Who created God?
NOONE.
>>18479582God is defined in classical theology as the first mover and eternal, so by necessity nothing created him. If you believe in the existence of this god is personal and a different matter; but thats your answer
>>18479584Who died and made you king?
>>18479584Who or what made her eternal?
>>18479586I exist eternally as king, my position is not contingent on anyone or anything else.
>>18479588God wasn't made
>>18479592Then how did she become eternal?
>>18479593>How did the north pole become northDon't ask silly questions
>>18479597>Don't ask questions I can't answer
>>18479599I have already substantiated you an answer from ontological necessity; if you can not interpret my response, the fault lays on you.
>>18479593don't misgender god, sis This is not your little neo-pagan circle where you burn effigys to freya, asherah, elvira, kali and whatever
>>18479597North was defined by humans, so you're saying humans made god.
>>18479582It's a good question not because theists don't have an answer to it (they do, he always existed), but because it's in direct contradiction with the theist argument that the universe needs a cause.If the universe needs a creator, but god doesn't, then the universe doesn't need a creator either.
>>18479603>don't misgender god, sisShe has a penis?
>>18479605This is futile.Good day.
>>18479609Don't rage bait, god is without form
>>18479614If she doesn't have a penis, there's no problem with using she/her pronouns.
>>18479616Oh yeah? What if call you he/him? My BROTHER
>>18479618That's okay, I have a penis, unlike Her.
>>18479582Creation implies time but I would assume god is timeless so he isnt created or destroyed and also doesnt change
>>18479614If God lacks a form, doesn’t that imply God lacks a defined gender?
>>18479582Cantor's diagonal argument shows that there is a transfinite cardinal hierarchy of gods, each one greater than the previous.
>>18479582I did.
>>18479582God was invented, not created.
>>18479605There was a man sent from God whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.
>>18479991Yes, but that anon is trying to subvert and undermine masculine pronouns being used as the default when refering to non-gendered beings. It's a commentary on benign patriarchy being present historically across religions, due to male dominant social structures forming a cognitive bias.This is why i won't let him say it.
