According to Protestantism, why did God create humanity? I have been looking around this website for some Biblical verses, etc for some clues, but couldn't find any.

This question arose from the understanding that God being one nature and three persons. Though (I am trinitarian myself), I observe that in these discussions it is presupposed that humans have one nature and one person (here and here ). **So I ask: Is there a single human nature or there are multiple human natures?** - *If you answer one human nature = multiple human persons*, how come that (unlike God), we speak of humanity as "being**S**" and not "being"? but; - *If you answer one human nature = one human person*, what then do we mean when we say "human nature " in a collective sense (ex. "It is human nature to XYZ.")? What do we make of the similarities of our own individual natures? And is it right to say instead that we have "multiple yet similar human natures"? ___________________________ **UPDATE:** I was looking through this few days back, and I think I found resources that profoundly helped me in this question. Here's a Catholic Exchange article discussing 'individuation' , to quote: > "Remember, Aquinas says, that a person is “an individual substance of > a rational nature.” On first blush that seems to work quite well. But > hold on. Something shouldn’t sit well with us in thinking about > individuals within God. Surely Father Son and Holy Spirit are not > three individual persons having the divine nature in the same way that > John, Joe, and James are three persons having a human nature. > > Aquinas readily recognizes this objection. He notes that > ‘individuation’ only happens when we’re talking about matter—which we > have, but God doesn’t. So when it comes to God, we have to recognize > that we use the word ‘person’ with a meaning somewhat different than > when we talk about man. In the case of God, Aquinas says we have to > use Richard of St. Victor’s definition of a divine person as “the > incommunicable existence of the divine nature.” Another resource I found is James E. Dolezal's All That is in God - a subsection in Chapter 4 called Real Distinction among Divine Persons. (albeit just a Google Books preview . One has to click it as the text can't be copied).

In the afterlife, is one still a human? Or is an angel (or whatever you are after death) something other than a human? Obviously, according to Christian views you would not be an animal, but would you still be a human?

I am aware of Romans chapter 9 and it’s eternal implications for eternal destinies, especially given the Reformed interpretation of it. I am also aware of the doctrines of “Original Sin” & “God’s Sovereignty” by which He makes all people: > **But now, O Lord, You are our Father; We are the clay, and You our > potter; And all we are the work of Your hand**. Isaiah 64:8*** We also read: > “For as ***through the one man’s disobedience the many were made > sinners***, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be > made righteous.” Romans 5:19 **My question** is: According to the **reformed** tradition, why does God even bother to continue to give people breath & life (**1 Tim 6:13**) to those who are already sinners **in Adam**? (**Ephesians 2:3**, **Rom 5:19**) My mind thinks of **Acts 17:22-31**, yet this seems confusing to me ***even as a Reformed person myself***. Put it another way, a **reformed confession** states in relation to the Fall: > “Our first parents, being seduced by the subtlety and temptation of > Satan, sinned, in eating the forbidden fruit. This their sin, **God was > pleased**, according to his wise and holy counsel, **to permit**, having > purposed to order it to his own glory.” What are we to make of God’s design of such a permission? What is God’s end goal in Creation/Providence/The Fall, etc? **NOTE**: Please **only** answer if you are also Reformed, it would help answer my question better. Or if you are knowledgeable enough in the Reformed tradition.

Are there still leaders of these households or are they obsolete? 1. Reuben: 46,500 2. Simeon: 59,300 3. Gad: 45,650 4. Judah: 74,600 5. Issachar: 54,400 6. Zebulun: 57,400 7. Joseph: - Ephraim: 40,500 - Manasseh: 32,200 9. Benjamin: 35,400 10. Dan: 62,700 11. Asher: 41,500 12. Naphtali: 53,400 13. Levites: ?

As far I can tell, being made in the image of God refers to how human beings reflect God's nature since an image, according to Google definition, is "a representation of the external form of a person or thing in art". In what way, exactly, do we reflect God? Perspectives from any Christian denomination are allowable.

