#STRask - Did God Create Us So He Wouldn’t Be Alone?

Episode Date: November 3, 2025

Questions about whether God created us so he wouldn’t be alone, what he had before us, and a comparison between the Muslim view of God and the Christian view of God.   Did God create us so he wouldn’t be alone, and what did he have before us? Can you compare and contrast the Muslim view of God with the Christian view of God?

Welcome to Stand to Reasons, hashtag STR-Ask podcast. I'm Amy Hall, and I'm here with Greg Kogel, and we're here to respond to your questions. Right. And this first question, Greg, comes from Kaylee. Kaylee. Kayie. All right. Hi, Kaylee.

Did God create us so he wouldn't be able to? alone? What did he have before us? You know, that's an amazing, amazingly profound question because it relates to something distinctive about Christian theology, and that is, the answer would be no. And if God was Unitarian, that is, just one God with one person, he would be alone for eternity. And in fact, I make this point when I talk about the Trinity, how is it that if, for example, a person is on an island by themselves with nobody around, and they just kept looking into the reflection in the water, and they felt all this love for themselves, would we consider that profound love? No, we'd consider that narcissism, right? So,

love is something that is shared. And if God is love, then with whom does he share love with for eternity past before he created anything else to interact with. And the answer from our side is, well, he wasn't just one person. There were three persons that were entwined in a certain way, interpenetrating. And I use that language because Jesus uses that language in John 17. He talks about the oneness he had with the father, and he wants to have oneness with us, us to have oneness with the father in a similar way. But it's kind of mystical the way he's talking about it, and it's hard to really conceive of. But Jesus is talking to the father, he knows what he means, and they know what they mean, but we can kind of speculate. In any event, there is this intimacy

that the word, the second person, and the Holy Spirit, though he's not mentioned there, had with the father from before time. And so therefore, God is the God of love by nature because he's loving another or within the Godhead, there is a relationship of love between the persons. And if there is no relationship of love between persons, because God is one God and one person, that's a unitarian view, small you. I mean, any religion that holds that view is unitarian. There's also a unitarian religion, but I'm just speaking more generally here. And that, then that God can't be properly said to be, be love, like God is love, First John, four, what, seven and eight or whatever, because there is no, you're back to the person on the island looking at his own

reflection and loving himself. And that seems odd. It doesn't seem to comport with our intuitions what love actually entails. It's shared quality. So, no, God didn't need to make us to be able to experience love or friendship. He already had that in the Trinity. And it's one of the things that the Trinity, a trinitarian understanding of God provides that a Unitarian of God does not provide. Muslims can't say God is love because of the problem I just described. And the same thing of any Unitarian religion. We can because of the nature of the Godhead is that there are three persons who eternally self-existent in the one God. and therefore there can be love flowing between them.

So God didn't need us. Now, then why did he create us? And this is speculative, of course, but one simple answer, I think I explore this a little bit in the story of reality, Amy. And that is that God wanted to share, he wanted us to share in his happiness, is the way I put it, because happiness is based on goodness, since God is perfectly good, he is perfectly happy. He makes us as what philosophers he would call a supererogatory act, above and beyond what's required. It's an overflowing of his love that results in him creating other creatures that can share

in a loving relationship and share in virtue and therefore share the kind of happiness that God experiences. And so we have a cogent explanation for why God didn't need us to be loving or to, in a sense, have friends, but as an expression of his overflowing goodness decided to make creatures that he could be in friendship with that could also share that relationship for their benefit, not for his and for an experience the happiness that moral virtue produces. Yeah, there are so many implications if God were Unitarian. Not only would he not be at root love because there would be no relationship, but also

think about the centrality of love and relationship in a Trinitarian God to his. his creation. So I think that even has implications for what? For us? Because if at rock bottom, the foundation of the universe is a God who loves and is in relationship between persons, then that is the most important thing. Whereas a Unitarian God, it's a completely different foundation for the universe. And you mentioned John 17. I was thinking about how Jesus talks about the glory. that he had with the father before the world began. So you can read about the relationship between the persons before there was a world, and you can find that examples of that.

