Why Create a Universe?

[GrowingSmaller]

You lost me at "to do justice". It's not as if there was unjust behavior before he created mankind....correct?

So he created mankind so he would have someone to judge?

I think so, that's seemingly the Muslim perspective. I suppose God could do no wrong, but man can do both right and wrong.

I've read the Qur'an...don't claim to have understood all of it, but to each his own.

The appeal of what you've explained here is lost on me though.

Imagine if you met a couple you know and they told you they were expecting twins. You asked them what made them finally decide to have children...and they replied that they really wanted someone to judge.

I think my mouth would hang open at an answer like that. When did this stop appearing absurd to you?

Good point, I'll have to put my apologetics hat on. Maybe judgement is part of raising a child, judgement and striving for justice. After all wouldn't you want the child to behave " properly" (in accord with what is good for it, according to its nature)? In this respect the love you show a child is part of justice. Acting with "symmetry" or with an understanding of what is fitting. After all abusers and cruel people are rightly frowned on and brought to justice in certain respects. In this sense people deserve to be treated fairly, and that involves love, friendship, character development etc. Because these things pertain to the essence of a good human life.

Justice is not just an abstract principle, but a way of living well. Even if there is no God and we are evolved, and the universe is a "_____" (insert what it is here) it still seems like evolution "created us" (i.e. we have developed as agents) in a way that a sense of justice, purpose and proper conduct are relevant to the human condition.

But, thanks for giving me the time of day! Its interesting to develop ideas like this.

 

[SkyWriting]

Boredom?I think that the standard answer is something like "to give glory to God". IOWs, God "needs" someone to sing his praises, if God can be said to need anything at all. No, that never really made sense to me.eudaimonia,Mark

Correct on both counts. God desires community.
He enjoys fellowship.

27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
28 God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth...

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

So in other words, God really doesn't care about events on this earth?

That's a strange thing to say. The analogy with my wife taking up painting would be like saying my wife didn't care about how the little dog in the picture at the lower left came out.

Great artists care about every little detail in their work. God is the greatest artist of all.

Matt 18:12-14 "What do you think? If any man has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go and search for the one that is straying? If it turns out that he finds it, truly I say to you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine which have not gone astray. So it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones perish."
NASU

 

[Ana the Ist]

I think so, that's seemingly the Muslim perspective. I suppose God could do no wrong, but man can do both right and wrong.

Good point, I'll have to put my apologetics hat on. Maybe judgement is part of raising a child, judgement and striving for justice. After all wouldn't you want the child to behave " properly" (in accord with what is good for it, according to its nature)? In this respect the love you show a child is part of justice. Acting with "symmetry" or with an understanding of what is fitting. After all abusers and cruel people are rightly frowned on and brought to justice in certain respects. In this sense people deserve to be treated fairly, and that involves love, friendship, character development etc. Because these things pertain to the essence of a good human life.

Justice is not just an abstract principle, but a way of living well. Even if there is no God and we are evolved, and the universe is a "_____" (insert what it is here) it still seems like evolution "created us" (i.e. we have developed as agents) in a way that a sense of justice, purpose and proper conduct are relevant to the human condition.

But, thanks for giving me the time of day! Its interesting to develop ideas like this.

Justice is kind of an abstract principle. Even if you define it as "living well"...this means many different things to many different people.

I'm not going to argue that judgement isn't a part of raising a child though...it's just not a reason to create one. There's a difference there.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Correct on both counts. God desires community.
He enjoys fellowship.

What a strange notion...fellowship and community with god? Why not create other gods then?

We are so far beneath a creature of omnipotence and omniscience that it would be like fellowship and community with an ant.

