• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Voltaire Said If God Didn't Exist, Then It Would Be Necessary To Invent Him Him

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
They call it singularity, invisible particles, quantum mechanics, the Big Bang, abiogenesis, theory of evolution, dark energy, dark matter, and such. Some of it has science involved, but not enough of their invention is testable and falsifiable.
Actually putting these things together in the same category demonstrates total scientific illiteracy. There are well tested, falsifiable theories (quantum mechanics, theory of evolution, Big Bang theory), a meaningless statement (invisible particles), observations requiring hypotheses to be tested (dark energy, dark matter, abiogenesis) and one of the best tested theories in the history of science (quantum mechanics - more accurately quantum field theory).

The idea that any of these is equivalent to a god is comical.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
God is right in front of their nose and yet the typical internet atheist can't see him.
You won't have any difficulty providing unequivocal evidence for this god, then? As well as evidence that points to which, of the many thousands of gods humanity does and has believed in, it is...
 

ArtieE

Well-Known Member
Isn't this true?
Inventing a god is a way to make immoral, irrational people behave morally. They have a survival instinct so we simply say that this god has the power to grant them eternal happy life in exchange for following some simple moral commandments and rules. Millions and millions of people have swallowed the bait hook, line and sinker so it works. Yes, I would say that God is a necessary invention so we can keep immoral and irrational people in check.
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Isn't this true? In the atheist world, God doesn't exist so the atheist scientists have invented him. They call it singularity, invisible particles, quantum mechanics, the Big Bang, abiogenesis, theory of evolution, dark energy, dark matter, and such. Some of it has science involved, but not enough of their invention is testable and falsifiable. Oh, they have spent billions on the LHC to find the invisible particles, sophisticated equipment to find evidence of gravitational waves or biology equipment to produce living matter from existing living matter, but have they actually created anything? Recently, they claim they will find microbes in outer space or other planets within ten years. While impressive, have they found the smoking gun? Isn't that why atheist scientists argue so hard and won't peer-review any God-based creation? They have nothing else to hang their hat on besides their "inventions" so to speak. If I am wrong on this, then where are the tests?

OTOH, if God did exist as the believers with faith believe, then there wouldn't be need to deny the truth. Is creation testable and fasifiable? Yes, it is. Can believers show that the atheist scientists models do not work? Yes, they can.

The scientific model of creation includes the scientific evidence for a sudden creation of complex and diversified kinds of life, with systematic gaps persisting between different kinds and with genetic variation occurring within each kind since that time.
Ok you are confused about the topic GOD nature, cosmos, physical, psyche, spirit etc. Reductionism in religion unfortunately is normal, and strange to say the least.
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Isn't this true? In the atheist world, God doesn't exist so the atheist scientists have invented him. They call it singularity, invisible particles, quantum mechanics, the Big Bang, abiogenesis, theory of evolution, dark energy, dark matter, and such. Some of it has science involved, but not enough of their invention is testable and falsifiable. Oh, they have spent billions on the LHC to find the invisible particles, sophisticated equipment to find evidence of gravitational waves or biology equipment to produce living matter from existing living matter, but have they actually created anything? Recently, they claim they will find microbes in outer space or other planets within ten years. While impressive, have they found the smoking gun? Isn't that why atheist scientists argue so hard and won't peer-review any God-based creation? They have nothing else to hang their hat on besides their "inventions" so to speak. If I am wrong on this, then where are the tests?
The concept has been invented more than once. For example Socrates is thought to have decided upon monotheism. On the other hand I do not take the monotheism of pharoah Akhenaten seriously, since it seemed to be all about him. He was the prophet, and he was the only one who could deal with the Aten. Not surprisingly later pharoahs attempted to erase him from history.

OTOH, if God did exist as the believers with faith believe, then there wouldn't be need to deny the truth. Is creation testable and fasifiable? Yes, it is. Can believers show that the atheist scientists models do not work? Yes, they can.
The idea that everything works together under common principles is something that Christianity has influenced in modern Scientific research. While I do not agree with creation-science holdouts, I think its good to recognize that Science is a heavily Christian influenced process. There are other influences, too. There are atheists who believe all things work together, and there are atheists who feel that the world doesn't make sense. There is not a consistent kind of atheist or an atheist point of view. There is, however, in Science the Christian point of view that each voice matters and that everyone moves forward together; so it is far from 'Atheist' in its essence. It is best just to think of it as a process and methodology.

