Originally Posted by Fico
The opposite of ATHEISM (no spiritual) is THEISM (spiritual).
Did you atheists ever read short book who wrote William Pierce (educated man)-CosmoTHEISM? If you red this,what is your opinion about this theism?
I'm not sure if I've read it or not, but I know the basic idea, from Pierce's writing and from Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds, in which Griffin goes over its history. It comes from George Bernard Shaw, as I recall.
I don't personally see any need for Cosmotheism, either as a religion people can join, or, intellectually, as an idea. Any system with an ineffectual god, to me is silly.
I see no design or purpose in the universe. Oh, it's above my pay grade? Really? How do you know that? I don't accept that. Something may be beyond my ability to comprehend - but not beyond someone else's. There is nothing in the world that can't ultimately be understood. Look at the human record - a steady increase in what we know. While the religious thought-queers like Augustine are warning us about curiosity being a sin. A man who can think doesn't need a church. The conmen who run churches know this.
And I can tell you as someone his entire life engaged in producing effects, if there is a god, loving aint a good description of him. If you look at the world as a product of design, "loving" is the very last word you would associate with
its designer. Sadistic would be in the top ten, and very possibly #1. This, again, is easy to see, if you have eyes. Christians are blind. Not by nature - by choice. This is one of a thousand reasons they're contemptible to humans.
I see here mention of the Vatican. Vatican is state within a state,they don't promote real Romancatolicism,he (Vatican) is globalist branch who have own agents who promotes interests only one states-Vatican he only care about his own state.
The Vatican is the center of a giant, globalist enterprise, most of whose members are muds.
Secularism is the answer for this with ideology who promote interests for defend race,nation and state. People like people-they have right for belive in spiritual but let they consetracion on they own race,nation and state and not on priests (any other religion),because people tuday know how to read what some religion say and priests are not required.
P.S. Alex,I can sense wich religion lies on you posts Why? I red your theme when you past chapter one book wich I read,chapter is "Racial history in Haiti" (thereabouts).
You'll have to get closer to English before I can make out what you're saying, still too far down in the water, good chum.
I have written to a very limited extent about the origins of my political views in the pre-political belief, which I have never not had, that reality exists. If you think reality is option, you are not likely to become a right-winger. At least so far as daily business on earth is concerned. You might well embrace christoid fantasies about la-la lands in the clouds.
Contrast the jew approach with the christian:
jewism is a racial religion. Jewism promotes strength and specificity.
Catholicism is a universal religion. It champions weakness and catholicity.
See the difference?
The gun to a gunfight is a jewism for whites: a religion that promotes strength, and a religion that is specific to whites - built to their unique racial spiritual needs, or geared to produce the type its creator wishes to see. Which would be a strain among. Make that strain the entire race, rather than just a strain in a race. The jews are helping on this part by promoting race mixing, which ends white lines, turns them into muddy lanes.