What is easier to believe that we have a creator or that no one created us?


13 Answers

Maurice Korvo Profile
Maurice Korvo answered

Its easier to believe that no one created us, but it is more comforting to believe there is a creator, and we are here for a reason, not just by chance. (until you start thinking about the possibility we are simply a computer creation )

6 People thanked the writer.
Deston Elite
Deston Elite commented
So it's easier to believe that no one created us (which leads you to thoughts about how we were created and it goes even further) than it is to believe someone created us? So it's easier to believe that a painting was designed by no one than to believe that a painting was designed by someone?

You need to rethink what you say.
Maurice Korvo
Maurice Korvo commented
That is my point of view, it may be skewed due to education, age, experience, etc. Your reference to a painting goes over my head,
Deston Elite
Deston Elite commented
Then your point of view is incorrect.
Ray Dart Profile
Ray Dart answered

As several people have pointed out, it IS much easier to posit a creator, than work out why/how the universe is the way it is (and how/why we are the way we are).

It's also lazier.

If you don't understand something, invent something to explain it.

Man has always done that.

Didge Doo Profile
Didge Doo answered

Clearly it's easier to believe that there was a creator. It was good enough for the ancients who lacked any means of understanding how worlds may have come into existence and it still seems to be good enough for many people.

Education requires effort.

Pepper pot Profile
Pepper pot answered

Most of the first scientists believed in a Creator. They examined the world and saw that it followed laws, order. For them a building needs a builder, a painting a painter, a design a designer.  As Tom says, Aristotle believed there has to be a cause, this was in line with many of the beliefs, Hermes/Thoth was and still is followed by some scientists and builders (craftsman and medicine).

"All source and truth is in all things. Source is not from but of itself, as it is source of all. The oneness of every number but is not contained by none's. Engendered of every number but is engendered of no other one.

Appearances enlight us, where those without appearance make there believing hard. Where those are the more apparent things, where as the good can never show itself to the eyes, for it has neither form or figure. Therefore, the good is like itself alone.

Even order has it's place marked by place and number. No order lack of place and lack of measure."

(Well it's  a change from biblical scripture, though very similar, they believe in the Cosmos and the unnamed God).

For me I believe we come from something, or I would be nothing, and maybe we are, quantum physics says  energy, and vibration brings us into being.  The Bible says "In the beginning created Elohim "aleph and tav" the heavens and the earth." God spoke the word into existence, this is why the people of Judah value phonetics.  Phonetics and our alphabet goes back to the Phonicians, vowels were never written because they were classed as sacred. If I call you a dumb idiot are you affected by it? If you speak to yourself this way are you? What if I said you were brilliant and clever? 

Look at music, it can make us happy and sad, angry and sleepy. What rationale does dancing, laughter or dreaming have? We are manipulated energy, I think it takes more faith to believe in nothing and randomness than something when studying quantum physics, and a world with its laws and numerology, for laws do not have to exist, there is no reason why tomorrow you should not wake up and float out of your bed. I have no need to follow a religion but when I look about me and see the delicate detail in a leaf, when I see the network of veins and arteries in my body, when I feel the energy in a storm, I cannot help but be impressed, for nothing I try to create can ever compare.  That to me gets my respect, my intrigue, my awe.

2 People thanked the writer.
View all 8 Comments
Pepper pot
Pepper pot commented
Your understanding of hebrew is different to how it has been explained to me, it means more than is written. Hebrew use to be in pictogram.
Charles Davis
Charles Davis commented
Hmm, I've never heard that Hebrew was pictogram. I know it is very different then it is now, but the earliest forms were closer to Sumerian script then Egyptian hieroglyphs.
Pepper pot
Pepper pot commented
Sumerian cuneiform also evolved out of a pictographic script.
Cookie Hill Profile
Cookie Hill answered

Simply put it is easier to accept that their is a Creator because it would take intelligence to creat the universe, and the way that everything works. Hebrews 3:4, , Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but the one who constructed all things is God."

thanked the writer.
Ty Hibb
Ty Hibb commented
You would think that it would be simple. There is no limit to what a person will do to avoid the obvious. Thank you for your comments, they were truly appreciated, especially by those that love and respect God's word the bible.
Dakota  Mackenzie Profile

I find it's easier to believe that no one created us. I like having facts and some type of proof, proof for a god existing? There is none. Think about it, if god supposedly created the first two people and life built from that, it had to start somewhere! Then wouldn't that make us all related? Incest? >.> It says if you have a baby with someone close to you in your family, that child could have serious health risks and for that to keep happening, it would just get worse each generation.... But most of us are fine. There is no god. (my opinion, feel free to disagree, I'm not looking for an argument.)

