Who Created God? - Why This BAD Question has a BIG Impact

If the question 'Who Created God' is naïve and nonsensical, why do so many atheists hurl it in the direction of believers? Does it actually have any affect on their faith? I provide my own personal testimony in this video...

ENJOY THIS VIDEO?
If you enjoyed this video, or at least found it thought provoking, let me know by liking the video👍 and commenting your thoughts...
As well as subscribing, please ensure you have the notification bell turned on🔔 so that you never miss an upload :)

WANT TO SUPPORT MY WORK?
Each video that I write and produce requires a mammoth amount of time to script, record, edit, design digital artwork, and finally upload after many proof viewings. My work here on YouTube is only made possible
with the kind support of people like you via Patreon. (I'm being serious, without you guys I would have no choice but to hang up my boots.)
If you would like to support the work I do and care so much about, please take a look at how you can do so on Patreon using this link:
Thank you.

SPECIAL THANKS
I would like to thank all of my Patrons for making videos like this possible. However, I wish to personally thank these individuals from the top three tiers for their incredibly generous support:
JEHOVAH GOD: Russell Coy-Burt, Josh
REALM OF THE GODS: Reluctantheist, Fredrik Andersson, Jimmy Tux, Laurence Lear, Daniel Reumiller, Daniel Blankstein, Jalin Murphy, Rick Me, Craig Young
SUN SIZED SUBSCRIBERS: Jimmy B, Stephen Baxter, Johanna Rowland, Stephen Ellis, A Gordon

CONNECT
(If you wish to get in touch with me directly, the best way to do so is via direct message on Instagram)

CHAPTER LIST
- Intro 0:00
- Why a 'BAD' question? 1:48
- Why do atheists ask it so frequently? 3:01
- God - a simple solution? 8:07
- A childish question? 12:26
- Personal impact on my faith 13:35

#christian #bible #jehovahswitnesses

[NotSprag]

The question "Who created God?", in my experience, is typically a response to the statement "Complexity requires design". Then when the theist says their god always existed, one could point out the special pleading fallacy they committed. In these scenarios, I do not think the question is stupid.

[unclescar]

The only reason some questions like "Who created God?" come off as silly is because believers can paste whatever attributes they want on God without explanation and demand to get away with it (Special pleading). For everything else in reality, we always have to give an explanation for why they possess the attributes do. A "HOW?" response to justify why something is characterized as possessing a particular attribute.
For instance, "Why don't fish drown in water?" the answer isn't just "because fish are water dwelling, non-drowning animals". There is an explanation for why they have the ability to not drown, a "HOW" explanation .
This is the case with any "WHY?" question about anything we observe in nature. The answer always turns out to be a "HOW". Why is the sun hot? Why does the moon shine? Why do thing fall? Why do we die?
But this not the case with any of God's "natural" attributes. How/Why is God omnipotent? How/Why is he all-loving? How/Why is he uncreated? All these attributes are just pasted onto him without explanation. Without a "HOW" to justify WHY he has been characterized that way. Thereby making a God the ultimate non-explanation.

[kaylow]

I get what you're going for buy it's not really a bad question. Special Pleading is at the root of most apologist arguments, especially KCA and it's revised editions, and is a direct contradiction to miracles and the mind/body problem.

[EfrainRiveraJunior]

"Ready to make a defense of my faith." That's why the Australian Royal Commission was so eye-opening to me. Geoffrey Jackson and his colleagues failed miserably in that aspect.

[mgroat]

The point you made about how people say God must've created humans because of how complex we are, yet no one created God even with him being 1000 times more complex was great. I've never thought of it that way! Thank you for that!

[loriw]

This is how I feel about the problem of evil. Many atheists that debate don’t like that argument. But the problem of evil is what starts many religious people on their journey to atheism. I was one of them. I think “who created god” isn’t a good argument but I think “WHAT created god” is a better one. And if god doesn’t need a creator, why does the universe?

