Mageth

I've always liked the ant farm analogy. God needed something to give Jesus for Christmas (unlucky sot, his birthday's the same day!) so he created the universe, populated it with us "ants" and gave it to the kid for his amusement.

Marduk

He was bored so he created a huge universe full of amazing things, he liked it so much he wanted to show it off. So he made a creature he thought would be his finest achievement, a creature who was able to percieve the wonder and beauty of it all, Mankind. But what he thought would be his finest work turned out to be the most vile, destructive, violent, selfish thing in all his creation. A "Frankenstein Monster". God recoiled in terror at the beast he made, and the realization that he made a mistake! He fucked up! a perfect record shot to hell. He went mad, and like Captain Ahab has never gotten over it.
He keeps trying to patch things up but it always fails, He created a perfect man and through him to the beasts, they nailed him to a tree, took his words and created a manmade terror called Christianity. Finally he just gave up and went back to where he came from.

DaveJes1979

Well, the Christian conception of God sees God's plan in the unfolding of the history of the universe as being for His own glory. That is, God is demonstrating and will continue to demonstrate his perfections and attributes in all that comes to pass.

God's glory is demonstrated in a number of ways:

1. the beauty and order of the creation (before the Fall)

2. in the goodness and grandeur of man, who is made in His image.

3. in his wrath, when God pours out his fury against fallen man.

4. and lastly, in his love and grace, poured out on His redeemed by grace alone through the work of His Son. It is on this basis that man may be whole and "serve God and enjoy Him forever."

God is glorified in all of these things. It is for this end that the universe was made. God has controlled and planned every last detail of history, for this very purpose.

Dave Gadbois

Douglas J. Bender

God isn't trying to "achieve" anything - God is love, and love "loves" to share love with others. It's a natural aspect of "love" (and stay away from the gutter-level comparisons, please). God created the angels, and man, and living creatures, in order to share and express His love. Once man (and Satan, first) fell, all the things Dave Gadbois mentioned above "became" part of His purpose. God is perfect, and perfectly "love", and since there is nothing greater than Himself to "glorify", part of His purpose in history is to glorify Himself - to make known His love and power.

For man, God's purpose is to redeem from sin all who will repent - He is not willing that any should perish, but that all might be saved. He did not desire man to fall into sin, but He desired man to be able to understand love, and so had to create man with free will, which necessarily entails the possibility of a sinful choice, which man made. Jesus died to pay for our sins, and all who accept His sacrifice for their sins, and repent of their sins, have their sins forgiven them by God, Who yet retains His justice and integrity.

In Christ,

Douglas

[ May 08, 2002: Message edited by: Douglas J. Bender ]</p>

Mageth

Is it just me, or is there a conflict between the two concepts of god listed in the above messages? On the one hand we have god's plan as "being for His own glory." On the other we have "God is love. God created the angels, and man, and living creatures, in order to share and express His love."

The only way I can reconcile these concepts is if god is a Narcissist.

I also have a problem with why the "perfect" god of xian imagination would have a need either to be glorified by "lower" creatures or to love or be loved by "lower" creatures. If god needs to be glorified, needs to love and to be loved, is he truly perfect and complete within himself?

[ May 08, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

Rational Ag

Did he know before the "fall of man" that man would fall?

Why did he not create a man that wouldn't fall? Did a perfect god create an imperfect creation?

When, in your theological opinion, was "man" created (time-wise)?

How does that jive with the geological record of the earth, universe, etc with regard evidence of man's existence?

How exactly is God glorious for pouring out his wrath on a creation he made, knowing full well it would not live up to his expectations before he created it?

If I were to create a living being, knowing in advance that living being would not do as I wanted it to, and then punished it for being exactly as I wished it to be, how does that make me glorious?

God is displeased with those that he created that do not follow his will, but yet he created them that way, knowing they would not follow his will.

What an odd god-concept you have indeed.

What exactly did the work of his son accomplish?

Would it be acceptable in any justice system to punish someone for something another person did?

So God created the universe for Man to glorify himself?

He knew full well what would happen throughout the course of history, so why would he do the creating in the first place.

Let me get this straight. God created 50 billion galaxies, each with 500 billion stars, each star with it's own set of planets and moons. Out of these 25,000,000,000,000 solar systems, God picks ONE planet in ONE solar system to place his creation. The planet he creates for man (a land dwelling creature), earth, is 2/3 water. He then lets this planet sit around for 4 billion years with other smaller forms of life before "creating" man. Once he creates man, he is happy about it, but hands out plenty of wrath on people that don't do as he says in a highly questionable book that seems like mythology and fiction to many.

This makes sense to you, does it?

God is controlling all of these things so that he can be glorified and "man", his greatest creation, can live forever with him and worship his greatness?

*chortle*

-Rational Ag

Douglas J. Bender

Mageth,


Where did I say anything about God "needing" to love and be loved? God is a Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), and so there was no "need" to create other beings in order to share and express love. And nothing I said (nor that Dave said, I don't think) implies that God "needs" to be glorified. He is "perfect and complete in Himself", but since when would that mean that such a Being wouldn't then choose to create something? Perhaps being "creative" is a necessary part of "being perfect in Himself".


In Christ,

Douglas

Mageth

David said:

"It is for this end that the universe was made. God has controlled and planned every last detail of history, for this very purpose."

So god had an end/purpose in creating the universe - to glorify himself. Why would he have such a "purpose" if he didn't need to glorify himself? Why have a "purpose" if there is not something that needs to be achieved?

