After due and diligent search and re-search, I have come to the conclusion that our various notions of deities..."gods"...are merely a reflection of mankind's traditional misapprehensions of the supernatural as well as his apprehensions concerning his worth and meaning. I have found no evidence whatsoever to support the common belief in so-called "gods" including our Westernized notions of the judeo-christian "God".

The idea of "deities" has often been generalized into the notion of a "higher power". Thus, those who delude themselves into thinking that there is some sort of human-like intelligence creating, re-creating and directing the universe are needlessly and temporarily containing their growing unease at confronting the fact that our "higher power" is not a single "deity", but a combination of nature, evolution, intellect, nurturing and individual conscience. None of these things is deistic or "holy" by itself, but all of them together form the societally and culturally sanctioned morality, knowledge and compassion, the meaningfulness which I hold as the basis for what we know as human spirituality.

This naturalistic combination, which is as near a "higher power" or a "god" or a deity of some sort as we are likely to get, needs no humbling of humanity or of universal life. It needs no guilt-ridden "worship" or prayer or martyr or saint or messiah. It merely deserves a respectful recognition common to all of us in the universal human community

Some long since debunked or eradicated religions have at one time or another held this realistic and natural basis of observable phenomena as their central philosophy or doctrine, but, since these more reasonable and less opportunistic religions didn't agree with the notions of the more arrogant, intolerant and greedy modern organized religions of the world, these perfectly viable and humanistic religions have essentially been wiped from the face of the earth. This further proves my point that socially/culturally ordained organized religion is usually a poor purveyor of morality and spirituality in its often all-consuming manuvering for wealth, power and influence as well as for its subtle yet effective incitement of inter-religious hatred.

II. Religion as we know it has no relevance to the 21st century.

While I don't agree politically with a lot of what Marx had to say, I am proud to admit that his assessment of religion is one of the more concisely accurate observations I've ever heard on any subject.

All organized religions and their attendant myths seem merely parables for the mortality of conscience. Jesus, Allah, Abraham, Buddha, Vishnu, Yahweh, and so forth...all metaphors for instinctual and natural morals, ethics, goodness and earthly spirituality. (See essay on "Faith")

The popular conception of "god" seems to be of some omniscient, omnipotent and benevolent force or being, represented in Western christian portrayals as elderly and white...kind of Germanic-looking...which has created the human race for the sole purpose of worshiping the "holy trinity" (at least the "heavenly father" part of it) both in this life and in the (alleged) next.

I've always thought this a blatantly petty and selfish, even dictatorial reason for the existence of the human species. Certainly not very "christian". Seems like after ten or twelve billion years of tinkering around with quasars and planets, stars and blackness, quadrupeds and mollusks, this "god" got bored one day and decided to entertain itself with this ridiculous "clone" of itself called mankind whom it could supposedly and eventually make as "perfect" as it allegedly is itself through the instruction of worship. When its original plan wasn't working (so much for perfection), it supposedly decided to send its "son" among us to straighten everybody out...! Are you kidding me? If it's the "supreme being", why doesn't he/she/it show up personally to literally and/or figuratively kick some human ass? This is, of course, assuming the popular notion that such a "god" could possibly exist in any form outside human imagination.

I feel that there physically can not have been a "son of god" since:

1) there is no single all-powerful "god" as the monotheistic organized religions would have us believe (otherwise there would be only one single religious faith and philosophy world-wide) and:

2) "immaculate conception" (at least the implications thereof) by some woman named Mary in Palestine (or wherever) in the commonly accepted year of 0 (or thereabout), well before scientific analysis of such an occurrence, seems a conveniently disproveable event. Now that we've dated our entire Western history from the time of the improbable appearance of this "son", the professed "messiah", most of mankind considers itself "lucky" to have concieved this nonsense. The actual year in realistic terms of human existence, however, must be about 1,199,700.

Organized religion (each and every one) has relied on overwrought nursery rhymes in the attempt to get our children hooked on their dogma, then perpetuates this insanity with glorified fairy tales which the majority of mankind, in it's eagerness to have someone else do its thinking for it, embraces and perpetuates, all the while contributing its pennies, dollars and hundreds of dollars to the absurdly full coffers of whatever religion, denomination, sect or cult they've been indoctrinated into. The pulp fiction adults know as the "koran", the "bible", the "scriptures" (or the "gospels"), etc., all of which were "discovered" and/or written generations after the alleged events they purport to chronicle, are outmoded and contradictory. How advanced can a civilization be which still reveres such ancient superstition?

