Atheist church of the evolving human God

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

First topic message reminder :

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 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 Tosh Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:11 pm

I am confused, are we discussing sanctity, worship, morality, democracy or the 5 thingymajigs ?

Humanism is an atheistic movement that believes in the sanctity of human life, its morality is based on the principles laid out in the declaration of human rights, which was democratically agreed by representatives from each signature nation. ( Muslim countries abstained and set up their own....go figure).

by oftenwrong Wed Nov 14, 2012 5:32 pm

Some people are so full of their own importance we can only abase ourselves for being permitted to receive such pearls of wisdom.

by Greatest I am Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:00 pm

Tosh wrote:I am confused, are we discussing sanctity, worship, morality, democracy or the 5 thingymajigs ?

Humanism is an atheistic movement that believes in the sanctity of human life, its morality is based on the principles laid out in the declaration of human rights, which was democratically agreed by representatives from each signature nation. ( Muslim countries abstained and set up their own....go figure).

We are discussing how to make atheism more relevant and organized based on what Mr. Haigt's research shows.

+ Stealing ideas.

Regards
DL

by Guest Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:57 pm

Greatest I am wrote:
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?

Different people function based upon different definitions of the same word. Uncle Adolf’s definition of morality compelled extermination of eleven million innocent human souls.

by Tosh Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:09 pm

Some people are so full of their own importance we can only abase ourselves for being permitted to receive such pearls of wisdom..

Make your mind up you big girls blouse, you are all over the place.

One minute you are crying about sameness, then its bleating on about being different and now you are whingeing about originality.

You are the only poster I know who humiliates himself trying too hard to be condascending, oftenwrong you are just not up to the task, it is beyond you.

My arrogance is well founded, crushing you like a bug takes minimal effort.

by trevorw2539 Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:16 pm

Greatest I am wrote:
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

So he despises the views of the poor of the world. Those who are at the wrong end of the abuses of their fellow man. However he worked his views out they are only his theory without putting it to the test. And I guess that's impossible, as he must know.

The Declaration of Human Rights is about as useful as the United Nations. Every state uses it to their advantage, ignoring it when it's not convenient. If you don't believe it look at what is going on in the world around.

If just one state ignores a point in the Declaration it leaves the whole thing open to abuse. 'If you can, I can'. 'If you won't..., I won't'. If you ignore it you can't blame another nation for doing so, and so it spirals into merely another piece of paper. Just like the League of Nations.
It was quite a battle to get the Declaration together, and I can guarantee that those who signed it were already looking for ways around some points owing to the state of things in their own country.

Wake up to the real world. Atheists are no more moral than agnostics or the majority of the religious.

IF man survives it will be a thousand generations before anything like a peaceful world comes into existence unless necessity drives it. In the 8-9 millenia past we are no better than our forebears.

by oftenwrong Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:50 pm

Let the typos flow.

by Shirina Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:51 pm

Every state uses it to their advantage, ignoring it when it's not convenient. If you don't believe it look at what is going on in the world around.

Just like religion, only more so.

by trevorw2539 Thu Nov 15, 2012 10:12 am

Shirina wrote:
Every state uses it to their advantage, ignoring it when it's not convenient. If you don't believe it look at what is going on in the world around.

Just like religion, only more so.

NO. NO. Religion is different. It is... erm ... Oh I don't know though Basketball

by Tosh Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:56 pm

Let the typos flow..

Anoraks always wear anoraks.

by polyglide Fri Nov 16, 2012 12:14 pm

Yes, Shirina, everyone would do well to look at what is going on in the world.

Be afraid, be very, very, afraid.

by Tosh Fri Nov 16, 2012 1:41 pm

Be afraid, be very, very, afraid..

Scary woman, nurse she is out again.

by Greatest I am Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:53 pm

Tosh wrote:
Some people are so full of their own importance we can only abase ourselves for being permitted to receive such pearls of wisdom..

Make your mind up you big girls blouse, you are all over the place.