When I seek company...I seek it with someone I see as comparable to myself. It would be mighty strange to seek a personal relationship with the insects in my backyard.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Yes its ambiguous .i.e. justice, and I was looking in my boook on *christian* ethics and it seems like the foremost use of justice in chrisatianity relates to righteousness and well being. So youre right.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes its ambiguous .i.e. justice, and I was looking in my boook on *christian* ethics and it seems like the foremost use of justice in chrisatianity relates to righteousness and well being. So youre right.

Ambiguity and abstraction aren't the same thing.

 

[grasping the after wind]

I would wager we do...let's play your idea out to its logical conclusion though...

Let's say goodness is a necessary part of perfection. Let's say that since its a necessary part of perfection...a perfect being could only do good.

Let's say this perfect being creates a free will actor (since this is what christian theology believes). Our free will actor...decides to cause great destruction upon our perfect god's creations.

This free will actor (let's call him Satan, for fun lol) isn't going to stop inflicting pain and suffering and death upon other free will actors. Our other free will actors cannot stop Satan either...

So our perfect god is faced with a decision. He can be cruel to Satan...and cast him outside of his creation into a special place designed for him (let's call this hell).

Or...

He can be cruel to the rest of his free will actors and do nothing. This too would be cruel since our perfect god in this example is the only one capable of stopping the destruction caused by Satan.

Either way...this perfect creator would be cruel to someone. It's a situation resulting of free will...one that our god shouldn't be in since he can only be "good" as you've defined it as a necessary part of perfection. I suppose you could make that argument if you believe there's no such thing as free will...but it would still be a rather difficult argument.

Emotional aspects of character like "goodness" or "cruelty" are simply matters of perspective...not factual attributes of a thing. You may think you have the sweetest most loving kitty cat in the world...but to a mouse it's a vicious monster.

So do you see now why I don't think emotional characteristics can necessarily be a part of "perfection"?

Of course for those that do not believe in free will your explanation is meaningless but I do see why you think the way you think as I accept that your basic POV and set of assumptions about the nature of reality informs the rest of your argument, I just have my own POV and set of basic assumptions, some similar and some different than your own.. BTW I did not insist that emotional characteristics were necessary for perfection though I think you did say that they were necessarily precluded from perfection and I did not see why within your worldview that was necessarily the case. I don't consider goodness or cruelty to be emotions but rather subjective assessments of actions and attitudes . I consider infatuation and hate and envy and many other chemically induced feelings to be emotions and I believe the chemical reaction to stimulus causes the feelings. I do not consider either love or selflessness to be an emotion as , from my own perspective, I do not experience any chemical reaction when I act in those ways, but rather I consider those words to be descriptions of motivation for actions toward others and not properly descriptions of a reaction to a stimulus. An emotion like hate or infatuation can cause one to act in manners we would describe as cruelly or beneficently but those emotions are not necessary for the existence of any action that might be considered cruel or bad or good or whatever other subjective moral judgement one might assign to the action.

So, obviously, since our basic assumptions about what is and is not an emotion, what is or is not perfection and whether free will is a factor or not do not line up, our views will ever be out of sync with each other. Arguing about the matter of what constitutes a perfect being under those circumstances can not lead to anything constructive as our conceptions of perfection differ . If one of us were to , for entertainment purposes , allow for the assumptions of the other to control the discussion it might be instructive and helpful in understanding the other's POV and could be useful in pointing out any inconsistencies in the conclusions drawn from the POV controlling the discussion but unless one has a fundamental change in their basic POV apart from such a discussion( something that happens very rarely ) there is no way that such a discussion can lead to a change of mind of either party.

It is unfortunate that many here( I am not pointing my finger in your direction when I say this so do not take offense ) find it impossible to allow that other POVs may have validity and continue to argue strictly on the basis that their own particular POV is objectively correct. I see Christians actually trying to convince atheists of something by referencing the Bible as the authority by which the atheist ought to be convinced to agree with the Christian and Atheists seriously arguing with Theists and expecting them to be enlightened by an argument that dismisses any possibility that the physical world might not be the totality of all reality. Neither one for a moment taking into consideration that the person they are dealing with has a completely different set of assumptions about what reality entails. If one wishes to have a useful conversation with another, rather than simply some kind of pedantic rant that treats the other as an ignoramus( a thing I suspect is that enticing to many) one cannot simply dismiss the other's basic assumptions about the nature of reality as invalid because it does not mirror one's own subjectively arrived at assumptions.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

What a strange notion...fellowship and community with god? Why not create other gods then?

