Why Create a Universe?

[Davian]

Would you appreciate a God who is patient with you and diligent in trying to explain Himself to you in a way you can understand so that you'll believe He's real?

Your answer now might be that He's failing to explain Himself to you, but what if He's still patiently trying to reach out to you?

Your allegedly all-power-all-knowing-whatever-it-is is trying to reach out to me, and the best it can do is to appear fictional? How would it look if it was only fictional?

 

[Achilles6129]

I think that God commands worship because he's good. As a matter of fact, he's the very definition of good. God created all things and owns all things.

In addition, I think that to compare a human being to the Creator of the universe is silly. The Creator made everything and owns everything and thus has certain rights which no human could ever have.

 

[Chriliman]

So you wouldn't appreciate a God who is patient with you and diligent in helping you understand Him so that you can believe He's real?

 

[grasping the after wind]

I don't think the concept of perfection can hold emotional constrictions. To take that view, it would leave the subject unable to "perfectly" deal with certain situations...situations that might, for example, require cruelty or some such emotional description.

I do not see things the way you do. How do you define perfection? How do you define emotion? Do you considers selflessness an emotion? Do you consider an attitude of indifference to be necessary for perfection? I would wager we have very different conception of what might constitute perfection.

 

[SepiaAndDust]

Doesn't that just create another "why"?

As in...why would a god create someone just to "test their deeds"?

What's the point of that?

You never rolled a character and hoped for all 18s?

 

[durangodawood]

Have you ever created anything?
It can fun and highly engaging.
Maybe thats a clue.
Create a universe just for the sake of doing some creating.

 

[Achilles6129]

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?

 

[Davian]

I think that God commands worship because he's good. As a matter of fact, he's the very definition of good. God created all things and owns all things.

In addition, I think that to compare a human being to the Creator of the universe is silly. The Creator made everything and owns everything and thus has certain rights which no human could ever have.

Such as the right to burn people forever for things beyond their control. And this is the "very definition of good".

I am so glad not to be a religionist, and have to deal with trying to make sense of that.

 

[Davian]

So you wouldn't appreciate a God who is patient with you and diligent in helping you understand Him so that you can believe He's real?

I cannot appreciate a 'god' that is either is 1) making every effort to appear fictional or 2) fictional.

 

[Achilles6129]

Such as the right to burn people forever for things beyond their control. And this is the "very definition of good".

I am so glad not to be a religionist, and have to deal with trying to make sense of that.

Well then you should really study the Bible then, because there's nothing in there about burning people for things beyond their control.

 

[Davian]

Well then you should really study the Bible then,

It has been my experience here that there is no position, however contrary to another, that someone cannot find support for in the Bible.

because there's nothing in there about burning people for things beyond their control.

In your theology, is one held responsible for what they believe?

 

[ananda]

My premises:

1. The "Creator" is infinite;
2. The only limitation an infinite Creator has is this: it has no innate knowledge of finiteness; so, for lack of a better way of putting it, the Creator is compelled to explore finiteness to "complete" its infinite nature, e.g. it must explore finiteness to truly be infinite, and this process of exploration existed as one with its infinite self from eternity;
3. Since the Creator is already infinite, it cannot create a "creation" separate from itself (since the very existence of a separate creation implies that the Creator would now be finite and separated from its creation), so creation is one with the creator.

Therefore, "creation" is simply a mental, imaginative creation of the Creator; we exist in its infinite mind, an ongoing, eternal exploration of what it means to be finite, in all of its permutations. As fragments of the Creator, we carry within ourselves the hidden potential of the Creator, just as a small fragment of a hologram possesses within itself the image of the whole hologram, albeit in a degraded sense.

We, as a fragmented image of the Creator, are made in its image. We also possess the creative potential of the Creator, in our own minds - we can create worlds upon worlds in our imagination, just like the Creator has done in its imagination.​

So, in summary, the Creator's purpose is to imaginatively explore what it means to be finite, even while it itself is infinite. The fragment of creation's purpose is to imaginatively explore what it means to be infinite and unlimited (reaching Nibbana, the All, etc.) and to awaken its innate infinite nature, even though the fragment itself is (illusorily) finite.

