The Universe as a Tragedy... (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Thursday, July 30, 2009, 05:04 (5377 days ago)

Different for me, I know but I won't be talking too much about logic here. This is a shot to the humanities... - Why is it that virtually all creator-gods are benevolent in nature? I've spent the greater part of my off-time the past two years studying both "pagan" and Abrahamic mythologies, for a novel. The most striking difference in religions comes from the Mesopotamians. - "Let her create primeval man
	So that he may bear the yoke;
	So that he may bear the work, the work of Ellil,
	Let man bear the load of the gods!" 
 --Ea, from the Akkadian epic, "Atra-hasis" - Man to the Sumerians, was a slave to the gods. How would we be able to bear the load of gods? - In the broader scope of the question, why would we assume that a being as powerful as God would want anything to do with us? To the Greeks, we were amusement. To Jehovah, we were spoiled children. (Not sure which is worse...) - Isn't it possible that God created all of this as art? Aesthetics? No real reason or purpose but because he can? - But it doesn't have to be a craft of love. I write music too, but my music is where I channel all of my negative energy, it's my catharsis. What if god created this universe from anguish instead? I admit I make the mistake of my nymsake, but why would we think the universe would be made as an act of love? All of the best art and music seems to come from pain. Sophocles. Caravaggio. Dostoevsky. Pascal. Wagner. Beethoven. Nietzsche. Poe. Maya Angelou. Ann Rice. All tortured souls. All considered to be a height, a peak in human creativity. - Why wouldn't we consider our world also created from such pain?

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"