Why did God create humans?

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Christianity
  3. » Why did God create humans?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 10:35 am
I just got done reading Genesis, and I plan to make my way into Exodus next. So far I have gathered, God is a prick by my standards. The amount of lying, stealing, brother aganist brother, one using their servent as a baby making machine when the wife cannot have children,and even alittle bit of incest was thrown into the mix. This has only provoked more questions as I was assuming it would.

One of the questions being, why did God create humans in the first place?
 
sometime sun
 
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 11:16 am
@NecromanticSin,
To create God......
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 11:30 am
@NecromanticSin,
NecromanticSin;147537 wrote:
I just got done reading Genesis, and I plan to make my way into Exodus next. So far I have gathered, God is a prick by my standards. The amount of lying, stealing, brother aganist brother, one using their servent as a baby making machine when the wife cannot have children,and even alittle bit of incest was thrown into the mix. This has only provoked more questions as I was assuming it would.

One of the questions being, why did God create humans in the first place?

According to boox not inthe bible but same Time, God created Angels who created pairs of Humans. Humans are like vessels for the Immortal Souls. Souls learn living from Human contacts. Humans can learn. Angels not.
 
NecromanticSin
 
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 12:41 pm
@sometime sun,
sometime sun;147548 wrote:
To create God......



Alittle self egotistic
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 12:44 pm
@NecromanticSin,
Very, very Egotistic !

---------- Post added 04-02-2010 at 11:46 AM ----------

If GOD saw the mess, would YHWE:lol:Laughing create again ?:bigsmile:
 
Pyrrho
 
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 01:10 pm
@NecromanticSin,
NecromanticSin;147537 wrote:
I just got done reading Genesis, and I plan to make my way into Exodus next. So far I have gathered, God is a prick by my standards. The amount of lying, stealing, brother aganist brother, one using their servent as a baby making machine when the wife cannot have children,and even alittle bit of incest was thrown into the mix. This has only provoked more questions as I was assuming it would.

One of the questions being, why did God create humans in the first place?



The question is a good one. Either God is a total prick (to use your word, which conveys the idea well enough), or the story is simply false. I choose the latter, because there is no evidence that the primitive savages who wrote the Bible knew what they were writing about, and the best available evidence suggests that there is nothing like the God of the Bible.

---------- Post added 04-02-2010 at 03:16 PM ----------

sometime sun;147548 wrote:
To create God......


NecromanticSin;147569 wrote:
Alittle self egotistic


I think it is more ironic, like someone going back in time to father himself. In order for God to create, God must exist, and therefore is not going to be created later on by what it creates. But, perhaps, sometime sun meant it more as you are taking it. The idea of creating beings in order for them to worship one is exceedingly egotistic, and shows that the being is not self-sufficient, and therefore not perfect. But, the god of the Bible is far from perfect, for how could Adam be hiding from him in the garden of Eden, such that he needs to call out to Adam to ask him where he is? Far from an omniscient being. And given the slaughter that the god of the Bible does and orders, it is far from being perfectly benevolent, too. As depicted in the Bible, it really is a nasty thing, much more like what people imagine the devil to be. And yet that is what many people worship.
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 01:18 pm
@Pyrrho,
Pyrrho;147581 wrote:
The question is a good one. Either God is a total prick (to use your word, which conveys the idea well enough), or the story is simply false. I choose the latter, because there is no evidence that the primitive savages who wrote the Bible knew what they were writing about, and the best available evidence suggests that there is nothing like the God of the Bible.


The Bible is a collection ofbooks from different origin & languages, like Quoran.

People were definitely no savages ! Probably JWH is an amalgaan ofg different local Baals. He even was suppossed to have a Wife, but she did survive Christianity.

Pepijn Sweep
Magister X:bigsmile:X
 
Pyrrho
 
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 01:23 pm
@Pepijn Sweep,
Pepijn Sweep;147585 wrote:
The Bible is a collection ofbooks from different origin & languages, like Quoran.



Yes, absolutely.


Pepijn Sweep;147585 wrote:
People were definitely no savages ! Probably JWH is an amalgaan ofg different local Baals. He even was suppossed to have a Wife, but she did survive Christianity.

Pepijn Sweep
Magister X:bigsmile:X



On the contrary, the primitive people of the time were quite savage.
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 03:37 pm
@Pyrrho,
Pyrrho;147586 wrote:
Yes, absolutely.





On the contrary, the primitive people of the time were quite savage.


I stand corrected. I am an idiot myself.
 
ikurwa89
 
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2010 04:32 pm
@NecromanticSin,
NecromanticSin;147537 wrote:
I just got done reading Genesis, and I plan to make my way into Exodus next. So far I have gathered, God is a prick by my standards. The amount of lying, stealing, brother aganist brother, one using their servent as a baby making machine when the wife cannot have children,and even alittle bit of incest was thrown into the mix. This has only provoked more questions as I was assuming it would.

One of the questions being, why did God create humans in the first place?



Well no one for sure knows the "why", because it's really hard to get into the mind of God. People only can conjeture about the why tho. Look at my thread "perfect God? Not so perfect!"