Fr. Chad Ripperger , FSSP , says (@3:19ff. of this video ) that humans were created to replace the fallen angels. **Is this an official teaching of Catholic Church?** Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich also mentions this in her writings; however, they are private revelations. My question here is related to this question , but from a Catholic perspective.

God created the world with a process that involves sexuality to bring more people to existence to serve him. It doesn’t seem sustainable; if everyone achieved the degree of spirituality that the continent clergy has, then the population would decrease and no more people would serve God. Why would God benefit from the prohibition of an act which gives existence to other humans that will potentially also serve Him? I read the argument “better focus to serve God by ignoring sexual impulses and distractions,” but in that case having children while controlling sexual impulses and abstaining from time to time makes more sense.

Often times I have had or come across the thought of "Without God I could do nothing" in a general sense, not something as specific as doing good nor our ability to fix ourselves (i.e. I'm *not* talking about total depravity but about all actions). The primary Biblical evidence I can find possibly backing this is the following: 1. The fact that God created humans with all of their abilities/being/situation/etc. so as such without God at all we would never be able to do anything because we could never exist 2. Jesus' quote "By myself I can do nothing" in John 5:30 (how much more so can we do nothing) 3. "I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing." in John 15:5 4. The fact that God ultimately controls the world and has the power to destroy us or do whatever He wants The first potential problem that I see with these supporting the general claim that "without God I can do nothing" is that 1. doesn't really address the issue of our ability to do something *now* but rather the past (meaning yes, without Him we wouldn't exist, but since we do exist it doesn't determine if we can do something). The second potential problem is that 2. and 3. might only be implying a more specific case such as "apart from me you can do nothing *good*". The third is that in 4. if God didn't do anything ("without God") then Him stopping us wouldn't happen. Is there any other Biblical basis for the general claim of "Without God I could do nothing"? Or is the evidence above generally enough to convince most theologians that this claim is true?

Orthodox teaches that Jesus assumed the full human nature. Why is it necessary that he is fully human?

This just seems like built in bigotry. Probably going back to the times when tribes captured tribes in battle over land or water or food or whatever and held them as slaves. There is no 'black race', any more than there is an 'oriental race' or 'white race' or 'any other color race'. Just the Human race. So any implications drawn are incorrect. Melanin levels in the skin do not determine a race, just an adaptation to the environment by ones ancestors, just like "the epicanthic fold, the skin fold of the upper eyelid, covering the inner corner (medial canthus) of the eye", is thought to be an adaptation to a bright environment (snow covered bright), by people livng in more northern climates long ago. If there different Races we couldn't all breed together, could we. "Modern scholarship regards race as a social construct, that is, a symbolic identity created to establish some cultural meaning. While partially based on physical similarities within groups, race is not an inherent physical or biological quality.", and "race has no taxonomic significance ... all living humans belong to the same species, Homo sapiens, and (as far as applicable) subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens." (Wikipedia for all references)

I was wondering who this man is, in the Catholic church: I am wondering his position therein more so than his name. *I saw him in a dream moments ago—I am not Catholic, I am Apostolic Pentecostal.

Scripture tells us in [Genesis 6:3](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+6%3A3&version=ESV) that God saw fit to shorten the lifespan of mankind. He did something that dramatically reduced humans years from close to a thousand years (Methusala) to 100 or less. Some speculate that the flood opened the earth's atmosphere up to greater UV light and changed atmospheric pressure and those things changed the environment thus shortening human lifespans. Recently I had a interesting dialogue with a Christian who had been taught that the Creator accomplished the goal of shortening lifespan by tilting the earth from original setting to a more extreme setting that changed "normal" to a new "Normal," which caused the dramatic climate changes and led to a much different habitat for humanity and shortened the life expectancy. This was partially supported by [scientists quoted here](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earths-tilt-spawns-rise-a/#) who theorize that the orbit and tilt of the earth causes emergence and extinction of mammals in 2.5 million year cycles. I know the YEC Christians have much to say about the meanings of Genesis history. Have any YECs ever written about the effect of the earth's tilt on the way lifespan or other environmental decline occurred?

