GOD AS MASTERFUL CREATOR

Newton saw God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation.

Nevertheless, he rejected Leibniz' thesis that God would necessarily make a perfect world which requires no intervention from the creator.

In Query 31 of the Opticks, Newton simultaneously made an argument from design and for the necessity of intervention:

For while comets move in very eccentric orbs in all manner of positions, blind fate could never make all the planets move one and the same way in orbs concentric, some inconsiderable irregularities excepted which may have arisen from the mutual actions of comets and planets on one another, and which will be apt to increase, till this system wants a reformation.

This passage prompted an attack by Leibniz in a letter to his friend Caroline of Ansbach:

Sir Isaac Newton and his followers have also a very odd opinion concerning the work of God. According to their doctrine, God Almighty wants to wind up his watch from time to time: otherwise it would cease to move. He had not, it seems, sufficient foresight to make it a perpetual motion.

Leibniz' letter initiated the Leibniz-Clarke correspondence, ostensibly with Newton's friend and disciple Samuel Clarke, although as Caroline wrote, Clarke's letters "are not written without the advice of the Chev. Newton".

Clarke complained that Leibniz' concept of God as a "supra-mundane intelligence" who set up a "pre-established harmony" was only a step from atheism:

"And as those men, who pretend that in an earthly government things may go on perfectly with without the king himself ordering or disposing of any thing, may reasonably be suspected that they would like very well to set the king aside: so, whosoever contends, that the beings of the world can go on without the continual direction of God...his doctrine does in effect tend to exclude God out of the world".

In addition to stepping in to re-form the solar system, Newton invoked God's active intervention to prevent the stars falling in on each other, and perhaps in preventing the amount of motion in the universe from decaying due to viscosity and friction.

In private correspondence Newton sometimes hinted that the force of Gravity was due to an immaterial influence:

Tis inconceivable that inanimate brute matter should (without the mediation of something else which is not material) operate upon & affect other matter without mutual contact.

Leibniz jibed that such an immaterial influence would be a continual miracle; this was another strand of his debate with Clarke.

Newton's view has been considered to be close to deism and several biographers and scholars labeled him as a deist who is strongly influenced by Christianity.

However, he differed from strict adherents of deism in that he invoked God as a special physical cause to keep the planets in orbits.

He warned against using the law of gravity to view the universe as a mere machine, like a great clock. He said:

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being. [...] This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called "Lord God" παντοκρατωρ [pantokratōr], or "Universal Ruler". [...] The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, [and] absolutely perfect. Opposition to godliness is atheism in profession and idolatry in practice. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors.

Source: Wikipedia.

Psalm 14:1

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

Post the sources of your quotes.

bedspread:
Psalm 14:1

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

it is actually funny how the bolded is done by those who say "there is God", especially in Nigeria.

Seun:
Post the sources of your quotes.

Ok Noted. Thanks for this platform that's given some of us the opportunity to share God's Word to His creation. God bless you!

God rules!

你甚至不知道你刚才写的是

Newton also believed in alchemy and similar hogwash. I don't think u want to use him to support your cause.

NPComplete:
Newton also believed in alchemy and similar hogwash. I don't think u want to use him to support your cause.

It's a good thing that you can't deny the quote of the distinguished scientist from Wikipedia though.

Ok this is a sign that God exists since this quote is from isaac Newton

Illuminatus:
Ordinarily, I would walk past but I recognize that some impressionable fellow may stumble upon this thread and use it to justify some advanced sort of cognitive dissonance I would like to point out that:

1. Newton lived in a very peculiar time when the overall accepted knowledge was that God controls everything and man was at the center of the universe. It was fashionable to be religious and even when some scientific advancement wasn’t the result of a scientist cloaked in a monk’s robe, the church’s validation or denouncement spelt the fate of every scientist.

2. The statements you reported above are unverifiable, well, aren’t as verifiable as the Law of Gravity and the Law of Relativity.

3. The underlying rationale for that argument has been tested again and again and it has failed again whilst the law of gravity has stood the rest of time.

4. Religion remains a social construct, incapable of being universally true hence, the fact that one scientist ascribed to it whilst secretly nurturing doubts isn’t a fair point.

Perhaps you chose the wrong option by not following your first instinct, because your desperate attempt to discredit this quote from Isaac Newton has even given some reason to believe that it's worthy of consideration.

It was unwise you to think that atheists who to a significant extent hinge their beliefs on scientific studies and findings would rather chose to believe your own view rather than that of arguably the greatest scientist of all time.

