So what came first?

[vite]

Humans or GOD?

[1715037681]

1715037681

[1715037681]

1715037681

[1715037681]

1715037681

[1715037681]

1715037681

[Akka]

GOD is only four years old. What is this for a Question?

Also, we know that Humans build it. You are confusing me.  

[juggalodarkclow]

[dancupid]

God, being independent of time and space, cares little for your trival human notion of temporal continuity.

[chmod755]

what came first?

Humans or GOD?

Humans. God is a virgin.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

what came first?

Humans or GOD?

Humans. God is a virgin.

Not for long!

[Mike Christ]

 

Ask your pastor/rabbi/tribe leader    It's a simple question but it requires an educated background, of which not commonly found in religion as tradition conflicts with reason.  A better question is, why do Humans insist God?

It's like the question, chicken or the egg?  The chicken, of course.  The egg didn't magically appear out of thin air.  "But what hatched the chicken?"  Whatever it evolved from.

[Rob E]

Well if you go of the premise that "god" created the universe ..The answer is???

[Mike Christ]

The answer is God.

Herein lies the problem    You must assume God created the universe.  But if you didn't, that leaves the question: what created the universe?

I don't know.  There are theories, but nobody knows.  And so God persists.

[justusranvier]

What came first? Birds or the tooth fairy?

[Rob E]

 Definition of what god is crucial to define.

[Mike Christ]

Definition of what god is crucial to define.

Very good point.  If I said my God was a bar of soap I carved into the image of Bill Cosby, you'd have a hard time telling me it didn't exist.  If I said my God was all energy to exist in the universe, it'd be a little more tangible, even then.

However, as God is described in the popular religions, there are too many contradictions which need to be addressed.  They chose Gods which were too OP and totally unbelievable, like the characters in Twilight.  Not Bella, but she had the personality of a desk.  This would essentially require a rewriting of the various Bibles.  To fill in the plot holes    Which could never happen, as they are sacred.

[Akka]

GOD is only four years old. What is this for a Question?

Also, we know that Humans build it. You are confusing me.  

Definition of what god is crucial to define.

I was of course talking about the Global Observation Device.

The Satellite Network

[RodeoX]

You can't have a God without a human. God came into existence when some caveman asked the clan chief "Just what the hell is the Sun?".  Ever since then the story has been getting more elaborate.

[interlagos]

The question in the OP implies there is a difference, where in fact there isn't.
We all create the Universe as we go by observing it.
Think of it as a Universal Blockchain of consensus reality in which everyone of us has some divine hashpower.
"Us" doesn't imply just humans, but all beings.

[Rob E]

You can't have a God without a human. God came into existence when some caveman asked the clan chief "Just what the hell is the Sun?".  Ever since then the story has been getting more elaborate.

I don't think cavemen worshiped any gods. Only humans did. I mean human beings because the difference between human beings and cavemen is pretty pretty spectacular, there's a huge chasm in the progression of development from apelike creatures all the way up to what is now" Human beings". 

[Mike Christ]

At the same time, evolution does not occur in the way you describe.  Cavemen were humans, and slowly evolved into what we are now.  There is no simple caveman/human line you can draw.  As RodeoX described (excellent insight btw, totally forgot about that), at some point in time, someone tried to describe the sun, and the wind, and the moon, and the stars, and thus, all were assigned gods--how else would they describe it?

It could be argued god/God is born from ignorance--which isn't an insult.  People back then really just didn't know, and it wasn't their fault.  It's only an insult nowadays because now we do know what the sun, and the wind, and the moon, and the stars are.  We know what causes floods and what causes lightning.  We know there's no tangible heaven or hell.  It was easy, in the time of early man, to believe such things, because it made more sense than "I dunno."  If nothing else, religion was a stepping stone, a product of man's imagination, the earliest of sciences.  But a couple thousand years later and it's like beating your head on the desk, screaming, "We already figured this stuff out!"

