In The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins suggests that designer hypothesis immediately raises the larger question of who designed the Designer. Evidently materialists like Dawkins seem to think that they have theists over a barrel: “Oh yeah? Well, who created God, then?”

But the answer is: nobody. A First Cause has to be uncreated; it couldn’t be caused to exist by anything else by definition. Further, this First Cause would have to stand outside time, because time is necessary for cause and effect to function. Something causes something else; one follows the other in time. It is therefore evident that for a First Cause to be what it is – underived, not the result of something else – it has to stand outside time.

These logical facts have been attributed to God for thousands of years. I don’t understand why materialists would think they were scoring some sort of “gotcha” here. It just shows that their concept of God doesn’t match up with what Christians have always believed about God.

Cosmologists tell us that before the Big Bang time as we know it didn’t exist; that the laws of physics end when we extrapolate backwards to the singularity that became the birth of the Universe. If everything finite has a cause, what caused the thing that started time? While I don’t want to lean too heavily on this, it occurs to me that an underived God fits the job description quite nicely. An underived being by definition is Something that has to be eternal.

When the the first Russian cosmonaut went to space, the atheists gleefully reported that they didn’t see God up there, as if this proved something. I think Christians would have been worried if they had: God would have had to be pretty small to be viewed in such a narrow locality. The present objections of militant atheists such as Dawkins seem of the same sort: their bias reveals such a narrow idea of God it’s almost laughable. I’d find their idea of God hard to believe in too.