Constructing the image of the hypothetical God

[ApeNotKillApe]

1. Actions have purpose. We would never take any sort of action unless there was a purpose to it. When we voluntarily perform an action it is always to our benefit. It may not necessarily be something we want to do at that point in time, but we do it because it will have a positive effect on ourselves. Examples: I decided to lay in my bed because it is comfortable; I decided to write this post because it interests me; I woke up at 7 this morning so I could go to work and make money. This is how we know actions. It makes sense that we can apply this meaning of actions to God. The creation of the universe is an action. Therefore God created the universe because creating it somehow benefited him.

Actions have purpose? Since when? Does an atom drop into lower excited state with a purpose? I mean, humans often behave with purpose, sure, but to say they always do what's in their best interest is absurd. Have you ever heard of depression? Mental illness? Addiction? Self mutilation? Are you aware that people do really stupid things all the time, often on impulse? 
As an example, often when people drown in the sea, the reason they died is because they panicked, rather than remaining still, they thrashed around, exhausting and inadvertently killing themselves. As to how creating the universe as is benefited God, I can only assume this entity is a monster of unfathomable malevolence; the guy invented the very concept of suffering and put it into practice. 

2. What sort of value does life hold? More specifically: do we as a species hold value? Are we more valuable than other animals? Than trees? I'd argue that all life is valuable, but some life is more valuable than others. Not only do we feel and do, but we do freely and autonomously. We are unique in that regard. The fact that we have these abilities says something. In a universe where a God created the universe (including us), this means that we hold intrinsic value greater than any other living thing on this planet. God is supposedly a supreme being, so us evolving so highly could not be accident (or it would contradict what it means to be God.) Therefore God purposely created a universe where humans are the dominant species.

Bias, bias, a thousand times, bias. The cosmos does not share your notions of worth, "value" is a concept manifest only in the minds of bartering primates.
Humans are unique? Good for you. Cosmos doesn't care; the universe is incapable of giving a shit. On that note, "God" clearly doesn't value human life either, in some respects it holds particular contempt for the species. 

3. We as humans possess certain values. It is not natural for us just to try and survive, but rather to try and live a good life (a “good life” meaning a life from which we can derive pleasure.) A sane and rational human being can get pleasure from a number of things: sports, music, television, film, arguing on a forum with strangers. Pleasure from things such as the pain of others is sadism and is not something a sane and rational human being derives pleasure from. It could also be argued that we’re not satisfied with just witnessing these forms of pleasure. Such as with life, we don’t want to just experience these things, we want to master them. Now I’m not saying every person who listens to music wants to master an instrument (although I’m willing to bet the majority of music listeners either play an instrument or wishes they could.) I’m saying it’s in human nature to want to master at least one value. If you are musically inclined, you will want to attempt to master music by learning music as much as you can. If you are scientifically inclined you may want to attempt to master an area of science through school and studies. If you are physically inclined you may gravitate toward a physical profession in which you would try your best at (and in that you’d be attempting to master it.) The amount of examples is endless. There is at least one thing every person wants to “master.” My point here is that these forms of pleasure are not enough at face value. We want more. I said earlier that we have to base God off of what we already know. If we are this way, then we can apply this line of thinking to God. All we know is the universe, implying that God only has himself and our universe to fool around with. This would mean that it doesn’t make sense for God to create the universe and then leave it be. I established already that simply by creating the universe God was taking an action which benefited him. So how did it benefit him? He derives pleasure from it. And we are to model God after a sane and rational person (which means it wouldn’t make sense for him to be sadistic or evil.) This means that God finds entertainment in our universe, but simply creating it and leaving it be would be nonsensical; he’d want to be involved and he’d want to “master” what he derives pleasure from in the same manner that we do. Therefore God would be actively involved in the universe that he created.

Good thing you went and beat Aristotle at his own game and clarified exactly what constitutes a good life, otherwise all of this would read as a load of baseless assertions. On what authority do you constitute what is good? People used to burn their neighbors at the stake for entertainment and moral reinforcement, to this day there are entire communities that torture animals for fun. I don't even know what point you're trying to make. How does the fact that you can do things that are fulfilling and non-harmful speak to the benign nature of this hypothetical god? The people who enjoy causing harm and misery still exist, you know. You still have to account for their existence in God's universe too, in addition to all the unpleasant things that occur in nature that are not the result of human interaction.