God taking His own time

Millions only, Mervin, if we are talking about us. The billions would mean you are including “births” as single-celled organisms, fungi, and plants.
Your point is a related but different one than what troubles me. I’m not at all bothered by “millions of years of death”. My question is how to coordinate God’s message to us, as we understand it today, with the fact that He waited so long to evolve us. So at that point, many have accused me of ‘an anthropocentric view’. But to defend myself from that, let me elaborate and hopefully make clearer the premise of my question.

My human centered question is meant only as it relates to God and His intentions for us. It does not mean that we are the primary, and certainly not the only holders of moral standing. My question does not imply that we should be able to do anything we want with or to the environment, e.g. But certainly we are viewed differently by God. So then why did He wait so long for His intended subjects to be present to hear and ponder His message? Reasonable and logical answers evade me at present.

Anthropocentrism, is your assumption, so let me elaborate a little (and defend myself against that concept). Let’s see if we can agree at the outset on a few stipulations: Most of us believe that animals have certain rights. And that plants have lesser (or perhaps no) rights. Human life exploits animals, plants and mineral resources for the benefit of humankind, but that must have limits. My human centered question is meant only as it relates to God and His intentions for us. It does not mean that we are the primary, and certainly not the only holders of moral standing. My question does not imply that we should be able to do anything we want with or to the environment, e.g. Consider Genesis: what are we to assume the intention was to refer to us being created in the image of God, and unstructured to “subdue” Earth and to “have dominion” over all other living creatures? I even discount this as figurative and metaphorical language used by other humans as their interpretation of events. And for that, I am pilloried by others on these forums. So I am not anthropocentric in that regard. But still what is to be the message we receive from and within our faith and beliefs as it relates to God’s plan(s)?

If I am to be accused of that, then what is the opposite of anthropocentrism? Perhaps Theocentrism, but that sort of sidesteps the question of His intentions towards us. And does that opposing view assert that God’s plans are equally important for plants and animals? If so, why is it not addressed in The Good Book? In fact, Paul says:
‘You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.’ Is it for oxen that God is concerned? Or does he not speak entirely for our sake?"

My question comes from a simple belief and a simple fact. First the fact: life has existed for 4B years, but human life only .005% of that time. Now the belief: God presumably placed life here (or allowed life to occur here). And His intention(s) included for us to eventually have the opportunity for eternal salvation. My question is: why did He wait so long?

For humanity - yes -to be sure. I was even reaching for a broader outlook of thinking that non-human animals too can probably have something of “enjoyment” in life in their own way. But even then - you’re right - millions, not billions. That many magnitudes “out”, the additional number of zeros tacked on the end doesn’t much affect my main point I don’t think.

I wouldn’t lose much sleep over that - except maybe how to somehow gently address your critic’s concerns. What else could any of us ever be other than anthropocentric? After all, we are … human! So I’m not sure what else any critic might be hoping for. If one was not anthropocentric in their outlook and communications they would be unable to connect with anybody else and would be, or at least would appear insane to all the rest of us. So if people have some notion that they’ve somehow “risen above” anthropocentrism, I would just file that back among the interesting amusements we all tease ourselves with. It would be sort of like me claiming I’m going to step outside my humanity. I won’t be doing that (nor anybody else) any more than a cow will transcend its bovinity.

[The best we can hope to do is at least just recognize the inevitable anthropocentrism we all possess and operate within, and in the recognition of that then, perhaps our imaginations become a bit more free to meditate on how we aren’t the only living creatures in the universe.]

1 Like

Wait for what? Wait how?

Hey, @Bucky_Wood!
Interesting questions. And I think your use of the football field may be the best ever.

The Westminster Catechism’s first question helps give some perspective, although it doesn’t directly answer your questions.

Q. 1. What is the chief end of man?
A. Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.

We’re here go glorify God. Period. All that is, no matter how you want to define it or how far back (billions of years or eternity past), exists/has existed to do the same. The more the glory the better! Strangely, baked into that purpose, we puny humans are somehow given the capacity to actually enjoy God, and to continue to do that forever. There is nothing humanly logical about this. You can’t tease this one out that way.

This model of uninhibited glory and enjoyment absolutely resists utility as we understand it, because as you started to point out,

  • our part in the existence of life on the Earth is miniscule compared to the existence of the Earth;
  • the existence of Earth is miniscule compared to the existence of the Universe (well, depending on its starting point);
  • and finally, the existence of the Universe is simply not to be understood in comparison to the eternality of God.

Like children, who are shocked to find out their parents had fulfilling and busy lives before the children, we are naïve in our tendency to conceive the life of God really took off, when we arrived on the scene. We don’t know what He was doing or why, and even with some hints about what comes after each of us is done repurposing the earthy resources we use in order to have existence, the future is a bit murky. Murky but promising, because of promises we have been given.
We can rage for more information, if we want, but that will also be of no purpose.

I’ll wrap up with this. I am not the first to think about God’s work in the human terms I wrote below. (I’m quoting myself from another thread, because I’m too lazy to retype the same thing.) But I think considering the things we do ourselves for the sheer enjoyment of the process, even if nothing practical or needed is the result, is a way to help us differently and more helpfully think about God’s purposes behind creating anything at all, much less us.

1 Like

Wait??? It took that long because that is how long it takes. God’s omnipotence does not mean He is able to do whatever we say in whatever means we care to dictate. That is the difference between reality and a dream world.

The logic is evolution.

Only if your faith is in a magical dream world understanding of Christianity.

