Quote:
Originally Posted by Type R
After hanging around in the void of eternity for - what? - a buzillion quintillion millenia, an idea just hits Him: "Hey, let's create people!"
Now, this needs further investigation. What was God's motive in creating lesser fallible error-prone mortal beings? And why at this point? Why hadn't he done it before, such that all history would have happened by now and, instead of being in Mashada, we'd be in heaven or hell? What was the prompt?
Does "before" exist in eternity, or is it just a perspective derived from mortality?
The problem with this whole thread is that it is using mortality as a point of view from which to observe immortality, thereby attempting to provide a rationale for mortality. Since immortality presumably precedes mortality, then it should be incumbent upon immortality to furnish us with a good argument for immortality and mortality.
As I said, God without Life is the extremity of absurdity!!! Everybody has run away from this!!!
|
Type R, I’m sure you’ve read (or heard of) the Book of Ecclesiastes. I first read it in High School (and almost dropped out of school as a result). Why was I roasting myself with all this physics when the end was certain? Nothing is new, all is vanity. Now, this good book says “Fear the Lord and obey His commands, for this is the
WHOLE duty of man.” Eccl 12:13. My understanding of this is that this is
THE ultimate purpose for Type R to be around. Rather scary, eh?
Now, we know that ‘time’ is an ‘earth’ concept. On Mars, time is different. Looking at other galaxies and the entire universe, ‘time’ becomes meaningless. If God is who He is, then He is outside of time. He does not have to rush to meet a deadline etc. So I would imagine in eternity, there’s neither before nor after, as these have a temporal base.
Does God need a prompt? I don’t know. But if He is who He is and He “needs” one (a needy God?), then it would be internal. And this would be what is called ‘God’s will.’
As for creating error-prone individuals, this has been explained as ‘free-will’, not robots. I don’t know the validity of the argument.