Douglas said:

"God is perfect, and perfectly "love", and since there is nothing greater than Himself to "glorify", part of His purpose in history is to glorify Himself - to make known His love and power."

So "part of His purpose in history is to glorify Himself." Again, why would he have such a "purpose" if he didn't need to glorify himself?

If he doesn't "need" to, then does he "desire" to glorify himself? If so, isn't that vanity? And why would a "perfect" being have desires? What would he be lacking?

BTW, one definition of "necessary" is needed in order to achieve a particular result.

DaveJes1979

Mageth Is it just me, or is there a conflict between the two concepts of god listed in the above messages? On the one hand we have god's plan as "being for His own glory." On the other we have "God is love. God created the angels, and man, and living creatures, in order to share and express His love."
The only way I can reconcile these concepts is if god is a Narcissist.

Dave says: or one can simply reconcile it by realizing that the statement "God is love" is a statement in reference to one of God's attributes, not his historical plan. However, God's attributes (including love) is seen and outworked in His historical plan. God is glorified as His creatures both see and are benefited by God's love.

Mageth: I also have a problem with why the "perfect" god of xian imagination would have a need either to be glorified by "lower" creatures or to love or be loved by "lower" creatures. If god needs to be glorified, needs to love and to be loved, is he truly perfect and complete within himself?

Dave says: God did not "need" to be glorified, but He was certainly PLEASED to have glory drawn to Him. God's creation is the result of the overflow of God's delight in Himself.


Ag: Did he know before the "fall of man" that man would fall?

Why did he not create a man that wouldn't fall? Did a perfect god create an imperfect creation?

Dave says: ABSOLUTELY God knew. He certainly could have made creatures incapable of falling. But it was God's plan that we would fall, and that God would, in the end, be glorified through the Fall. Although the sin itself is not glorifying to God, God is glorified when he pours out his wrath in response to sin, as well as when he redeems some men from sin.

Ag: When, in your theological opinion, was "man" created (time-wise)?

How does that jive with the geological record of the earth, universe, etc with regard evidence of man's existence?

Dave says: the Bible does not give us a date. I am of no dogmatic opinion on the matter. I haven't been convinced of any argument, biblical or scientific, on the matter.

Ag: How exactly is God glorious for pouring out his wrath on a creation he made, knowing full well it would not live up to his expectations before he created it?

Dave: it is glorious because it not only demonstrates God's power, but also His justice in condemning injustice, and in His goodness by doing away with evil.


Ag: What exactly did the work of his son accomplish?

Would it be acceptable in any justice system to punish someone for something another person did?

Dave says: of course, there IS no comparison. That is because you are trying to compare penal justice with vicarious, substitutionary atonement. It should be pointed out that the Son willingly paid the penalty. Jesus "bore the sins of many" as a substitute for Believers, so that the wrath that would have justly fallen on us, fell on the Blameless One. Thus, Christians have Christ's merits and righteousness credited to our accounts.


Ag: So God created the universe for Man to glorify himself?

Dave: yep.

Ag: He knew full well what would happen throughout the course of history, so why would he do the creating in the first place.

Dave: history happened for His glory. It was God's design, and it will continue to glorify Him.

Ag: Let me get this straight. God created 50 billion galaxies, each with 500 billion stars, each star with it's own set of planets and moons. Out of these 25,000,000,000,000 solar systems, God picks ONE planet in ONE solar system to place his creation. The planet he creates for man (a land dwelling creature), earth, is 2/3 water. He then lets this planet sit around for 4 billion years with other smaller forms of life before "creating" man. Once he creates man, he is happy about it, but hands out plenty of wrath on people that don't do as he says in a highly questionable book that seems like mythology and fiction to many.

Dave: well, I would not necessarily "buy" your account of cosmological history, but God did indeed create a large universe, along with a very small mankind. He has indeed showed, and will continue to show, his wrath on a disobedient people. And I am sure that your objections to the Bible are of the same nature as the others around here - they are of a presuppositional nature. That is, one has to asume, a priori, atheism, along with all of its epistemological baggage, in order to find fault.

Ag: God is controlling all of these things so that he can be glorified and "man", his greatest creation, can live forever with him and worship his greatness?

*chortle*

Dave: well, that is pretty much what your argument comes down to. Very little beyond ridicule. But I suppose that's pretty common around here.


Dave Gadbois

Rational Ag

Very little beyond ridicule?

Do you actually read what people are typing or do you just *gloss* over the arguments people make and ignore about what we're trying to get at?

If you think atheism or naturalism have no basis to stand on, and you have read through the message boards and/or information on this website, then you are reading everything with "faith" colored glasses. You understand everything within your worldview and try to reconcile the world as you understand it with the stuff you are taught at church.

If you could, just for a moment, acknowledge that you just *might* be wrong, and read what we are saying objectively, everything might read very differently. Until you accept that we might be right, we are speaking two different languages.

And yes, most of us here have gone into these thoughts and a debate considering that (in most cases, believing) religion is the truth. It's open minded discussion, without a priori bias, that leads to knowledge.

After talking with countless Christians, it's very obvious to most of us here that the ones intent on seeking the truth, rather than "strengthening their faith", are the Christians that have the most thoughtful things to say.

Many people here can understand both sides of issue. Just ask Rainbow Walking, Bree, or countless others.

Ridicule comes in when the conversation resorts to silliness when defending a position that obviously has no merit. Go read through some Douglas Bender or Randman threads if you would like examples.

It's only expected that you will use your brain and think for yourself.

-Rational Ag