Worshipping a creator of the universe

[John Cuthber]

If there's a creator He has a lot to answer for.

 

Re sickle cell disease + malaria.

One of the things He has to learn is that two wrongs don't make a right.

[Ophiolite]

Why do you assume that a creator would necessarily have any interest in humans? Life might be an incidental by-product of her creation.

[Moontanman]

Why do you assume that a creator would necessarily have any interest in humans? Life might be an incidental by-product of her creation.

 

 

Like some kind of brobdingnagian creature that feeds in a infinite void of dark matter and excretes universes....

[tar]

jp255,

 

I am at a loss, to understand what people are talking about, when they critique a supposed God, that they do not fear or have any reverence or love for, or even believe exists in the first place.

 

If the universe did not do what it did before we were born, then we would not have had any patterns to copy. We would not have any "memories" of existence. There would be no light, coming into the Earth from 125 lys away. There would be no record of that which is other than us.

 

And since we ourselves, did not spring into existence, but were born of parents, it would be rather safe to conclude, in the absence of any other apparent designer, that our parents created us. With the instructions, the working patterns, that their parents gave them. We have no knowledge of a way to spring into existence, without copying and maintaining the way it was done before. Abiogenisis had to be a natural occurence. Things fit together in such a manner and the patterns were copied and reproduced again. We are not then, other than, something akin to what was previously existing, prior our birth.

 

The only conclusion reachable is that the universe created itself. Each component of the universe created by the confluence of that which previously existed. Thus A creator is not particularly descriptive or even possible. He, she or it, would have nothing to spring from, nothing to copy, nothing to carry forward, nothing to "do better than" or worse than.

 

Thus we can not critique or worship a creator, objectively, that we are so intimately involved with.

 

It would be a conflict of interests. We would have to testify against ourselves, and our own parents.

 

Respect for, honoring, loving, your parents, already is worshipping your creator.

 

Oh, you were asking about the creator of the universe, should one be found. My answer would be, yes, I would worship him, her, it. Its my source and who or what it is that I am copying and being like.

 

Regards, TAR2

[jp255]

 

Why do you assume that a creator would necessarily have any interest in humans? Life might be an incidental by-product of her creation.

I do realise that is a possibility. The assumption that the creator did know that life is a possibility in this universe makes the scenario more interesting to consider, since you couldn't really judge the creator if it didn't have any knowledge of this possibility.

 

 

Oh, you were asking about the creator of the universe, should one be found. My answer would be, yes, I would worship him, her, it. Its my source and who or what it is that I am copying and being like.

 

Whether or not the creator is my source or not has no impact on the conclusion I come to, and I'd ask you "Why should it?". As I have highlighted, there are ethical considerations about creation of life such as with the sod1 mice example. Why not apply those same considerations to the creator? creation of this universe is similar to the sod1 mice creation (assuming life will arise), just on a much grander scale. So for me, there'd have to be an inquiry into the intentions of the creator. How come you wouldn't need an inquiry in order to worship the creator?

 

I have almost no knowledge about any religion, so I don't know what they state about their deity's intentions etc. For me, if I were to be an individual who were to adopt the belief which I am most comfortable with regardless of any evidence, I would still choose abiogenesis. The beginning of this universe being created by an entity isn't appealing to me, as it would bring in the whole creating life issue into the mix.

Edited December 6, 2012 by jp255

[Semjase]

The creation stands above God is responsible for creating universes in matter and antimatter pairs and Jmmanuel who was actually was Jesus

talked about the creation, his real life was recorded in great detail 2000 years and the scrolls were translated into English and can be viewed at.

 

http://www.fourwinds10.net/journals/talmud/talmud.pdf

[tar]

jp255,

 

Well I would say it is obvious that we have, as humans, a capacity for self-reflection.

 

You bring up a good point, and an often used argument against there being a conscious, omnipotent god, who, if he or she or it, was able to critique him/her/itself, would have done it exactly right, from the beginning, and not allowed there to be any "bad" stuff. (cruelity, suffering, disease, death, anquish, destruction, loss, hunger, pain, etc.)

 

However, this assessment presupposes that a human's judgement of good and bad is going to be the criteria that he/she/it should have used. I would agree that this is a good argument against an anthropomorphic god, but would advise against using it to critique a non-human creator.

 

As has been pointed out, and suggested, this creator we would be subject to, need not be a human, with human concerns, and human judgement.

 

Like the board of directors of a company, the shareholders are the first concern, and the company is not there to take care of the workers. Such could be the case with the imagined creator you are finding fault with. He/she/it could have the best interests of the shareholders of the universe in mind, and do an excellent job at running the universe, even if that means you stub your toe, or catch a cold, or die in a hurricane.

 

Now, on the other hand, with the abiogenisis that we both agree makes the most sense, WE are the shareholders, and are beholding to ourselves, and also responsible for deciding what is good, what is bad, and seeing to it, that the good is maintained and fostered, and the bad is reduced and struggled against. But even this leaves us beholding to the rest of the universe, that made it possible for us to be...even if we grabbed life and form and structure from a universe that otherwise seems headed toward disorganisation.

 

So, if there IS a creator, he/she/it left some ingredients in the mix, that would allow for entities such as us, to exist. And that allowed for the universe to grow and evolve, and do something different than it did before, next. And since we are here to contemplate the rest, I would have to give the creator, whether that creator be familiar or strange, a grade of "excellent", and have no problem at all, worshipping it, should we find it.

 

Regards, TAR2

 

and perhaps we are overthinking the matter, and already know the creator intimately. its right before our eyes.