What caused God to create the universe?

[JDaniel]

Thank you. I’ve enjoyed this place so far. (although the wine bar has a slightly bloody taste… is there someone I should talk to about that?)

LJH:

Perhaps you are not cast to taste it?

In order to answer this question, I’m going to have to invent some terms, so bear with me a moment.
ourtime= time on the timeline of this universe as we perceive it.
godtime= time on the timeline that God/Heaven experiences.
elsetime#= time for some other creation(s) of God’s.

Okay, ourtime is a property of this universe.

I disagree: Time is a correlative of motion. Period. If anything, where ever and when ever there is motion, there is also time. Time, in my opinion, is not a property per se.

However, that does not preclude the idea of additional timelines, by any stretch. God may exist in a universe that experiences godtime, and the angels may experience it with Him (this is just speculation).

Or, God may be actually Infinite.

On the godtime timeline, there is a “before” our universe, and an “after.”

OK. I’ll grant the concession for this, just to see where you’re going…

Just as with the person operating the printing press, there is a “before I stamped the page” and “after I stamped the page.” But the timeline of the characters on the page has no relation to the timeline of the person who stamped the page.

Significance?

The printer may also have stamped other pages (other universes) that also have other timelines (elsetime1, elsetime2, etc.). But elsetimes are not on the same timeline as ourtime

Or, they might.

Regarding God being outside ourtime, there are two possibilities. Since ourtime is a property of this universe, it had to have been created when this universe was created, thus God must:
1.) Have exist outside of ourtime, since He created it.

Despite the premise, your conclusion is correct, IMO.

2.) Have created ourtime and the universe as part of the act of creating Himself.

He did not “create Himself.” Here’s where we disagree big time.

There is a third option: that He didn’t create the universe, but that’s not relevant to a Catholic forum.

And you’d be a first!

Indeed, but I still don’t get how you are asking what existed before ourtime. Do you agree that ourtime is a component of our universe?

No I don’t.

If I’m reading your intentions correctly, you’re going to mention the angels as mobile objects created prior to the universe (this is an assumtpion). But let me ask this: is time, as the angels perceive it affected by acceleration/gravity?

Hopefully, I’ll find out when I get there.

I grant it’s an assumption, but I had never considered angels be be subject to the physical laws of our material universe.

Well, you can never say that again.

God bless,
jd

 

[Alterum]

With regard to the notion that God’s relationship to the universe changes (for example, when He creates the universe):

First, there is no “God-time”. God is outside of time and immutable, which means that He does not change.

Second, God’s immutability does not entail that there are not asymmetrical real relations of creatures to God. When the universe was created, a real asymmetrical relation was also established. God has no real relation to creation (He is wholly unmodified, even accidentally, by creation, since He is immutable). But creation has a real relation to God, namely dependency.

 

[pgnat1]

His unconditional love which is beyond our understanding.

 

[perro_sarnoso]

God always existed. The universe did not. So what caused God to create the universe 13.7 billion years ago?

In other words, does God really solve the problem of the first cause?

To say that God always existed simply means that the potential to create the universe always existed. But what caused the potential to create the universe – which always existed – to become the actual creation of the universe? And what was the cause of that cause, etc.?

God is Love and the cause and reason for all creation is Love. Love is God and God is Love. So the reason and the cause is Love.

 

[mitex]

God started the big bang and we’ve been on our own mostly ever since with the exception of the Biblical events and Jesus.

 

[gentle_atheist]

I want to thank everyone for their responses.

What I’m trying to understand is why the universe is only 13.7 billion years old. Shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old? Consider the following syllogism:

1. God has always existed.
2. God’s love has always existed.
3. God expresses His love by creating the universe.
4. Therefore, the universe has always existed.

The problem with this question, in my opinion, is the use of the word “always,” which is a qualifier of time. One can only say God has existed “always” in relation to the universe. It is improper to say he existed before the universe. Rather, he exists independently of the universe. Time itself is a property of the universe, not existing outside of it. So, to God, the universe is eternal in that it is present to him in its entirety, past, present and future. You might even say the universe is like a movie on God’s shelf in which the actors chose all of their own lines. The universe would be the reel of tape in the cassette. While it exists as a whole, the characters can only ever be present to themselves in a single frame.

But anyway, the concept of time is one that depends upon contingent beings confined to temporal existence. That is, we lack (in this life) the faculty of eternal perception. You might say, though this should not be taken literally, time is an illusion. It’s not, really, but it is an experiential mechanism given by God to allow us to make choices, culminating ultimately in the decision to love Him.

The above post comes closest to resolving the issue for me, but I guess not completely since I find myself asking, “But still, shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old?”

In other words, sometimes I get it and sometimes I don’t.