So wrong choice bro for not walking past, but thanks anyways for stopping by, for it's been quite helpful in this regard.

jesusjnr:
Perhaps you chose the wrong option by not following your first instinct, because your desperate attempt to discredit this quote from Isaac Newton has even given some reason to believe that it's worthy of consideration.

It was unwise you to think that atheists who to a significant extent hinge their beliefs on scientific studies and findings would rather chose to believe your own view rather than that of arguably the greatest scientist of all time.

So wrong choice bro for not walking past, but thanks anyways for stopping by, for it's been quite helpful in this regard.

News flash: That someone is a reknowned scientist doesn’t mean that everything he says should be believed.

If you tried reading my comment, you would see how I differentiate between the opinions of scientists that are verifiable and thus, of universal validity and the opinions of scientists that are just that - opinions.

That Newton was a spectacular scientist doesn’t mean that we should believe what he says about the future or death or religion IF IT IS NOT VERIFIABLE. Such opinions are worth as much as that of the average Joe. If Newton said that there was a Flying Spaghetti Monster would you believe him without evidence? Abeg, carry your rationalization to one side.

Scientists can be wrong. Charles Darwin, the celebrated father of The Theory of Evolution was wrong about some aspects of his discovery and postulations. Sigmund Frued, the father of psychoanalysis said a lot of things that are now considered horseshit as it pertains to psychology. We don’t blindly follow the postulations of scientists. That is the difference between theism and science.

Illuminatus:


News flash: That someone is a reknowned scientist doesn’t mean that everything he says should be believed.

If you tried reading my comment, you would see how I differentiate between the opinions of scientists that are verifiable and thus, of universal validity and the opinions of scientists that are just that - opinions.

That Newton was a spectacular scientist doesn’t mean that we should believe what he says about the future or death or religion IF IT IS NOT VERIFIABLE. Such opinions are worth as much as that of the average Joe. If Newton said that there was a Flying Spaghetti Monster would you believe him without evidence? Abeg, carry your rationalization to one side.

Scientists can be wrong. Charles Darwin, the celebrated father of The Theory of Evolution was wrong about some aspects of his discovery and postulations. Sigmund Frued, the father of psychoanalysis said a lot of things that are now considered horseshit as it pertains to psychology. We don’t blindly follow the postulations of scientists. That is the difference between theism and science.

You say blindly follow the postulations of science and here you are trying to discredit the saying of Isaac without any scientific proof to back your claims, but only unfounded postulations of your own.

Because Isaac Newton's argument in this respect, though only theorical wasn't without a valid and logical basis. But compare that with your own flimsy excuse that his statement was a result of what was obtainable during his time where, as you said, it was generally accepted knowledge that God was in control of everything.

So you expect people to believe this your idea was also applicable in the field of scientific knowledge where nothing becomes accepted except when systematically and practically proven to be correct.

And moreover the fact that Newton spoke against atheism proves this idea of yours to be a mere figment of your imagination, as it showed that it was well and truly an observation of his day and age, and even within his field.

Because science has more or less always been associated with atheism, since it requires the idea of the existence of a God or Creator to be proven by scientific method, before it is accepted.

And because that has not been achieved via science, means that most scientists usually turn out atheists.

Therefore Isaac Newton was one of the few exceptions to that tendency in the science world, and the reasons he gave as such signified why.

Therefore by virtue of his distinguished position in the scientific field, he ought to have earned the right for his views concerning God as such to be considered by others in his field, and also atheists who have shown themselves to be significantly influenced by such persons in the science world.

After all you have many in the science world and atheists positing evolution as a basis of belief or explanation, despite it being only a theory and not proven by science to be a fact, but then you seem to have no problem with that.

You seem very intelligent and knowledgeable, but let me teach you something that you may yet lack knowledge of:

That a belief or an idea has not have proven true by science, doesn't to any extent mean that it has been proven otherwise and is not true.

Hence even some of the presently accepted laws in the world of science, had a period when they were only regarded as thesis in the same field, therefore that science hadn't proven them true yet beforehand didn't make them any less true than they already were, for science only just confirmed what already was for it to be acceptable as such in its own field.

Therefore it is possible that there were those who were already ahead of science, in the sense that they already accepted such as a fact before science could, and hence were already applying it wherever applicable and utilizing it to their own benefit.

Therefore you can wait for the day that science is able to prove the fact that a Creator actually exists, but we don't need such a proof as we already believe it's a fact, and hence we are already applying that belief to our lives and utilizing it to our benefits.

And we know just as Newton did, that a day would definitely come where this factual knowledge would become accepted by all and sundry, inclusive of those in the science world, that behind the most fascinating system of the universe lies a Supreme Being who not only created it all but also holds it in place.

