologians (mutakallimun) dating as far back as the time of Hassan al-Basri and 'Amr b. Wasil. When we discuss God-hood, we must bear in mind the twin concepts of sifatullah and dzatullah, that is, the attributes of God and the essence of God. In Islam, one of the key concepts of sifatullah is Wujuud, ie, Existence. Notice, that when we speak of the Being-ness of God, we do not talk of Created-ness. Instead we talk of Existing-ness. This is because God, in the Islamic beliafs, is excluded from sifatummakhluq, ie, the attributes of Creations. Therefore, although one can say that everything is created, the question of who created God doesn't come to play because God is not to be classified as being similar or akin to everything. God is outside the realm of thing-ness. This is simple common sense because if Allah is al-Khaliqul Mutlaq, ie the Ultimate Creator, then the idea of having another creator creating the ultimate creator is theologically and philosophically untenable. One of the clearest and most direct description that God in Islam has Given of Himself is in the suratul ikhlas. The ayahs in the surah is a direct revelation from Allah SWT and He specifically say that He is neither Begotten nor does He Begets. From this simple ayahs, the Muslims based their faith on the idea of a God that Is Existing, Has always Existed and Will always Exist. Allahu 'alim. May The Most Gracious and Most Merciful Lord Forgive me for any wrong I have stated in the answer above. Astarghfirullah, Astarghfirullah, Astarghfirullah. Wassalam |
| 03/29/04 at 08:35:13 |
| UmmWafi |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| rkhan |
| 03/29/04 at 01:55:05 |
| [slm] Do you hv to convince someone else or do [i] you [/i] need convincing? From your post, I gathered that someone else is posing the question to you...I'm asking because my answer would be different in the two cases... The Prophet SAW said that the Shaytaan (Satan) will come to you and trouble you with questions like: "Who created this or that?" To which you would logically respond: "Allaah." Until he would come to the question: “Then who created Allaah?” At which point the Prophet SAW instructed us to say: [i] Aoozu billaahe minash Shaytaanir rajeem." I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed devil [/i] And then leave off this train of thought. (Saheeh Muslim) In case an atheist or a "rationalist" (what a misnomer!!) is asking the question you could reply: 1. In Islaam (unlike Christianity or Hinduism) we consider Allaah to be completely different from His creation..."laysa ka mislehi shai-un" there is nothing like Him..He isn't comparable to any of His creation in any way...so the question of being created etc doesn't arise.. 2. Everything has certain inherent charchteristics...[i] sifaat [/i]. e.g. a woman is capable of giving birth, not a man; a lion eats meat, not grass... Similarly in Islaam we believe that Allaah has certain inherent charchteristics which He Himself has revealed to us in the Qur'aan. One of the charchteristics of Allaah swt is that "He neither begets, nor is begotten." that He is Al-Awwal "The First" and Al Aaakhir "The Last" , He is Al-Mubdi "The Originator" and He is As-Samad "The Ever Sought/EverLasting" There are good books on the charachteristics ofAllaah... two I can think of are y Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips and Jamal Zarabazo..they should suffice if the person is genuinely trying to get an understanding of God from an Islaamic point of view. However, if they're just trying to confound you and score a point in an argument, I'd just echo the Qur'aan's advice and ask you to say "Salaam alay'kum" and move on.. I say this because the people of Musa AS asked him to show them Allaah in person in order to convince them that He exists...so basically there's no limit to what the whispers of shaytaan will lead a person to ask... Wallahu A'aalam |
| 03/29/04 at 02:31:41 |
| rkhan |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| AbdulJalil |
| 03/29/04 at 09:36:54 |
| assalamu alaikum God in Islam is NOT a human being. God is neither male, nor female. God is not white, nor black, or yellow. If someone asks you what is the gender of God, then they assume that God is like a human being, because they look how it is here on Earth, and they want to apply what they know from their earthly observations, to the nature of God . it is the same with the question "who created God". God is not created, since he is not a human being, so the question makes no sense really. What apply here on Earth does not necessarly apply to God. i am not sure if this will help, but think of gravity here on Earth and on the moon. The force of gravity on the Moon is less than the one on Earth. So there are similar characteristics on the Moon and on the Earth, BUT they are not exactly the same. Well, in our case, concerning God,the Nature and Characteristics of God are COMPLETELY different than Ours. Nothing in the Creation is like God.So just because Human beings were created, does not mean God was created. He is different than us. |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| AbdulJalil |
