If God exists, why did he create life? (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by dhw, Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:01 (5089 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

TONY: We keep dancing around each other. There is nothing entertaining about the absorption of zinc or CO, or many of the multitude of other processes that happen throughout the universe. Which to me indicates that the purpose is something other than entertainment.-No dance necessary. The absorption of zinc or CO and the multitude of other processes have the purpose of creating and sustaining life. There is much pleasure to be had out of this essential, creative work, but the entertainment comes from what living creatures do with their lives. There's a distinction between the way things get made and the reason for making them (my question is why, not how).-I think this comment of yours makes it clear that we're dealing with two very different phases in your answer to my question. Because of your conviction that all other forms of life have been created to make Earth "inhabitable by humanity", they all have precisely that purpose for you (i.e. not entertainment). Even if I open my mind to its widest, I don't think I'll ever be able to believe that every extinct and living species of animal, insect, fish, plant etc. was created for the sake of humans, but I respect your faith (inspired by Genesis?) and we can agree to disagree. The second phase is humanity itself, and so instead of asking why God created life, I would have to ask why God created humans. Your next comment can be taken as an answer:-TONY: I am not arguing that he did/does not find it entertaining, simply that entertainment was not the end goal itself. My inability to provide a replacement goal is not a reason to use entertainment as the answer.-Agreed, but I'm merely proposing a theory that seems to me to make sense in all the contexts, prior to and including humans. I have not asked you to accept it, but only to point out anything that "contradicts your own experience and knowledge of the world". The fact that you can't do so suggests to me that the entertainment theory is at least as good as, if not better than any other explanation of God's conduct. As David has pointed out, so far God "is not the revealing type", and if he is there at all, I think you'll agree that his silence cries out for an explanation. The conventional religious one is "have faith" ... again tying in with what David says about God and love ... and that is probably where you and I must again agree to disagree. Stick to your faith, and I'll stay on my fence with my puny human reasoning!