
This comes out of an ongoing collection of observations and theories I have been working on regarding social theory and religion.
Humans seem to be incredibly concerned with relationship. We go to great lengths to build and maintain a complex relational network for ourselves of which there are differing types, degrees, and functions of relationships to other sentient beings. With this the construction and maintenance of a relational network is driven by the selfish (value neutral) understanding of necessity. In other words a person or being is orderly introduced into my relational network to serve a specific need I have. Now this seems very awful and self centered. It may not be awful but it is self centered. But since relationship is a two way street I am also fulfilling a specific need for the people that are fulfilling certain needs for me. With this relationship is give and take, but never is it give without a any take at all.
Relationship to a spouse or a close friend fulfills a relational need for intimacy - to be known on many different levels with many different shared experiences. The spouse or close friend also has their needs met in some way and this is their reason for maintaining the relationship. If there was never to be any benefit to having relationship with a specific individual why would one seek that relationship in the first place?
Relationships between coworkers fulfill a need to navigate a vocation more successfully. These coworkers might be close friends as well, but at the very least the relationship serves an isolated need within the workplace. Both persons then agree that a professional relationship is beneficial to the both of them while in the workplace.
A teacher student relationship might fulfill the need for knowledge for the student. For the teacher the relationship might bring purpose or meaning to their life in addition to a paycheck. If there was no knowledge to be gained for the student why would the student strike or maintain such a relationship with the teacher. In the same way if the student offered no feeling of purpose or meaning for the teacher and that teacher was also not receiving a paycheck or any other form of benefit why would that teacher care to teach that student?
Within my relational network I have all of these things. I even have relationships with bartenders, cashiers at the grocery store, and baristas at cafes. I may not know anything about them other than the service they provide for me, but I have found their service and the familiarity thereof to be beneficial. In the same way they might remember my name and nothing else about me, but they benefit by being relational to me within isolated moments of interaction because I, at the very least, contribute to their paychecks. If these individuals stopped being beneficial to my needs I would more than likely abandon all form of relational loyalty to them and find different bartenders, cashiers, or baristas that I did benefit from in some way.
Now this is not the most romantic of observations, but if we are honest we see evidence that from the most intimate relationships down to relationships we define as mere acquaintances it is a fundamental agreement of mutually fulfilled necessity that motivates the construction and maintenance of relationship and, in sum, relational networks.
But what happens when human relationships and/or relational networks are not sufficient to meet certain needs?
Some people get pets. Some people form imaginary friends. Some people have God.
Surely this is where the theist could make an argument for God. And in some ways I have already written most of the argument for them. Yes, of course, there are needs we have that sometimes cannot be sufficiently met by other people. This is because we all have a God shaped hole that only God can fill by having relationship with Him. Augustine says it well: "...our heart is restless until it finds rest in you [God]."
This is a real argument and in some ways, on the surface, seems plausible. Let us for a moment say that indeed we need relationship with God and our failed attempts to completely fulfill our needs within human relationships further proves our need for relationship with One who is all benevolent, all powerful, all knowing, all everything good. That sounds great to me for this God is conveniently very beneficial to me.
But here is the question: Why does God want to have relationship with us? Does he need to have relationship to people? If God needs anything then surely God is not God. What is the benefit for God to have relationship with me? If God is God then he receives no benefit from having relationship with me because he is not lacking anything. Therefore there is no mutuality and therefore no relationship.
It could be said that God does not need humans and yet desired to create us and desired for us to know Him. But then wouldn't God's desire imply a lack of something? One does not desire something that one does not want or need. Again, how could the God of the universe want, desire, or need anything if He is self sufficient and complete in perfection of everything?
All that said it is still possible that God exists and it is beneficial to us to know Him. But if God does not need anything from us because He is self sufficient then He can not be concerned or emotional as to whether or not we choose to know Him despite our supposed gain.
So if God is not concerned about whether or not we know Him or, for that matter, how we choose to know Him then we can choose to know Him in any way that we find most beneficial. With this we can operate on the idea that God is simply a Being to be used to fulfill our needs. Again this God is conveniently very beneficial to me.
This unlimited benefit also seems to be the understanding of all theists. In other words despite numerous different theologies of God, every differing theologian and the community he associates with conclude God to be ultimately beneficial. The kaleidoscope of differences of God and the creeds thereof might cause conflict or disagreement, but in the eye of the beholder, regardless of where he or she lands within the kaleidoscope, God is always beneficial. If God was not beneficial in any way then it would not be compelling to believe in God at all. Somehow millions of people in our world and millions more throughout history have found the opposite.
If this has any validity to it then we can make God into whatever we desire, need, or want God to be. It follows then that it is not God who creates us in His image, but rather we create God in ours.
To be continued.