| 03/29/04 at 12:39:23 |
| assalamu alaikum you can also look at it this way. Imagine you have a parallelogram and a circle. A person comes to you and asks you "What is the radius of your paralellogram?" This question makes no sense, because BY DEFINITION a parallelogram has no radius. In the same manner, asking who created God makes no sense , since God is uncreated by definition |
| 03/29/04 at 12:52:55 |
| AbdulJalil |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| sal |
| 03/29/04 at 16:20:29 |
| well suppose there is an answer who created GOD is so and so . Then there comes another question who created this creator? This endless answer is why we have no to go deeper in to who created GOD? beacause the GOD we might want to know who created is a false satanic faith in our mind to be GOD This is what devil tells us So that endless question takes you to the real creator of all those images we have taken to be GOD GOD has created all and not created and that is all . besides if we strive to know such things a so simple questions will be hard to answer for example HOW LONG IS YOUR NOSE? the answer is well what is so important to know this ok when it is seems not sensible to know something u can get an answer for what is the significance of trying to know who created GOD ? Any way there will be an answer for this if the questioner has reached that every question is answered . and for the time being let these questions are answered then we proceed to the other after that who created love ? How heavy is it ? we know it exists that is why we love our family etc. But why we cant answer how heavy it is ? if there is an answer for this question then we can get an answer for who created GOD [wlm] |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| sal |
| 03/29/04 at 16:24:41 |
| well suppose there is an answer who created GOD is so and so . Then there comes another question who created this creator? This endless answer is why we have no to go deeper in to who created GOD? beacause the GOD we might want to know who created is a false satanic faith in our mind to be GOD This is what devil tells us So that endless question takes you to the real creator of all those images we have taken to be GOD GOD has created all and not created and that is all . besides if we strive to know such things a so simple questions will be hard to answer for example HOW LONG IS YOUR NOSE? the answer is well what is so important to know this ok when it is seems not sensible to know something we can get an answer for what is the significance of trying to know who created GOD ? Any way there will be an answer for this if the questioner has reached that every question is answered . and for the time being let these questions are answered then we proceed to the other after that How heavy is love ? what color is it ? we know it exists that is why we love our family etc. But why we cant answer how heavy it is ? if there is an answer for this question then we can get an answer for who created GOD [wlm] |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| superFOB |
| 03/29/04 at 18:35:49 |
| [slm] [quote author=Mossy link=board=lighthouse;num=1080454005;start=0#3 date=03/28/04 at 08:03:43]Indeed, he exists outside of time as he is a multidimensional being. Creation exists within time, so if he exists outside of time, he cannot be created.. That has some holes, but eh..[/quote] Multidimensional sounds so limited, any description of Allah's being is flawed, we can't describe Him except what He Himself has told us in the Quran. His being is beyond our comprehension. Likewise, creation need not be bound by time, why should it be? |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| Mossy |
| 03/29/04 at 18:55:03 |
| [quote author=superFOB link=board=lighthouse;num=1080454005;start=10#11 date=03/29/04 at 18:35:49][slm] Multidimensional sounds so limited, any description of Allah's being is flawed, we can't describe Him except what He Himself has told us in the Quran. His being is beyond our comprehension. Likewise, creation need not be bound by time, why should it be? [/quote] Multidimensional means he can affect all dimensions, it does not preclude an extra-dimensional existence :P Actually, if one looks to the texts, does it not indicate that we will be able to percieve him in the highes dimension of all, heaven? The throne being at the centre of all? Not grasp him still, but gain a semblance.. We can never full graps what even one dimension extra is like, how can we percieve the ones above? By creation I was referring to the things we can percieve as created with our senses - ie the dunya. The dunya is bound by time as time is a part of the dunya. |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| amika |
