A White Wolf's Purpose
Another question, beyond the good and evil issue is the deeper question many philosophers have tackled for centuries. What is our purpose here? Do we even have one?
Now the Catholics at least will state that our purpose is to glorify God. I have heard others say so as well. Now this seems to me to be one of the least thought out theological responses I have ever gotten to any of my questions, but lets dig deeper into it to see if that changes.
How do we glorify God? Are we glorifying God as in a declaration of his glory, or is our existence supposed to prove the Glory of God? I suppose one could make an argument for both being true. Of course there is a wrench to throw into the mix.
Who are we glorifying God to? If we are proving the glory of God, who is watching that needs to see this demonstration? If we are declaring it, who are we declaring it to?
One would imagine that God already knows who he is and what he is capable of. Even if he were uncertain, would he take validation from that which he created? A two year old will think his father is impressive even if all of his father's contemporaries see that there is nothing spectacular about him. The two year old has limitations in physical capabilities and in knowledge, so he is not a good judge. As such, the man isn't going to gain a lot of confidence from the glorification from an infant. Similarly one can assume that us telling God he is awesome isn't necessary for God's self esteem.
Now why does the man in our example need the boost from somewhere? Because he is measuring himself up against his contemporaries. Who are God's contemporaries? Who is it that he is measuring up to that he needs to prove himself? No one. He is at the very top of the chain. So there is no proof necessary that we can provide to show God that he is even better than he thought he was. We can not offer this glorification that is supposedly our purpose.
This being the case, were we created for a purpose that we cannot achieve? Or is this glorification in fact not why we are here? If the latter is true, then why are we here?
If we are going to look at the "why are we" we should probably look at the "what are we." We are a creature. One of many creatures on this planet. We do have some unique characteristics though. We have opposable thumbs. We have minds that rationalize, categorize and plan. We create. We are also the least dependant on our environment. Amongst other creatures, if their environment is unsuitable they can't thrive there. We invent so that we can withstand the environmental strictures, or we change the environment ourselves.
If we are going to look at ourselves as a functional part of a plan, we must assume that our purpose lies within that which we are uniquely capable of. We can change, build, destroy or maintain that which is our environment. Our impacts on this environment have a direct effect on every other creature's ability to survive. In short, if what only we can do must in fact be what we were meant to do, that would make us stewards. That would put us in charge of keeping the balance within which the rest of the environment thrives.
Why us though? Why couldn't God maintain this balance himself? Undoubtedly he could, so then, why didn't he? This would lead toward the possibility that there is a secondary purpose as well. Before I get onto my thoughts on what this plan might be, I would be interested in what your thoughts are so far.
Now the Catholics at least will state that our purpose is to glorify God. I have heard others say so as well. Now this seems to me to be one of the least thought out theological responses I have ever gotten to any of my questions, but lets dig deeper into it to see if that changes.
How do we glorify God? Are we glorifying God as in a declaration of his glory, or is our existence supposed to prove the Glory of God? I suppose one could make an argument for both being true. Of course there is a wrench to throw into the mix.
Who are we glorifying God to? If we are proving the glory of God, who is watching that needs to see this demonstration? If we are declaring it, who are we declaring it to?
One would imagine that God already knows who he is and what he is capable of. Even if he were uncertain, would he take validation from that which he created? A two year old will think his father is impressive even if all of his father's contemporaries see that there is nothing spectacular about him. The two year old has limitations in physical capabilities and in knowledge, so he is not a good judge. As such, the man isn't going to gain a lot of confidence from the glorification from an infant. Similarly one can assume that us telling God he is awesome isn't necessary for God's self esteem.
Now why does the man in our example need the boost from somewhere? Because he is measuring himself up against his contemporaries. Who are God's contemporaries? Who is it that he is measuring up to that he needs to prove himself? No one. He is at the very top of the chain. So there is no proof necessary that we can provide to show God that he is even better than he thought he was. We can not offer this glorification that is supposedly our purpose.
This being the case, were we created for a purpose that we cannot achieve? Or is this glorification in fact not why we are here? If the latter is true, then why are we here?
If we are going to look at the "why are we" we should probably look at the "what are we." We are a creature. One of many creatures on this planet. We do have some unique characteristics though. We have opposable thumbs. We have minds that rationalize, categorize and plan. We create. We are also the least dependant on our environment. Amongst other creatures, if their environment is unsuitable they can't thrive there. We invent so that we can withstand the environmental strictures, or we change the environment ourselves.
