What is the purpose of God?

Topic

I see no evidence for God, so I assume he doesn't exist, or to be more specific lack a belief in him. Seeing as I don't believe in him, there wouldn't be any purpose.

Get ready for the 17 page thread argument.

god is the purpose

(no im not a secular anything)

Seeing as no one's even proved that he exists, we might be trying to run a little too fast here when it comes down to finding answers about God.

Provide an alternative to Big Bang and other cosmological models.

To make there be a ridiculous amount of religion threads on GS OT.

Depends which god you're asking about.

If there is a God, any purpose that man could think up is irrelevant and meaningless.

Opiate of the people?

to smite down on the heretics

To give people hope of something more.
Wouldn't it be convenient if there was some greater means to an end, or if there was a purpose in general or something to look forward to other than to live, die, rot, than cease to exist?


I think i'm speaking more of religion, but there is no religion without some sort of god so they are one in the same in their own ways.

opium of the masses

You're about as hopeful as asking the question:

What is the purpose of humans?

If your answer is to be "There is no purpose, we simply exist", then perhaps it may be fair to also say "There is no purpose, God simply exists".

I think i'm speaking more of religion, but there is no religion without some sort of god so they are one in the same in their own ways.

MuddVader

Buddhism is a religion without a belief in a god. If any buddhist proclaims belief in a god, it's an external god not founded on buddhism. Buddhists claim that the belief in gods, while strongly discouraged, are acceptable so long as it helps reach towards the goal of spiritual enlightenment.

You're about as hopeful as asking the question:

What is the purpose of humans?

If your answer is to be "There is no purpose, we simply exist", then perhaps it may be fair to also say "There is no purpose, God simply exists".

[QUOTE="MuddVader"]

I think i'm speaking more of religion, but there is no religion without some sort of god so they are one in the same in their own ways.

FrozenLiquid

Buddhism is a religion without a belief in a god. If any buddhist proclaims belief in a god, it's an external god not founded on buddhism. Buddhists claim that the belief in gods, while strongly discouraged, are acceptable so long as it helps reach towards the goal of spiritual enlightenment.

Simply, to have a set morals and to be more comfortable with dieing.

The purpose of God is to provide an answer to a question that we couldn't previously answer.Rocky32189

Topic

Gunslinger_1988

For people to explain the unexplainable. It doesn't matter how far science progresses there's always going to be unanswered questions and a lot of people would rather put blind faith in something than accept the world is full of mysteries.

Which God?

There's thousands.

If you're referring to the Christian or Islamic God I'd be more interested in what the purpose of humans would be in his almighty scheme.

We're a very flawed creation to have come from a perfect being.

To me the purpose of "God" is to give people a sense of relief that there is an after-life beyond our own limited, mortal lives. This will hopefully make people less depressed and fearful about their impending and inevitable death.
To me religion is all about keeping society calm; and plays a part in making people happier.

Of course the opposite effect can occur, inevitably.

For people to explain the unexplainable. It doesn't matter how far science progresses there's always going to be unanswered questions and a lot of people would rather put blind faith in something than accept the world is full of mysteries.

bALTHar86

The Abrahamic religions accept that God is a mystery, and by proxy, the world is full of mysteries. In fact a lot of religions require you not to understand but simply believe, in order that you can live your life happily.

Very few people understand, and very few people can explain. That is why you only find one Ayn Rand, one Frederich Nietsczhe, one Thomas Aquinas and one Augustine of Hippo. Even those great people, along with Plato, Aristotle, Descartes etc, broke very little into the wealth of information in the universe as you would be able to see if you looked at the history of their works, not because they were wrong (their conclusions are arguably more informed than you, I, and the majority of people that have lived in the world), but because the information they uncover is so vast.

But I digress. No, people don't believe in God so they can explain something. I would purport that they believe in God (or some sort of Supreme Being) because they themselves cannot explain, don't believe any other human capable of explaining, so put trust in an allegedly immovable, eternal, all-knowing source.

Which God?

There's thousands.

If you're referring to the Christian or Islamic God I'd be more interested in what the purpose of humans would be in his almighty scheme.

