Atheist church of the evolving human God

by Greatest I am Fri Nov 09, 2012 1:54 pm

Atheist Church of the evolving Human God.

Atheist friends, should you elect a God and sacrifice to him or her?

By doing so, you would be acknowledging that mankind is the greatest force in the universe by symbolically taking the name of Human God and insuring that there is always a church that preaches the truth of what is known as a certainty of the supernatural God. That he probably does not exist and is a man-made mythical ideal perpetuated by the Noble Lie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T64_El2s7FU

If you believe what the research indicates in terms of hive behavior, then you might wonder as I do if it would not be in the best interest of the atheist movement to elect an atheist God and sacrifice to him or her?

This, if the research is true, would insure the longevity and cohesion of the atheist movement and give it power.

You may have some suggestion for the title that you would put on your leader and church. I do not except for my choice in the title above. Not being a full atheist, I would not have a vote on it; even as I support atheists and non-supernatural spirituality in people over supernatural religious notions and beliefs. I would also suggest a mantra for this church; that being, --- Faith without Facts is for Fools.

I believe in a strongly assertive type of atheism that preaches that truth is the highest principle. This preaching should be done with eloquence and good form and language; recognizing the trap of logical fallacies and the impossibility of atheists proving that there is no creator God; as well as the impossibility of believers to prove that there is a creator God.

Unfortunately I cannot call myself an atheist anymore because of having suffered an apotheosis. As an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian, you will know that I think that creating an atheist church should be the next evolutionary step for the atheist movement. I believe the research shown above to be true and fear that without a church, atheism will not be affective and perhaps die out without it.

Creating an atheist church would be the ideal for both religionists and atheists. It would insure that atheists are always here to correct the imaginary thinking of those who believe in a mythical supernatural God. This would be a benevolent and altruistic expression of atheist’s social conscience and desire to bring all people to sane thinking. This atheist church would recognize the human attribute shown in the following clip and gently try to help those adults whose thinking is hampered by it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vm971ltF44A&feature=related

Atheists seem to already want to do more for society towards this end as they seem to be over-represented in religious forums even as statistics say that the atheist in the U. S. and Canada are only at about 5% of the population. This is a sacrifice for atheists that already adds some cohesion and longevity to the organization and appeases the hive nature that we seem to have. But I do not think it is enough based on the research shown above.

Should atheist elect themselves a Pope or God or someone with some other title and do whatever sacrifice is demanded of them to keep the movement alive for the long run?

Regards
DL

by Tosh Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:02 pm

Atheism is not a philosophy, evolution is a philosophy, a template from which each individual can create their own story and pursue psychological and physical well being. A broad framework of personal and social responsibility that will give each individual their own purpose, significance and meaning.

Each person is their own god creating their own story.

by Greatest I am Fri Nov 09, 2012 5:27 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHc-yMcfAY4

Regards
DL

by oftenwrong Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:30 pm

QUOTE: "Unfortunately I cannot call myself an atheist anymore because of having suffered an apotheosis. As an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian, you will know that I think that creating an atheist church should be the next evolutionary step for the atheist movement. I believe the research shown above to be true and fear that without a church, atheism will not be affective and perhaps die out without it."

Bullshit baffles brains, and gnostic (gnostikos, "learned", from Greek: γνῶσις gnōsis) does not require a Capital letter. Perhaps the writer was thinking of gnomic.

by Tosh Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:38 pm

and gnostic (gnostikos, "learned", from Greek: γνῶσις gnōsis) does not require a Capital letter.

Does " Capital " require a capital letter ?

Just asking ?

by oftenwrong Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:51 pm

As an aid to the semi-literate, no more than that.

by Tosh Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:54 pm

As an aid to the semi-literate, no more than that..

The answer you are choking on is no, it does not need a capital letter, which makes you look very foolish now, doesn't it Sage ?

by oftenwrong Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:55 pm

Some people just don't got Style.

by Tosh Fri Nov 09, 2012 8:03 pm

Some people just don't got Style..

Said like a true Gnostic.

Please please stop digging.

by snowyflake Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:11 pm

A church to an atheist God? Pardon me, but the hell is the point? The whole point of religion, belief in unsubstantiated claims, worshipping an invisible entity with superpowers just seems so utterly delusional and mentally ill.

I think DL has been tampering with his meds.....

by Greatest I am Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:17 pm

Tosh wrote:Atheism is not a philosophy, evolution is a philosophy, a template from which each individual can create their own story and pursue psychological and physical well being. A broad framework of personal and social responsibility that will give each individual their own purpose, significance and meaning.

Each person is their own god creating their own story.

No argument but not the point of the O P.

I see that you have not quite understood what Mr. Haigt is speaking of.

In a nutshell, he is saying that if the atheist movement does not organize and give that organized body sanctity through sacrifice of some kind, it will not last long and die out.