| 03/30/04 at 16:08:14 |
| [slm], Really, the answer to "Who created God?" is in Surat al Ikhlas. Each and every line tells us what God is. And that means He is not like anything in creation. The Creator is different from His creation. The first line is the most important. "Say: God is One." What is meant by "one"? The only ONE thing that is unique, The only ONE thing that is the First as well as the Last, The only ONE thing that has power to create, The only ONE thing that has power over all things, The only ONE thing that is not produced nor created, The only ONE thing that is eternal, That is Allah.......Al-Ilah (The God). He is Eternal. He has no beginning. There was nothing before Him, and there is nothing after Him. He does not beget nor is He begotten. This line clearly answers the question "Who created God?". Let us look at it this way: He does not beget (create/produce another God like Himself) He is not begotten (He was not created/produced by any other God) If He were to beget, then there would be two Gods. And the statement "Say: God is one" would have no meaning whatsoever. If He were to be begotten, that would mean there was some other God who created Him. Again that would mean more than ONE God. There is only ONE God, the UNIQUE. Wa lam yakul lahu kufuwan ahad! If you can't comprehend what it is that is not created, that is eternal, having no beginning nor an end, that is perfectly fine. For that is Allah! There is none like unto Him! La ilaha il Allah! |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| muslimah853 |
| 04/02/04 at 22:14:55 |
| [slm] Another important point is the idea of an infinite regress. At some point, there has to be an Originator that doesn't have an origin, otherwise it just keeps going backwards. In other words, supposing there was someone who created God, then the question is now asked, 'who created the creator of God?' , and then it keeps going...'who created the creator of the creator of God?' and so on. Astaghferullah, but you see the point. There is no solution if you take that route. |
| Log-icky |
|---|
| AbuKhaled |
| 04/03/04 at 18:44:47 |
| Dear Brother/Sister Anonymous, Wa-alaikum assalam wa rahmatullah. I thought I’d try and come from a slightly more technical angle, by framing your question within a formal structure. Apologies beforehand for a somewhat abstract approach. Such a discussion about the proof of whether God exists, sits squarely in the domain of critical thinking, specifically logic, because the arguments used commonly tend to be – though don’t have to be – reasoned arguments of a rational nature, which is the ground that logic treads. Hence, such arguments have specific forms and types, both in/correct and in/valid (which are useful to know, especially if one is engaging in such topics). One of the usual mistakes made when entering into the kind of argument you have – though I am not saying it is a mistake you yourself have made, so please don’t take it personally - is that oftentimes we start off with what is known as a *sweeping generalisation*. This is when one makes a mass-generalisation which fails to account for important factors that might limit the generalisation, or qualify it. The absence of which can later cause us to back ourselves into a corner. A classic example of a sweeping generalisation is the premise that *everything is created*, which is the proposition embedded in your question, “If everything was created, who created God?”. The part about “if everything was created”, is evidently rhetorical. Ostensibly this seems like quite a reasonable claim for a Muslim to make, given that this is what we believe, right? Wrong. We don’t believe that everything is created. Rather, and more accurately, we believe that *everything we PERCEIVE is created*, wallahu a’lam. By perceive here, I mean perception that occurs through the senses (so for example, a dream is not considered, according to this definition, something we perceive). Why is this apparently pedantic distinction so important? Because it helps us avoid the very question you have encountered, by the extremely important inclusion of a qualifier like *perceived*. Clearly, to say that ‘everything we perceive is created’, is no different to saying ‘not everything is created’, for not everything is perceptible, is it? A *thought*, is something you conceive, not perceive. Or, if I ask you to perceive *the number one*, what comes to mind? Either the symbol that represents the notation for one (i.e. 1), which is an abstract notion, or one of something (e.g. one orange, one car, one building), which attaches to the abstract concept a tangible reality. In either case – the notational symbol, or the orange etc. – you conjure in your mind something you have perceived previously. Yet a number without a reality has no reality, just