NationStates Jolt Archive

In chaos and confusion, there is creation. Though there is much lamentation, clamor, and depreciation. As of right now, there is a certain dichotomy in our society. Although everyone is “unique” in one way or another, any educated man knows that essentially they’re two categories to place people into. No doubt, they’re shades of gray, but all of us inevitably decide whether our fellow men are good or evil. Both are arbitrary terms, but I do not consider myself a scientist, so the concrete idiocy of the common person does not apply to me. I do not adhere to dualism, nor does my doctrine.

The intermingling of religion with logic is revolting, but also somewhat humorous. As anyone who has truly studied the sacred texts of any religion, would know, logic does not apply to them. Their word is infallible, the stories often times allegorical.

There have been so many cults, associations, and churches. All of them I have found discouraging, in the sense that they are extremely authoritarian. As we know, any thinking being respects only the authority which can respect others. This point of view has caused me bitter angst in the past, especially with the brutally idiotic law enforcement officers, and low-level bureaucrats of the public school system. The objectivist/Satanist philosophies left me unsatisfied. They were so cold, so contradictory, and so boring.

After looking through mysticism, various sects and schools. I became slightly enamored to chaos magic, but it did not have enough substance to captivate me. Nor did it have the number of tapestries that most religions consist of, that are vital to sustaining existence.

Ritual seems empty, for the most part. With the exception of the invocation of demons and other supernatural entities. Ordering others to live their lives in one way, and obeying orders is not how man was meant to live. Man is a god himself, god is the highest manifestation of cosmic glory, when he looks inside himself, he will see a being superior to all others. He has already eaten the fruit of knowledge from the Garden of Eden, only the fruit of immortality remains.

Therefore, every man is half-divine. He is capable of cruelty and kindness, of brilliance and ignorance. He may add misery to the world, or he might decide to improve his lot, along with the lots of others. With mere thoughts, and intense concentration, man can bend reality, in the ways he likes it. Each man emits small quantities of this “divine energy” which is contained in the heavens.

Am I a polytheist? Or am I a monotheist? Do I really care what I am called, for it is certain, that Christians could be considered polytheists, just as Hindus could be called monotheists. Or vice versa, Brahman is one entity after all, and the Christian god is divided into three sections. How one perceives the universe based off of old texts is unimportant. Self-discovery is far more important, I do not believe there is a universal axiom, anywhere. Each man must find his own truth, for he is an individual, with desires and needs of his own.

One being, so complex, and so mysterious, created the universe, no doubt about it. Dozens of schisms birthed the Gods of mythology, and the hundreds of thousands of angels and demons, who posed as Gods. All of them can be summoned, to do thy bidding. Lucifer, Prometheus, Baal; entangled in flame, serpents, and molten gold. Zeus, Ra, and Odin; lust, under the guise of love. The sky forever spanning the universe, despised knowledge of some sorts, but embrace it too.

No man, or god, is capable of deciphering God’s will. To claim one knows such a thing, is pure blasphemy. Yahweh, Ahura Mazda, that is the God I speak of. The being who has touched every grain of sand, knows every man’s face, and understands every man’s hopes and fears.

Man stands in judgment of himself, and his fellow man. My disillusionment with objectivism stems with its complete selfishness, utter lack of care, and the daunting question, how can it be enforced on a large scale? Man was meant to be a collective creature, which is only an extension of the individual, not a destroyer. For within a group, they’re unique, thinking beings, it is purely symbolic that they are categorized with one another.

Ethics in lieu of morality, destruction if evil, and so is creation in the name of destruction. Change is simply a testament to the malleability of reality as whole. Pleasure is merely what it is, pleasure. Suffering is nothing more than suffering. There is no deeper meaning, beings do not punish or pleasure, without interference. Otherwise, all actions are determined by humans, who indeed have freewill.

Pompous are the prophets of the past, they shall be punished. Like parrots they repeat the phrases of the men before them, never revolutionizing, only causing upheaval. For they swear they are spreading Gods own word, the claim that the one, who is so pure and divine, he will never be seen by any mortal man. Hence, he will rarely speak to a man, and he will never reveal himself unto a man.