The scientific model of creation includes the scientific evidence for a sudden creation of complex and diversified kinds of life, with systematic gaps persisting between different kinds and with genetic variation occurring within each kind since that time.
I do not take 'Creation scientists' at their word any longer, except for rare exceptions. Its because there are so few, and its because there's no need for them. Evolutionary theory is no threat to anyone.

I don't pretend to understand quantum mechanics. I don't even see why the speed of light in a vacuum cannot be exceeded.

I guess I am an atheist's atheist.
Tom
You do not need to know quantum physics. No one knows why the speed of light cannot be exceeded -- only that so far it cannot. The equations derived from motion experiments seem to confirm Einstein's decisions about it. I can show you his formula or link you to examples of experiments that confirm that it cannot be exceeded, but the reason is still debated. Its one of those things that we describe rather than understand.
 

james bond

Well-Known Member
Actually putting these things together in the same category demonstrates total scientific illiteracy. There are well tested, falsifiable theories (quantum mechanics, theory of evolution, Big Bang theory), a meaningless statement (invisible particles), observations requiring hypotheses to be tested (dark energy, dark matter, abiogenesis) and one of the best tested theories in the history of science (quantum mechanics - more accurately quantum field theory).

The idea that any of these is equivalent to a god is comical.

What part of quantum mechanics has been tested and falsifiable?

What part of ToE has been tested and fasifiable?

You haven't backed your claim at all. It's laughable.
 

james bond

Well-Known Member
You won't have any difficulty providing unequivocal evidence for this god, then? As well as evidence that points to which, of the many thousands of gods humanity does and has believed in, it is...

I doubt you see any God since you can't even spell it correctly like the ignorant internet atheists. Academia backs me up while other ignorant internet atheists continue to be ignorant.

 

james bond

Well-Known Member
Inventing a god is a way to make immoral, irrational people behave morally. They have a survival instinct so we simply say that this god has the power to grant them eternal happy life in exchange for following some simple moral commandments and rules. Millions and millions of people have swallowed the bait hook, line and sinker so it works. Yes, I would say that God is a necessary invention so we can keep immoral and irrational people in check.

Ha ha ha ha. My sides hurt just reading. You just reply to the voice in your confused head don't you? I said the atheist scientists invented God by quoting Voltaire and presenting a different view. So I have to agree with you ha ha.

Did you see what I did?

As for the creationists, they did not invent God. God created them.
 
Last edited:

james bond

Well-Known Member
I do not take 'Creation scientists' at their word any longer, except for rare exceptions. Its because there are so few, and its because there's no need for them. Evolutionary theory is no threat to anyone.

I agree with your first two paragraphs. Are you in science? What made you not take them seriously?

I'm in computer science which isn't biological science or the hard sciences, but I know enough about science, evolution and the science against evolution. I even communicated with a quantum scientist several times on a different forum. While fascinating, they aren't people one could easily understand unless they were quantum scientist, too. I'm usually not one to put TLDR, but it became TCDR (too complex or too unconventional to understand it and read). I read evolution and accepted it, too, in the beginning. That was much easier. Later, I compared it to what the creation scientists were saying and agreed with them more.
 

james bond

Well-Known Member
I wonder how I acquire citizenship.

Ha ha. It's worldview that I was referring to.

However, now that you mention it it will be your final destination and there won't be any atheists there. One way of getting there is to have atheism in your heart. I say this with no malice. Just telling it like it is from what I found.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
What part of quantum mechanics has been tested and falsifiable?
Wow - you really are scientifically illiterate. Quantum mechanics isn't some oddity of scientific research - it's used in engineering - they teach it to electronics undergraduates because of its application in semiconductor design - you need it to make modern electronics (like the device you are using now). It's also used in lasers, MRI scanners and so on - google is your friend - the applications and the experiments are not hard to find.

