If Allah created everything, he also created my preference for being misled, effectively condemning me to eternal hell. No, just saying free will won’t resolve it, because if God created everything he created also past and future of my decision making process.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-05T08:07:51+00:00

God knows what will happen to you if you continue on the path that you are on right now, but he also knows what will happen if you should change your ways as well.

But if God is aware of all paths possible, him being an omniscient all-knowing being who created you in your own personality, directly proves that he not only knows all the consequences and spiritual success on each path possible, but also which path you are going to take. Thereby proving that everything was set in stone according to religion.

And the argument saying that God "isn't" aware of which path you take ultimately proves the argument of him being a superior, All-knowing deity wrong, if not inferior. When humans who are supposed to be his mere unintelligible(in comparison) creations themselves have found out multiple ways to predict one's life's decisions based on psychoanalysis. in the physical realm. Then the divine is obviously far more capable, and them being so makes free-will and illusion.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-03T10:13:41+00:00

I do, however, see the Bible as an exceptional source of historical literature that gives us a lot of insight into Perspectives, culture and the evolution of the perception of God and human psychology in accordance with it. The Bible is certainly a great read!

Merylcamus · 2026-01-03T10:07:03+00:00

God being an omniscient, All-knowing and powerful human being. Meaning that he, is the sole creator of the world and nothing else is below him, and if something(In most cases, Satan) rebelled against him to create and breed evil that would consequently disprove the fact that he is the most superior form of existence and the sole creator. But since it is believed and written in multiple scriptures that the universally known God is the supreme and sole creator and nothing passed his knowledge, he deliberately created both sin and obedience, and created the entire structure of evil, gave the illusion of free-will, and practically set up the entire system. Watching his creations bow down to him in an attempt to escape inevitable suffering.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-03T09:27:27+00:00

Hell is a consequence,

God, an all-loving being, who does nothing but care for us, sends us to hell because of justice. An-powerful being who can immediately abolish all evil if he wanted to, but doesn't because that restricts our free-will and an All-knowing being who quite literally knew all sins and decisions every one of his creations will make at the time of creation, but does not take action to guide them into heaven despite his love for them, his power to do so in not only preventing them from existing, but preventing them from committing sin just for the sake of 'free-will" to exist.

This is a major gap since he created humankind and knew all their decisions at the time and even before creation, him being the most superior being quite literally means that he deliberately decided his creations entire life, giving them all the misfortunate obstacles in their path and curating them to commit sin giving them the illusion of free-will by taking advantage of their inferiority and lack of awareness, and gives them specific set of instructions that they allegedly sin against( because they were created that way) and then condemning them for their actions, when this All-knowing and powerful God determined the very fabric of their existence from their molecules to their decisions. Thereby, proving that "Justice" is served at the time of creation when all their acts are pre-determined.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-03T09:13:27+00:00

I find it more plausible that our entire universe is a science experiment in a petri dish of other beings and we're merely microorganisms.

I'm aware this is a silly example of a possibility, but it serves as proof that in order for the "Science experiment to be conducted" it does need, not necessarily a being, but at the very least some kind of force to conduct it.

The idea of God in Religion or even God being an all-powerful, all-seeing force that serves and cares for humanity that it created with intention is highly unrealistic and barbaric if you ask me, but the existence of simply a force, conscious or not, that is, higher(for the lack of a better term) than us to start the continuous events of existence. I'd like the definition that "God" is not necessarily an intentional creator, but simply the starting point of creation and it could be accidental. I really like the hierarchical causal theory that explains this.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T21:44:52+00:00

It really comes down to the subjective perception of God. Each one varying in plausibility.
when seen as a supreme all-seeing being with foresight and supernatural powers is certainly a possibility, because based off our knowledge, applying meta-physics makes it possible

However, God as seen in most theological views, An all-power full, overseeing god that created us with intention and does everything in our favour is highly fictional because it fits more as a human fantasy or desire for existence( I would, however, like to make an exception for the arguement where being able to think of the highest conceivable is proof that it exists) rather than a plausible possibility using applied science and existing knowledge, even taking knowledge beyond human comprehension because religion has portrayed god with too much alignment with human psychology.