Each God takes special interest in a particular man. Thoth is who has always aided me, in my time of need. For others, Thor may come to their aid, and for others, Aphrodite. Each being is willing to serve, and be served by man; it is simply a matter of tapping into the power.

A new wave of justice, rationality, and mysticism is sweeping the nation. One which satisfies the needs of all its followers, one that will provide happiness and advancement to its members. One that does without confusing, monolithic hierarchies. Instead of partaking in such foolishness, it keeps a deep concern for each of its members, as vital members of the occult world

No man, or god, is capable of deciphering God’s will.

Uh-huh. So God cannot decipher God's own will?

In chaos and confusion, there is creation. Though there is much lamentation, clamor, and depreciation. As of right now, there is a certain dichotomy in our society. Although everyone is “unique” in one way or another, any educated man knows that essentially they’re two categories to place people into. No doubt, they’re shades of gray, but all of us inevitably decide whether our fellow men are good or evil. Both are arbitrary terms, but I do not consider myself a scientist, so the concrete idiocy of the common person does not apply to me. I do not adhere to dualism, nor does my doctrine.

The intermingling of religion with logic is revolting, but also somewhat humorous. As anyone who has truly studied the sacred texts of any religion, would know, logic does not apply to them. Their word is infallible, the stories often times allegorical.

There have been so many cults, associations, and churches. All of them I have found discouraging, in the sense that they are extremely authoritarian. As we know, any thinking being respects only the authority which can respect others. This point of view has caused me bitter angst in the past, especially with the brutally idiotic law enforcement officers, and low-level bureaucrats of the public school system. The objectivist/Satanist philosophies left me unsatisfied. They were so cold, so contradictory, and so boring.

After looking through mysticism, various sects and schools. I became slightly enamored to chaos magic, but it did not have enough substance to captivate me. Nor did it have the number of tapestries that most religions consist of, that are vital to sustaining existence.

Ritual seems empty, for the most part. With the exception of the invocation of demons and other supernatural entities. Ordering others to live their lives in one way, and obeying orders is not how man was meant to live. Man is a god himself, god is the highest manifestation of cosmic glory, when he looks inside himself, he will see a being superior to all others. He has already eaten the fruit of knowledge from the Garden of Eden, only the fruit of immortality remains.

Therefore, every man is half-divine. He is capable of cruelty and kindness, of brilliance and ignorance. He may add misery to the world, or he might decide to improve his lot, along with the lots of others. With mere thoughts, and intense concentration, man can bend reality, in the ways he likes it. Each man emits small quantities of this “divine energy” which is contained in the heavens.

Am I a polytheist? Or am I a monotheist? Do I really care what I am called, for it is certain, that Christians could be considered polytheists, just as Hindus could be called monotheists. Or vice versa, Brahman is one entity after all, and the Christian god is divided into three sections. How one perceives the universe based off of old texts is unimportant. Self-discovery is far more important, I do not believe there is a universal axiom, anywhere. Each man must find his own truth, for he is an individual, with desires and needs of his own.

One being, so complex, and so mysterious, created the universe, no doubt about it. Dozens of schisms birthed the Gods of mythology, and the hundreds of thousands of angels and demons, who posed as Gods. All of them can be summoned, to do thy bidding. Lucifer, Prometheus, Baal; entangled in flame, serpents, and molten gold. Zeus, Ra, and Odin; lust, under the guise of love. The sky forever spanning the universe, despised knowledge of some sorts, but embrace it too.

No man, or god, is capable of deciphering God’s will. To claim one knows such a thing, is pure blasphemy. Yahweh, Ahura Mazda, that is the God I speak of. The being who has touched every grain of sand, knows every man’s face, and understands every man’s hopes and fears.

Man stands in judgment of himself, and his fellow man. My disillusionment with objectivism stems with its complete selfishness, utter lack of care, and the daunting question, how can it be enforced on a large scale? Man was meant to be a collective creature, which is only an extension of the individual, not a destroyer. For within a group, they’re unique, thinking beings, it is purely symbolic that they are categorized with one another.