You won't have any difficulty providing unequivocal evidence for this god, then? As well as evidence that points to which, of the many thousands of gods humanity does and has believed in, it is...
I doubt you see any God since you can't even spell it correctly like the ignorant internet atheists. Academia backs me up while other ignorant internet atheists continue to be ignorant.
What academia backs you up?

I also note that you are unable to provide unequivocal evidence for this god of yours - just a rather silly video.
 

Darkstorn

This shows how unique i am.
I also note that you are unable to provide unequivocal evidence for this god of yours - just a rather silly video.

I'm going to quote from JB from one of his other threads. It's his own words, not changed, or edited.

Hitler was raised Catholic, but left his Bible at home. He found his life's calling when he found Darwin. He was wearing the I ♥ Darwin shirt when he put his victims in ovens and performed medical torture on them. This led him to become the 2nd anti-Christ.

Stuff like this makes it seem as if a concise, valid argument against his "points" is an exercise in futility. Just thought i'd "help". :E
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Ha ha. It's worldview that I was referring to.

However, now that you mention it it will be your final destination and there won't be any atheists there. One way of getting there is to have atheism in your heart. I say this with no malice. Just telling it like it is from what I found.
Wow. Such a waste of effort, and for no purpose.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Isn't this true? In the atheist world, God doesn't exist so the atheist scientists have invented him. They call it singularity, invisible particles, quantum mechanics, the Big Bang, abiogenesis, theory of evolution, dark energy, dark matter, and such.
First, as others have pointed out, this is not an atheistic system, but rather a scientific system. There are many scientists who also believe in a deity.

None of the list you have given (singularity, invisible particles, quantum mechanics, the Big Bang, abiogenesis, theory of evolution, dark energy, dark matter) is in any way similar to the proposal that there is a God. Some are well-tested scientific principles (quantum mechanics, the theory of evolution), some are broad ranging explanations for the observations we have made (the Big Bang), some are speculative but have observations to back them up (dark matter, dark energy), some are vague (invisible particles) and some are just plain misunderstandings (singularity). But NONE of them is a God-substitute. ALL are our attempts to understand the universe around us.

Some of it has science involved, but not enough of their invention is testable and falsifiable. Oh, they have spent billions on the LHC to find the invisible particles, sophisticated equipment to find evidence of gravitational waves or biology equipment to produce living matter from existing living matter, but have they actually created anything?
Yes. They have created an understanding of the universe around us. As I pointed out, some on your list are extensively tested. Others need new equipment or new techniques to test more thoroughly. The 'invisible particles' have been discovered and have broadened our understanding of matter. We have found gravitational waves. We understand much more now about the chemistry of life and what had to have taken place when life first formed.

Recently, they claim they will find microbes in outer space or other planets within ten years. While impressive, have they found the smoking gun?
If you think any of them said definitively that they *will* find microbes somewhere else, then the problem is in your understanding of what they said, NOT in what they said. Because NOBODY has made that claim. They claim that the *conditions* are better than expected for such.

Isn't that why atheist scientists argue so hard and won't peer-review any God-based creation? They have nothing else to hang their hat on besides their "inventions" so to speak. If I am wrong on this, then where are the tests?
Again, this has nothing at all to do with atheism and everything to do with how science is done. It takes time, energy, and extensive testing. It requires making hypotheses and seeing which ones hold up to scrutiny. It laso has to deal with a public ignorant of the process expecting immediate answers when it may well take decades for full answers.

OTOH, if God did exist as the believers with faith believe, then there wouldn't be need to deny the truth. Is creation testable and fasifiable? Yes, it is. Can believers show that the atheist scientists models do not work? Yes, they can.

Really? Please let us know about these testing procedures! Which falsifiable hyppppp have been brought to the table? Please show us one! Please show exactly where the current scientific models do not work and propose one that is better.