[RodeoX]

You can't have a God without a human. God came into existence when some caveman asked the clan chief "Just what the hell is the Sun?".  Ever since then the story has been getting more elaborate.

I don't think cavemen worshiped any gods. Only humans did. I mean human beings because the difference between human beings and cavemen is pretty pretty spectacular, there's a huge chasm in the progression of development from apelike creatures all the way up to what is now" Human beings". 

I totally agree. By caveman I meant an early Homo sapien, not a Neanderthal or one of the other humanoid relatives.

[Rob E]

At the same time, evolution does not occur in the way you describe.  Cavemen were humans, and slowly evolved into what we are now.  There is no simple caveman/human line you can draw.  As RodeoX described (excellent insight btw, totally forgot about that), at some point in time, someone tried to describe the sun, and the wind, and the moon, and the stars, and thus, all were assigned gods--how else would they describe it?

It could be argued god/God is born from ignorance--which isn't an insult.  People back then really just didn't know, and it wasn't their fault.  It's only an insult nowadays because now we do know what the sun, and the wind, and the moon, and the stars are.  We know what causes floods and what causes lightning.  We know there's no tangible heaven or hell.  It was easy, in the time of early man, to believe such things, because it made more sense than "I dunno."  If nothing else, religion was a stepping stone, a product of man's imagination, the earliest of sciences.  But a couple thousand years later and it's like beating your head on the desk, screaming, "We already figured this stuff out!"

Well that's just part of the evolutionary theory which can easily be  blown full of holes, there' have been a nr of  "missing links" claims  for example turned out to be hoaxes. The evolutionary link between human beings and apelike creatures still has to be found one moment were dragging knuckles next thing were shaving. There's two different species, they draw in the missing bits to make it LOOk like we progressed from apes but truth is there is no evidence for two or three drawings which they show and which supposed to prove we stemmed from the apes. There's a huge evolutionary gap.

[Mike Christ]

At the same time, evolution does not occur in the way you describe.  Cavemen were humans, and slowly evolved into what we are now.  There is no simple caveman/human line you can draw.  As RodeoX described (excellent insight btw, totally forgot about that), at some point in time, someone tried to describe the sun, and the wind, and the moon, and the stars, and thus, all were assigned gods--how else would they describe it?

It could be argued god/God is born from ignorance--which isn't an insult.  People back then really just didn't know, and it wasn't their fault.  It's only an insult nowadays because now we do know what the sun, and the wind, and the moon, and the stars are.  We know what causes floods and what causes lightning.  We know there's no tangible heaven or hell.  It was easy, in the time of early man, to believe such things, because it made more sense than "I dunno."  If nothing else, religion was a stepping stone, a product of man's imagination, the earliest of sciences.  But a couple thousand years later and it's like beating your head on the desk, screaming, "We already figured this stuff out!"

Well that's just theory evolutionary theory which can easily be  blown full of holes, there' have been a nr of  "missing links" claims  for example turned out to be hoaxes. The evolutionary link between human beings and apelike creatures still has to be found one moment were dragging knuckles next thing were shaving. There's two different species, they draw in the missing bits to make it LOOk like we progressed from apes but truth is there is no evidence for two or three drawings which they show and which supposed to prove we stemmed from the apes. There's a huge evolutionary gap.

I'll agree with you there, all theories are theories, and sometimes they have many parts which are hard to connect.  Newer theories overtake older theories, and science chugs onward.  But I feel some theories, like the theory of evolution, make more sense than other theories, like the theory of creation.  Even Newton's laws, which are taught in all schools by now, are still just theories--and even his are being overtaken by others (which sadly aren't being taught or acknowledged, but that's another story.)

The difference being, anyone can test the theory of evolution, and create a new, more improved theory.  The theory of creation, however, is not only extremely old, but designed to be absolute and untouchable, or, due to its method of inception, 'sacred.'  If nothing else, I cannot agree with a theory which does not allow itself changes.  Ideas evolve, and they always will.  Religion pretends not to evolve, and protects its archaic theories to death.