That's just the one that comes to mind. Well, I'm thinking when it says the most famous verse, John 316, for God so love the world, that word actually is cosmos. It isn't restricted just to human beings. It's the whole thing that he made, that it's love infused. you might think. And what this means then is, and I never thought of it quite like this, Amy, but if it's inherent to God and therefore it is manifest in what he does, then love is not an accidental feature

of the universe. It's an essential or necessary part of the universe. It's part of the structure of reality. Mm-hmm. Yeah, I actually never thought of that before. So mark the calendar, write it down. I don't want to forget this again. Lightning doesn't strike twice usually.

But I think that love now, we can talk about love being. If we say God is love, that is a characteristic of his person. That means it's part of the nature of existence, the nature of reality. And that casts, like I said, it's not accidental. It's not like it could have been otherwise. So, human beings have necessary qualities and accidental qualities. So I have, well, I used to have brown hair. It's not brown anymore.

Oh, it's white, which means it's accidental. I'm still me. And so my essential self is the same because that's a necessary quality. I continue to be me, even though there's these accidental qualities like my height, my weight, my, et cetera, hair color. but in the case of God, he doesn't have accidental qualities. He has necessary qualities. There are the kinds of things that are essential to who God is, and without them,

he would no longer be God. Now, if it turns out love is like that, and love is relational, then we have the Trinity as a necessary feature of the universe, and we have love as a necessary feature of the universe, and therefore love is a substantial thing. It's not just an accidental thing. And that's expressed by God when he made us to join into this relationship that brings happiness through the virtue of the relationship. And this brings us to a question from Lucy since we talked about the Muslim God. And she asks, can you compare and contrast the Muslim view of God with the Christian view of God?

Well, Alan would be better to answer this one, but I just gave one example. And clearly, the Trinity itself, and I pause because the concept of love there is tied to the Trinity, God is love because he's Trinitarian. Certainly their view is that God is not Trinitarian. So you've got a fundamental difference there. Now, they make a claim to worship the same God as the Jews and Christians, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It is one thing to make the claim. It's another thing to manifest that.

I think when you look at particulars there, where you have the God of Islam, somewhat capricious, there is no confidence whether a person is going to heaven or not. You know, it's just up to him. The sovereignty of God is big with Muslims, but not all the same characteristics. And I think that Judaism is different because we are following, faithfully this God, and our Jesus believed in who we follow, believed in the God of the Old Testament. I mean, that was, he reinforced all of the theology of the Old Testament, which you don't get in Islam.

What you, what we get in the New Testament is a detail that's maybe implicit in the Old Testament, but not explicit enough for the Jews to get, and that is the multiple, multiple personality of God, the Trinity. And I listened to a piece yesterday with John MacArthur, the late great John MacArthur, when he was having a conversation with, oh, my goodness, the kind of the political Jewish guy, the little guy. I don't know who you mean. Yes, you do.

Oh, Ben Shapiro. Thank you, Ben Shapiro. Everybody knows who this is, but me. What a description. I know. Well, you got it, right? But the observant, you, and about the differences between the two, and what John was saying is that essentially everything about Christianity is grounded in the Old Testament, and it's the same, except for when you get to the New Testament, the real crux is, what do you make of Jesus, of Nazareth? And that's the distinction.

So I only mentioned that show that since we agree with the entire Old Testament, everything that's said about God, we believe the same God as the Jews, even though they reject the Trinity, because this is more of an more explicit New Testament kind of teaching, but this is something about the same God that they weren't aware of. Islam has a very different God. And so when you kind of look at some of these characteristics, you find out, and they specifically will reject that Jesus is the son of. of God, et cetera. So I guess Jews would reject that, too, but they're really coming from totally different foundations. And this is why Muhammad offered the revelation to give a whole different perspective. And notice, by the way, that in Islam, the God of Islam is directing persecution of the Jews as a standard thing. The God of the Old Testament didn't direct persecution of the Jews. He directed judgment of the Jews when they were bad.

