Couldn't God Create a Better World?

[fhansen]

To this question, sometimes posed by atheists and theists alike, I believe Aquinas would answer that this world could be better, because an infinitely powerful God could always make something better. But by the same logic, it seems that if God could always make something better, then He could still never make anything perfect-which is the equivalent of saying that evil will always be present in creation to some degree by virtue of the fact that creation, itself, is not God, or, perhaps to put it another way: even God can’t create another God.

But this unavoidable “flaw” becomes an even greater dilemma if God deems it wise to grant freewill to creation-in, say, the form of man or angels. Because then this imperfect creation can conceivably express its imperfection, by an act of its imperfect will, with moral evil or sin a possible result. If all this is so, then the only way a created being with freewill could consistently act perfectly would be if He was somehow led by Gods’ perfect will instead of his own.

And if this is so, then perhaps it would make sense that the only way for these beings, this creation-with-freewill, to always behave perfectly would be for them to choose, not to act perfectly, which they could not consistently do, but, if possible, to always be directly united with God, who is perfection itself, and as such the only Being who always wills rightly. And I believe this is consistent in a general way with Catholic thought and teachings on the New Law/Covenant, except maybe for my first paragraph. Any thoughts of your own on this?

 

[Windfish]

I think this is just another iteration of the problem of evil. Why does God create people knowing from eternity that they will do bad things and freely damn themselves? Why not only create the “elect?” Is that even a possible world? Or, if it is possible, would the world really be “better?” After all, many of our own saints led terrible lives before converting, so even if only the “elect” were created, there would still be a lot of imperfection/evil in the world.

Far beyond my ability to answer these questions.

 

[fhansen]

I think this is just another iteration of the problem of evil. Why does God create people knowing from eternity that they will do bad things and freely damn themselves? Why not only create the “elect?” Is that even a possible world? Or, if it is possible, would the world really be “better?” After all, many of our own saints led terrible lives before converting, so even if only the “elect” were created, there would still be a lot of imperfection/evil in the world.

Far beyond my ability to answer these questions.

Yes, probably nothing new except for me, but one point, from the first paragraph, could be that if God could *not *create a perfect world then there will always be opportunity for someone to complain about the world not being better, no matter how close to perfection it is. And this sort of renders the ‘best possible world question’ moot, I would think, because how then could we know what the best world-out of all the imperfect choices-might be?

 

[tonyrey]

But this unavoidable “flaw” becomes an even greater dilemma if God deems it wise to grant freewill to creation-in, say, the form of man or angels. Because then this imperfect creation can conceivably express its imperfection, by an act of its imperfect will, with moral evil or sin a possible result. If all this is so, then the only way a created being with freewill could consistently act perfectly would be if He was somehow led by Gods’ perfect will instead of his own.

We would not be genuinely free if we were always led by Gods’ perfect will. The element of choice would not exist

I believe all evil is ultimately a form of ignorance. If we were omniscient we would never do what is wrong because we would know it is not in our interest. As only God is omniscient sooner or later we are bound to do what is wrong. But we are culpable only when we are aware it is wrong. If unnecessary suffering is evil then evil is inevitable - even if we always do what we believe is right! Sometimes with the best of intentions we do more harm than good…

 

[fhansen]

We would not be genuinely free if we were always led by Gods’ perfect will. The element of choice would not exist

I believe all evil is ultimately a form of ignorance. If we were omniscient we would never do what is wrong because we would know it is not in our interest. As only God is omniscient sooner or later we are bound to do what is wrong. But we are culpable only when we are aware it is wrong. If unnecessary suffering is evil then evil is inevitable - even if we always do what we believe is right! Sometimes with the best of intentions we do more harm than good…

Hi, tonyrey
What I was getting at there is that Adam & Eve decided to follow their own wills rather than Gods, and from then on His will was no longer necessarily done ‘on earth as it is in heaven’. With man not abiding in the Spirit, with sanctifying grace gone- IOWs with the rejection by man of an interior, intimate loving relationship with God, man lost his integrity-his ability to control himself morally according to the order God had designated for him.

Man freely fell but mans rising involves the choice to freely subjugate himself to God again, once God took the initiative, via the Atonement, to restore this relationship broken at the fall. Man cannot make this choice strictly on his own, so, at some point and to some degree, God apparently must “help out” in the area of our wills, IMO. He first of all endeavors to get us to the point where we recognize our need for Him, then we begin to be more malleable for His purpose of molding us; our wills and His becoming increasingly aligned. In any case our wills, without His grace- without Him-are incapable of always making the right choice.