One minute you are crying about sameness, then its bleating on about being different and now you are whingeing about originality.

You are the only poster I know who humiliates himself trying too hard to be condascending, oftenwrong you are just not up to the task, it is beyond you.

My arrogance is well founded, crushing you like a bug takes minimal effort.

Sigh.

Ok.

Let's use whatever definition you like.

Regards
DL

by Greatest I am Fri Nov 16, 2012 5:57 pm

polyglide wrote:Yes, Shirina, everyone would do well to look at what is going on in the world.

Be afraid, be very, very, afraid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Oww4Ap3YZA

Regards
DL

by Shirina Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:23 pm

Be afraid, be very, very, afraid.

You sound like an American right-winger the morning after the election. They love peddling fear as a hot commodity.

by polyglide Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:35 am

Those who do not take the present circumstances in the world today, seriously, are in cloud cuckoo land.

There is a big difference between being concerned and being complacent, the next few days or weeks will be a telling factor in world affairs and the outlook is anything but bright.

They might be a REVERLATION.

by snowyflake Sat Nov 17, 2012 12:46 pm

Revelation? Every generation thinks it's the ONE that will fulfill prophecy. It hasn't for thousands of years and we are still here. If there is an apocolypse it won't be god or jesus raining it down on us. It will be a self-fulfilling prophecy by those who believe in fairy tales.

by Tosh Sat Nov 17, 2012 2:09 pm

And the wind up just trundles along. Very Happy

by trevorw2539 Sat Nov 17, 2012 3:51 pm

polyglide wrote:Those who do not take the present circumstances in the world today, seriously, are in cloud cuckoo land.

There is a big difference between being concerned and being complacent, the next few days or weeks will be a telling factor in world affairs and the outlook is anything but bright.

They might be a REVERLATION.

Polyglide might just be right, though I'm not coming from a religious point of view, or from the view of Armageddon. The Middle East has changed over the last year or two and is a tinderbox. Moderating voices have been silenced by events in the Arab world. 2 peoples are fighting for existence in Palestine and neither are prepared to give way. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Jordan are in turmoil. Iran is heading for nuclear weapons to counter Israel's 'non-existent' ones.

A war in the Middle East will spread unrest throughout the Islamic world, and that includes Islamic and even non-Islamic states which have a large population of Moslems. Would the UK or the US allow Israel to be defeated? And we have large Islamic groups in our countries.

by Tosh Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:10 pm

Polyglide might just be right,

Surely you jest, there is more chance of an afterlife.

by trevorw2539 Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:12 pm

Tosh wrote:
Polyglide might just be right,

Surely you jest, there is more chance of an afterlife.

I deliberately ruled out religion so why do you bring it in. I suggest you look at the world in reality. If Israel decides to invade Gaza where will it end.
Egypt is no longer 'neutral' with the Moslem Brotherhood in control, though it is doubtful it could mount a serious campaign against Israel from the south. But it could be enough for Israel to have to deploy troops which would be needed on other fronts.
Islamist Turkey has also voiced its concern. And Turkey is a member of NATO.
Iran seeks nuclear weapons, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan are all in turmoil. How much would it take to start another conflict.

Quote from Wiki

The causes of World War I, which began in central Europe in late July 1914, included intertwined factors, such as the conflicts and hostility of the four decades leading up to the war. Militarism, alliances, imperialism, and nationalism played major roles in the conflict as well. The immediate origins of the war, however, lay in the decisions taken by statesmen and generals during the Crisis of 1914, casus belli for which was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and his wife by Gavrilo Princip, an irredentist Serb.[1]

The crisis came after a long and difficult series of diplomatic clashes between the Great Powers (Italy, France, Germany, the British Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Russia) over European and colonial issues in the decade before 1914 that had left tensions high. In turn these diplomatic clashes can be traced to changes in the balance of power in Europe since 1867.[2] The more immediate cause for the war was tensions over territory in the Balkans. Austria-Hungary competed with Serbia and Russia for territory and influence in the region and they pulled the rest of the Great Powers into the conflict through their various alliances and treaties.

