So God created God?
If thats possible - and you admit you don’t understand the process - why is it ‘neccessary’ for ‘god’ to have created us?
So God created God because magic I dunno, but the idea of a strand of amino acids interacting and becoming DNA and evolving into something more complex over eons is obviously impossible.
I said God most definitely created parts of himself, that much is revealed in scripture. And the reason God created us , in my view, is because of Jesus, who was the first and only being God gave birth to. Jesus was not created, nor did he exist forever, I believe God gave actual birth to him. And because Jesus turned out so well, that made God want more children. Now this is my view, and I am not Christian, this is not a Christian view, because some Atheist here are demanding that I am Christian, which is nonsense in my view.
Humans exist because the mind of God became pregnant.
I said God created " Parts of himself", I didNOT say God created God, YOU said that.
<bolding mine>
Admit it - now you’re just making stuff up as you go, right?
I wasn’t trying to misinterpret your position. The two statements seems the same to me. I’ve never heard anyone make this claim or draw this distinction before. If you think God made parts of himself and those parts wound up becoming God somehow, how is it wrong to say God created himself?
What part started first? What created that part?
Was your god less than perfect before he created stuff, or was he already perfect then became “perfect-plus” after he created stuff?
Well its what I believe, its just not a " Full understanding of something." I mean I have limited understanding of God. I don’t know God, just a little bit about him. But I believe he created parts of himself, by his own words; in example, Job 40:10, God is actually talking to Job, he ask him, " Can you Adorn " Yourself" with Eminence and Dignity, and clothe YOURSELF with honor and Majesty?" Here God is actually revealing that he created parts of himself.
Now, as to if he created his whole self, I don’t know. But we can know it, if HE said it. And he actually says here, and in other scriptures, that he created these parts of himself.
I don’t know.
I just don’t know. In Psalms 93:1, it states , " The Lord reigns, he is Clothed with Majesty; the Lord has CLOTHED and GIRDED HIMSELF with strength". Now again, here, in my view, God is actually again creating parts of himself. Maturing himself, yes, working on himself, and I think fair to say " Improving himself", making adjustments.
So I think in one sense, yes, he was " Less than those adjustments BEFORE he made them." Or why would he make them? But again, I really am not sure, this is speculation on my part that could, or could not be true.
So - the difference between a theist and an atheist - boiled down to the simplest statement is that.
Atheist - “I don’t know how X came to be”
Theist - “God Did it”
Which of the two is more honest and open for discovery?
Since you allow for some ‘complex creation’ to ‘come out of nothing’ (those parts of God that created other parts of God would have to be complex, correct? or did they start out simple and ‘evolve’ ?) - then its reasonable to assume that anything can evolve similarly - and since that initial part of God did not require GOD - neither does anything else.
I have not allowed any such thing, YOU said that. I plainly said in the english language that God definitely created parts of himself, not his whole self. I believe that parts of God are eternal, with no origin at all. Which I think explains the cycle of life. For life to even exist, in my view, some thing must have always existed to begin existence itself, which avoids infinite regression and gives us some kind of beginning.
<bolding mine>
uhhh - what?
That does nothing to avoid ‘infinite regression’ and it ‘begs the question’.
Is your god still creating parts of himself, and if so, does that mean that he is not yet perfect?
Actually, it sounds a lot like one of the subplots of To Reign in Hell, by Steven Brust.
– Lazarus Long
No, I think it means that perfection can improve on perfection; I mean when you got that kind of power, its hard to belittle it or demean it if it does some improving. For Atheist thats easy to do, because you don’t fear or respect God, as for me its quite different, I can only say things out of fear and respect and awe, and from ignorance.
So if God improves on himself, then a new definition of perfection must be created that defines that perfection can improve on perfection.
Unless you buy the Ontological Argument.
Now you’re trying to redefine “perfection”.