Tom  Jackson Profile
Tom Jackson answered

Aristotle reasoned to the necessity of an "uncaused" cause.

I'm not going to argue with him---I'll let those who believe that an "uncaused" cause doesn't exist try to prove him wrong.

Not only is belief in a creator easier, it would appear to be the accurate explanation of what we observe on a daily basis.


1 Person thanked the writer.
View all 4 Comments
Tom  Jackson
Tom Jackson commented
@Kaywinnet Frye

Even from down in the "hold" you can make me laugh.

Have you ever actually heard of Aristotle?---you are a trip.
Call me Z
Call me Z commented
Carl Sagan, Albert Einstein, Thomas Jefferson, Stephen Hawking, Steve Jobs, and the greater majority of human academia have (or had) the opposite view, call me nitpicky, but the product of learned minds such as these far outstrip the wishful ponderings of an ancient with less formal eduction than a modern eighth grader. Say what you will, I'll support the opinions of the former over of those of the latter, based on that pesky novelty we call evidence.
Tom  Jackson
Tom Jackson commented
As you indicate, you have a preference for certain types of analyses.

You are still dealing with the question of whether or not God exists---or at least it seems to me that the question of His existence remains an issue in your life.

I settled that question about 40 years ago. I really don't know how time maps to eternity; but since I suspect personal progress requires determining the correct answer to that question there is a distinct possibility that I may have certain insights about reality that you are forced to reject due to your philosophy of that reality.

I can't talk to you about the taste of prime grade if you think that standard grade is representative of all beef.

In a case like that, only one of us loses.
John McCann Profile
John McCann answered

Why are we getting a surplus of religious questions here lately?

Regardless, we have no evidence for any creator anytime or anywhere. Natural process are pretty well understood to a point, but where our understanding breaks down is not where one posits a creator.

Darik Majoren Profile
Darik Majoren answered

If there were ANY evidence THOSE whom are evidence based, would most likely believe in a creator.

The creator concept is so easily determined to be of "Man's Design" that is unorthodox that any one would come to this conclusion on their own today . . . It is simply a myth based concept indoctrinated to stay alive from generation to generation . . . . As less and less offspring subscribe to these empty notions of God/Gods it will dwindle through the next generations, making the island of "Misfit Myth-based notions" all but gone the way the Greek Gods went from religion to stories and myth . . . I can see the shore line eroding away already . . .

2 People thanked the writer.
View all 9 Comments
Tom  Jackson
Tom Jackson commented
My first degree is in theoretical physics.

Apparently I have a much better insight into the limitations of science than you do.

The reference to the "edge" was from an earlier comment I sent to Dark about CS Lewis's comment about Nero fiddling on the brink of hell.
Tom  Jackson
Tom Jackson commented
Very slow internet---three comments as a result.
Tom  Jackson
Tom Jackson commented
The multiple comment were addressed to the Z's comment in this thread.
ly fen chen Profile
ly fen chen answered

It's a difficult question, but  it depends on persons, as there are different believers and there are none as well.

Charles Davis Profile
Charles Davis answered

It is WAY simpler to believe that we were created, and have a creator. It's  like this "I do not understand how this or that came about, so therefore it is God" (and this is not denying there is a creator as science has not completely figured out how life started). It is causing the dumbing of America, because "It's God so no more need for research", this has in its self caused many to stop research when they didn't understand something, even people that have the genius of the greatest minds in history, Issac Newton even limited his mind at one point to the thought of "God did it" and stopped research, many others as well.

The culture of Islam in the periods of 800 to 1100 CE was the light of humanity, what happened? They were the center of advancement, they developed mathematics, astronomy, science of all sorts. They dropped into their "Dark Age" and decided "God did it". Research and understanding stopped, math became "demonic" (we still see this in the cultures of ISIS and the Taliban). We saw this during the "dark ages" in Europe, it was not until the Renaissance that we started advancing again, which was when Islam delved into their dark time.