It raises the question about if some one is perfect he/she/it wouldn't have the tendence to say I want/need.

He/she/it would just be..complete.

I did recieve acouple of good answers like "act of love" but I hardly think that's the case, associating love with a supernatural being... but then again reality is not restircted to one possible outcome, he could of been a curious creator(I use creator because it seperates it from God, which people always assume it's the abrahamic God).

That's just my 2 cents... That's good your reading the bible, and I recommend you to finish reading it with an OPEN MIND, question everything I mean everything and keep track of the numbers.. like how long adam lived for etc and check it with todays history etc.
 
jeeprs
 
Reply Sat 3 Apr, 2010 05:47 am
@NecromanticSin,
to give guys like you the freedom to say things like this.
 
prothero
 
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 01:06 am
@NecromanticSin,
In what way and in what manner did god "create humans"?
Do you think humans are the inevitable result of evolutionary process?
Can one still conceive of man as the "crown of creation" the "purpose of creation" in the age of evolution with its dead branches and mass extinctions?
Is there an unexplainable upward trend in development of life and mind in a universe that otherwise appears to be winding down and dying?
 
trismegisto
 
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 02:02 am
@NecromanticSin,
NecromanticSin;147537 wrote:
I just got done reading Genesis, and I plan to make my way into Exodus next. So far I have gathered, God is a prick by my standards. The amount of lying, stealing, brother aganist brother, one using their servent as a baby making machine when the wife cannot have children,and even alittle bit of incest was thrown into the mix. This has only provoked more questions as I was assuming it would.

One of the questions being, why did God create humans in the first place?



Your first mistake is assuming that you will ever be able to understand the story of Genesis. It wasn't written for you. You are completely removed from the both the authors and the audience. Nobody that reads the bible today in English can ever grasp the nuance, the intent, the mounds of information that lay implicit between the lines. Unless you have the time and patience to exhaustively study every aspect of the the people who authored those books over a 1000 years then of course it is going to seem stupid.

It is just silly to imagine that when we read Genesis we take away the same ideas as the intended audience did.

The second mistake is to read one book at a time. They have to be read all together so you get the whole story. Heck if I had only ever seen the Phantom Menace I would post on all sorts of forums about how ridiculous and asinine Star Wars is. Now, clearly that is the antithesis of the truth. Star wars as a whole is the greatest story of the 2st century which every living person knows to be true and without question.

As to your question, according to the religions of the book, God created Man to be custodian over the Earth, to tend to it and to increase its beauty. Something Man has clearly failed at.
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2010 10:50 am
@Pyrrho,
Pyrrho;147586 wrote:
Yes, absolutely.

On the contrary, the primitive people of the time were quite savage.


I learn more about English then about anything else. OK They couldn't read or write. S by definition...

Maya people used pictograms; 5% (?) of populus could probable understand. But were Maya savages ?
:detective:
 
polpol
 
Reply Sat 10 Apr, 2010 10:35 am
@NecromanticSin,
"why did God create humans in the first place?"

When I was young my father told me god created mankind out of boredom, he wanted to have something and someone to laugh at. Perhaps we are nothing else than god's bufoons.I imagine meeting god after I die to be judged and hearing him say to me, "Relax!, it was just a joke."
 
Krumple
 
Reply Sat 10 Apr, 2010 10:53 am
@trismegisto,
trismegisto;148122 wrote:
Your first mistake is assuming that you will ever be able to understand the story of Genesis. It wasn't written for you. You are completely removed from the both the authors and the audience. Nobody that reads the bible today in English can ever grasp the nuance, the intent, the mounds of information that lay implicit between the lines. Unless you have the time and patience to exhaustively study every aspect of the the people who authored those books over a 1000 years then of course it is going to seem stupid.


Well then god is also a moron then. If you inspire a book that is suppose to be the basis for which humans will attempt to "come" to you. Then shouldn't it be easy to understand and something that every society can easily comprehend? It seems that a god would have the ability to craft such a thing, but according to you, the bible is no longer understandable without extensive research. So how is the bible even practical then, in your view? It wouldn't be and that would make it completely worthless then. However; I would take a different approach, I feel your view is just an apologetic response to a bible that is completely and utterly flawed from cover to cover. It is outdated knowledge and only the knowledge of man, not a god. The only point I agree with you on, is that the bible is worthless.

trismegisto;148122 wrote:

It is just silly to imagine that when we read Genesis we take away the same ideas as the intended audience did.


Why not abandon it then? If we are not getting the message for the reason behind it, then why have it? I think this is another apologetic approach to try and save a dying religion. I also think that the target audience actually knows better that the bible is actually the flaw not the peoples understanding.

trismegisto;148122 wrote:

The second mistake is to read one book at a time. They have to be read all together so you get the whole story. Heck if I had only ever seen the Phantom Menace I would post on all sorts of forums about how ridiculous and asinine Star Wars is. Now, clearly that is the antithesis of the truth. Star wars as a whole is the greatest story of the 2st century which every living person knows to be true and without question.