[lilitheden]

I am a great fan of Richard Dawkins. The God Delusion is an amazing book. My poor husband used to be an agnostic . After reading this book he became depressed because after reading it he was convinced that there is no afterlife. I still remember him putting the book aside and saying “now I am never going to see mum again”. (His mum died a few years ago).That was so heartbreaking. I told him that she had a good and full life surrounded by people who loved her. She and his father became atheists after some quarrels with a priest… So, if she was at peace with death, why shouldn’t we?
Anyway I always enjoy your videos. You give me stuff to think about.

[orsonzedd]

I always used "who created god?" To set up for "the universe is uncreated"

[sulas]

Thought requires time.
Change requires time.
Decisions require time.
Creation requires time.
Timelessness = Changelessness
Causation = cause leading to effect = change
Timeless cause = Changeless change
A blatant contradiction.

[MarkAhlquist]

I usually ask why the universe can't have the property of being uncaused. It's a property, they claim, that it's possible to have. How could they know which things have it?

[Evidence]

Is it really a bad question though?
If the believer says that everything must have a creator except the God I believe in, I call it special pleading.

[laymanphil]

Even if God does not exist, my sister will need to be framed by groupthink and a movement that will control her. This is reassuring and makes you feel better. It's like taking medicine to feel better and this medicine will be taken for life. Indoctrination only cures the effects of an illness and not the causes, which is why there is today more and more depression in all the fundamentalist movements. Artificial love is a powerful trap. Only vulnerable or fragile people will remain trapped.
Once this trap closes it is very difficult to wean off. I think of the thousands of PIMO who today suffer in silence for having succumbed at some point in their lives to this sectarian movement. SAD.

[kelleren]

I'll say there also is one situation where this question is perfectly useful: when debunking the Kalam Cosmological Argument.

In a nutshell, it goes, "everything that exists has a cause, the universe exists, therefore it has a cause. Therefore God"

(It's a dumb argument, I know, and this isn't the only way to debunk it but here goes)

"Okay, so if god exists, who created God?"

At that point they generally say "well God is different because we can't have infinite regression" and from there it's pretty easy to point out that they're making a special pleading argument. "Well, if you just admitted that some things can exist without a cause, why do you get to assert that that thing is definitively your iteration of Skydaddy?"

[RebelAlliance]

One of the many things I could never get my head around is why evil people are "blessed" with fertility, while perfectly good people are punished with infertility. There is zero justification for that. The only answers I ever got were "we have to have faith that God has His reasons" or "God works in mysterious ways" or "we will never know God's plans" that's absolute bs to me, there's no rhyme or reason to it, if "God" exists, He has a very messed up way of doing things. I asked my Christian friend recently that if he knew his great niece was being S.A., or abused in any way for that matter, like he actually witnessed it happening, would he step in and do something about it, or would he just turn a blind eye and say "I promised myself not to interfere"? Even he admitted how messed up that is. And this is why I don't believe anymore.

[netic_fx]

I actually have the replacement "Why is God allowed to lack creation?" it is the exact same question but phrased in a way that shows you have thought about it. It works because it is an even playing field because they have no answer but neither do you, nobody does.

[bootedbuilds]

Christian dogma dictates that 'nothing' can exist without having been created (by god). Therefor Christians have three options:
1. Declare that God is nothing and thus does not exist.
2. Declare that God is not nothing and must therefor have been created.
3. Throw in loads of word-salad, the twisting of definitions, juggling of semantics, and whatnot, in a desperate but doomed attempt to flee from the fact that if god can exist without having been created, so can our universe, so can earth, and so can we.

[johanahonen]

It's not a stupid question. It's a way to point out special pleading.

[ghenulo]

When I was a believer, I pondered this very question. Whether you accept that God created everything or that the Big Bang started everything, you have to contend with that there was something (either God or the singularity) that always existed, which seemed counterintuitive to me. So yes, the logical answer to theists claiming that everything that exists had to be created (the Kalam Cosmological Argument) is either that there was an exception that didn't have to be created (i.e. God, but why not something else, like the singularity whose expansion produced the Big Bang?) or that something had to create God, something had to have created the creator of God, etc, ad infinitum.

[alystimes]

Amazing work, as usual. I always find your content to be so mentally stimulating; you almost always illustrate a point in a way I've never thought of before.

[Ashs-mini-vlogs]

Fear of death keep religion alive I welcome death its apart of nature