# Evidence of a Creator **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 17, 2010, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307 "2010-01-17T12:15:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/61 "2010-01-17T16:50:15Z")
> [@raindog](#): > > That’s absolutely true. It’s almost as if human individualism is anathematic to the true comprehension of a divine creator. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/62 "2010-01-17T16:53:59Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > It’s almost as if human individualism is anathematic to the true comprehension of a divine creator. That’s certainly implied by Christianity with its emphasis on a community of faith. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/63 "2010-01-17T17:05:15Z")
> [@](#): > > Hear, O people: The NIKE is our God, the NIKE is one. Love the NIKE your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength,and most of all, with your wallet. These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. BUY, BUY, BUY… and then buy some more. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads, and place these symbols on your t-shirts. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates. Hey, it really does translate into modern terms! ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/64 "2010-01-17T17:16:11Z")
I believe in Ubercreator. Here is my reasoning. There are three possibilities: 1. The universe always existed 2. The universe had a creator, and the creator always existed 3. The universe had a creator, and it itself had an ubercreator Which is simpler? The OP has already convinced me that 2 is simpler than 1. Since 2 reduces to 1 because it posits that a creator always existed, then 3 is clearly simpler than 2. I’d continue this indefinitely, but I need to create breakfast. ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/65 "2010-01-17T17:50:14Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > This seems like an odd selection, since (to me) it doesn’t seem to particularly impart a close, or understandable, relationship with God. It doesn’t really seem to state much about the ability to comprehend God at all. Could you spell it out for me? I think we’d agree that an \*effort \*to understand God (and, for that matter, anyone you wish to have a close relationship with) is necessary part of knowing him. These texts (and there are hundreds and hundreds of others, both in the OT and NT) show not just a desire by the Jews to understand God via their written word (said to be given directly by God to their prophets) and through their [God appointed] leaders, but to have an _intimate_ understanding; to have this understanding impressed in their hearts. These weren’t ‘Sunday Jews.’ When they say that you should have these words on your heart when you’re walking, or lying down, or on the road or, or, or…they’re making a case for having these **teachings** central to every day life. These writings didn’t simply give the Jews (and the Christian Jews would prove just as interested) a list of rules--------although with **rules alone** a compelling argument can be made that they could ‘comprehend’ God---------but rather a written history of their life with Yahweh. Again these words show not just a comprehension of their God, but an intimacy, a commune with him. Their understanding included the times he delivered them, when he loved them, when he taught them, when he punished them, when he counseled them, when he admonished them, when he appealed to them. At any rate, this cloudy, oblique, obtuse, detached, confusing God that is so popular at SDMB/GD is not the God the Jews or Christian Jews would have perceived. ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/66 "2010-01-17T17:56:48Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > It’s almost as if human individualism is anathematic to the true comprehension of a divine creator. Paradoxically yes and no. When **Proverbs 18:1** says\* “1HE WHO willfully separates and estranges himself [from God and man] seeks his own desire and pretext to break out against all wise and sound judgment”\* (Amplified Bible) its making a case for a sense of community. And there are hundreds, if not thousands, of texts that support that both the Jews and Christians were part of a defined community; church or group recognized by God himself. But **Hebrews 4:13** —and hundreds of others----- support the notion that one can’t “hide” in the group; that ultimately we must all give an\*\* individual\*\* account for how we used our life. **Hebrews 4:13** : _13Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account._ ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/67 "2010-01-17T18:03:38Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Were those words heard by all of Israel or were they spoken through some representative like Moses or Aaron? These teachings were spoken through representatives, and the teachings weren’t the equivalent of who was on [in the case of these specific texts] Moses’s Twitter feed. It was an element of their faith and tradition that these teachings were disseminated throughout the whole Jewish encampment. Everyone got the message. Everyone knew the drill. This was a theocracy; the teachings were central to Jewish life. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/68 "2010-01-17T18:05:22Z")