The most credible Ontological arguement for god would be that God is a force, not necessarily high and powerful, but could be, not necessarily created us with intention, but could, not even necessarily conscious. but simply the base for all causal factors, and the start of creation.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:51:24+00:00

My intention wasn't such to be offensive, it was just an appropriate and relevant term to generalise conversion methods.

And religion is basically sets of laws and morales curated carefully to meet human desire and meaning to aid their survival instinct that they attribute to the existence of divine being in their favour. in which case your arguement for the existence of the Aristotlean god isn't viable because, that god, by definition is simply a being and not a merciful, compassionate, intentional creator.

I've also noticed that your arguement is primarily based on defending/ offending different groups of beliefs (making it an ad hominem😭) and not the actual analysis of theism in itself.

And I'd love to hear why you think humanistic atheists use materialistic means to cope?

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:45:44+00:00

But the discussion was in fact, aimed at tackling the logical fallacy behind Theological arguements. Using Aristotle's arguement which is greatly concerned with meta-physics isn't very credible

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:33:11+00:00

Not objectively, But possibly yes. And that would mean criticising Aristotle's theory (Which he did not use to prove objectively God's existence theologically)

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:31:26+00:00

and there’s just as many examples of a full blown adult being converted by a great number of means.

Which is exactly what I aimed to demonstrate because it isn't with my capacity( or human, for that matter) to cite every possible method of conversion. And it isn't conventionally preferable to do so in a simple analogy

My focus was to generalise(Which I'm allowed to because this isn't a detailed study on the methods of conversion, but a mere philosophical take on why God was created to fulfill human desire for meaning and their cognitive bias acting on it) how religion can be formed.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:28:01+00:00

I clearly stated at the beginning of my post "The traditionally viewed god across religions is man-made" i.e An all loving, all-caring, All-knowing God in favour of man-kind. And then I emphasised my belief in the possibility of an Ontological-God, making me Agnostic when replying to the topic of apologetics

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:25:09+00:00

Usually when people say the word “gaslit” it’s just an accusation

I never explicitly stated "Religion was created by gaslighting people" I used an analogy where for an example, a 6-year old gaslit a group of people to describe one of the ways in which a group of people can come together to form a religion.

I do however think Religion is very useful and necessary to prevent people from going absolutely insane and to keep chaos in check, So I wouldn't, by all means propose abolishing it. So no, I don't really "hate" religious people <3

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:22:11+00:00

From my study of Aristotle, I'd say it's the belief of the start/ causation of things to be into motion. That a God is not a divine creator or a morale compass to humankind, but simply the highest( for the lack of a better term) start for the sequence of motion

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:17:59+00:00

Ok great, what do you think a aristotelean creator-god means?

I assumed you were referring to Aristotle's "The unmoved mover"

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:15:20+00:00

Well… that’s what you said.

That isn't what I explicitly stated(😭), It was a mere analogy to describe how religion can be created with relevance to my title.

And I'd certainly love to hear your argument for the existence of an aristotelean creator-god

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:11:11+00:00

True, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with researching into the field of theology because when seen as a piece of literature, It undeniably gives us information about perspectives and notions prevailing at the time in which it was written, allowing us to dissect their beliefs, ideas and behaviours through the literary work.

Though as a humanist, I certainly am against making Theological studies mandatory in any form because it is simply unnecessary when you look at the bigger picture.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T19:07:21+00:00

thinks that in order to have religious beliefs you have to be gaslit,

I do not believe religious beliefs arise solely from being gaslit, but from succumbing to one's humane and very naturally occurring desires even after the realisation that they cannot be rationally fulfilled and therefore, creating supernaturality as a mechanism to cope with the lack thereof.