like the negative number line that is used in calculus. Can you imagine *minus two oranges*? Or something else: can you perceive heaven (as in, can you perceive it right now)? No. You *conceive* it, because it is something not tangible yet, though we believe it exists. The point of the preceding paragraph was not to get you all confused, but to show that existence is not only that which is known perceptibly, but also that which is known only conceptually. This is actually a big debate in some non-Islamic philosophical circles. Whether knowledge (i.e. fact and truth) can be established on *a priori* reasoning, that is, reasoning that is based on other than experience; or *a posteriori* reasoning, that is, reasoning based on experience. An example should unconfuse you, lol: Say there are three guys; Farhan, Atiq, & Almas. Farhan is the shortest, Atiq is taller than him, and Almas taller than Atiq. I could conclude, by looking at them, that Almas is the tallest. This would be *a posteriori* reasoning. Alternatively, say I had never seen any of them, and someone told me that Atiq is taller than Farhan, and Almas is taller than Atiq. I could conclude from this, without seeing any of them, that Almas is the tallest, right? This would be *a priori* reasoning. I have no experience of any of them, no perception. Yet I made a valid, and true conclusion. For reasons beyond the scope of this post, the debate amongst non-Muslim philosophers over the epistemic validity/strength of *a posteriori* versus *a priori* reasoning rages on, I think, from what I last read. I could be wrong. As usual I have gone off the beaten track… What I was trying to get to – in my roundabout, take a stroll the longest possible way – was that things exist in realms/ways other than that which can be known only via sensible perception. Like thoughts, do they exist? Not in the tangible domain, but in the domain of conception. Okay, yawn if you will, I get the picture. Moving on then. Wikipedia defines a logical fallacy as an error in argument or reasoning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy There are many kinds of logical fallacies. *Special pleading* is one of them, relevant to our thread here. It is the term given when one has made a generalisation for the sake of an argument they are presenting, which they then seek an exception to when it suits their own purposes. Such as the following: Mark believes that all murderers should get the death sentence. Mark commits a murder. But he argues that he should not get the death sentence because he was coerced into murdering. This is an example of special pleading. The word “all” in the first sentence of the example, is referred to as a *universal quantifier* because it includes every murderer bar none. By using the word “all”, Mark has excluded no murders (including himself), regardless of their motive. Had he said ‘some murderers’, then this example would not be considered one of special pleading, because the word ‘some’ is considered an *existential quantifier*, since it includes some and excludes some; which, by extension, means it could exclude Mark. I hope this is clear, as it is central to the point I wish to make. Let me know if not. Knowing when to use the right kind of quantifier – when engaged in argument (the reasoned kind, not the heated kind) – is essential, to avoid the kinds of pitfalls that we often get waylaid by. As an example: ‘Of course no Muslims believe that drinking beer is halal!’ Not true. Some Muslims – ignorant, foolish and unlearned – believe that if you flick the first two drops of alcohol away (true, I had a non-Muslim friend ask me about it), the rest is okay to drink (don’t even ask me). So you see, the appropriate quantifiers are needed to avoid generalisations that aren’t true, even if the exceptions which the quantifiers allow for constitute a tiny tiny minority! Okay, so that was kind of a way-out example, cos’ you’re probably all scratching your heads about that one, and going ‘huh, fer real with that beer thing AbuK?’ Yes, for real. And yes to still haram, two flicks or no flicks. ’Dem crazy mozlems eh… Returning to your question, the proper quantifier, or limiter, for your argument would be ‘everything that we perceive is created’, for this then allows for a Creator which exists outside of the domain of “everything”, and is uncreated. Otherwise, when you say “everything” – but don’t incorporate a qualifier to limit the word to a particular context (‘Oh! You meant only created things that we can perceive, riiiiight. Why didn’t you say so Hombre?!’) - then by definition you include God too, for God is necessarily part of that everything which you left undefined, since you did not exclude God. You cannot then exclude God further down the line, as your argument reaches its endgoal. Which means, unfortunately, the only goal you’ll be scoring is an own-goal, pun very-muchly intended. The