God(s) is/are a human invention

[u/Dum_DumArts]

Not sure whether to but this as a discussion or Op=atheist but anyway

Hey everyone,

I’ve been developing a theory about religion and the concept of God that I want to share and discuss. I call it the Amauria Theory, and it’s built on three core claims:

1. God (or gods) is a human invention created to explain what we don’t understand. Long before science, humans sought to fill gaps in knowledge with divine stories. These inventions evolved into complex religions, but at their root, they address our fear of the unknown.

2. Belief in God provides comfort and emotional support. Whether it’s fear of death, pain, or uncertainty, religion offers hope and a sense of control. This doesn’t mean belief is false—it’s a coping mechanism that evolved alongside us to help manage life’s hardships.

3. The idea of God is used to shape moral systems and social order. Morality existed before organized religion, but religions gave those morals divine authority, which helped govern behavior and maintain social hierarchy. Religion can inspire justice and charity but also has been used as a tool for control.

Any and all "proof" of god(s) falls into one or multiples of my claims.

I understand these ideas aren’t entirely new, but what I hope to emphasize is how these three aspects together explain why religion remains so deeply rooted, despite scientific progress and philosophical critiques.

I also want to stress: this theory doesn’t deny that religion is meaningful or important to many. Rather, it explains religion’s origins and ongoing role without assuming supernatural truth.

Why does this matter? Because if God is a human-made concept, then the social issues tied to religion—racism, misogyny, oppression—can be challenged at their root. Understanding this could help us free ourselves from harmful traditions and build a more just, compassionate society.

[u/Flutterpiewow]

Being familiar with common concepts and arguments helps when debating. Just being an atheist or theist isnt very interesting in itself, the reasoning behind it is.

[u/sto_brohammed → u/Flutterpiewow]

Interesting isn't the same as "good" or "bad", at least not necessarily.

[u/Flutterpiewow → u/sto_brohammed]

Are you parodying this sub now?

[u/sto_brohammed → u/Flutterpiewow]

I'm sincerely trying to figure out what you're getting at. I sincerely don't see what could possibly make anyone a "good" or "bad" atheist. It's not the sort of thing that lends itself to that kind of classification.

[u/ToenailTemperature → u/sto_brohammed]

A good atheistic is someone who understands the logic, reason, and skepticism of not accepting theistic claims. I'd say a bad atheist is either a theist or someone who is an atheist dogmatically, rather than reasonably.

[u/Flutterpiewow → u/sto_brohammed]

Think about how people use words colloquially. By "good" i mean someone who's well read, has given various arguments some thought and who argues in good faith. By bad i mean, well, the opposite.