Or… we are the pinnacle right here and now in this particular pile of God’s creation. Doesn’t require us to think that we are the center of the universe or end of God’s creation.

1 Like

So you do not believe that we were His intent at the beginning? To ask my question a different way: Do you think that God, when He created our universe, envisioned the inevitable evolution of humans like us from the abiotic beginnings, to singe celled life and a LUCA?

I can’t help but wonder on what basis we are to believe that. And if true, who or what was to glorify Him during the 99.995% of time since He created life on Earth? Or perhaps His goal was for us to finally arrive and only then would He be glorified? And if that is the case, I ask my question again…why did He wait so long? He could have sped the process up, but chose not to, I guess. Which raises the question of whether (or not) He had a plan or simply wanted to let it play out by mutations followed by selective advantages benefiting survival and/or reproduction.

Another possibility (among many) is that He created life, then left it alone. Thanks to an asteroid 66 Mya, we were able to evolve. How we behave, who we praise, who we glorify does not matter to Him. His work has been done. The rest is up to us.

To say the least! Imagine what the future was thought to be if you were a small mouse-like mammal 80 Mya…

A good thought, but if so He had no expectation or requirement that we glorify Him, I wouldn’t think.

For Christ to complete His transforming work on you.

By living in prayerful trust and obedience to his calling on you.

[I don’t even know what you were responding to there of Bucky’s - but that’s my answer to questions like that. How’d I do?]

1 Like

The what? Christ will do that for us all after we’re dead. But it’s about what God was waiting for after He created life.

And the how; how does God wait?

If He only created life on one planet in a single universe, He was waiting to do that for eternity.

This reminds me of Jesus saying that if people didn’t praise God, then the rocks would cry out. So perhaps God does not require any kind of living being in order to be glorified – we have just been afforded the ability to have a relationship with him in the way that rocks and galaxies (presumably) do not.

1 Like

Sorry…I had already stipulated two assumptions of a) a fact and b) a belief, so it then would follow that He “waited” to achieve the goal of us glorifying Him and the “How” was simply time, allowing 99.995% of the time His life existed before we could glorify Him.
Believe me, I am not trying to split hairs or be argumentative here. The assumptions stipulated are not necessarily my beliefs or opinions. I thought the question posed was interesting, but if it is not relevant to your beliefs/opinions, just ignore this entire thread.

He’s eternal, so it’s 100% at all times.

1 Like

Hello, @Bucky_Wood
I’m not a debater. Or an apologist. Or someone who enjoys argument. There are others around here who are actually energized by that and are really skilled.
I admire their abilities and knowledge (as well as the enormous amount of time they must put into their writing).
I do enjoy a good discussion now and then with people who are willing to consider reframing questions or a different perspective. Maybe I’ve stepped into the wrong thread. I will happily step away again, if that’s the case. I’ll address the points in your response to me, and see how it goes.

You seem set on the assumption that humans are The Thing that creation exists to produce. That’s fine. There is surely a lot of agreement for your view. I believe, however, that your assumption is faulty.

Let me return to the full point I had made:

It’s supported by other verses, but Romans 11:36 is a fine one:

For from him and through him and for him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen.

And for good measure I’ll add Revelation 4:11:

You are worthy, our Lord and God,
to receive glory and honor and power,
for you created all things,
and by your will they were created
and have their being.

I see in these verses that language, even biology, is unnecessary for created things to glorify God. We only limit our understand of the concept of glorification by our adding a language element to it. The very existence of matter, much less life, brings glory to God.

Again, you seem to assume that Creation has a single, specific goal – humanity. I’m proposing that the processes God created that lead to the vast array of ALL is far more glorifying than a direct shot to a specific product. If processes are all about utility and scarcity (conservation of resources, of which time is one), then one might concern oneself with racing to the end goal.
When One has eternal resources of time and creative wealth, why skimp? Why not be gloriously, wastefully lavish with the way One uses One’s endless, eternal supply and take eternal pleasure and joy in seeing infinite variation come to fruition?

Certainly. We witness this right now. The creature with a will and language can attempt to withhold glory.
But who can make man?
Again, our very existence glorifies God, even when we attempt to withhold the praise from our mouths.

1 Like

Maybe it is more a case of being the only creature requiring extensive tutoring?

1 Like

I believe it was His intent to create children to whom He could give of Himself without end in an eternal relationship.

No.

Children are not a matter of design and control. We were not made to specifications. We were made to make our own choices and live our own life.

Why in the world should we presume we are His only pupils. C. S. Lewis certainly didn’t think so.

That is not the intent. And why acknowledge that? It’s not true either. Unless rationality is meaningless.

Some rational presuppositions are wrong. That’s a brute fact.

Actually, I do NOT assume that at all. I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that most other people did, and that is why I posed the question about the times. It was an “if you believe this, then explain that” kind of supposition/question.

And that may be the key. I had used a different concept of “glorifying God”, one that focused on our actions rather than His acceptance of them. I like your context.

Again, I do NOT believe that. But I thought that most every Christian believed it, and I based that on my Bible Study groups and mentors. I do think that I am right about what most Christians believe on that front, but maybe I’m wrong (and your view is correct). At any rate, IF a person thinks that God’s purpose was to create human life on Earth, then my original question was to challenge it.
Regarding who, how and why God is “glorified”, I guess semantics must play a key role in defining the word, much like the words so casually thrown around like Faith, or Sovereignty. My use of the term was in the context of praise and example, not just as evidence of his glory.

1 Like

Now that is a thought! And it is an absolute fact that we do!

2 Likes