Translate that to the Middle East.

One man - 2 well aimed shots.

Do you really think man has learnt anything in the last century?

by Tosh Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:30 pm

Trevor,

I seriously object to you plagiarising my posts.

There is a perfect storm brewing on this pale blue dot, all the seeds for major upheaval and inevitable conflict are being sown.

Economically the planet grew too fast and too far, it is now unsustainable and we must go backwards before we can go forward. The ever increasing fallout from this reverse is unemployment, social cuts, reduced income, drop in living standards and increased poverty.

Desperate and disenfranchised people historically adopt extremism as a solution because the status quo has failed them, We have democracy unraveling in Southern Europe and Russia, and the Muslim world is heading for Theo-tyranny or Islamofascism.
Israel is getting twitchy, the Chinese are smelling freedom and America is polarized between conservative fundamentalism and Social Democracy.

And its only going to get worse, the global economy is stagnating and inflation is not, annual inflation is the economy reversing back to a sustainable capital value. Any economic growth to date is an illusion, it is due to increased profitability( lower wages) due to high unemployment, its called a jobless recovery and its short term.

One thing everyone now realizes is there is nothing short term about this stagnation, the global economy is just a larger version of Japan, and they are no further forward after more than a decade.

Economically things will get worse in Europe, the Middle East, America and China, and this will fuel the fires of extremism.

I will be amazed if a major conflict does not come out of this unholy and holy mess.

Do you really think man has learnt anything in the last century?.

Socialisation is a war of attrition, much like evolution, civilisation is the survival of the fittest memes adapting to environmental pressures.

p.s. I deliberately ruled out religion so why do you bring it in.

How can you quote Middle East/Israel scenarios and rule out religion, it is you sir that needs to waken up to reality, the bad meme that will be discarded over the next hundred years will be Islam, and it will not go peacefully.

by Tosh Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:30 pm

One of the advantages of free market globalisation is it creates inter-dependancy, this in turn reduces the chances of major conflict. The beauty of blatant consumerism is it drives freedom and democracy amongst the masses, China is changing rapidly and the Communist party knows they cannot put the genie back in the bottle.

Islamic theocracies are segregating themselves from the free market, they stand against freedom, democracy, capitalism and consumerism, once our dependancy on their oil is diluted by greeen energy policies in the West, their meme will be exposed to global environmental pressures, it will either adapt or go extinct.

The Christian Reformation/enlightenment/industrial revolution was driven by poverty and religious excess, the Muslim world is a mirror of those historical times.

by trevorw2539 Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:22 pm

As I have not read your quoted article I deny plagiarisation. I very seldom visit here now as I find most of it insult and counter insult.

My post was of short term consequences, yours in the longer term. Undoubtedly one of us will be right.

As regards Islam. It is following the same path as Christianity as you say. That was able to keep its 'world' in subjection for centuries. Rich and Priest keeping the poor in subjection. I agree with your idea regarding their dependency on oil. Let's just hope we soon find another method of propulsion.

The Middle East problem is essentially about land. Prior to the last century and for 2000 years Jews have lived in Palestine in areas/pockets. Sometimes accepted, sometimes persecuted by the Arabs.
During the League of Nations Mandate in Palestine Zionists bought up land. The farms and settlements were destroyed by the Arabs, not because they belonged to Jews, but because they believed rightly the land belonged to them, and they fought even the British in that attitude.
Religion is involved obviously but there would be no unrest in the Middle East between Jew and Arab if the Arabs still owned the land they once had, and which was taken from them.

No I'm not anti'Semitic.

by Tosh Sun Nov 18, 2012 9:04 pm

I very seldom visit here now as I find most of it insult and counter insult.

There is some genuine discussion amongst the platitudes, verbosity and creationist codswallop, but I am as guilty as any of not turning my cheek.

I am not a Christian and Celts with neanderthal genes make poor pacifists.

I am pro-Jewish but anti-Zionist, there must be a fair and workable two state solution that includes East Jerusalem amongst other things.