and they were not coveted keeping, but he expressed consistently his faithfulness to the nation of Israel, even in the midst of their chastisement. And this is another huge distinction. You can see what's so interesting, and I have a few ideas about differences, partly because I did know this was coming, so I talked to Alan. I got a few ideas from him, so I credit to Alan on some of these. But when you look at the societies they created, there are some basic differences you can see. And those come from their understanding of God, as you'll see as I go through a few of these things. We already talked about the Unitarian versus Trinitarian and implications that has for the importance of love and relationship. The second thing is the idea of justice for, you know, the Islamic God is a demand.

justice, and the Christian God has justice, but also grace. So the Muslim God does not have, not only does he not have a way to provide grace, but he has no way to ground, how can I put this, there's no way to ground any sort of forgiveness in justice. So the reason why as Christians we are forgiven is because Jesus paid for the justice. justice. So God upholds justice and grace. So even when the Muslim God forgives someone, it's basically capricious. There's no grounding for that forgiveness. And for the most part, it's a demanding of obedience. There's not a provision for grace, although he will occasionally capriciously offer forgiveness just on a whim, not based on anything he's set forward for the people. So next,

the idea of God as father is so foundational for the Christian view, not only a father of us, but even between the persons of the Trinity, the father and the son, there's this idea of fatherhood, and all that conveys about relationship, both for us and for the Trinity. And I think that creates a completely different kind of God than a Unitarian God who is primarily judge and never regarded as a father. Yeah, my understanding from Alan, when I asked him about this one, I wrote the story of reality, is that there really isn't a concept of a relationship with God as our father in Islam, because that would be considered demeaning of God, lowering him in some way. And, of course, Muslims don't want to do that. So the goal would be obedience in that case, but for us, the goal is a relationship. So that is a big difference. Yeah. Some people say, well, Islam meets peace.

it doesn't. It means submission. That's what the word is referring to. And along those same lines, there's the idea of power and transcendence for the Muslim God. And the Christian God, there is the power and the transcendence, but there's also eminence. So God came down in the incarnation, became one of us, is able to interact with us, is not so separate that there's no interaction between us. One time I heard this, and this is along these same lines, I heard a quote from a Muslim. I heard it on James White's podcast many, many years ago, and I never forgot this. I wrote a post about this. But listen to what he says about the idea of Jesus dying on the cross for us.

Here's what he says. The idea or the concept of Jesus being God or being divine has raised for Muslims a number of issues pertaining to the theological mistrust. If Jesus is God and God allows himself to be edged out of the world and onto the cross, and as John had suggested earlier on, it was the idea of God incarnate coming down to earth, humiliating himself in a manner of speaking, and being crushed by his enemies in a manner of speaking. Now, if that's the idea of God, if God allows himself to be edged out of the world onto the cross, then our understanding of God is fundamentally a God who is weak and totally powerless in the world. He helps us not through his omnipotence, not through his

almightiness, but rather through his weakness and suffering. So that was... What a difference. That is an idea that he couldn't contemplate this idea that God would do anything through weakness and suffering and coming down to us. That was abhorrent to him. To the Muslim. Right, to the Muslim. So this is a huge difference here where God was willing to come down and suffer for us versus the idea that God is transcendent and always transcendent and can't do that without compromising who he is in some way. So this also has implications for who we are, because think about what it says in Philippians too, where it talks about how we're supposed to have this attitude in ourselves that was

in Christ Jesus, who didn't consider equality with God something to be grasped, but came down emptied himself, came in the form of a bond servant. And this has become, for us, this is our, this is what we are conforming ourselves to, to this idea of humble servanthood by those in power, rather than just naked power over people. Like, power is used to serve and to be humble. And so again, you see what a different society that creates, having that as your, as your ideal. I was just thinking, I want to make a variation. Power is used to serve.

The word that came to mind is relinquished. Power is relinquished to serve. So he doesn't grasp on, as you were quoting out of Philippians. He doesn't hold on to it, but he's willing to step down. Emmanuel, God, with us, and become a servant, even suffering the death of a common criminal. Okay, so there he's relinquishing it. And this is not something that you see in Muslim behavior, society. I'm not saying that there aren't Muslims that might manifest servitude or humility, but it is not a theological feature of Islam.