 

[belorg]

I want to thank everyone for their responses.

What I’m trying to understand is why the universe is only 13.7 billion years old. Shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old? Consider the following syllogism:

1. God has always existed.
2. God’s love has always existed.
3. God expresses His love by creating the universe.
4. Therefore, the universe has always existed.

You are absolutely correct. If God has always existed then the univrese should also have always existed.

The above post comes closest to resolving the issue for me, but I guess not completely since I find myself asking, “But still, shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old?”

That depends on whether you think ‘timeless’ existence makes any sense.
If you think it odes, then the universe has always existed but is not infintely old. It had a ‘stage’ of timeless existence beyond its temporal existence.

 

[cerad2]

The above post comes closest to resolving the issue for me, but I guess not completely since I find myself asking, “But still, shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old?”

In other words, sometimes I get it and sometimes I don’t.

And again the notion of time didn’t exist before out universe came into being. In fact, at the quantum level, time is really just another dimension and has no special significance. How this quantum foam could have led to our universe is one of the more interesting scientific questions of our time.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

God always existed. The universe did not. So what caused God to create the universe 13.7 billion years ago?

In other words, does God really solve the problem of the first cause?

To say that God always existed simply means that the potential to create the universe always existed. But what caused the potential to create the universe – which always existed – to become the actual creation of the universe? And what was the cause of that cause, etc.?

There’s a dichotomy in your question. On the one hand you say “the potential to create the universe” always existed, but then turn around and say the universe itself always existed. The universe did not “always exist”, and we can’t be sure we’ve got the time right as it is.

God existed before the universe existed. He may well have made other universes before this one, but simply hasn’t told us about them. After all if He’s infinite in every respect, then there is no end to what He can do or may do.

As for His reason, you’d have to ask Him. However the focal point of this universe is the crucifixion, when God Himself died for His (this) creation, namely humanity. And that would have been in His plan before He even began. It wasn’t Plan B. God went from His omnipotence to His complete helplessness.

Simone Weil, in her essay on “The Love of God and Affliction” summarised God’s intent in this way -

(Link - payingattentiontothesky.com/2010/07/15/the-love-of-god-and-affliction-by-simone-weil/)

God created through love and for love. God did not create anything except love itself, and the means to love. He created love in all its forms. He created beings capable of love from all possible distances. Because no other could do it, he himself went to the greatest possible distance, the infinite distance. This infinite distance between God and God, this supreme tearing apart, this agony beyond all others, this marvel of love, is the crucifixion. Nothing can be further from God than that which has been made accursed.

This tearing apart, over which supreme love places the bond of supreme union, echoes perpetually across the universe in the midst of the silence, like two notes, separate yet melting into one, like pure and heart-rending harmony. This is the Word of God. The whole creation is nothing but its vibration. When human music in its greatest purity pierces our soul, this is what we hear through it. When we have learned to hear the silence, this is what we grasp more distinctly through it.

He created this universe so that He could demonstrate Love at it’s greatest possible distance, by suffering infinite affliction in His own person.

 

[JDaniel]

I want to thank everyone for their responses.

What I’m trying to understand is why the universe is only 13.7 billion years old. Shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old? Consider the following syllogism:

1. God has always existed.
2. God’s love has always existed.
3. God expresses His love by creating the universe.
4. Therefore, the universe has always existed.

GA:

This would be true IF we knew for certain that the Universe was the only thing that God ever created. We are told, in Revelation, that He created angels prior to creating humans, and we are told that He created the earth and the Heavens. What does this mean? Well, all we have here is a general statement that He created the earth and the Heavens. Does that mean, precisely, that He created mobile being at that precise moment? There’s plenty of conjecture, but, the fact is, we don’t know for sure. Mobile being is anything that moves relative to other things.

There are those that profess that God was in no need of any other universe and, therefore, created only this one. I’m not one of them. I think God is a Creator and created things throughout His duration and continues to create. So, Time could well be infinite, in that sense, that is, in the sense that it is correlative with motion of any kind, in a universe, or a multiverse, or any other kind of universe that He wished to imagine.

Saying all of this does not preclude God from creating throughout a ‘timeline,’ as we might call it. He certainly creates new souls each and every second throughout a ‘timeline,’ doesn’t He? If God exists as Infinite Nothingness, as is elsewhere intimated, then He simply alters the s-points within s-frames, at the implicate level, which results in what we see as motion, mobile being(s), energy, and time - throughout all of infinity.

The above post comes closest to resolving the issue for me, but I guess not completely since I find myself asking, “But still, shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old?”