 

[Achilles6129]

It has been my experience here that there is no position, however contrary to another, that someone cannot find support for in the Bible.

In your theology, is one held responsible for what they believe?

"Believe" is not referring to an intellectual belief but rather to obedience to God's commands.

Of course someone can use Scripture to draw virtually any conclusion. What's important, however, is what Scripture says, not what we want it to say.

 

[Davian]

"Believe" is not referring to an intellectual belief but rather to obedience to God's commands.

You are not clear here; is that obedience not dependant on belief??

Of course someone can use Scripture to draw virtually any conclusion.

That is why I see no value in studying it.

What's important, however, is what Scripture says, not what we want it to say.

What do you think it says? In your theology, is one held responsible for what they believe?

 

[Ana the Ist]

I do not see things the way you do. How do you define perfection? How do you define emotion? Do you considers selflessness an emotion? Do you consider an attitude of indifference to be necessary for perfection? I would wager we have very different conception of what might constitute perfection.

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"?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

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

Probably for the same reason my wife has taken up painting as a hobby.

 

[Achilles6129]

Probably for the same reason my wife has taken up painting as a hobby.

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

 

[LivingWordUnity]

I think it's the same the reason men and women decide to procreate after getting married to each other, to share the love.

 

[Brokenhill]

My take on this is probably different than most Christians, particularly my conservative Church of Christ brethren, but it is based on my best attempt at an unbiased study of scripture:
I don't see why God couldn't "need" something (case in point, our love for him). I think the fact that we are created in His image helps to suggest that God could indeed have needs, because we have a need for the affection of others.

Acts 17:“24The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’ 29“Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man."

This passage suggests that God doesn't need anything, but I think it's reasonable to assume He doesn't need anything physical...food, water, shelter, obviously. Love is something spiritual (not tangible), so I don't think there is a contradiction here. We know God already has some character defining "limitations" (e.g., God cannot lie). So, if God did need our love/affection, that "limitation" of being wouldn't necessarily be a flaw...it doesn't mean He's not perfect or less of a God or anything. God can still be perfect, all knowing, all wise, all powerful, but have that character-defining limitation, in my opinion...

To consider further how we are made in His image: I think about how we are analytical creatures...we observe things and learn and make decisions based on given information and we also change over time. Some of this, I believe, is seen in the OT when God has discussions with Adam, Noah, and Joshua--where God changes His mind or reacts to a question/concern by the human. But God was still God in those situations and although He may have changed His actions, He did it on His terms.
So I take that concept and apply it to the creation of Angels vs. Humans--we can infer that angels were created first, and that they also had free-will because some were "fallen". So the fact that God made additional types of beings that were different than angels, tends to suggest that He wanted a different result the second time? I don't know.
My thoughts of "why" the earth/us stems from that concept...that God desired freely given love (hence not creating robots) from us, but in a world that was mostly separate from the spiritual realms, to control the balance of positive/negative influence (with the limited allowance of the devil's authority) on it, so that we might choose Him and then be rewarded. I believe His desire for us to be happy with Him eternally is equal to His desire to be desired.

But I could be completely wrong. The "why" seems to be one of those things that are above our very limited understanding...the "why" is not for us to know, at least not yet. So I'm mostly like wrong.

I do want to make clear that I am not trying to bring God down, or make Him human, or disgrace Him. Glory and Honor and Dominion is to be to Him forever and ever, and He is indeed perfect and Holy and powerful, to be respected. I am trying to have a more unbiased understanding of His character through scripture, rather than a misguided human ideal of what it means to be "perfect" or to be Spirit/Holy/etc.
Also, I would never teach these concepts to anyone, since I don't believe they're teachable. This is just some of the philosophy (my presupposition, I suppose) that I use when trying to comprehend scripture. It aids my faith.

 

[katerinah1947]

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

Hi,

Maybe the question should be what rather than why.

Biblically, and from historical accounts we know what God has done.

Working backwards from the all of the what's, it seems as though we might never know why, until and unless He tells us why.

My personal view from my what's, is God wanted a family. His Two Son's, to me, one being Begotten and the other being Sent, are two members of His family, and He taught us about family and love, the way it should be, then He offered that to all of us, those that He created and made.

LOVE,