 

[marica_mandic]

To this question, sometimes posed by atheists and theists alike, I believe Aquinas would answer that this world could be better, because an infinitely powerful God could always make something better. But by the same logic, it seems that if God could always make something better, then He could still never make anything perfect-which is the equivalent of saying that evil will always be present in creation to some degree by virtue of the fact that creation, itself, is not God, or, perhaps to put it another way: even God can’t create another God.

But this unavoidable “flaw” becomes an even greater dilemma if God deems it wise to grant freewill to creation-in, say, the form of man or angels. Because then this imperfect creation can conceivably express its imperfection, by an act of its imperfect will, with moral evil or sin a possible result. If all this is so, then the only way a created being with freewill could consistently act perfectly would be if He was somehow led by Gods’ perfect will instead of his own.

And if this is so, then perhaps it would make sense that the only way for these beings, this creation-with-freewill, to always behave perfectly would be for them to choose, not to act perfectly, which they could not consistently do, but, if possible, to always be directly united with God, who is perfection itself, and as such the only Being who always wills rightly. And I believe this is consistent in a general way with Catholic thought and teachings on the New Law/Covenant, except maybe for my first paragraph. Any thoughts of your own on this?

We all have free will. I and you can make world better, at least in our environment.
I am some kind idealist. If we give one person charity today that is just 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%
better world then before that move.
I like to remember when I was done good thing.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

God gave us the greatest commandments to live by, this gives us the freedom to disobey these commands and do evil.

 

[catharina]

God gave us a better world - twice.
First at Creation,
Second at the birth of Our Lord.

Humanity can comply with
God’s blessings or not. It’s not
a problem with the actions of God.

 

[fhansen]

God gave us the greatest commandments to live by, this gives us the freedom to disobey these commands and do evil.

This is true-and that’s what the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is meant to evoke according to the Catechism-both our freedom and our limitations. But in any case there’s a major difference between the old and new covenants. By the old, we learn of our inability to fulfill the Law on our own-of our inability to please God, or be just, by virtue of the Law alone. In the New Covenant we find the answer-man needs reconciliation and restored relationship with God in order to even begin to be capable of fulfilling it.

 

[tonyrey]

Hi, tonyrey
What I was getting at there is that Adam & Eve decided to follow their own wills rather than Gods, and from then on His will was no longer necessarily done ‘on earth as it is in heaven’. With man not abiding in the Spirit, with sanctifying grace gone- IOWs with the rejection by man of an interior, intimate loving relationship with God, man lost his integrity-his ability to control himself morally according to the order God had designated for him.

Man freely fell but mans rising involves the choice to freely subjugate himself to God again, once God took the initiative, via the Atonement, to restore this relationship broken at the fall. Man cannot make this choice strictly on his own, so, at some point and to some degree, God apparently must “help out” in the area of our wills, IMO. He first of all endeavors to get us to the point where we recognize our need for Him, then we begin to be more malleable for His purpose of molding us; our wills and His becoming increasingly aligned. In any case our wills, without His grace- without Him-are incapable of always making the right choice.

Then a better world cannot be created by God but it can be transformed by us - with His grace.

 

[fhansen]

Then a better world cannot be created by God but it can be transformed by us - with His grace.

Yes good point-maybe that’s why He created time. Maybe not. But, either way maybe it takes time to do the transforming-and so we get to participate in bringing the world to perfection.

 

[catharina]

Yes good point-maybe that’s why He created time. Maybe not. But, either way maybe it takes time to do the transforming-and so we get to participate in bringing the world to perfection.

Again, from Post # 8:

God gave us a better world - twice.
First at Creation,
Second at the Birth of Our Lord.

Humanity can comply with
God’s blessings or not. It’s not
a problem with the actions of God.

 

[fhansen]

Again, from Post # 8:

God gave us a better world - twice.
First at Creation,
Second at the Birth of Our Lord.

Humanity can comply with
God’s blessings or not. It’s not
a problem with the actions of God.

Thank you Catharina-you put it much more succinctly than I. I just need to lay everything out on the table and mull over it for awhile.

 

[catharina]

Thank you Catharina-you put it much more succinctly than I. I just need to lay everything out on the table and mull over it for awhile.

You’re welcome.
Happy Easter!

 

[yosephdaviyd]

It is a common argument from non-believers and even from believers, but whenever I hear it (or it’s versions more related to suffering) I go straight for the gut shot, so that we can move on to the next issue.

Their question is only held together by their arrogance and demonic self-deity. Basically what they are saying is, "If I were God, I would have done a better job. I would have made a better world’. I just point them back to the fact that in their limited time on earth they know absolutely nothing about nothing and how dare you, barely worth a second on the timeline of eternity, tell God how to do His job. That usually shots them up and allows us to get closer their their REAL issue.

David

 

[marica_mandic]

God gave us the greatest commandments to live by, this gives us the freedom to disobey these commands and do evil.