And hence, in that sense, those of us that believe In the fact that God exists are truly and surely ahead of science.

Come and hear oh!

W

jesusjnr:
Perhaps you chose the wrong option by not following your first instinct, because your desperate attempt to discredit this quote from Isaac Newton has even given some reason to believe that it's worthy of consideration.

It was unwise you to think that atheists who to a significant extent hinge their beliefs on scientific studies and findings would rather chose to believe your own view rather than that of arguably the greatest scientist of all time.

So wrong choice bro for not walking past, but thanks anyways for stopping by, for it's been quite helpful in this regard.

I sincerely appreciate your effort in trying to get an atheist or atheists to accept that God exists. And I also like the argument that it cannot be scientifically proven that God does not exist.

However I think it's a waste of time trying to convince atheists otherwise. You see the Bible calls atheists fools. While the term fool is a combination of many inadequacies, the fool is fundamentally devoid of common (ordinary) sense. Meaning that he may have uncommon sense, thereby making him knowledgeable enough to be a scientist, an excellent poet, writer, artist and all. But fundamental and common sense is lacking.

Lacking not because it doesn't exist in the person but because it's been beclouded by pride, usually arising from the uncommon sense and intelligence the person poseses, an experience of the past that turns hatred for God to outright denial of his existence, or indoctrination by a parent or mentor.

In either of the circumstances, arguments cannot help the person, only experience does. But sadly most die that way, especially the proud cos pride is very difficult to overcome.

dokie:



I sincerely appreciate your effort in trying to get an atheist or atheists to accept that God exists. And I also like the argument that it cannot be scientifically proven that God does not exist.

However I think it's a waste of time trying to convince atheists otherwise. You see the Bible calls atheists fools. While the term fool is a combination of many inadequacies, the fool is fundamentally devoid of common (ordinary) sense. Meaning that he may have uncommon sense, thereby making him knowledgeable enough to be a scientist, an excellent poet, writer, artist and all. But fundamental and common sense is lacking.

Lacking not because it doesn't exist in the person but because it's been beclouded by pride, usually arising from the uncommon sense and intelligence the person poseses, an experience of the past that turns hatred for God to outright denial of his existence, or indoctrination by a parent or mentor.

In either of the circumstances, arguments cannot help the person, only experience does. But sadly most die that way, especially the proud cos pride is very difficult to overcome.

Pride is a most common triat among athiests. I've watched several debates where Athiests where brought to a stand still and instead of accepting defeat or answering the questions poised to them, began to ridicule their christian opponents

That's why they are fools. Not that they are not intelligent but they realised their mistakes and denied them because of their ego, status, followers, friends, wealth, fear of living in fear/reality that there is God and consequently a Hell (thereby subjecting themselves to control/unwanted moral standards). PRIDE IS MOTHER TO DOWNFALL.

"The kings of the Earth (rich fools) said, let us break their bands and cast their cords from us. But He that sits in Heaven shall laugh and vex them". Psalm 2:2-4

Jesusjnr you are very intelligent and wise. Please use it more.

dokie:



I sincerely appreciate your effort in trying to get an atheist or atheists to accept that God exists. And I also like the argument that it cannot be scientifically proven that God does not exist.

However I think it's a waste of time trying to convince atheists otherwise. You see the Bible calls atheists fools. While the term fool is a combination of many inadequacies, the fool is fundamentally devoid of common (ordinary) sense. Meaning that he may have uncommon sense, thereby making him knowledgeable enough to be a scientist, an excellent poet, writer, artist and all. But fundamental and common sense is lacking.

Lacking not because it doesn't exist in the person but because it's been beclouded by pride, usually arising from the uncommon sense and intelligence the person poseses, an experience of the past that turns hatred for God to outright denial of his existence, or indoctrination by a parent or mentor.

In either of the circumstances, arguments cannot help the person, only experience does. But sadly most die that way, especially the proud cos pride is very difficult to overcome.

I must say that you have a point concerning most atheists, but not all of them. Because I believe that there are a few among them who can are yet rescuable, and they are the essence of my efforts.

And even though at the end it's just one of them that this net of mine catches, it would be worth it all, for that alone would bring joy to heaven.

So I'm not looking at the many as you say who are not worth the effort, but the few who are, for they are also part of the reason Jesus went thru all that He did in His passion.

Therefore for such ones alone the effort is worth it.

Some unbelievers think he was an undercover atheist these atheists and their conspiracy theories.

The same Isaac Newton that said Christ will come in 2000? So now that he was wrong what does that tell you?