The scientific model of creation includes the scientific evidence for a sudden creation of complex and diversified kinds of life, with systematic gaps persisting between different kinds and with genetic variation occurring within each kind since that time.
Please present this evidence. All I have ever seen from the creationist camp is ignorant attacks on what other people have done. When the mistakes are pointed out to them, they ignore the instruction and repeat their myths. Ultimately, we simply have to start assuming that creationists are lying and attempting to play to the crowd rather than to find the truth.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
I didn't say it, but Voltaire did. There's no reason to invent God when we do not disavow him and believe in his existence and love. Every time I come on here, there is some internet atheist beotching about his miserable life and then wanting evidence for God. Why should he care if God doesn't exist? If I was an atheist, I wouldn't care. I'd call myself jbburnsinhell and wouldn't waste my time on religious forums. Thus, why should an atheist care if God doesn't exist? It's because he needs the answers. And the atheists scientists write books to give him the answers. None of it is science. There is no evidence. All of it is philosophy to put it kindly. It's scientific bullshat to separate atheists from their hard earned money.

And your understanding of Voltaire is even worse than your understanding of science and theology. Voltaire was claiming that we would need to invent a God story to keep the ignorant people like you in line. Have you actually *read* any Voltaire? Do you have *any* idea what he lived for and what he thought about? Or are you simply copying a quote you got from somewhere else, misinterpreting it, and passing it along as something that supports your beliefs?

I am an atheist. I have a very happy life. I am successful in my career, have a wonderful wife, have a lot of love around me, and have been able to think deeply about subtle ideas.

My main *complaint* is about all the theists out there trying to push their ignorance down everyone else's throats. I really don't care about whether a deity exists or not. It is beside the point. What I *do* care about is what believers do. They bomb clinics, crash airplanes into buildings, bomb innocents who believe other than they, and stir up rivalries when we need more cooperation. THAT is what bothers me.

Back to the misery. The typical internet atheist disavows God, so there is no evidence he will accept.
Oh, there is evidence I could accept. If you want a creator of the universe, I could accept a collection of millisecond pulsars distributed across the sky, synchronized from the position of the Earth, and patterned so as to look like the first verse of Genesis. Now, *that* would be evidence for a designer.

Or, how about a segment of DNA that appears in all organisms, is preserved under any conditions, and can be read as a binary transcription of the New Testament. That would be convincing evidence that life on Earth was created.

Instead, what we see is vague signs that are easily misinterpreted, have easier and more mundane explanations, and are only seen if you believe ahead of time. Sorry, that just isn't up to the task of a real proof.

Instead, he has to accept responsibility for all the cr*p that goes on in his miserable life and try to make his life better. Not only is his life miserable, he has to go find reasons for why his life is so. How did he get here? Why does the planet work this way? The internet atheists do not read books to find the answers. They just come on here and beotch and hope someone gives him the answers. He doesn't even know where his worldview comes from. It's laughable.

On the contrary, there are a great many atheists that are attempting to build a better world. One without the superstitions and bigotry shown by almost all religions. One where people are taught how to think rationally, are encouraged to investigate new ideas, and to challenge those who state things they *cannot* know. Where peole demand evidence and accountability from not just scientists and politicians, but from business leaders and, yes, ourselves.

It is the *theist* who longs for an after-life that has given up on this world. Where the lust for eternal life has blocked any attempts to make life better here and now. Maybe you should look within and ask yourself if you have done as much as you can to help bring about a better world rather than complain about atheists and the fact that they disagree with you.
 

james bond

Well-Known Member
Wow - you really are scientifically illiterate. Quantum mechanics isn't some oddity of scientific research - it's used in engineering - they teach it to electronics undergraduates because of its application in semiconductor design - you need it to make modern electronics (like the device you are using now). It's also used in lasers, MRI scanners and so on - google is your friend - the applications and the experiments are not hard to find.


What academia backs you up?

I also note that you are unable to provide unequivocal evidence for this god of yours - just a rather silly video.

I'm done talking with you. I asked a serious question and you come back with ad hominems. Aren't you the one who has deficiencies in science then?
 

james bond

Well-Known Member
>>What academia backs you up?<<

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and strangely enough, Richard Dawkins. Is Dawkins academia? I'm not positive about how good his credentials are, but he does have them. I guess it's better than having a law degree from a school in American Samoa.

We are done.
 
Top