**raindog** , dial it back on the “rubbish” and similar comments. All that does is inflame the discussion without illuminating it. If you want to make your point, do it politely. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/69 "2010-01-17T18:06:12Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > The argument that everything has a cause, therefore God, is simply bizarre. > > If everything has a cause, then God must have a cause. Oh, God is in a category of entities that don’t require a cause? Well, how do we know then that God is the only member of the set of uncaused causes? Why couldn’t there be two? Or three, or a kabillion? The syllogism isn’t the one you’ve constructed though. It’s this:[ul][li]The universe is made up of components, all of which require some prior influence to bring it into its current state of existence.[_]An infinite regression of entities of such a nature is impossible.[_]Therefore, the components of our universe, as we understand them, require some initiator that does NOT require a prior cause. Such an initiator would exist outside of time and space, but has the capacity to create time and space (or the event that creates it).[/ul]That’s it. I suppose there could be more than one such entity, each doing whatever amuses such a being. I’ll have to think about it.[/li][quote] If we imagine that there can be uncaused causes, then labeling any uncaused causes “God” is an attempt to shoehorn in all sorts of attributes to those uncaused causes. Like as Stratocaster accidentally did earlier, when he imagined that an uncaused cause would be an “entity”. Why would whatever it was that started the Big Bang be an “entity”? [/quote] “Entity” is a pretty shapeless moniker, isn’t it though? Call it “something.” Or “Fred.” Or “the Force.” Is there a better word? But “God” serves the purpose too, if we limit the definition of God to “the being who existed before all other things, who brought into being all other things” and assign no other attributes. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/70 "2010-01-17T18:10:12Z")
That said, I would say tht you have completely failed to make youir point. Quoting the _Shema_, which is a prayer/command for the people to instruct their relationship with God does nothing to actually provide an understanding or image of God. Beyond that, your claim that nothing in Scripture indicates that the Jewish people considered God to beyond understanding is completely upset by the Book of Job, where the inability of humanity to understand God is its primary point. An entire book refuting you: move on to a different argument. ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/71 "2010-01-17T18:13:19Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > That said, I would say tht you have completely failed to make youir point. Quoting the _Shema_, which is a prayer/command for the people to instruct their relationship with God does nothing to actually provide an understanding or image of God. > > Beyond that, your claim that nothing in Scripture indicates that the Jewish people considered God to beyond understanding is completely upset by the Book of Job, where the inability of humanity to understand God is its primary point. > An entire book refuting you: move on to a different argument. You are mistaken. The book of Job is _not_ about mankind’s inability to understand God; not at all. If you’d like to use the book of Job I’d be quite willing to delve into it greater. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/72 "2010-01-17T18:25:01Z")
Yes, but if we postulate that there exists one cause that has no cause, then proposition 1 of your syllogism is therefore falsified. You postulate that uncaused causes exist. Why should there only be one of them, and every other cause flows from that first cause? If there’s one, why not a kabillion? Why can’t they be happening every day all around us? And the problem with “entity” is exactly what you said–it implies a “thing” of some sort. Is gravity an entity? Is quantum indeterminancy an entity? Is the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle an entity? Is the proposition that all causes must have a prior cause an entity? One thing we know for sure is that the deep workings of matter and energy don’t correspond to our everyday intuition about how such things should work. It turns out that the low level weirdness produces the sorts of forces that evolution has designed us to understand. But just because something seems weird or impossible doesn’t mean it isn’t true. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/73 "2010-01-17T18:34:42Z")
> [@raindog](#): > > You are mistaken. > > The book of Job is _not_ about mankind’s inability to understand God; not at all. If you’d like to use the book of Job I’d be quite willing to delve into it greater. You and I will never agree on your personal interpretation of scripture, so that is a pointless invitation. It remains true that there is nothing in the _Shema_ that indicates an image or understanding of God and your attempt to wrest the discussion from image or understanding to relationship fails to make the point you originally claimed. ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/74 "2010-01-17T18:41:05Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > You and I will never agree on your personal interpretation of scripture, so that is a pointless invitation. > > It remains true that there is nothing in the _Shema_ that indicates an image or understanding of God and your attempt to wrest the discussion from image or understanding to relationship fails to make the point you originally claimed. You’re in Great Debates. You posted to me directly. If you have no intention to buttress your argument, why post? ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/75 "2010-01-17T18:49:10Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > You and I will never agree on your personal interpretation of scripture, so that is a pointless invitation. > > It remains true that there is nothing in the _Shema_ that indicates an image or understanding of God and your attempt to wrest the discussion from image or understanding to relationship fails to make the point you originally claimed. I would simply add that I can think of few individual texts or few verses make any such claim. My quote of the Shema underscores the attitude that the Jews had toward their God and informs us as to the relationship they desire[d] with their God. If they ever reached those lofty ideals or not can be found in the bible, in part and in whole, and in recorded history. If they----and the later Jewish Christians----never had the relationship described in the Shema that would be a sad commentary wouldn’t it? In the end, I think we should be able to safely say that the “image” we’re talking about is metaphorical, and that my relationship of God is based in large part of what I understand him to be. My reading of the bible (and the Shema is a sterling example of this…) is that God wants me to have a [relative] understanding of him. Does your reading suggest otherwise? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/76 "2010-01-17T19:02:31Z")