God gave us the best roules, and who play by roules can be happy even in bad moments in his life.
Therefore for better world we must listen the God roules.

 

[Luke_K]

To this question, sometimes posed by atheists and theists alike, I believe Aquinas would answer that this world could be better, because an infinitely powerful God could always make something better. But by the same logic, it seems that if God could always make something better, then He could still never make anything perfect-which is the equivalent of saying that evil will always be present in creation to some degree by virtue of the fact that creation, itself, is not God, or, perhaps to put it another way: even God can’t create another God.

Well, God sort of did create another God. The Father gave/gives his entire being to create the Son, who in turn gives his entire being to create the Father, and this eternal self-giving is the Holy Spirit (the “being” that is given between the Father and Son). But of course these persons are all the same God.

Something isn’t evil just because it’s not God. Evil consists of something not being what it should be. It would actually be evil for us to try and be God. We can be perfect according to our nature, but that perfection is not as great as God’s because our natures simply aren’t as great as God’s. So God could always create natures that are greater or better, but as long as a thing lives up to its nature, then it is perfect.

In other words, a perfect pencil is different than a perfect scissors.

 

[Nelka]

God created a lovely world.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

This is just a collection of words to challenge the mind to think, if you choose to read further then search for something greater than I have written.

In search of a Greatest or Ultimate Truth for God

Here is a child like and yet profound way to test the power of the greatest commandments; when looking for a purpose for the creation of the universe and life.

Did God have a complete plan for the creation of everything, did he think ahead? Were Christ’s life, death and resurrection planned before the creation of the universe began?
To search for a deeper meaning, was Christ freely given the choice to accept his sacrifice before the creation of the universe began?
Would it mean that the Father had a purpose for man so great, that creation could not be achieved in any lesser way?
What purpose can be so great, that it would compel God to create the universe and life, knowing in advance that his son would die?
Would it be to forgive the sins of mankind, or can there be something greater?

Challenge your mind to find a greatest good purpose for creation; by searching for answers to three questions.

What greatest thing can God create?

God could create all the stars and planets of the universe; he then becomes God the builder.
God could create a whole variety of life with almost no intelligence like plants; he now becomes God the gardener’
God could create life with more intelligence but if the knowledge is limited he has now created the animal kingdom. He now becomes God the farmer.
God could create life in his own image, a life that could understand him. Can God create anything greater than life in his own image, does he now become God the Father.
Does the greatest thing that God creates, depend on the relationship that he can have with them?

What greatest purpose can God have to create children in his own image?

Could love be the greatest reason for God to create children?
Could the ultimate God be a God who loves in the greatest way?

God the Father willingly loves all of mankind as he loves HIMSELF.

Can there be any greater reason to create children, even for God, can God love us more than he loves himself??

To find a greatest purpose for all God’s children.

What greatest purpose could God set for humanity? Would it be for everyone to turn to His kind of religion and pray the way that he stipulates, or would it be to banish poverty, gain intellectual superiority, conquer sickness and death, and subdue the universe or is there more?

If the greatest reason God could have to create mankind, is to love us, as he loves himself, then God could create mankind, with the freedom to return God’s love

All of mankind to be created with the freedom to love God the creator unconditionally, are we given the greatest commandment as a guide for this very purpose?

God willingly loves everyone as he loves himself; do we also need this same freedom to love everyone in the same way, so that the truth can be complete for God and mankind.

All of mankind, to be created with the freedom to love their neighbour; as they love themselves unconditionally; are we given the second greatest commandment as a guide?

Is this how God wants his children to be one? He wants us to love each other as we love ourselves.

In a way, God loves us more than he loves himself, because he was willing to do what was good for us but not good for him (send his Son to die). In a sort of contradicting way, God loves himself more than us, because he knows that he is the greatest being in the universe and retains the power of heaven or hell over us.

When you ask the question; why did Christ say they are the greatest commandment, can it possibly be because God can do nothing greater?

Could the greatest commandments be a Greatest an Ultimate Truth?

If our greatest purpose for creation is to live by the greatest commandments, then this freedom to love also gives us the choice to do both good and evil.

Are the greatest commandments powerful enough, to compel God to create the universe and life, knowing in advance the costs involved?

We can marvel at the great attention to detail that is evident in everything from the tiniest single cell of life and right up to the giant structures of galaxies. Can you find any greater purpose for all this to exist? Challenge the above statements in your mind in an honest way, test them against any religious beliefs, and test them against any form of logic.

Blessings

Eric

 

[fhansen]

This is just a collection of words to challenge the mind to think, if you choose to read further then search for something greater than I have written.

Those are some great questions to ponder, especially interesting by the way you posed them. Thanks, Eric.