MrPRevailer:


Pride is a most common triat among athiests. I've watched several debates where Athiests where brought to a stand still and instead of accepting defeat or answering the questions poised to them, began to ridicule their christian opponents

That's why they are fools. Not that they are not intelligent but they realised their mistakes and denied them because of their ego, status, followers, friends, wealth, fear of living in fear/reality that there is God and consequently a Hell (thereby subjecting themselves to control/unwanted moral standards). PRIDE IS MOTHER TO DOWNFALL.

"The kings of the Earth (rich fools) said, let us break their bands and cast their cords from us. But He that sits in Heaven shall laugh and vex them". Psalm 2:2-4

Jesusjnr you are very intelligent and wise. Please use it more.

Thanks for your comments. I really appreciate it.

However I must be honest with you and let you know that some of the intelligence I exhibit here thru my posts and responses far exceeds my scope and capacity.

Because there are times when I view some of the comments i make here afterwards, and I say to myself, that definitely wasn't me because I couldn't have been able to have done that by myself.

So i also am an observer and appreciator in that respect as it makes me to understand what Jesus actually meant when He said:

"For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist." Lk 21:14-15(KJV)

For there are times when i don't have the answers or know how to respond to some of the questions posed to me, as they are sometimes very difficult.

But then when i'm wondering where to start from, on the spot I could just get an idea and start putting the body together, and when I'm thru, I would be like, No way!

So afterwards I would have to go back to admire the work of the Spirit of God, and also learn from Him because despite that He uses me to produce such, the intelligence and knowledge showcased in them often exceeds my level.

So bro I must confess that it's not by my intelligence nor by my wisdom but it's by the Spirit of God.

So that you won't say you weren't told this by a renowned scientist!

Not a proof but worthy of consideration.

"For I so loved the atheists, that I gave this my beloved thread..." Jesusjnr 1.2:0.5

I have a remix of my previous post and I thought it surpassed the original and that's the reason I brought it to you:

"For I so loved the atheists, that I gave this my only Newton thread, that whosoever..." Jesusjnr 1.2:0.5

Tell them something Isaac!

jesusjnr:
So that you won't say you weren't told this by a renowned scientist!

Argumentum ad verecundiam

A form of defeasible argument in which a claimed authority's support is used as evidence for an argument's conclusion.

***********

I applaud you greatly, for being very knowledgeable, though very unwise.

Basing your conclusion on the fact of a renowned scientist made you a complete flaw. It means you can't reason but rather, rely wholely on the reasoning of another. No wonder it was an easy feat to make you a xtian.

We have tens of hundreds of religions in the world and each one of them, claiming to serve the true god. In fact, there are more than 4000 gods in history in which Yahwah is among. What proof do you have that your god is indeed more true than Thor, or maybe Odin, or maybe Shiva?

See, Atheism is not about pride or hate as you xtains assume. It is lack of evidence for your proposed god. A book that was written thousands of years ago by some lunatics isn't proof. If that to you is proof, you might as well believe in Shiva, Buddha, Allah since they also have their own unique holy book written by figures that were considered holy and spiritual.

Religion is a mere human construct. Men like I created religion to control men like you.

And again, stop spewing bible passages here cause it means nothing. Just as Quran, Torah etc means nothing to us. They are just hogwash!

Your God is all the Omnes meaning, he already knew that over 6 billions of the world population will go to hell even before creating Adam and yet, he took a step to create humanity.. That is ridiculous. He also knew that Lucifer will rebel yet he created him. Reading your bible, from beginning to end depicted a blood tasty god. It is either he isn't omne or.. just an entity created for control. Going by the numerous loopholes and inconsistencies in your bible, i would say your god is no god at all. A god that REGRETTED ever creating man is no god. What a funny Omne god.

Out of all the staged miracles by your con men of god, I'm yet to see one regrow an amputated hand or leg. Prove Gods existence and you will save a soul.. basing your conclusion on the stance of an authority in a field is foolishness. Use your head my friend!

I made an assertion with respect to my beliefs and you rubbished it for this single reason:

HenryDion:


What proof do you have that your god is indeed more true than Thor, or maybe Odin, or maybe Shiva?

For lack of proof.

HenryDion:

Prove Gods existence and you will save a soul..

Again for the second time you condemned it for lack of proof.

And then you that destroyed my assertions as such on the basis of lack of proof would now go on to say:

HenryDion:

Religion is a mere human construct. Men like I created religion to control men like you.

Need I say anything else, maybe that's the proof you actually needed, because I didn't disqualify you, but you've disqualified yourself, by yourself and for yourself.

