An Interdisciplinary Inquiry into the Emergence of the Concept of God and the Grounds of Human Existence-過去から今へ

God needs Man --God outstetches hand to Man

Abstract

This paper investigates the emergence of the concept of God in ancient Western societies and analyzes the theological, mythological, and anthropological implications of portraying God as a being who instills the fear of death in humans. Drawing on religious studies, comparative mythology, cognitive science, and existential philosophy, the study interrogates the persistent tension between the presumed divine necessity for human existence and the conspicuous absence of any absolute existential justification on the human side. Through a comparative reading of ancient mythological corpora and philosophical accounts of human existence, the paper argues that both the theological premise of divine intentionality and the anthropological premise of human existential grounding remain theoretically underdeveloped. The conclusion outlines the broader implications of this tension and identifies promising avenues for future interdisciplinary research.

Keywords: God concept; death anxiety; ancient Western religion; existential anthropology; comparative mythology; philosophy of religion

1. Introduction

The emergence and function of the concept of God constitute foundational questions in religious philosophy, cultural anthropology, and comparative mythology (Eliade, 1959; Burkert, 1985). In ancient Western traditions, God is frequently depicted as a being who imposes the fear of death and demands obedience — a motif that lies at the structural core of religious authority.

This paper advances three interrelated aims:

To clarify the cultural, cognitive, and social conditions under which the concept of God emerged
To analyze the mythological and theological logic underlying divine punishment that stops short of human annihilation
To examine the philosophical problem of human existential justification through existentialist and psychological frameworks

The study’s contribution lies in its interdisciplinary synthesis, which reveals a structural tension at the heart of the divine–human relationship — a tension that has received insufficient theoretical scrutiny.

2. Methodology

The analysis integrates three methodological approaches:

Historical and mythological textual analysis
Primary sources from Greek, Hebrew, and Mesopotamian traditions are examined to identify recurring patterns in divine–human relations.
Philosophical analysisExistentialist and phenomenological theories (Heidegger, Sartre, Camus) are employed to interrogate the grounds — or groundlessness — of human existence.
Psychological and cognitive frameworks

Theories of death anxiety (Becker, 1973) and cognitive accounts of religious belief (Boyer, 2001) are used to contextualize the formation of divine concepts.

This triangulated approach enables a more comprehensive account than any single disciplinary lens could provide.

3. Theoretical Background

　3.1 Cognitive, Social, and Mythological Origins of the God Concept

The origins of the God concept have been theorized through multiple lenses:

Animistic explanatory models (Tylor, 1871)
Religion as a symbolic system of social cohesion (Durkheim, 1912)
Myth as a response to existential anxiety (Campbell, 1949)
Cognitive predispositions toward detecting agency (Boyer, 2001)

Taken together, these perspectives suggest that the God concept is a multilayered construct, emerging from the convergence of cognitive biases, social imperatives, and mythopoetic imagination. It is neither reducible to a single causal mechanism nor explicable within a single disciplinary framework.

　3.2 Death Anxiety and Religious Authority

Weber (1922) emphasized that religious authority often operates through the dialectic of salvation and punishment.

Becker (1973) argued that humans construct cultural and religious systems to buffer the terror of mortality.

Fear of death thus functions as a central psychological mechanism in the maintenance of religious authority, and the portrayal of God as the arbiter of life and death reinforces this structure with remarkable durability.

4. Comparative Mythological Analysis
　4.1 Divine Punishment Without Annihilation

A cross-cultural comparison reveals a strikingly consistent pattern: gods punish humanity but refrain from total destruction.

Greek Mythology — Prometheus
Zeus punishes humanity yet preserves its existence (Hesiod, Works and Days).
Mesopotamian Mythology — Atra-Hasis
The gods unleash a flood but ultimately preserve a remnant (Lambert & Millard, 1969).
Hebrew Tradition — Genesis Flood Narrative
God destroys but simultaneously preserves humanity through Noah.

This pattern suggests that divine punishment is instrumental rather than terminal — a mechanism of regulation rather than eradication. The gods’ ambivalence toward humanity is thus not merely narrative ornamentation but a structural feature of ancient cosmologies.

　4.2 Theological Interpretations of Divine Non-Annihilation

Several interpretive frameworks illuminate this phenomenon:

Teleological accounts of creation
If God creates with purpose, total annihilation would negate divine intentionality.
Theodical considerations
Divine justice requires a balance between retribution and mercy.
Institutional and sociological interpretations
Myths function as legitimizing narratives for social order, which presupposes human continuity.

These frameworks collectively indicate that divine non-annihilation is not arbitrary but structurally embedded in religious cosmologies.

5. Philosophical Analysis of Human Existence

　5.1 Existential Groundlessness

Existential philosophy consistently denies that human existence possesses intrinsic justification.

Heidegger (1927): Dasein is fundamentally contingent, situated between thrownness and projection.
Sartre (1943): Existence precedes essence; no pre-given purpose structures human life.
Camus (1942): Human existence is marked by radical absurdity.

These accounts converge on the claim that human existence lacks metaphysical grounding — a conclusion that stands in stark contrast to theological narratives of divine intentionality.

　5.2 Psychological Mechanisms of Justification

Becker (1973) argues that cultural meaning systems function as symbolic defenses against death anxiety.

However, such systems provide psychological consolation, not ontological justification.

Thus, the human quest for existential grounding is revealed as a compensatory strategy rather than a metaphysical discovery.

6. Discussion
The interdisciplinary analysis yields three central insights:

Divine intentionality toward humanity is neither uniform nor fully explicable within existing mythological or theological frameworks.
Myths depict divine motives as multifaceted, often oscillating between benevolence and hostility.
Human existence lacks intrinsic justification and is instead sustained by psychological and cultural mechanisms.
A structural asymmetry emerges:
• God is presumed to have reasons for human existence
• Humans lack reasons for their own existence

This asymmetry constitutes a fundamental tension within religious worldviews, revealing a gap between theological narratives and existential realities.

7. Conclusion

This study has examined the emergence of the God concept, the role of death-related fear in divine–human relations, and the philosophical problem of human existence. The findings indicate that traditional accounts of the divine–human relationship are marked by unresolved tensions when viewed through mythological, theological, and existential lenses.

The theoretical implications are threefold:

The God concept must be understood as a product of intersecting cognitive, social, and psychological processes
Divine intentionality is deeply embedded in the institutional logic of religious systems
The absence of intrinsic existential grounding shapes the human need for religious meaning

Future research should pursue:

Integrative studies combining cognitive science and comparative mythology
Analyses of the relationship between religious authority and death-related beliefs
Cross-cultural comparisons beyond the Western tradition

References

Becker, E. (1973). The Denial of Death. Free Press.

Boyer, P. (2001). Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought. Basic Books.

Burkert, W. (1985). Greek Religion. Harvard University Press.

Camus, A. (1942). Le Mythe de Sisyphe. Gallimard.

Campbell, J. (1949). The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton University Press.

Durkheim, E. (1912). Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse. Alcan.

Eliade, M. (1959). The Sacred and the Profane. Harcourt.

Heidegger, M. (1927). Sein und Zeit. Niemeyer.

Lambert, W. G., & Millard, A. R. (1969). Atra-Hasis: The Babylonian Story of the Flood. Oxford University Press.

Sartre, J.-P. (1943). L’Être et le Néant. Gallimard.

Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive Culture. Murray.