No. Consider that the universe consists mostly of space. Elsewhere in these forums, it was noted that an atom is 50,000 time larger than its nucleus. And, that it is currently thought that within the explicate view of our universe, that the universe consists of discrete space forming, perhaps, the postulated quantum foam. We believe the universe is expanding. If it was infinitely old, how would we ever know that? If it is expanding, it must be expanding into something. I think, along with others, that it is expanding into Infinite Space, and, as it is finite, it can expand until what we call entropy slows it down, or stops it altogether.

Just some ideas I picked up from another poster who calls himself Yppop.

In other words, sometimes I get it and sometimes I don’t.

Don’t feel alone!

God bless,
jd

 

[Robertanthony]

Would it be fair to say that God created the universe and human beings for purely selfless reasons, that is he’s not gaining anything by creating us because he’s perfectly happy and content in himself, that we can’t add even an iota to his happiness/well-being/himself, therefore he created us to have a share in his glory and felicity exclusively for our own sakes? He didn’t create us to add anything to him because he is lacking in nothing.
Does the impassiblity of God mean in a very real sense that he's not subject to emotions? So that he loves his creation but doesn't feel any emotion/affection towards it, he wills its (creation's) best, which is the real meaning of loving someone, but he doesn't love us with the sort of overflowing affection that we humans see as an intrisic part of love? There is a great deal of anthropomorphism in our view of God, the parable of the prodigal son probably contributed to it, although parables were used to convey, in simple human terms, things that are infinitely more complex IMHO. A father who sees his son ruining his life and being sentenced to life in jail is devastated, a soul being condemned to Hell (or choosing Hell, that's not the point) doesn't cause any kind of turmoil or sadness in God as he is impassible.

 

[JDaniel]

Would it be fair to say that God created the universe and human beings for purely selfless reasons, that is he’s not gaining anything by creating us because he’s perfectly happy and content in himself, that we can’t add even an iota to his happiness/well-being/himself, therefore he created us to have a share in his glory and felicity exclusively for our own sakes? He didn’t create us to add anything to him because he is lacking in nothing.

Does the impassiblity of God mean in a very real sense that he's not subject to emotions? So that he loves his creation but doesn't feel any emotion/affection towards it, he wills its (creation's) best, which is the real meaning of loving someone, but he doesn't love us with the sort of overflowing affection that we humans see as an intrisic part of love? There is a great deal of anthropomorphism in our view of God, the parable of the prodigal son probably contributed to it, although parables were used to convey, in simple human terms, things that are infinitely more complex IMHO. A father who sees his son ruining his life and being sentenced to life in jail is devastated, a soul being condemned to Hell (or choosing Hell, that's not the point) doesn't cause any kind of turmoil or sadness in God as he is impassible.

RA:

I’m still looking for an error in your statements!

God bless,
jd

 

[jochoa]

I want to thank everyone for their responses.

What I’m trying to understand is why the universe is only 13.7 billion years old. Shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old? Consider the following syllogism:

1. God has always existed.
2. God’s love has always existed.
3. God expresses His love by creating the universe.
4. Therefore, the universe has always existed.

Please consider the following concept: God’s Greatest Commandment can be defined as Love God with all your body, spirit, thoughts, and will. Since this is His expectation of us, He must be perfect at this.

Therefore:

1. God has always existed.
2. God’s love for us always exists because:
   -initially it exists in His Thoughts,
   -then it exists in His Body,
   -then it exists in His Spirit.
3. Then God expresses His Love for us by Loving us with all His Will by creating the universe.
4. Therefore, just as us, the universe has not always physically/materially existed, but God and His Love for us always has.

Thoughts?

 

[LJH_80]

Why do people do anything less than the best option available?
1.) Because they don’t know the best option available (or don’t know that it is best).
2.) They are unable to do the best option available.
3.) Because they know it and make the imperfect decision not to do it.

If God is omniscient and omnipotent, #1 and #2 cannot apply.
If God is perfect, then, He can only make the perfect decision, which means that there is only ever one course of action allowed to God.

If God only ever has one possible course of action, He does not have free will, and ceases to be a personal God, and instead is a bound quantity that must act in a way, such as Gravity.

Therefore, God created the universe because He had to.

 

[Alterum]

Why do people do anything less than the best option available?
1.) Because they don’t know the best option available (or don’t know that it is best).
2.) They are unable to do the best option available.
3.) Because they know it and make the imperfect decision not to do it.

If God is omniscient and omnipotent, #1 and #2 cannot apply.
If God is perfect, then, He can only make the perfect decision, which means that there is only ever one course of action allowed to God.

If God only ever has one possible course of action, He does not have free will, and ceases to be a personal God, and instead is a bound quantity that must act in a way, such as Gravity.

Therefore, God created the universe because He had to.

