Very interesting responses...

Majority seems to saying... We, humans created GOD or GODs to our image to suit our human needs. Hm...
So, this becomes chicken and egg debate.

Yes, that is the core of the question.

Does the GOD ask itself this very question?

So, we shall indulge in the "chicken vs egg" dichotomy.

When we speak of God, we are speaking about pure, unfiltered, direct perception.

We did not "create God" but what we are creating, is the concept OF God and there is a big difference there.

Human perception creates labels and the concept of linear time and in such regards (and it has been scientifically proven), both chicken and egg existed simultaneously.

It is also an existential paradox, based on a purely intellectual synopsis, but what's not to say that God is existent and non existent simultaneously? More along the lines of Schroedinger's Cat?

I could go into Hindu philosophy and discuss the nature of Purusha and Prakriti, but I will spare you that....instead, I will quote Aldous Huxley..

https://goo.gl/images/TLVtWQ

So then "We, humans" are the GODs referred to.

I usually phrase the question in this way: Set aside for the moment what exists or if anything actually exists, how is it possible that anything can exist? Shouldn't 'nothing' have remained thus?

No answer here because clearly there is no way to boot strap the ceasing of nothing.

Note that I do not consider "it always existed" as a valid answer as it does not answer how it is possible.

This is going to be very difficult for me to articulate so as to be understood.

I don't have any personal issue with the realisation that "God has always been" in much the same way as what existed before the Big Bang in order to bring the whole universe into being? How is that even possible?

According to Quantum Physics, there is no such thing as "nothing":

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/bigt...05311.amp.html

...and even if there were such a thing as "nothing" it would need to be contrasted with "something" to make "nothing" and "something" even possible...wherein lies the whole duality of existence.

Even the term "non dual" requires what is "dual" for the whole distinction to be made, which is dual in and of itself.

Suffice to say, the human mind is capable of infinite contortions and associations with "being"...even those who say "I am God" because there is always that little bit of "legroom" left for me to innocently ask "what is the 'you' that is 'God'?

It is also said that the whole of existence is God just looking in a mirror, trying to make sense of what it sees...and I can understand that, but my ego wonders why God would need a mirror to look at in the first place?

To get beyond any line of deductive reasoning, the mind and all thought must be totally dropped and this is just way too much of an ask for any rational human being who lives and exists within their own mental sphere of trying to "understand" what God is, because that's a fool's errand.

I don't think there's any chicken or egg debate. The egg was first because the higher level spark happens in the egg, not in the chicken.

You assume that "firstly" there was nothing ... Why? Because you can't conceive that something can't not have a beginning? In a non-dual realm you don't have to have both something and nothing ...

Who created God? Then, who created God's creator? ...

Let's just accept there are things that our minds can't fathom.

Let's find out the answers to smaller and more practical questions: Why are we, humans, here? What do we try to do? What am I supposed to do?

I definitely do not assume that first there was nothing. Doesn't really matter if there was a nothing first, the question is about how there is a something currently. How is that even possible for there to be a something.

"Argue for your limitations, and sure enough they're yours." - Richard Bach

Do not assume everyone on this forum is human.
Also do not assume that those who are human intend to stay human.
Growth is a thing that can be embraced and even realized.

Then why not ask that originally?

You don't seem to have God nailed down (pardon the pun Christians).

If we were to look at God as any of the things I listed - teacher, destroyer, father etc then those traits tell you the motivation, if we look at God as a natural force then it's essentially automatic.

Your either asking does the great creator ponder upon why they create or your asking does a natural force question its own motivations.

In scinario A its asking a creative mind why it needs to create.

In scinario B its asking the wind why it blows.

Quoted for sheer emphasis.