I am a fan of Noam Chomsky in this regard, and his debate with Alan Dershowitz is a must viewing for anyone interested.

http://www.democracynow.org/2005/12/23/noam_chomsky_v_alan_dershowitz_a

by polyglide Mon Nov 19, 2012 3:09 pm

I have come to the firm conclusion that you cannot get any sense at all from a monkey, as Tosh so rightly proves.

by Tosh Mon Nov 19, 2012 3:11 pm

See you later son, when you have all grown up.

by polyglide Mon Nov 19, 2012 3:18 pm

Ha. Ha. Ha. thought that would get your knickers in a twist.

by Tosh Mon Nov 19, 2012 3:19 pm

Ha. Ha. Ha. thought that would get your knickers in a twist..

Sure, bye.

by polyglide Fri Nov 23, 2012 12:42 pm

There would apparently be more sense from the monkey than from those presently delving into the private life of a banana.

Every plant and every animal has a place and a purpose, the ones most lost in that respect are mankind.

If there is a more mixed up, confused and irresponsible example than mankind I would certainly not want to meet it.

Tosh being a prime example, unfortunately, we have no choice, in this instance.

by Tosh Fri Nov 23, 2012 4:41 pm

Every plant and every animal has a place and a purpose, the ones most lost in that respect are mankind.

What was the purpose of the dinosaurs ?

by Shirina Fri Nov 23, 2012 7:17 pm

What was the purpose of the dinosaurs ?

To test the faith of modern Christians. Twisted Evil

by polyglide Sat Nov 24, 2012 11:11 am

As I have said previously, there has been many uses of the earth and some we are aware of and others no doubt have left no means of knowing.

When you have coal more than a mile underground and evidence of other life forms including all the dinosaurs not forgetting the Ice Age etc; then it is obvious that there was life forms created for purposes that we are unaware of.

Stardust and all the other scientific explanations do not cover the possibility that there is more than one being capable of creating and some good and some bad.

Scientists can come up with any theory they like but none explains where that which they think is the answer came from in the first place.

The only logical answer is that there are far superior beings than man with far superior powers.

If that is a fact then it answers everything where science only puts forward theories, which when considered make no sense.

by Tosh Sat Nov 24, 2012 12:30 pm

The only logical answer is that there are far superior beings than man with far superior powers.

Not really, they still don't explain the purpose of the dinosaurs.

by polyglide Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:14 pm

Dinosaurs could be the creation of another party with other priorities than those of God.

When it is said the earth was barren, when God created the present situation on earth, it does not mean that the earth was not used for other purposes prior to God taking over.

Many things suggest that there has been several ages where animal life and vegitation was present and had we needed to know about them then we would have been made aware.

What we should concentrate on is the state the world is in now and consider what a mess we have made of everything.

by Tosh Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:13 pm

Dinosaurs could be the creation of another party with other priorities than those of God.

I thought one god created the universe, the earth and all life on it, are you suggesting the Bible is wrong and other gods were involved ?

polyglide the polytheist.

by polyglide Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:55 pm

I do not believe God created the universe, I believe he is a creator amongst many others , there is no suggestion that the Devil and others have not the same kind of powers or the Devil would not have challenged God.

I am concerned only about that which is evident and at this time it is anything but comforting, but is in line with what was predicted.

by Shirina Tue Nov 27, 2012 5:24 pm

So now you're saying that there is more than one all-powerful Supreme Being that we have to believe in? I mean, it was a stretch just to believe in one of them, but now you're saying there are many others? And yet not a SINGLE one has offered any proof that they exist. The more of them there are, the greater the chance that ONE of them would have swooped down from on high and visited us mere mortals, but nope ... nothing.

by Tosh Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:02 pm

polyglide is making all this up as she goes along, and doing it very badly.

by Shirina Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:17 pm

polyglide is making all this up as she goes along, and doing it very badly.

Heh, yeah, that's the impression I'm getting, too.

by Sponsored content