You have escaped the fantasy world sold by religions and I congratulate you for that but you have forgotten your social conscience and duty to your children and grandchildren.

It is the sacrifice that somehow activates the longevity. I think it may be somehow tied with respect and willingness to perpetuate the sanctity of the movement. We seem to not put much value in what we do not pay for. Something like if you have to work hard to woe a conquest or having one fall into your lap in a happenstance way. They are both good but the one you sacrificed the time and effort to was much more rewarding. Remember?

The thing is though that if your type of guy and your group dies out in the time frame shown, you leave your children and grandchildren at the mercy of a stronger right wing. Do you want them to be able to do as they please with them?

Do you have girls ------

http://www.funnyordie.com...-******

or boys?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5YrB7TpT1Y

Regards
DL

by Greatest I am Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:24 pm

oftenwrong wrote:As an aid to the semi-literate, no more than that.

Exactly.

As a Gnostic Christian I agree. Names are capitalized BTW.

I like those that go for cheap one-upmanship without discussing the issue though. It shows those who deserve to be ignored. You can spell and write perhaps but I have yet to see anything of yours worth reading.

Regards
DL

by Greatest I am Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:29 pm

snowyflake wrote:A church to an atheist God? Pardon me, but the hell is the point? The whole point of religion, belief in unsubstantiated claims, worshipping an invisible entity with superpowers just seems so utterly delusional and mentally ill.

I think DL has been tampering with his meds.....

Perhaps but at least I understand Mr. Haigt's work.

I also dealt with the word God in the O P but you would have had to read it to see that.

This type of church is what I am basically suggesting----

http://www.churchoffreethought.org/

And I gave tosh the reasons why.
You may want to take a look.

Regards
DL

by Tosh Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:31 pm

In a nutshell, he is saying that if the atheist movement does not organize and give that organized body sanctity through sacrifice of some kind, it will not last long and die out.

He is a bit late, the Humanist movement has been around for decades, and it promotes the sanctity of life and sacrifice.
I do not agree with his conclusion anyway, he cannot dictate what any individual builds his story around, he has no authority, nobody has the authority.

I have no intention of building my life primarily around sacrifice, I simply do not need another authority spewing out dogma, even if it is atheistic.

by snowyflake Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:59 pm

Sorry DL.

I doubt very much that atheism will die out. There will always be those who will accept religious dogma and those that won't. Creating a meeting place for freethinkers, atheists etc is a great idea but let's not call it a church ok? That puts me right off the whole idea.

For polyglide: http://www.atheismresource.com/2010/jesus-never-existed-at-all

For someone who concerns themselves with just the events following the life of jesus, you might want to consider whether he was even a real person. The evidence suggests he is not and merely no more real than Harry Potter.

by Greatest I am Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:19 pm

Tosh wrote:
In a nutshell, he is saying that if the atheist movement does not organize and give that organized body sanctity through sacrifice of some kind, it will not last long and die out.

He is a bit late, the Humanist movement has been around for decades, and it promotes the sanctity of life and sacrifice.
I do not agree with his conclusion anyway, he cannot dictate what any individual builds his story around, he has no authority, nobody has the authority.

I have no intention of building my life primarily around sacrifice, I simply do not need another authority spewing out dogma, even if it is atheistic.

Yet you accept your own authority to express yours.

This is not about you my friend. It is about the future of those you are supposed to care about.

Regards
DL

by Greatest I am Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:23 pm

snowyflake wrote:Sorry DL. I doubt very much that atheism will die out. There will always be those who will accept religious dogma and those that won't. Creating a meeting place for freethinkers, atheists etc is a great idea but let's not call it a church ok? That puts me right off the whole idea.

For polyglide: http://www.atheismresource.com/2010/jesus-never-existed-at-all

For someone who concerns themselves with just the events following the life of jesus, you might want to consider whether he was even a real person. The evidence suggests he is not and merely no more real than Harry Potter.

No argument but I see you quoted a site that is trying to promote clear thinking yet you do not think they are required.

Do nothing and lose you loved one to foolish thinking just because you do not recognize that you have to sanctify a movement to give it longevity.

The hive instinct we all have must be appeased.

If atheist offsprings do not have an atheist place to appease it, they will gravitate to religion and lose their ability to think rationally.

You have hivisness the same way we all do and that is partly why you are in this forum. Now put your good mind to work and do your duty to your loved ones and children.

