I Have A Problem With An Atheist Argument

[David Sklansky]

Its the argument that says that using God to explain some things postualtes something even more complicated that has to be explained. Or the similar argument that if we use God to explain how the universe was created we bump into the question of who created God?

Although I am not an expert on the subject, I think that the possibility of a universe outside ours, with five or more dimensions can refute these points. Religious people refutethe second comment with the words that God is "outside time". I think that is conceivably true. But it is also true, I'm pretty sure that you don't need to be God to be outside time. In other words it is not logically impossible for something to always exist. Time could fall back on itself in five dimensions just like the equater does in three. (I suppose that could be possible in a three dimensional univerde as well, but in our case the evidence suggests a beginning did happen.) If so many different entities could be outside time.

But such a fifth dimensional entity could be pretty simplistic, not Godlike, not omnipotent, but still be capable of creating and miraculously (to us) interfering inside a three or four dimensional universe. Just like the spherein flatland couldremove a kidney without breaking the skin.

In a nutshell to reject the idea of an intelligent designer as a simple explanation for at least some things because the designer couldn't be simple is I think fallacious.