Yeah, many of the books get the information wrong according to each other. Numbers will be different, names will be different, places will be different and even the events themselves will be different. There is actually two genesis stories in the bible, both give different accounts. Are you suppose to take this as a whole that the creation story is flexible?

trismegisto;148122 wrote:

As to your question, according to the religions of the book, God created Man to be custodian over the Earth, to tend to it and to increase its beauty. Something Man has clearly failed at.


Don't you mean god failed to create good custodians? If humans were created for that purpose, and you say that humans failed, it would not be because of the humans that failed, it would be the creator failing to make a good match for that purpose.
 
ughaibu
 
Reply Sat 10 Apr, 2010 11:27 am
@NecromanticSin,
NecromanticSin;147537 wrote:
why did God create humans in the first place?
This pseudo-question has no meaning unless you first establish a god which did create humans.
 
trismegisto
 
Reply Sat 10 Apr, 2010 04:37 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple;150275 wrote:
Well then god is also a moron then. If you inspire a book that is suppose to be the basis for which humans will attempt to "come" to you. Then shouldn't it be easy to understand and something that every society can easily comprehend? It seems that a god would have the ability to craft such a thing, but according to you, the bible is no longer understandable without extensive research. So how is the bible even practical then, in your view? It wouldn't be and that would make it completely worthless then. However; I would take a different approach, I feel your view is just an apologetic response to a bible that is completely and utterly flawed from cover to cover. It is outdated knowledge and only the knowledge of man, not a god. The only point I agree with you on, is that the bible is worthless.


The modern english bible is an acceptable translation of a latin version of the corrupted Roman State religion which was co-opted from greek philosophers who adopted the essenic version the reformative jewish religion that changed dramatically after the babylonian captivity and was originally borrowed from egyptian priests who were terrible influenced by babylonian astrologers that had been in contact with indo-aryan culture.

Good luck practicing that as it was intended by its many many authors.
It does, however, have some great ideas for conscious contemplation contained within its stories.


kennethamy;150308 wrote:
Why not abandon it then? If we are not getting the message for the reason behind it, then why have it? I think this is another apologetic approach to try and save a dying religion. I also think that the target audience actually knows better that the bible is actually the flaw not the peoples understanding.


If you detail the history of Deism you will get a great reason for why we don't abandon our culturally sponsored religions. Every religion requires a leap of faith, as the Deists eventually discovered. If a leap of faith is required for every religion than any religion is just as plausible. So why abandon what is already accepted for something that is not accpeted and requires the same faith? No readon, that is why there are no Deists today, at least none that have any notion of what deism implies.



kennethamy;150308 wrote:
Yeah, many of the books get the information wrong according to each other. Numbers will be different, names will be different, places will be different and even the events themselves will be different. There is actually two genesis stories in the bible, both give different accounts. Are you suppose to take this as a whole that the creation story is flexible?

As with every story in the bible it offers many significant points to consciously contemplate each of which will then help better inform your future actions and bring you closer to God.

There is no literal understanding of ancient words using modern definitions. There is only story.




kennethamy;150308 wrote:
Don't you mean god failed to create good custodians? If humans were created for that purpose, and you say that humans failed, it would not be because of the humans that failed, it would be the creator failing to make a good match for that purpose.


Humanity is not over yet. If you walked into an operating room 4 hours into an 8 hour surgery and expected the operation to be complete, it would probably look like the surgeon had failed miserably.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Sat 10 Apr, 2010 11:12 pm
@NecromanticSin,
NecromanticSin;147537 wrote:
I just got done reading Genesis, and I plan to make my way into Exodus next. So far I have gathered, God is a prick by my standards. The amount of lying, stealing, brother aganist brother, one using their servent as a baby making machine when the wife cannot have children,and even alittle bit of incest was thrown into the mix. This has only provoked more questions as I was assuming it would.

One of the questions being, why did God create humans in the first place?


It's famous, this god-as-prick idea. Indeed, the O.T. God is often a monster. Freud painted God as a projected father. Jung painted God as a projected derivation of the Self-archetype (to oversimplify).

I would say that the "primitive" belief in God is long dead and buried among the thinking type. But of course that still leaves more sophisticated conceptions of God as quite defensible.

If you ask why the O.T. God did this or that, I'm limited to what I can answer. But if you expand your God-concept in the question, I suppose a person could argue that a loving God might create consciousness in order for this consciousness to experience love and beauty.

Another question might be: why did man invent God in the first place? Was it only to kill better, to enslave better? Or was it also to find order in the Kosmos, or to dream of supreme and ideal intelligence. Or is God the idea of the intelligence inherent in existence? Etc. etc.

I like Blakes view. Humanity is god.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Sat 10 Apr, 2010 11:17 pm
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;150467 [B wrote:
Another question might be: why did man invent God in the first place? [/B].


If Man invented God, then God must exist (or have existed). Man invented the automobile, so the automobile exists. Is this a new proof of God? I never knew that God was supposed to be an invention.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Christianity
  3. » Why did God create humans?
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/18/2018 at 10:27:12