If we are going to look at ourselves as a functional part of a plan, we must assume that our purpose lies within that which we are uniquely capable of. We can change, build, destroy or maintain that which is our environment. Our impacts on this environment have a direct effect on every other creature's ability to survive. In short, if what only we can do must in fact be what we were meant to do, that would make us stewards. That would put us in charge of keeping the balance within which the rest of the environment thrives.
Why us though? Why couldn't God maintain this balance himself? Undoubtedly he could, so then, why didn't he? This would lead toward the possibility that there is a secondary purpose as well. Before I get onto my thoughts on what this plan might be, I would be interested in what your thoughts are so far.
posted by Wanderer at 10:30 AM
10 Comments:
Hmm. Worthy of some thought. I'll have to get back to you.
Steven, I'll throw some thoughts out:
"How do we glorify God?"
I do it with words and songs and acts of service. Not sure my existence, such as it is, does much for his reputation.
"Who are we glorifying God to?"
This is a great question. I don't think many people have ever even considered it. I glorify God to Him, but, I think, not primarily FOR him. What he gains from it is probably mostly along the lines of relationship with me. (Which he appears to want in spite of, you know, me.)
Primarily I glorify, or praise, Him for me. That act itself puts me in a better position/mindset to receive what He has to offer, ie: the Holy Spirit/the presence of God in me.
Like I said before, I think the "Why are we?" question is best answered with, Because he wants to have a relationship with us. I'm inclined to agree with you that stewardship of the earth, though it's our job, isn't likely enough of a reason for our existence.
Good points on the relationship with us issue, except it falls into the category of why are we here. Just change it slightly. Why does he want a relationship with us?
I noticed you explored every possible reason except "We just so happen to be here." I'm not trying to get you to consider atheism; I'm just wondering why that gets discounted. Even if there is a God, why couldn't we be unexpected functionality of whatever he set up? Analogistically, I'm god to my software, but sometimes it does stuff I didn't plan.
MC - This question has been addressed, including briefly in the last "Mother" segment. I don't go into further detail on it since my beliefs don't concur with this thought process, and as indicated, beliefs are the only thing to go on. There is no way for us to ever know the precise elements that led to origin. It was also posited that this doesn't matter.
Even if we were accidental within the scope of God's plan, would it not make sense that a purpose would have been designated for us or we would have been removed?
Steven- another great question.
I've wondered plenty of times why he wants a relationship with us. If he created us, it would stand to reason that he'd intentionally create something to his own liking, right? Plus, I believe he made us like himself to some degree. Our children are little creations in our image-- with some variation. And we love them. Especially because they're like us...
It's in our nature as human beings to inherently want to re-create ourselves through children, and then give part of ourselves back to them. Maybe that is part of God's nature that we have in ourselves.
"It's in our nature as human beings to inherently want to re-create ourselves through children, and then give part of ourselves back to them. Maybe that is part of God's nature that we have in ourselves."
Cindy, it is my opinion that you have hit on something here. Fairly close to where I will be going with this in the next day or two, dependent strongly on the sleeping patterns of the baby and the several debates elsewhere that have tied me down slightly.
I'm looking forward to it. And I understand the circumstantial constrictions, as my 6 yr old had a 103 degree fever today. Hang in there.
I know... believe me I'm honestly trying to phrase this as a dialogue-spawning question, not as an rgument, because I'm interested. My question was, what is it that makes you believe otherwise?
Again, I give you my word, I'm not trying to argue, I'm curious why your beliefs 'don't concur with this thought process".
"Again, I give you my word, I'm not trying to argue, I'm curious why your beliefs 'don't concur with this thought process".
I believe you. I have to say, though, that our attempts along similar roads as this before is one of the reasons for the spawning of this series. The answer to your question is quite honestly wrapped up in the rest of this, and as such, can only adequately be addressed by addressing the rest of it. Still I will make an effort. I promise I am not blowing you off. It will take a little time for me to gather my thoughts on this, though, and I haven't slept since I saw you last. (In fact I haven't slept since 11am yesterday morning.) As such, I will approach this with a clear head, out of respect for the seriousness of your question. Whether it will be here or in post form is yet to be determined. It is also quite possible that it will begin here and expand to some serious drinking, poker and debate until all hours of the morning.
Post a Comment
<< Home