> [@raindog](#): > > Does your reading suggest otherwise? Of course. Simply read the text. The _Shema_ tells the Jews to love God and to repeat to their children the commandments and to carry the commandments with them. One might infer, easily, that such an action was to remind the people of their Covenant, but it does nothing to actually describe God. Nothing in that text identifies anything that could describe or explicate God. Nothing provides an understanding or an image. The only way that you can get from that point to a claim of understanding is to impose a number of your personal beliefs onto the text–something you have not really even done, here. It simply does not describe an image or an understanding of God. (That is why I will also decline to get into a discussion of Job: it would hijack this thread away from its actual point. I had hoped that pointing to Job would remind you of its theological point, but if you have some totally different interpretation–much as you have idiosyncratically interpreted the _Shema_–then it would be unfair to the other posters of this thread for the two of us to sidetrack the discussion with a mutually incomprehensible discussion of Job.) ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/77 "2010-01-17T19:03:24Z")
Time is a measurement device of man. Time can be measured back about 13. 6 billion years ago when the big boom occurred. Before that, there was nothing. There was no before . That was the beginning. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/78 "2010-01-17T19:12:56Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Time is a measurement device of man. No; it’s one of the aspects of spacetime. It’s a thing that we measure, but real in itself. > [@gonzomax](#): > > Time can be measured back about 13. 6 billion years ago when the big boom occurred. Before that, there was nothing. There was no before . That was the beginning. We don’t know that. The Big Bang was the start of our universe; the jury is still out on what came before. A number of scientific theories postulate that there was a long or even infinite period of time before our universe was born. ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/79 "2010-01-17T19:44:42Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Of course. Simply read the text. The _Shema_ tells the Jews to love God and to repeat to their children the commandments and to carry the commandments with them. One might infer, easily, that such an action was to remind the people of their Covenant, but it does nothing to actually describe God. > > Nothing in that text identifies anything that could describe or explicate God. Nothing provides an understanding or an image. The only way that you can get from that point to a claim of understanding is to impose a number of your personal beliefs onto the text–something you have not really even done, here. > > It simply does not describe an image or an understanding of God. > (That is why I will also decline to get into a discussion of Job: it would hijack this thread away from its actual point. I had hoped that pointing to Job would remind you of its theological point, but if you have some totally different interpretation–much as you have idiosyncratically interpreted the _Shema_–then it would be unfair to the other posters of this thread for the two of us to sidetrack the discussion with a mutually incomprehensible discussion of Job.) You’re not being disingenuous are you? I mean, ferpetessake, you brought up the book of Job. If you’re unwilling to back that up, why post it? “The book of Job is my cite and not open to debate/scrutiny” is IMHO material. The book of Job was _not_ about mankind not understanding God. If you wish to refute that, we can talk about the book of Job. If not, maybe you should qualify your posts up front as not open to discussion. I think I’ve made my point clear. mswas made the oft repeated point that God is incomprehensible. I don’t think the bible, or history, supports that this was either a Jewish or Christian mindset. The Shema speaks of their attitude towards their understanding. It is one small group of texts that paint one small picture of the view the Jews had towards God, their and not just their desire to know him, but whether they believed he was _knowable._ If you’d like to put those texts in their larger context to make or refute that claim I’m open to the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2010, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307/80 "2010-01-17T20:04:53Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > What is the origin of anything? What was there in the beginning? How did “stuff” begin? Well, to answer this question, we know that the answer falls within one of two deliberately very broad categories: > > 1. Something has always existed, and it was from this something that everything that is here now, came to be. > > 2. Something came in to existence from nothing (that’s a literal “nothing”. No thing. A lot of people (some atheists, especially) seem to have a lot of trouble understanding what is meant by “nothing”. To them, “nothing” can mean anything from quantum foam, zero energy entities with energy potential, singularities, all sorts of somethings that aren’t nothing. Please understand that by _nothing_, I am talking about what rocks dream of). > > Now, I would argue that option 1 is more probable, because it requires one less thing to occur (something coming in to existence from a literal nothing). Yes – but option 1 still leaves unanswered the basic unanswered question of cosmology: **Why** is there something rather than nothing? (“God” is, of course, no answer – if God exists, God is something.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evidence-of-a-creator/525307.md?page=5)