We are so far beneath a creature of omnipotence and omniscience that it would be like fellowship and community with an ant.

When I seek company...I seek it with someone I see as comparable to myself. It would be mighty strange to seek a personal relationship with the insects in my backyard.

Two comments about that.

a) some people, maybe even you, have pets and respect their pets even though they are not their equal. If God is real, then clearly he has created living things at all levels of functioning.

b) If Christians are correct, there's no reason to suppose we are so limited as you describe, considering our extended eternal life in heaven. Won't we be learning and growing there?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Two comments about that.

a) some people, maybe even you, have pets and respect their pets even though they are not their equal. If God is real, then clearly he has created living things at all levels of functioning.

b) If Christians are correct, there's no reason to suppose we are so limited as you describe, considering our extended eternal life in heaven. Won't we be learning and growing there?

A. The gap in intelligence between you and your pets would be tiny compared to the gap between you and something omnipotent and omniscient. Pets are a bad analogy...insects would be closer...microorganisms is probably the best analogy.

B. I didn't realize this was a part of christian theology. What kind of superpowers do you think you gain in heaven?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

A. The gap in intelligence between you and your pets would be tiny compared to the gap between you and something omnipotent and omniscient. Pets are a bad analogy...insects would be closer...microorganisms is probably the best analogy.

Awww, c'mon. Its not as you can't appreciate that there is fundamentally a difference between men and microbes regardless of how great a mind is contemplating the two.

B. I didn't realize this was a part of christian theology. What kind of superpowers do you think you gain in heaven?

Sort of like when a child becomes an adult, only more so. Think about being like angels, or like Jesus.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

The Creator of the universe.

If you define God as "The Creator of the Universe" and you ask why did God create the universe, I would say because he had to. He by definition has to create the universe or He wouldn't have that title.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

And what if those same children go to be with God as soon as they die on earth, but will live eternally with Him by His grace?

Why not just skip the unnecessary suffering part and go straight to eternity with God?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

And mine was a serious answer. I would create a universe out of sheer boredom. Not like I would have anything better to do as a deity by itself.

This is truer than it may look.

Really... What would God be without us? Would it even matter?

 

[Gracchus]

If there is a god, I see no reason to assume that he, she, or it is omniscient. Maybe the creator just wants to see what happens under different conditions. Good Christians should have no objections to being used as lab rats.

 

[quatona]

Here's a question: why create a universe? And why create life, specifically human beings, on planet earth?

Loneliness, boredom, the desire for drama.
Unfortunately, being omniscient, the experience of drama isn´t available for you, even if creating such.

 

[quatona]

For God's good pleasure.

Ah, so pleasure turns out to be the greatest good.

Do you enjoy creating and does it give you a feeling of accomplishment?

I don´t create. I modify, rearrange and/or manipulate that which already exists.

 

[quatona]

OK - why create human beings? Do you really think that God would create human beings just for fun? Wouldn't that be sort of apathetic?

Who are you to judge God´s motives?

 

[Willis Gravning]

Here's a question: why create a universe? And why create life, specifically human beings, on planet earth?

There is a quote from Eckhart Tolle that I like, 'You are the universe expressing itself as a human for a little while.' I think everything, including us, are expressions of God.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Loneliness, boredom, the desire for drama.
Unfortunately, being omniscient, the experience of drama isn´t available for you, even if creating such.

A great artist, making a great painting, can find satisfaction in the resulting work of art even if it is not exactly a surprise for him how it turns out.