This argument fails (like most things drawing on BPW arguments) from the beginning. You describe three reasons (which you incorrectly take to be exhaustive) why people do anything “less than the best option available”. Then there is a most peculiar elision, in which “people” suddenly drop out of the argument and “God” takes their place. So, if you were to put this in logical form, you’d clearly have an invalid argument. This is sufficient for refutation.

More than that, however, you should rethink the notion of a “best” act for God. You give no criteria for assessing “best”. Some say that whatever God freely does is “best”. Others say that “best” only applies to normative (moral) categories (and no act of God is moral). Others still, like Leibniz, refer to a cosmic best, such as maximum unity with maximum diversity – but that is nonsensical (for reasons I will not bother to give). Others say that in many acts, such as the creative act of an excellent artist, there is no such thing as a “best”. (Why strike the marble there and not a millimeter to the right? Why a brush stroke here?) It seems apparent to me that moral acts often fit within this category, because there is no such thing as a single moral calculus. But more generally, there is no such thing as a “best” act of an infinitely excellent creator (here I analogize God to a creator); whatever he does is excellent.

And as a final definitive remark, since God is immutable, He gains nothing by acting, so there is no “best” for God, considered in Himself, in the sense you have argued.

 

[Alterum]

Would it be fair to say that God created the universe and human beings for purely selfless reasons, that is he’s not gaining anything by creating us because he’s perfectly happy and content in himself, that we can’t add even an iota to his happiness/well-being/himself, therefore he created us to have a share in his glory and felicity exclusively for our own sakes? He didn’t create us to add anything to him because he is lacking in nothing.

Strictly-speaking, God acted without purpose (but not without reason) in creating the world. Selflessness or gratuity is often given as a reason. And yes, this is all right and important to keep in mind.

Does the impassiblity of God mean in a very real sense that he’s not subject to emotions? So that he loves his creation but doesn’t feel any emotion/affection towards it, he wills its (creation’s) best, which is the real meaning of loving someone, but he doesn’t love us with the sort of overflowing affection that we humans see as an intrisic part of love? There is a great deal of anthropomorphism in our view of God, the parable of the prodigal son probably contributed to it, although parables were used to convey, in simple human terms, things that are infinitely more complex IMHO. A father who sees his son ruining his life and being sentenced to life in jail is devastated, a soul being condemned to Hell (or choosing Hell, that’s not the point) doesn’t cause any kind of turmoil or sadness in God as he is impassible.

God is not subject to passions (He is impassible), correct; therefore He “feels” nothing toward His creation, correct. Perfectly reasonable ontological and semantic accounts can be supplied for this (in fact I can supply one!). It is, again, very important to keep in mind, otherwise absurd arguments (like the one I just criticized) are advanced.

 

[shoe]

I want to thank everyone for their responses.

What I’m trying to understand is why the universe is only 13.7 billion years old. Shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old? Consider the following syllogism:

1. God has always existed.
2. God’s love has always existed.
3. God expresses His love by creating the universe.

Yes, I believe that God, out of His love, manifested that love by creating the universe when He was under no obligation to do so.

1. Therefore, the universe has always existed.

I think that God’s thoughts to create the universe may be considered eternal in the sense that it is from eternity where God thinks. God’s thoughts and plans always have existed eternally with Him. Therefore, it was not God’s thoughts that actualized the universe (time, space, energy, and matter); rather, God, by His Divine power, willed the universe into being.

 

[Gabriel_Serafin]

What I’m trying to understand is why the universe is only 13.7 billion years old. Shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old? Consider the following syllogism:

1. God has always existed.
2. God’s love has always existed.
3. God expresses His love by creating the universe.
4. Therefore, the universe has always existed.

The above post comes closest to resolving the issue for me, but I guess not completely since I find myself asking, “But still, shouldn’t the universe be infinitely old?”

In other words, sometimes I get it and sometimes I don’t.

The airplane in the sky, the computer screen in front of your face, the chair on which you sit all, etc. existed in the mind of their creators before they were willed into physical existence. The mind of man simply took metal, plastics, glass, etc. and brought his idea into physical existence. But man creates in time, and his inventions are as old as they they begin to exist in time. God is outside of time.

Science tells us that time and matter came into existence together; thus the Cause of Time and Matter exists outside of time and matter itself. So the mystery lies in the concept of eternity; *Eternity *is not an infinite number of years. Eternity is not governed by time because it is outside of time itself.

The first thing you need to realize is that your existence itself and the amazing reality which surrounds you is incredibly marvelous. Harmony is not accidental. The Laws which govern the cosmos are did not simply “bubble-up” accidentally. The good news is that your existence has a purpose; you are not a meaningless bag of chemicals…