And then it shouldn't be surprising how so much power is manifest in Muslims' life against things they disagree with. and even maybe power manifest in mercy, not mercy, but honor killings, which are part of their thing. This is, this would be anathema, of course, in a Christian environment because of those details that you've just talked about. So, and actually, this is, I've never really thought about these concepts before, and I'm glad you're raising them because part of the distinction is not just in the, in a sense, the bald nature of God. himself, but how that manifest itself in our lives, because the God of Scripture came down and humbled himself, which is nathema to them. That's almost like Shirk. That's one of the, the biggest sin in Islam, Shirk, is demeaning in some way God, lessening him. And so God coming down is nothing to do with their theology, submitting to weakness, as you've just read. But that

becomes a model for Christians. So it is a theological virtue for us to be weak in the sense of surrendering and submitting and being servants to others because this is what God did on our have, but it is not a theological virtue for Muslims in virtue of the character of God to be that way. They might be commanded to do that in some sense, but it's not the virtue. And this is why I think it, theologies produce a very, theologies when properly followed, probably qualify it that way, produce a very different kind of person. I mean, just think about how revolutionary, the idea of Jesus.

And this is, the text says, knowing that he came from God and he was going back to God, he washed the disciples feet. So he connects that power. He connects that to the idea of being a servant. Right, right. That is the revolutionary idea. That, and obviously the cross is another example of this. But this whole idea.

Which Muslims deny. Yeah. Well, of course. Yeah. Jesus died at a cross. That's too. For the very reason. that God would never do that.

Yeah. And this idea has changed the West in so many ways. So all these differences, they have implications for love, for relationship, for salvation, for relationship with God, for who we are. All of these, all of these things can be traced back to who we believe God is and what we believe is foundational to who he is. You know, I'm trying to think of. this longish discussion, it's a singular kind of challenge to Christianity. I'm trying to think of

how to sum it up. And the Trinitarian distinction is one that's also held with Judaism, so that's not going to help you as a final distinction. But the idea that God came down, Emmanuel God with us, that the God of Christianity is the kind of God, the God of the Bible, is the kind of God that would come down and would serve, become a man to serve. That's a very different kind of God than the God of Islam. Maybe that's a way to sum it up. Yeah, I was just this morning reading Romans, surprise, rise. Yeah, yeah.

And thinking about how utterly magnificent it is. But there's this, there are a couple verses here that really struck me. It is exactly the same thing. And this is Romans 5, 7, and 8. For one will hardly die for a righteous man, though perhaps for the good man, someone would dare even to die. But God demonstrates his own love toward us, and that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. I mean, that is astounding. He died for sinners, something we would never do.

who were in sin continuing, not people who said, I'll stop, and now they're better. So that kind of grace, that is who our God is. He took the initiative to people who were his enemies, who hated him. He took the initiative and came and died, something that we would never do for anyone, not even for a good man, except maybe sometimes a good man, not a righteous man. But he did even more than that. So this is who our God is. The grace in Islam of the God of Islam is capricious, where in Christianity scripture, God's grace is not capricious.

It's not whatever, whenever he feels like it. He's made an opportunity. He's made provision by dying even for sinners so that any sinner can trust in his rescuer, his provision for mercy and forgiveness, and then experience it. not capricious, but according to a specific plan, so that anyone can enter in and not have any questions about it. And even stronger than that, it says that that was his eternal purpose. His eternal purpose was for Jesus to die in the cross, to reveal this grace, because it was so central to who he was, or is. So from eternity, he planned the cross because he wanted to reveal his grace so that we could see it and glorify him for it.

So two different gods. I love to see, Amy, you get so excited about this, you know, but you're relishing the character of God. You're just taken with it and relishing the truth of God's goodness. Yes, and we hope that you are doing the same. And if you have any questions for us, please send them on X with the hashtag STR Ask, or you can go to our website at STR.org. This is Amy Hall and Greg Kokel for Stand to Reason. Thank you.