III. We need no "gods" to live morally and compassionately.

Morality, compassion, justice, ethics, altruism, happiness, contentment, these triumphs of human intellect and "spirit" were manifest well before the institutionalization of "gods" and "higher powers". The goodness of nature and humanity needs no invocation of a deity to manifest itself. Neither do the ills and chaos of the world need the invocation of demons in manifesting the misery which is occasionally mankind's lot, collectively and individually.

The above declaration, I believe, speaks for itself.

This is as much an apolitical statement as I find modern religion to be "apolitical". I've tried to keep this document free of detailed observances about national and international government policies and philosophies since I'm a product of a certain way of life in a far-from-perfect socio-economic system with which most people reading this are familiar. Also, this is not intended as a treatise on particular issues of national or global economics or policies. My views in support and denial of these various theories and practices by individuals, groups, governments and corporations could be the subject of a whole other manifesto.

Regardless of my theology and ideology, I love, in the purest, simplest, physical sense of the word, my wife and my children. I respect them and, most times, I even like them in the manner of friends to talk to (when I feel like talking to anyone) and just be with. I love and respect my extended family and friends. I would not do knowing physical or emotional harm to any person on this earth unless I considered myself mistreated by anyone first. As I said, don't push me or I will push back. While I would give my life for certain people, I still have my own personal conscience to be responsible toward.

As a means of judging ourselves and each other as human beings, we feel we must force upon ourselves and each other a "love" for a generic "god", as well as for life itself, as a grieving response to tragedy and loss ... even if that tragedy and loss happens to people whom we really only know of rather than know. This love is alleged by theological apologists to be "gods" way of making itself known to people who may (as many do) turn away from it in their time of sorrow and anger. We are, therefore, asked to give renewed fealty to a less and less perfect "god" because it "created" the chaos which caused undeserved (or even deserved) loss. This means that humanity is to reaffirm their love of themselves as faithful religious servants in deference to their misery. At least that's how religionists seem to want mankind to correct any wavering in its dogmatic adherence to "faith".

Let's take a look at "love" for both deities and for our "loved ones". We begin life with pure love for our parents as protectors and providers. Even this pure love is learned and earned through the fact that we will love WHOMEVER feeds and protects us. Later, we learn to love because it's reciprocated by somebody (any-body). Eventually, we are brainwashed into an alleged mutually acceptable "love" for and by "god". My belief is that if you have the capacity to love your fellow man (singularly or collectively), then isn't that enough?

The human conception of "god" or a "higher power" is of an entity that demands mankind's love to assure its existence yet apparently rewards this (undeserved?) love with more misery, eventually culminating in the oblivion of death (albeit with the somewhat vague promise of "heaven").

The popular conceptions of "heaven" and "hell" are (in christian mythology, anyhow) of vast vistas aflutter with angels hovering over flowery gardens among the clouds and of confining caverns of demons prodding tortured souls to toil endlessly and uselessly among Fourth of July bonfires. These notions are, of course, wrong! Heaven and hell are obviously each a state of earthly and living mind, not a physical place or existence. Certainly, neither is everlasting... even the pope has recently admitted this. The ideas of "heaven", "hell", "nirvana", etc. are all merely another result of the mind-polluting dogma spewed forth by the world's religions.

In order to experience and understand the concepts of heaven and hell, each individual on the planet will, at one time or another and throughout his or her one and only lifetime, gain and lose his or her conscientious peace, contentment and comfort or conflict, unrest and discomfort within his or her finite, earthly (or universal) existence. I can feel "heavenly", for instance, when I accomplish a difficult task well, execute a pretty play during a ballgame or feel I've made someone genuinely happy; I experience "hell" at least once or twice a week driving in traffic or (hopefully, less often) when I feel that I've offended a person whom I like and respect. Real "hell" can also be experienced at the loss of someone close. This is as near as any of us will ever get to the theological or transcendental propaganda inculcated into most of us regarding "heaven" and "hell".

I have marginally more faith in earthly re-incarnation than I do in our potential awareness of any sort of zombie-like perpetual afterlife populated by angels, deities, demons and devils.

Conscience: the sense or consciousness of the

"Webster's New Student Dictionary"

Go To The next part: Note 1

Page Created by Eric J. Tallberg