We are created in the image and likeness of God, and are therefore acting in accordance with our true nature when we strive for self-emptying love, as we imitate God and Christ in so striving. However, because we are finite and fallen, and subject to original sin, it is impossible for us to love in the way that God, who is infinite, loves. We suffer terribly because of this inadequacy. According to Catholic doctrine, does our continuing to try to give in this way predispose us to abuse by others in this life because we give too much of ourselves, even when our intention is to give to God by giving to others? Abused partners caught in abusive relationships have a quality of never turning from the abuser, despite all of the pain given by the abuser to the abused. There is a great danger of seeing an abusive relationship as a sort of martyrdom. What is the Catholic Church's position on abusive relationships? Does the Catholic Church teach that partners should stay in abusive relationships and continue to love the abuser because we are called to find God (the Other) in the other, and as a martyrdom in the footsteps of Christ? Or are abusive relationships manifestations of our trying to love another person as though that person were God, which is some form of idolatry? I would appreciate an insightful answer on this topic, to see if Catholic doctrine can clarify things.

In the modern day, humanity farms animals to such a degree that rampant animal suffering is present across the board. From our egg and milk industry to our meat industry conditions are appalling and animals suffer widely and consistently. I have heard that the Bible says that humans can do whatever they like with God's creation, but also that other Christians say we have a responsibility to care for it. Does the Bible discuss the rights of humans verses animals, and in particular does it contain any moral or ethical rules that mankind should follow? Is there biblical basis for mankind being required to treat animals well?

"Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires." -http://biblehub.com/2_peter/1-4.htm My understanding is when the person of Christ became human, he assumed a human nature. Now we have this person of Christ with a human and divine nature. I think of it kind or like having a linux OS(Divine Nature) running a windows virtual OS (human nature). Now I think this elevates our human nature to a nature that God has. But does this also mean that humans will get a divine nature at some point. Perhaps baptism, or death, or final judgment? I am interested particularly in Catholic theological theories/teachings/camps. So back to the computer analogy if we are all running windows, is there a chance we get to install linux at some point? PS - can someone please tag this with **divine-nature** **human-nature** and **beatific-vision**... I do not have enough points.

**Are humans fallen angels who are being given the chance to earn their place in heaven again?** I was reading somewhere that this is true. The source gave no scripture references, however. Please give all answers from a biblical standpoint. I do not care of what denomination you are. Just show me in the word. Is there any scripture that backs up the claim that humans wew once angels? Thank You.

If we discover other intelligent life forms in the universe, would this change Christianity in any way or not? For the sake of the argument, let's presume we will find human-like life in a newly discovered planet in our solar system.

>As you do not know the way the spirit comes to the bones in the womb of a woman >with child, so you do not know the work of God who makes everything. >Ecclesiastes 11:5 (ESV) This quote states clearly that the "spirit comes to the bones in the womb of a woman with child". This spirit, in my understanding, is the child's human spirit, as opposed to the Spirit of God that comes to a person to do the work of regeneration and the many blessings that flow out of that work. The spirit "comes to the bones", which implies that it does not come until bones are formed, beginning at around 9 weeks. Can this scripture be used to determine the beginning of a human life? Also, what do various denominations teach about the beginning of a human life in relation to this verse?

On Earth, the Catholic Church teaches that humans are co-creators with God. > To human beings God even gives the power of freely sharing in his > providence by entrusting them with the responsibility of “subduing” > the earth and having dominion over it. **God thus enables men to be > intelligent and free causes in order to complete the work of creation**, > to perfect its harmony for their own good and that of their neighbors. > Though often unconscious collaborators with God’s will, they can also > enter deliberately into the divine plan by their actions, their > prayers, and their sufferings. **They then fully become “God’s fellow > workers” and co-workers for his kingdom.** ([Catechism of the Catholic > Church, paragraph 307](http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/epub/index.cfm?p=14-chapter4.xhtml%23para307)) Does any tradition see this concept of humans being co-creative/co-worker extending into heaven? If so, does this mean that we will continue to push technology forward?