Regards

DL

by snowyflake Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:31 pm

Hi DL. I didn't say websites weren't useful in providing information and promoting freethinking, I am just opposed to the idea of an 'atheist church'. We risk being as dogmatic and fanatical as religious folks and that is one of the things that puts me off religion. I come to this forum to discuss/debate (not very well at times) but no one is forcing me or expecting me to do this. Your thoughts around atheist offspring gravitating to religion sounds a bit far-fetched to me. People come to these decisions through education and knowledge. You cannot make anyone an atheist any more than you can make them religious. These are philosophies that people have to weigh up for themselves. The good news is that atheism is on the rise among the educated and the bad news is that education is on the decline. It seems to me that uneducated folks are more likely to be believers in unsubstantiated claims than educated folks.

Take care, DL Smile

by Greatest I am Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:15 pm

snowyflake wrote:Hi DL. I didn't say websites weren't useful in providing information and promoting freethinking, I am just opposed to the idea of an 'atheist church'. We risk being as dogmatic and fanatical as religious folks and that is one of the things that puts me off religion. I come to this forum to discuss/debate (not very well at times) but no one is forcing me or expecting me to do this. Your thoughts around atheist offspring gravitating to religion sounds a bit far-fetched to me. People come to these decisions through education and knowledge. You cannot make anyone an atheist any more than you can make them religious. These are philosophies that people have to weigh up for themselves. The good news is that atheism is on the rise among the educated and the bad news is that education is on the decline. It seems to me that uneducated folks are more likely to be believers in unsubstantiated claims than educated folks.

Take care, DL

Your last is true and I will not argue the former but will give you two things to think about in terms of making Christians. Let me know if they change your view. If not, I do not want to know that I failed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vm971ltF44A&feature=related

Jesus Camp 1of 9
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBv8tv62yGM

Regards
DL

by Tosh Sat Nov 10, 2012 9:15 pm

Yet you accept your own authority to express yours.

Now you are getting the message, it is both my right and my responsibility to create my own story, no one else has the authority to dictate to me their story. My story is my spirituality noone elses, call it a personal or invidual philosophy based on reason and love.

This is not about you my friend. It is about the future of those you are supposed to care about.

Since we are a social species that has to survive in the environment we create, my story incorporates my loved ones and my environment.

This is the universal evolutionary template I alluded to earlier, and my story contains the future of my kids, species and planet, My principles are a basic property of my genetic instinct to survive and reproduce.

by oftenwrong Sat Nov 10, 2012 11:33 pm

"I am what I am" has been adopted by the gay community as their anthem for the very simple reason that it sets them apart.

Atheism is similarly a declaration of difference.

The mystery is why any such grouping should imagine that the general population give a monkey's toss.

by Tosh Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:03 am

I am what I am" has been adopted by the gay community as their anthem for the very simple reason that it sets them apart.

mmm, your brain works funny, not as in funny ha ha but funny strange. Can you run this past me one more time? Gays are declaring they are different when their whole campaign is to be treated the same, what do you think gay rights means ?
They are treated differently and the anthem is an unashemed rejection of the homophobic culture you embrace.

Atheism is similarly a declaration of difference.

You worry me, I dismantled this tripe the first time you posted it, put the wine down. Atheists disbelieve in the existence of God for many reasons, I await your evidence to support your claim the main reason is to be different ?

Atheists are no less a product of nature/nurture than theists, you are suggesting all atheists are a product of an environment that craves to be different, does this apply to other minority religions like Buddhism ?

There are more atheists than Buddhists, atheism is found in every culture, every country and every class, it seems your " wanting to be different " theory has some rather large holes in it, and is hardly an improvement on your gay theory.

The mystery is why any such grouping should imagine that the general population give a monkey's toss..

The only mystery is why you believe you speak for the general population, and accurately reflect the concerns of atheists or gays. If either group had no complaints against the staus quo, then they would not give a monkeys toss about your apathy.

by Tosh Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:10 am

I have this theory that oftenwrong is a left wing socialist as a declaration of difference, just like the gays and atheists.

Contact oftenwrong if you wish this claim substantiated, he holds all the evidence. :affraid:

by oftenwrong Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:59 pm

The mystery to me is why anyone should imagine that I give a monkey's toss about their sexual or religious inclination, as long as they keep it to themselves. Don't want anything rammed down MY throat thank you, Tosh but others are of course free to do as they please.

by snowyflake Sun Nov 11, 2012 7:55 pm

The mystery to me is why anyone should imagine that I give a monkey's toss about their sexual or religious inclination

Perhaps the evidence suggests you have alot to say about gays and atheists and monkey's tossing. Maybe that's why we think that eh?

as long as they keep it to themselves.

LOL! You mean like you do?

Don't want anything rammed down MY throat thank you

That is too easy so I shall refrain. Smile

by Tosh Sun Nov 11, 2012 9:46 pm

The mystery to me is why anyone should imagine that I give a monkey's toss about their sexual or religious inclination, as long as they keep it to themselves. Don't want anything rammed down MY throat thank you, Tosh but others are of course free to do as they please..

I possess no such objections to free speech, its not Animal Farm.

