Well then, who did create your gods? You may find that question audacious because you're still a religionist. When you discover the error of your ways, you will realize the depth of your indoctrination.Why would you be amazed by anyone asking ''who created the gods''? Religionists tend to insist that their gods are eternal and uncreated but that is nothing more than a ''... because I say so" statement and requires unquestioning belief in partisan dogma. I'm amazed anyone would expect others to accept that.The problem with your argument here is that, and let's assume God created everything, that either God was created from nothing, or God wasn't even created.
So, if God wasn't created, then things being created from nothing is more plausible than something not even being created.
If God was created, then God was created from nothing. Which means things can be created from nothing, which means you don't need a God.
Or, God was created from something, who created God? Another God? And who created that God?
Your belief system is just as wacky, if not more so, than atheists' belief system.
I don't mean to be rude but I'm amazed that anyone is even asking that question ("who created God?") let alone a few people. It shows a blatant lack of understanding on the entire concept of God. God is the First Cause, which has to be eternal. The Creator is uncreated. The buck stops there.
You said that both theism and atheism are wacky, well I agree with you on the latter. To me what is truly wacky is to believe that everything - all of creation, which clearly shows order, design and complexity - is the result of dumb luck, no intelligence. That's like believing the Sistine Chapel could put itself together, with no architect or artist, just pure luck! And some atheists call our beliefs magical? What could be more magical than something (everything) coming from nothing, all by itself? As I always say, I'm awed by the faith of atheists. Personally I could never have that much faith.
As to the religioners belief in ''design'', I have to acknowledge that I don’t know exactly what religioners means by “designed”. One of the favorite games of rsligioners is equivocation, so it’s important to pin them down on a precise meaning. Religioners can't seem to state what they mean by “design”. Do they mean simply that something has a pattern to it (as in “the design of a snowflake”), or do they mean something that has a “function”, or must there necessarily be some teleology involved? I think it’s incumbent on religioners to make clear what they mean. Does ''design'' involve a man in a long flowing beard, wearing a nightgown and floating in the clouds who waves his hand and the magic apoears?
He didn't ask how God can be eternal (that's a different question) he asked who created God? My point was that shows a blatant lack of understanding on the whole idea of God. One doesn't have to believe in God to understand the basic concept of God. Unless one is brand new to these types of debates, I assumed that atheists have heard many times before that God is eternal. Now if he would've said "explain how can God be eternal?" then I wouldn't have said that I'm amazed anyone is asking that.
As for the word designed, I'm just going by the basic definition. Something that is designed requires intention, thought, a plan. It's the difference between a pile of sand on the beach that was formed by pure chance (the wind blowing it together) and an elaborate sandcastle on the beach… which obviously didn't come together by chance, it was designed and created.
In the same way that it would be absurd to assert that the sandcastle came together by dumb luck, it is absurd and blind to assert that genetic code, the human mind, and everything in creation seen and unseen came together by dumb luck, no intelligence involved.
In fact, believing that is a form of blindness. Not physical blindness obviously but a different type of blindness. You don't see that now because you're still an atheist. If/when that changes, you will realize that you once were blind. And by the way, debating this on the Internet is probably not going to change your mind, so imo it's kind of a waste of time. If you sincerely, truly want to be convinced then my advice to all atheists is to change your attitude, because God is the one who opens people's eyes, but it's probably not gonna happen with a prideful, stubborn, "I demand proof!!!!!1" type of attitude.
Yes, the ''I demand proof'', worldview is a failing of those who don't accept ''... because I say so'', claims. Thus, you must admit to being prideful and stubborn in regard to your disbelief in the gidsbof Shintoism.