Why Create a Universe?

[OldWiseGuy]

God is a trinity though...so that would make it a party of five.

That makes for a pretty crowded house. Of course if everyone chipped in living costs would be reasonable.

 

[Davian]

God is the third party.

God is a trinity though...so that would make it a party of five.

What happens between four or five consenting... beings is none of my business.

 

[Achilles6129]

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

Very interesting question.

 

[quatona]

The topic is the motive to create. The "why".
Its the exact same question whether God used existing matter or created new matter.

It´s the exact same wording.

 

[durangodawood]

It´s the exact same wording.

How does the motive to create differ when one is creating new forms out of existing matter vs creating new forms out of new matter?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

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

Because the suffering is necessary, like basic training.

 

[quatona]

How does the motive to create differ when one is creating new forms out of existing matter vs creating new forms out of new matter?

When you are creating stuff from existing stuff the motives follow the given situation, conditions, settings.
When there is nothing, there is no such frame of reference, to begin with.

 

[quatona]

Because the suffering is necessary, like basic training.

Training necessary how and for what?

 

[durangodawood]

When you are creating stuff from existing stuff the motives follow the given situation, conditions, settings.
When there is nothing, there is no such frame of reference, to begin with.

I see what youre saying.
But while the story has God creating new matter/forms, I never knew that there was no context at all to his situation. He had a mind, presumably. So there's a context right there that we can relate to.

And, we do get hints about him, his desires, his character, from the Bible (we are discussing the Biblical god-character here). Still, any attempt at an answer is highly speculative.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Training necessary how and for what?

We need to observe, and experience, the effects of sin, and rebellion against God. It's training for the kingdom.

 

[toLiJC]

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

the universe itself is not created, but uncaused, the universal creation is created, and there were souls in the primordial universe, which are also uncaused, and in the beginning God found them absorbed by the "darkness" being/existing there in a vexatious condition, therefore He created the so-called "nothingness" and placed them therein where they rest in a state of nonexistence(deep sleep), then He started to little by little take them out of there in order to give them life creating them in human (and animal) forms, otherwise the souls would be/exist only in the harrowing "darkness", moreover, they need to live anyway

Blessings

 

[quatona]

We need to observe, and experience, the effects of sin, and rebellion against God. It's training for the kingdom.

I asked you to explain the whys and hows - not to simply reword your claim.

 

[quatona]

I see what youre saying.
But while the story has God creating new matter/forms, I never knew that there was no context at all to his situation.

Of course it´s all a matter of the god concept in question. The traditional Christian god concept is about a perfect God with nothing else around. Everything else is created by this God. This isn´t a situation - it´s a unique instance of a non-situation without any context.
Our motives for acting, transforming ("creating") etc. are always contextual, situational. Thus, anthrophomorphic assumptions about God´s motives for creating are completely baseless.

He had a mind, presumably.

Actually, when I read or hear apologists, most of the time I understand that God (being eternal, unchanging, beyond space and time) doesn´t have anything that could possibly resemble what we think of as "mind". Neither does he have feelings, emotions, desires or anything that´s situational or reactive. According to this understanding, there i

And, we do get hints about him, his desires, his character, from the Bible (we are discussing the Biblical god-character here).

No, we don´t get any hints about all these things or attributes prior to creation. We only learn about them in relation to and after creation.
To emphasize the above point: An unchanging God can´t have desires. Or at least he can´t pursue them with any result (which would alter his desire into satisfaction or discontent).

Still, any attempt at an answer is highly speculative.

...to say it mildly.

 

[durangodawood]

Of course it´s all a matter of the god concept in question. The traditional Christian god concept is about a perfect God with nothing else around. Everything else is created by this God. This isn´t a situation - it´s a unique instance of a non-situation without any context.
Our motives for acting, transforming ("creating") etc. are always contextual, situational. Thus, anthrophomorphic assumptions about God´s motives for creating are completely baseless.

Actually, when I read or hear apologists, most of the time I understand that God (being eternal, unchanging, beyond space and time) doesn´t have anything that could possibly resemble what we think of as "mind". Neither does he have feelings, emotions, desires or anything that´s situational or reactive. According to this understanding, there i



No, we don´t get any hints about all these things or attributes prior to creation. We only learn about them in relation to and after creation.
To emphasize the above point: An unchanging God can´t have desires. Or at least he can´t pursue them with any result (which would alter his desire into satisfaction or discontent).

...to say it mildly.

I'm fine with anthropomorphizing God to come up with a possible explanation. After all, the Bible says we are God-morphisms in a way. So we should be able to run the equation backwards at least a bit.

As for all the unchanging, beyond space-time, no-mind notions. Those devolve into non intelligibility when we try to nail them down. They can be a hindrance to the project of creating the God-character. The post-creation God is still the same God, according to believers. Like any character, certain traits could well persist from prior to your relationship with him.

 

[durangodawood]

....oops

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I asked you to explain the whys and hows - not to simply reword your claim.

Read the bible. It's all in there.

 

[quatona]

I'm fine with anthropomorphizing God to come up with a possible explanation. After all, the Bible says we are God-morphisms in a way. So we should be able to run the equation backwards at least a bit.

Well, I am not going to hold all the inconsistencies that believers try to reconcile in their god concepts against you.
I just notice that they become very obvious when asking this question. To summarize them: the general assumption that God can be understood on our human terms, combined with the option to pull the "but God is mysterious and beyond our understanding" whenever things get inconvenient.
That, however, should not be a discussion between you and me, of all.

As for all the unchanging, beyond space-time, no-mind notions. Those devolve into non intelligibility when we try to nail them down.

Exactly. But, since you pointed out that the basis for our is the (mainstream) Christian god concept: these claims do belong to this very concept.
Of course, we can pick some of all these irreconcilable traits and definitions and ignore others in order to arrive at an answer to the question at hand, but that appears to be unsatisfactory to me.
For example: When I anthropomorphe a unchanging entitiy sitting there in the midst of nothing the first thought crossing my mind is "boredom". But then, I recall that God is claimed to be perfect - and that doesn´t go well with being bored. I also recall that God is claimed to be loving - and that is impossible without there someone else to be loved. I recall that God is claimed to be "just" - which is a completely absurd attribute for a being in the midst of nothing. Etc. etc.

They can be a hindrance to the project of creating the God-character.

Indeed, and that has always been a huge question for me: If it´s about creating a God character, why would people define God in ways that makes creating a coherent god concept impossible?

The post-creation God is still the same God, according to believers.

Yes...but just because believers create an impossible god doesn´t mean I must base my considerations on the impossible. Or, if I do; I am pretending to be able to play way beyond my league.

Like any character, certain traits could well persist from prior to your relationship with him.

Certain traits could, possibly - but I have just given examples of traits that can´t. And these are the very traits that we, as humans, could possibly extrapolate from.
We are temporal beings - we are born, we grow, we make mistakes, we put up with given conditions, we age, we know we will die, we react (instead of acting out of nothing), we are curious, we make experiences, we are surprised, we incorporate new, surprising experiences into our contingent of experiences...and all that is the basis for our motivations and possible explanations. None of all these things apply to an eternal, unchanging God.

 

[quatona]

Read the bible. It's all in there.

My question caused you inconvenience?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

My question caused you inconvenience?

Would reading the bible inconvenience you?

 

[durangodawood]

Would reading the bible inconvenience you?

Have you ever opened a Bible???
Its huge!