A theory of creation

As a christian my viewpoint could be said to be somewhat christian.  But since
I am proposing a theory and christians today seem a bit adverse to theorizing
you might question whether this theory is christian at all.  On the other hand
the assumptions made here are many and largely spring from a somewhat 
Christian world view.  Well, you can decide for yourself.

My theory begins, like Aristotle, with some kind of Unmoved Mover, some what 
like the Christian idea of God as all powerful, all knowing, infinite and 
perfect in knowledge and being.  Now the christian believes that such a being 
created the world, but I would like to stop before this, and first consider 
the question of action.  If a being like this should act, from what fountain 
of motivation does his action spring?  In other words, why do anything?  
Apparently this being is complete and sufficient of himself and it is 
inconceivable that he would act out of need.  I suggest that the only 
conceivable motivation is to give from that overwhelming abundance which is 
his being.  But if this is the case, then to whom or to what shall he give.  
In this initial state of unlimited omnipresence and power, is there anything 
or anyone which is not him that he can give anything to?  I think not.  

Therefore if this being should act at all it must be to create something other
than himself and because this creation is intended to receive, it must be 
animate to that extent.  Now consider what kind creation seems likely?  
Something that would receive only a little that he has to give or something 
that could eventually receive all.  It seems to me that the second is only 
logical for the first would quickly become obsolete - a mistake.  But if 
something animate had the capacity to receive all that this infinite being 
could give then does it not seem to be infinite itself in some sense?  It 
must have infinite potential, so that the more does receives from this 
creator, the greater its capacity to receive grows to become.  Now what do 
you think this thing would be, this animate being of infinite potential 
separate from its creater?  Now some of you might assume, ok right, here it 
comes,  he is going to say ... man...  right.   But you would be incorrect.

No, what I have in mind is something that springs a bit more directly from 
the requirements outlined above.  Consider what this being must do to acheive 
his end. To be something apart from himself this thing which he creates must 
have its own substance and this substance must take shape and act on its own, 
apart from the direction of his will.  Consider that he might acheive such an 
end with a substance called energy which takes shape and acts according to 
mathematical laws which are not 100% deterministic but which leave the 
smallest indeterminacy through which he can exert some influence if he 
chooses to do so.  Often simple rules can lead to a neverending increase in 
complexity which can surprise us especially if the process is not completely 
deterministic.  Considering his objectives, the rules or laws he would choose 
would have a potential for unbounded complextiy.  But more importantly it 
must have the capacity to support something of infinite potentiality.  What 
could this thing be?  It must be something with ability to become more than 
it is.  It must be able to increase itself in every way conceivable, to grow, 
to learn, to adapt, to evolve.  It seems obvious, to me at least, that what 
we are talking about is life.

For me it is a logically inescapable conclusion that if such a being as 
described above were to act, then it must be to create life.  And the 
universe is nothing more than the cradle or egg in which he can bring life 
into being.  Life is his perfect compliment - infinite potentiality to go 
with his infinite actuality.  Life is something to which he could give 
endlessly in care and guidance to cultivate and to teach.  So after creating 
this cradle of life he would naturally continue helping life to grow and help 
it to become more and more able to receive everything which he has to give. 
We are certainly a part of this because we are alive.  But considering how 
vast the universe is I think we can discount the incredible arrogance of man 
in supposing that the success of God in any way depends on this particular 
mote of dust we call the earth.

But this is a far cry from saying that he is disinterested.  Here is life, 
and in it is all potentiality for which he created the universe.  Consider 
that one way or another everything we are comes from this creator.  In us he 
cultivated the love and care we feel for each other.  In us he grew the 
beauty that we see in each other.  In us he raised the minds that judge the 
value we perceive in our fellow man.  Is this a product of fantasy or 
delusion or could this be only smallest hint of the love and care that he 
feels for us, and the beauty and value that he sees in us.  The fantasies and 
delusions of man are legion, but there is a foolish and childish feel to 
them.  The foolish and childish things all seem to come out when we fail to 
care for and love each other, when we fail to see the value and beauty in 
other human beings.