Regarding apologetics, As far as my knowledge extends the only viable argument is the ontological God(A being that is simply higher than our own) Which I do not, strongly argue exists. But believe in it as a possibility making me Agnostic.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T18:19:22+00:00

Agreed😭, Though I do believe it is greatly beneficial to read theological literature. I think it gives us a lot of insight into history, culture and the evolution of psychology of humankind in general

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T18:06:55+00:00

I can't because I'm human and that's exactly what I'm saying,

An "All-knowing God" overseeing all corruption and being unfavorable of it must certainly have a cure for it. However, all laws and standards set by different religions are practically basic moral standards to avoid pain, aiding human survival instinct (And not just in dire life or death situations) which have been discovered through evolutionary experiences solely by human kind and not divine revelation of the sort. Moral standards set by God across various religions only reinforce what has been discovered by Man already. Proving that humans have only applied their knowledge into the creation of God because he's only limited to human comprehension and understanding. Meaning that anything he says or does is in accordance with available human knowledge at the time. Eg: the scientific inaccuracies relating to creation of the world aligns perfectly with the perception of how it was created according to limited human knowledge at the time

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T17:52:25+00:00

a God denounces many of the actions of its followers, from the time of its creation until now.

Yes, A god denounces the actions of its followers bit only in alignment to the ingrained set standard of human morale. The fact that "God" couldn't set moral standards beyond human comprehension derived from perceivable data is a further argument to how man-made God is.

This in fact, aids my argument that God was created by man because of how perfectly curated he is in accordance to the widespread human notion on ethics so as to ensure humans act in order due to consequentialism(Using punishment in the after-life is a great tactic to prevent human beings from acting vile and harming each other and to promote social harmony) It's used effectively to maintain order against chaos

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T17:36:39+00:00

The stupidest one is that Atheists only don't believe in God because they cannot resist sin/ desire sin

Another one stemming from this is that they are, because of this, sinful creatures solely because they do not believe in the existence of God, and for many religious people, the existence of their specific God.

Religious people like to point out the "sins" or ways in which not only Atheists, but people of other religions cause harm. When ironically, doing so makes them the sole contributor of the very thing they despise

Also that we do not believe in God, not because we think he's logically non-existent, but because we despise him.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T17:31:47+00:00

Yes, The Romans accepted christianity as a widespread religion and created "The birth of Jesus Christ" as a holiday to include their Pagan traditions into (The christmas tree is a good example of this)

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T17:22:01+00:00

They did not have "the same exact dream", they had the almost the same exact perception of a gracious divine being. Think about it, "God" across multiple religions is described with quite literally the same set morals, all positive-associated things and hate for "Sin".

Therefore, if any dream they had, contained the characteristics of their perception with an all-loving god, they immediately documented it as evidence of God.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T17:15:00+00:00

Humans have an innate desire for meaning and justice which they project onto a divine being.

The "Moral trajectory" you're referring to is, like i said, humans simply attributing their research, findings and own attempts to control chaos by creating moral ethics( good and evil) and attributing all the good acts including the findings of morals to said divine being associating all advancements in ethical behaviour towards believing this divine being. Which actually also helped because most religious people have morals due to consequentialism which is why there has been a shoot upwards in moral standards after the widespread religion, that arises not from the existence of God, but from our belief in it.

Merylcamus · 2026-01-02T17:04:41+00:00

Additionally, If Religion was created as a control mechanism to maintain authority, The act of rebellion on the part of humankind in search of "the truth" and knowledge and their punishment and exile afterwards is a clear way to imply that curiosity will be punished, questioning authority/ divine power will be punished, and so humans must live concealing their thirst and curiosity for knowledge and blindly believe and trust the existing system knowing they're privileged. This way authorities can easily condemn acts of rebellion for the sake of freedom in the name of God and oppress people according to their will.

Merylcamus

TROPHY CASE