Someone with your sensitivities should not be hanging around a religious thread on a public message board, seems almost masochistic.

Maybe you should just ignore the content and check the spelling and grammar.

by Shirina Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:55 pm

Don't want anything rammed down MY throat

But ... but ... Ray Comfort said bananas were created by God to be the perfect shape, including ease of access into the mouth ... thus it can be rammed down your throat with very little discomfort.

by trevorw2539 Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:40 pm

Athiest 'Church'.????????????

Church (Koine Greek) = Kyriakon (Doma) - Lords (house)

Atheist Church of the evolving Human God. Are you going to worship yourselves? Build Temples to yourselves?

Man has been worshipping himself down the centuries. It's nothing new.

by bobby Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:13 pm

But ... but ... Ray Comfort said bananas were created by God to be the perfect shape, including ease of access into the mouth ... thus it can be rammed down your throat with very little discomfort.

Even in their natural state on the tree, they are perfect for eating (so long as you like the skin), you simply need to stand over the fruit bow your head sd though praying and munch away.

by Greatest I am Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:23 pm

trevorw2539 wrote:Athiest 'Church'.????????????

Church (Koine Greek) = Kyriakon (Doma) - Lords (house)

Atheist Church of the evolving Human God. Are you going to worship yourselves? Build Temples to yourselves?

Man has been worshipping himself down the centuries. It's nothing new.

And why not?

Who is greater?

Certainly not imaginary Gods.

Sanctity is one of the first five principles or morality and should only be given to humans or to what a consensus of humans say that it should be given to. Like free thinking.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

Regards
DL

by Shirina Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:03 pm

And why not?

Well, in all honesty, most Atheists I've talked to find the concept of "worship" rather repugnant. There are people that I highly respect, people whom I trust, but I've never felt any sort of compunction to literally "worship" anyone or anything.

by Greatest I am Mon Nov 12, 2012 5:12 pm

Shirina wrote:
And why not?

Well, in all honesty, most Atheists I've talked to find the concept of "worship" rather repugnant. There are people that I highly respect, people whom I trust, but I've never felt any sort of compunction to literally "worship" anyone or anything.

I do not equate giving sanctity or importance to something as worshipping it.

You are a free thinker.

Do you worship that trait or just give it a lot of respect which is how I more or less define sanctity?

3a: to impart or impute sacredness, inviolability, or respect to

b: to give moral or social sanction to

FMPOV, to adore something is to idol worship it.

I have a great respect for free thinking but do not idol worship it.

We all use language differently so I leave you to struggle with the nuances of English and take my French take of it with me.

Regards
DL

by oftenwrong Mon Nov 12, 2012 5:28 pm

Not merely a dialogue of the deaf, but a serious attempt to discuss the merits of Music.

by Tosh Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:50 pm

Not merely a dialogue of the deaf, but a serious attempt to discuss the merits of Music..

I didn't get where I am today without spewing out bare assertions as matters of fact.

Cool

by oftenwrong Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:11 pm

There is only one master of the banal.

by Tosh Mon Nov 12, 2012 11:50 pm

There is only one master of the banal..

No argument, lets check back the posting record on these threads and see who is posting actual content and who is quoting platitudes like they were gold dust.

What's up sweetie, peanuts bouncing off your forehead irritating you ?

lol.

by trevorw2539 Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:46 am

Sanctity is one of the first five principles or morality and should only be given to humans or to what a consensus of humans say that it should be given to. Like free thinking.

Could you provide me with the result of the poll of the worlds population as to the 5 principles of morality.

I suggest the concensus is formed by the educated of this world without reference to cultures and the ordinary, the uneducated, the poor.

Perhaps Jonathon Haidt should ask the above what they think.

by Guest Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:15 pm

Greatest I am wrote:
Sanctity is one of the first five principles or morality…

Your definition is meaningless, as you’ve defined neither “morality” nor “the first five principles of morality.”

by Greatest I am Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:50 pm

trevorw2539 wrote:Sanctity is one of the first five principles or morality and should only be given to humans or to what a consensus of humans say that it should be given to. Like free thinking.

Could you provide me with the result of the poll of the worlds population as to the 5 principles of morality.

I suggest the concensus is formed by the educated of this world without reference to cultures and the ordinary, the uneducated, the poor.

Perhaps Jonathon Haidt should ask the above what they think.

He speaks of how he came to his findings and I do not think he went about asking the stupid.

Do you know of any culture that deviates significantly from those five principles?

Regards
DL

by Greatest I am Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:51 pm

RockOnBrother wrote:
Greatest I am wrote:
Sanctity is one of the first five principles or morality…

Your definition is meaningless, as you’ve defined neither “morality” nor “the first five principles of morality.”

What?
The dictionary definition is not good enough for you or do you just not know what morality is?

Regards
DL

by Sponsored content