The Philosophy Discussion Forum

Many of us believe the material universe was the creation of an uncaused deity. That there had to be a first cause, thus a creator, and that there need not be more than one, so one is the minimalist assumption.

BUT -- how do we get from JUST that to "creation was by the INTENT of this deity". As opposed to just "chance".

For example, one divine eon, a god child was playing with his "....", well sort of like our children might be given a chemistry set. This eon, instead of following suggested experiments from the book, he just put a few scoops of this and that into the test tube at random. POOF, a universe. Looked interesting, but soon (soon for a god child) got bored looking at it and what it was doing, set it in the rack and went out to lay with the other godlings.

<< yeah, I like making fun of "intelligent design" and how its proponents jump from "a designer exists" to "and has these properties" (as seen by my religion) as they had NOT made an unsupportable "leap of faith" >>

So here, how did the believers in One God was the first cause of the creation (they believe that necessary) to all the other things they believe about it. That by the INTENT of this One God. That the One God CARES ABOUT what was created.

constant conjunction leads to psychological expectation...

-Imp

I guess I will have to start this off.

It is common to go from "the One who was the first cause of the universe is God" to all sorts of statements about God. Things like "God is omniscient", "God is omnipotent", "God created the universe by intent", "God cares about the universe", etc. I am not intending to challenge any of these beliefs BUT am going to question which of these, if any, can be derived from JUST "God created the universe" (this universe, as it is). Or are they independent beliefs.

Omniscient? What about "God created the universe" implies that? OK, you might argue "knowing enough to create the universe as it is". But that isn't omniscience. For example, might not know enough to be able to create the universe other than this universe is.

Omnipotent? Same thing. Sufficiently potent to have created THIS universe does not imply potent enough to create the universe with different features.
<< these first two address things like "The Problem of Evil"

By intention? Caring about the universe? If a sculptor takes hammer and chisel to a rock with the intention of creating a statue, chips of stone will fly off in the process. Reasonable to assume the sculptor creates the statue by intent, cares about the statue, but not so reasonable to assume cares about any of those chips of stone. The sculptor know chips of stone will be created by the process, but would you say creating those were by intent? Would you expect the sculptor to care about any of those chips of stone? JUST "the One is First Cause the universe" doesn't give us certainty whether our universe is the statue or one of the chips of stone.

Kind? Good?, etc. also don't seem to be implied JUST by being the First Cause of the universe.

Responses? << again a reminder, NOT arguing that any of these attributes wrong, just that belief in them cannot be derived from JUST "God created the universe" >>