Created or... What?

Cectic.com



This is a common argument against Intelligent Design: "If complexity necessitates a creator, wouldn't our creator need a creator?" Or, to put it another way, if God made the world, then who made God? While this seems to make Creationism untenable, I do not find this argument compelling once one examines the alternatives.



Two Alternatives:

1. The universe came from nothing. Assuming that everything has a cause, or everything that exists was created by something else, this is ridiculous. This viewpoint would say that everything was caused by something, until you get to the beginning of the universe, then... what? Regardless of how one may try to explain it away, the logical terminus of this naturalistic viewpoint is that the universe popped out of nothing. How's that for a miracle?



2. The universe created itself. Very similar argument, very similar response. Nothing can create itself, as it would have to exist before it could create itself. This just doesn't make sense. (Kinda mind-numbing, isn't it?)



I argue that the universe was created by something outside of itself (for instance, God). As the cartoon above shows, this does sound incredible, but when you consider the other options, it actually makes more sense to assume that something beyond our natural system (super-natural, perhaps?), made the universe to exist. If so, it is also possible for this being to be self-existent, needing no cause for itself (a first cause, or uncaused cause).



Now, this is not proof positive, I'll give you that, but look at the alternatives. Which is more ridiculous?



More info at Wikipedia: Cosmological Argument.