We're a very flawed creation to have come from a perfect being.

urdead18

Be careful of trying to say "my perceptions don't make sense of that thing, therefore that thing is irrational".

The same idea has been used on dogs. Think of dog attacks in the media, especially the excitement in pitbull attacks. Most of the conclusions about dog attacks are completely misled, because of ignorant assumptions, and therefore illogical conclusions. Dogs don't understand human communication, dogs don't understand the innocence of a 3 year old toddler, dogs don't understand what it means to be hugged by a 3 year old toddler. So why do we go up in flames when a dog bites the face off the 3 year old child it's known, loved and protected since child birth?

Simple. It probably never was 'protecting' the child by snuggling up to it and getting all over the child's space. It dog terms, that meant it 'owned' the child. When it barked at strangers in front of the child, it wasn't warding off strangers, it was claiming the child as its own. When the child got too close to the dog (intrusion of space is not affection, but disrespect on the intruder's part/submission on the victim's part), the dog put it back in place, as it always thought it was the alpha dog.

This is an issue that affects countless of families with dogs. You probably know of someone today who's grown up with a dog like that, thinking that it's been "best friends" with its owner all its life. Little do you know the dog is probably thinking something totally and utterly different.

See what I just explained. I'm talking about a dog here. It's an animal that is unanimous with human civilization and dominance. It's something we've "known" since as far back as we can remember.

And yet, none of us barely understand how a dog operates. Now think about understanding the idea of a God, especially the Abrahamic one, who is all knowing, all powerful, all loving, and all perfect. We can't explain dogs, and yet we're already coming to conclusions about a supernatural entity?

The child hugged the dog, the dog bit the child, therefore, the dog is insane.

God is all perfect, God created flawed human beings, therefore, God is not the person he says he is.

Not necessarily true.

Generally, to make some stuff or watch over some stuff is the purpose of most gods.

[QUOTE="urdead18"]

Which God?

There's thousands.

If you're referring to the Christian or Islamic God I'd be more interested in what the purpose of humans would be in his almighty scheme.

We're a very flawed creation to have come from a perfect being.

FrozenLiquid

Be careful of trying to say "my perceptions don't make sense of that thing, therefore that thing is irrational".

The same idea has been used on dogs. Think of dog attacks in the media, especially the excitement in pitbull attacks. Most of the conclusions about dog attacks are completely misled, because of ignorant assumptions, and therefore illogical conclusions. Dogs don't understand human communication, dogs don't understand the innocence of a 3 year old toddler, dogs don't understand what it means to be hugged by a 3 year old toddler. So why do we go up in flames when a dog bites the face off the 3 year old child it's known, loved and protected since child birth?

Simple. It probably never was 'protecting' the child by snuggling up to it and getting all over the child's space. It dog terms, that meant it 'owned' the child. When it barked at strangers in front of the child, it wasn't warding off strangers, it was claiming the child as its own. When the child got too close to the dog (intrusion of space is not affection, but disrespect on the intruder's part/submission on the victim's part), the dog put it back in place, as it always thought it was the alpha dog.

This is an issue that affects countless of families with dogs. You probably know of someone today who's grown up with a dog like that, thinking that it's been "best friends" with its owner all its life. Little do you know the dog is probably thinking something totally and utterly different.

See what I just explained. I'm talking about a dog here. It's an animal that is unanimous with human civilization and dominance. It's something we've "known" since as far back as we can remember.

And yet, none of us barely understand how a dog operates. Now think about understanding the idea of a God, especially the Abrahamic one, who is all knowing, all powerful, all loving, and all perfect. We can't explain dogs, and yet we're already coming to conclusions about a supernatural entity?

The child hugged the dog, the dog bit the child, therefore, the dog is insane.

God is all perfect, God created flawed human beings, therefore, God is not the person he says he is.

Not necessarily true.

inb4 1,000,000 posts

I primarily see God as a placeholder; until we figure out how something works, God did it. There are certainly other uses for the concept of God but I feel this is his/her/its original purpose.

To give people an excuse for crushing infidels! :P