word “everything” by definition includes all, and excludes none. This is its primary lexical meaning. So if you say “everything is created”, then semantically, you have shot yourself in the foot, for you cannot later backtrack and say, “Well, er, when I said everything I didn’t *actually* mean everything, I meant everything except God.” Because your opponent will not accept that from you, and rightly so, for according to the rules of argument, you have now applied a double standard, and made a special plea! I would not accept it either, for it is an erroneous way of reasoning. And such a proof needs to be impenetrable. Yet by missing out this crucial point, we have made it instead, permeable to a flaw. Two flaws in fact. The first being that we have implicitly included God in a proposition that was intended to exclude the Creator (azza wa jal), and the second being that we have allowed the valid – according to the rules of logic – conclusion that this Creator too, is created! So many of these discussions turn on such semantic ambiguities. I’m sorry, because I know it probably seems like nitpicking to those reading these words. It isn’t. These are issues which touch upon ‘aqida [belief], so imprecision in them can have far-reaching implications with respect to our probative endeavours. That said, in the normal course of life we tend not to discuss with such precision. Generalisations are of two types: soft and hard. Soft generalisations are used for cases when we want to express something that is the case for the most part, on average, usually, normally, etc. Hard generalisations, on the other hand, are used when we wish to make an assertion to which there is no exception. Of course, in the instance of *everything is created*, one intends a soft generalisation. The problem is that it can so easily be misinterpreted as a hard one, especially by someone who may have a vested interest in maintaining a position of agnosticism/atheism. Which is why it is so easy to unravel it by the question, “so who created God then, if everything is created?” Which leads us into what is known as an *infinite regress*. Therefore, to sidestep such a potentiality, just insert the qualifying phrase, and no such eventuality can then occur. Voila! Allah ta’ala is not perceived through our senses. He, tabarak wa ta’ala is transcendent. Yes, we *conceive* of His, subhanahu wa ta’ala, existence, but not *perceive* it, or Him, wal iyadhubillah. Wallahu ta’ala a’lam. It is worthwhile knowing the difference between these two words properly, as misunderstanding by fellow Muslims, of them, can cause well-meaning but hasty, Brothers/Sisters, to assume that one holds an unislamic view of Allah ta’ala, ma’adAllah. More significantly, using the wrong word at the wrong time/place in the argument (in relation to Allah ta’ala), can lead one to make statements which oppose the ‘aqida of a Muslim. Not so long ago I had this very contention put to me by an agnostic. He asserted that we could not conceive of God either (i.e. as well as not being able to perceive Him), which to me was an oxymoron from him anyway. For how do you use a term – as a noun – to refer to something which you consider impossible to conceive of, eh?? That’d be like me asking, “So, what’s a Qrdtalidofsky then?” How would I be able to determine your answer, when I know that such a thing doesn’t exist, as I made it up? Only something which does not exist (and here I mean: made-up) can have no meaning. Like a square-circle. (Which intriguingly begs the question: from where did meaning come from for the word God, originally, if God did not exist? Hehe, go figure…). So, as I was relating: He reckoned we cannot conceive of God. Because God is beyond what we are capable of conceiving, he said. Which is true, except that he was taking that to mean that since we cannot conceive of God, then we are likewise unable to conceive of His existence. Not true. But first, the task was to define our terms, so I defined what I meant by perception and conception and the difference between the two in my discourse and usage. He did not accept this from me initially, and we debated definitions for a while. Then he conceded my point. The next point was to correct his strawman (another kind of logical fallacy). A strawman is when you misrepresent someone’s argument/reasoning (be it deliberately, or because of misunderstanding it), and then proceed to dismantle that erroneous representation. In other words, you’ve attacked the wrong building you fool! Which means what? Yes, the original building is still intact (read: argument). Here, the strawman lay in him thinking that I was arguing that we *could* conceive of God. I wasn’t. Rather, I had reasoned that we could conceive of *the existence of God*, which is not the same thing at all, had he but realised it. Which left me with but one question to put to him: How is it that, when you don’t believe in the existence of a God, you managed to conclude that God is beyond what we are capable of conceiving? How were you able to make any conclusions about a deity (being beyond our conception), the existence of which you don’t accept?? From where then, did you acquire your information about this (supposedly non-existent) deity? Quod est demonstratum, as they say in Tahiti. 8) May Allah ta’ala forgive me for any mistakes in the above, be they due to ignorance, unlearnedness or error, astaghfirullah. Every good is from Him, azza wa jal, alone. Abu Khaled |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| UmmWafi |