Believe in the idea that God caused creation, which is fine to a point, but do not stop trying to discover how a "God did it", only then will we advance beyond what we now have.

Deston Elite Profile
Deston Elite answered

It's MUCH easier to believe we have a creator rather than that no one created us. The reason is because it's easier to justify and explain so many things.

Who created this creator? The creator created himself. He was always there. He exists outside of time and space.

If no one created us, how did we get here? This requires thousands of years of scientific advancement to answer.

If someone created us, how is their morality? He is our creator and therefore in order to please him we must live by the standards and laws that he set up for himself.

If no one created us, how is their morality? This takes a deeper understanding of humanity and even then there are thousands of questions that can be asked by a believer.

Why are our organs shaped like this if there is a creator? Because he created us. That's how he wanted his creation to look.

Why are our organs shaped like this if there is no creator? Let's go through much scientific research to figure this out. It's going to take a while.

As you can see, it's MUCH easier to believe in a creator than it is to believe no one created us.

2 People thanked the writer.
View all 11 Comments
Deston Elite
Deston Elite commented
So apparently Kaywinnet, you responded to my comment. However, it must have been removed. I'm sure that's because it was filled with insults, like your arguments usually are.

But I was able to read some of it.

Let's take vaccines for example, since you used that in like the only paragraph I could read. Yes, vaccines are based on science and using scientific knowledge in order to create them. However, somebody had to say "I dream of finding a vaccine for this disease, or for this condition." That's what science lacks: the motivation.

Science is simply knowledge of how things work. Without the drive or the motivation to find a vaccine for conditions and diseases, we wouldn't even be able to create this vaccine. Science lacks motivation, because it's simply knowledge.

You apparently don't seem to understand that. I'm not saying inventions come from nowhere or that inventions just pop out of thin air. I'm saying it requires motivation and a drive in order to have these inventions. Otherwise, science is simply useless, because it's only knowledge.

Knowledge without motivation to use this knowledge is useless. Science is simply that: knowledge.
Call me Z
Call me Z commented
Not entirely accurate.Science is the method or tool for acquiring knowledge and putting it to use, not just the static possession of it. That is more a definition of wisdom. I hold the view that the processes of science has rewarded our species with more wisdom than the absence of science that formulated omnipotent creators ever has. But to each their own...
Deston Elite
Deston Elite commented
Actually, putting science to use would simply be APPLYING science. You don't have to put it to use for it to be science. While more facts are discovered when you do put it to use, science is simply the knowledge of those facts.
mary adam Profile
mary adam answered

I suppose in many ways it is easier to believe in a creator when you have watched females of the species give birth or a potter create a piece of art.  On top of which humans are very different from other species, they enquire about their environment,  they use a complex language, have created vast ways to communicate, invented, explored, made artwork, use math, manipulate their environment, bury their dead, kill for sport. Those type of things point to a higher intelligence (to an extent).

We also seek order. Math is a way for us to describe our environment, in reality it only exists in the mind and breaks down.

Therefore as much as we explore and measure, we ourselves are limited to our own understanding, knowing that there are things beyond human comprehension. To say that to believe in anything for which their is no proof therefore becomes a bit of a misnomer when we are knowingly limited in the validity of the models we use in physics etc. Fact is things do exist that we can't prove.

Secondly,  people may well sleep better at night not believing in the supernatural and feel life is less complicated by stories of gods and the alike with the basic notion of getting up and making the most out of life. However, all these stories come from somewhere. They are far more elaborate than the beliefs of the shaman. They point to the first civilisations, ie architecture and domesticating animals and grasses. When nomad tribes decided to settle which would have been against every instinct (as it had been for many years previous) as it would make your livestock and crops vulnerable to occupation, theft and people vulnerable to slavery. So why did we do it? Was it even a choice? Why would we give up our freedom, for taxes, over population, slavery, hard labour, poorer quality of food, increased illness?  The God idea from that angle wasn't just an idea of uneducated people, even history says that in every culture they had "priests" and kings. If you look at it that way it was an idea of sheer brilliance, to control a vast group of people who keep you in the lap of luxury? Far from stupidity I would say. Plus any education we receive today only takes the effort of copy regurgitate and repeat, and that education is used to keep us in the same system, not very smart at all.

Answer Question