So next time when you come to me asking for proofs for, make sure that you have proofs against in your hand, supposed wise one!

jesusjnr:
I made an assertion with respect to my beliefs and you rubbished it for this single reason:


For lack of proof.

Again for the second time you condemned it for lack of proof.

And then you that destroyed my assertions as such on the basis of lack of proof would now go on to say:



Need I say anything else, maybe that's the proof you actually needed, because I didn't disqualify you, but you've disqualified yourself, by yourself and for yourself.

So next time when you come to me asking for proofs for, make sure that you have proofs against in your hand, supposed wise one!

I should have proof against? You are not good at this are you? The burden of proof lies on you who make claims of the existence of your fairy daddy.

It's like i asserting that Hulk is god and asking you to prove otherwise..

Please, make a little sense.

HenryDion:


I should have proof against? You are not good at this are you? The burden of proof lies on you who make claims of the existence of your fairy daddy.

It's like i asserting that Hulk is god and asking you to prove otherwise..

Please, make a little sense.

You came again without proof, you really don't know the extent of the error you are making, for now you're not just in the wrong but you are also magnifying your wrong to look bigger than it ordinarily is.

I mean common sense or logic should dictate to you that for someone that preaches proof, proof, proof, you ought to at least be seen to practice what you preach, otherwise you'd be seen not to be practicing what you preach, and hence not taking seriously.

I mean I didn't come to you, you came to me, so if you say that my assertion concerning God is not true, but false and only a social construct, according to your gospel of proof that you were preaching, the onus should be on you to prove it.

For how would you expect me to just believe your baseless assertion without proof?

Or do I need to quote from your gospel of proof again for you to understand how you hinged believing in God on proof?

So that should also apply to believing the otherwise, because that something has not been proven true doesn't in any way and to any extent mean that it has been proven otherwise!

So if you don't have proof of the otherwise of my assertion that God exists, don't come to me and expect me to believe your own assertion that God doesn't exist.

You seem to be very intelligent but maybe you still haven't learnt to apply that to your speech in terms of consistency.

jesusjnr:
You came again without proof, you really don't know the extent of the error you are making, for now you're not just in the wrong but you are also magnifying your wrong to look bigger than it ordinarily is.

I mean common sense or logic should dictate to you that for someone that preaches proof, proof, proof, you ought to at least be seen to practice what you preach, otherwise you'd be seen not to be practicing what you preach, and hence not taking seriously.

I mean I didn't come to you, you came to me, so if you say that my assertion concerning God is not true, but false and only a social construct, according to your gospel of proof that you were preaching, the onus should be on you to prove it.

For how would you expect me to just believe your baseless assertion without proof?

Or do I need to quote from your gospel of proof again for you to understand how you hinged believing in God on proof?

So that should also apply to believing the otherwise, because that something has not been proven true doesn't in any way and to any extent mean that it has been proven otherwise!

So if you don't have proof of the otherwise of my assertion that God exists, don't come to me and expect me to believe your own assertion that God doesn't exist.

You seem to be very intelligent but maybe you still haven't learnt to apply that to your speech in terms of consistency.

Did you say i came to you? You must be high on something LOL! The moment you created this thread, you made yourself open to debate and you have to prove whatever purport you make, cause the burden of proof lies on you who make claims. I wasn't expecting much from a xtain anyway, always ready to poison the well and apply red herring without hesitation.

The aim of this thread was to rubbish atheists because of their disbelief in your delusion. I came in, to tell you that atheism isn't about proud or hate but simply because of lack of substantial evidence which you and your lot had failed miserably to provide.

You made a claim that an entity exist, and I'm imploring you to prove such an assertion and you turn the whole situation around, asking me to prove against it. It is like telling you that Shiva is the true god and then, asking you to prove against it. Is it that you know nothing about argument? Do i need to teach you? Ridiculous!

Not only are you easily brainwashed, you're also brain dead and highly fallacious. These conclusion came from what i was able to deduce from our argument so far. Don't see it as an attack on personality.

Your god cannot be proven, that's why you keep beating around the bush. You already know that your stance is like a sinking ground. You just want to go ahead and keep defending your delusion even when you know quite alright that it doesn't hold up. The inconsistencies and loopholes in your belief are so evident.. They can't be easily dismissed! You need to attain the highest rank of a zombie to dismiss such a huge hole which you're slowly crawling to.

You have a brain, please use it!

Don't mention me again if you don't have anything sensible to say. It seems your brain was replaced with a thousands years old book, written by drunk lunatics who seeks only for control and power.