| 04/05/04 at 07:47:53 |
| [slm] Priceless Br AbuKhaled ! Reminds me of my Philosophy of Western Science class, my logic class and my Kalam class, all rolled in one :D Subhanallah...I didn't know its legal to "inflict" this kind of punishment on fellow Madinites ;) Ahhh such sweet memory of sitting in class laughing my head off at the Western scientists and philosophers argue about rocks in the field.... Jazakallah for this hugely enjoyable read. Wassalam |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| Nadeem |
| 04/05/04 at 12:33:36 |
| [slm] I am the one who originally posted the original question. Unfortunately at that time, the website was not accepting any new registrations, so I had to post as Anonymous. I would firstly like to thank everyone for their input and contributions. Each and every reply contained useful things to think about. I have a few thought on all the replies to my original post, which I would like to share. If I drag on a bit please forgive me. My posting was a result trying to effectively communicate Islam to those around me - Muslim and non-Muslim - and being faced with a number of difficult questions. Or perhaps they are not difficult but in my limited knowledge "I" find it difficult to answer them. One of these was "If everything was created, who created God?". The person who oriiginally asked me this is non-Muslim. Our fundamental belief as Muslims that Allah is One, is the most important, as it is the foundation on which the whole system of Islam is based. I found this as I attempted to give a satisfactory answer on the "who created God?" question. So although the question was difficult, Alhamdulillah, I feel our faith is often increased through these tricky questions. The problem in trying to answer this question is that I was first viewing the question and answer through my eyes. The answer for me, and no doubt most Muslims is that "no-one created God, God is One, has been there since the beginning of time, indeed even before time" and there the question is answered. I appreciate the people who posted replies with this type of reasoning, as this is exactly how I thought of it. However, as I found, obviously when trying to convince someone who is not Muslim, and doesnt view world through Muslim beliefs, you are in a whole different ball game. And now I'd like to respond to a few of the replies if I may. :-[ Jannah, thankyou for your robot example. I actually used the example of a Mercedes car, made in a factory, which I had heard from Yusuf Estes discussion. Salem, your "how long is your nose?" and "how heavy is love?" answer made me smile, :)but yes it illustrates the incomparability of the logic of the "who created God?" question. Muslimah853, your point about infinite regress being irrational was a useful one, which I actually used in discussions with a non-muslim, so thankyou. SoHuman, Mossy, UmmWafi, Amika, SuperFOB thank you all for your helpful ideas. rkhan, I suspect you are right, often the people putting forward these type of questions (i.e. who created God) are just trying to do so for arguments sake, being irrational whilst hiding behind "rational thinking". AbdulJalil, I really liked your radius of the parallelogram idea. AbuKhaled, your reply was very thorough, and intellectual. I thank you for that. Although I am not the most intellectual person, a lot of the things you mentioned made a lot of sense. You are indeed right, I made the mistake of saying "everything has a creator". Perhaps I should have said "everything in our universe was created by something or someone". The minus number of objects like oranges is a very good theory and one I think I may use in the future if you dont mind. :) Forgive me for my ignorance, but I was a little lost with the posteriori, priori, proper quantifier, or limiter parts of your post. I think I shall have to re-read those parts again. Again thank you to everyone for an interesting round of replies. [wlm] |
| Re: Who created God? |
|---|
| tripplea |
| 04/08/04 at 18:53:14 |
| Remember what the Prophet said?: "Curse not Time, for Time is Allah." I think that's a good way to describe God, because time is infinite, it never started and will never end, just like Allah. |
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board |