Ethics in lieu of morality, destruction if evil, and so is creation in the name of destruction. Change is simply a testament to the malleability of reality as whole. Pleasure is merely what it is, pleasure. Suffering is nothing more than suffering. There is no deeper meaning, beings do not punish or pleasure, without interference. Otherwise, all actions are determined by humans, who indeed have freewill.

Pompous are the prophets of the past, they shall be punished. Like parrots they repeat the phrases of the men before them, never revolutionizing, only causing upheaval. For they swear they are spreading Gods own word, the claim that the one, who is so pure and divine, he will never be seen by any mortal man. Hence, he will rarely speak to a man, and he will never reveal himself unto a man.

Each God takes special interest in a particular man. Thoth is who has always aided me, in my time of need. For others, Thor may come to their aid, and for others, Aphrodite. Each being is willing to serve, and be served by man; it is simply a matter of tapping into the power.

A new wave of justice, rationality, and mysticism is sweeping the nation. One which satisfies the needs of all its followers, one that will provide happiness and advancement to its members. One that does without confusing, monolithic hierarchies. Instead of partaking in such foolishness, it keeps a deep concern for each of its members, as vital members of the occult world
Hmm.. It's very long..

Good thing we don't have more than one Anu. Otherwise we would have...

Uh-huh. So God cannot decipher God's own will?

Minor deities can not decipher the one great Gods will.

Well the temple recognizes one supreme God over all others. But he is much too busy with cosmic affairs, and contemplating on his past cogitations(like Aristotle's model of God.) To intervene with human affairs, rather we must turn to minor deities to help us out with our problems.

Minor deities can not decipher the one great Gods will.


So God is not a god then?

So God is not a god then?

The model is rather simple. There is one supreme creator, who does not intervene in our lives, or at least rarely. They're nearly an unlimited number of minor Gods, demons, and goddesses.
Since we incorporate chaos magick into our doctrine, reality is does not really matter. Since it is easily bent.

As anyone who has truly studied the sacred texts of any religion, would know, logic does not apply to them
It's so true - you just have to look at some of the arguments on this forum to know that!

http://www.anucronus.webby.ms/

Our homepage, I hope to add to it.

It's so true - you just have to look at some of the arguments on this forum to know that!

Hence I have amalagated it with logic, and added more mysticism.

The model is rather simple.

Just answer the question: is God a god or not?

Anu? Is Padomay somehow involved as well?

I think you view of religion and its place in history is distorted by a lack of understanding of the purpose of religion.



Religion is the outer expression of the divine reality. Therefore it must be living, vitalized, moving and progressive. If it be without motion and non-progressive it is without the divine life; it is dead. The divine institutes are continuously active and evolutionary; therefore the revelation of them must be progressive and continuous. All things are subject to re-formation. This is a century of life and renewal. Sciences and arts, industry and invention have been reformed. Law and ethics have been reconstituted, reorganized. The world of thought has been regenerated. Sciences of former ages and philosophies of the past are useless today. Present exigencies demand new methods of solution; world problems are without precedent. Old ideas and modes of thought are fast becoming obsolete. Ancient laws and archaic ethical systems will not meet the requirements of modern conditions, for this is clearly the century of a new life, the century of the revelation of the reality and therefore the greatest of all centuries. Consider how the scientific developments of fifty years have surpassed and eclipsed the knowledge and achievements of all the former ages combined. Would the announcements and theories of ancient astronomers explain our present knowledge of the sun-worlds and planetary systems? Would the mask of obscurity which beclouded mediaeval centuries meet the demand for clear-eyed vision and understanding which characterizes the world today? Will the despotism of former governments answer the call for freedom which has risen from the heart of humanity in this cycle of illumination? It is evident that no vital results are now forthcoming from the customs, institutions and standpoints of the past. In view of this, shall blind imitations of ancestral forms and theological interpretations continue to guide and control the religious life and spiritual development of humanity today? Shall man gifted with the power of reason unthinkingly follow and adhere to dogma, creeds and hereditary beliefs which will not bear the analysis of reason in this century of effulgent reality? Unquestionably this will not satisfy men of science, for when they find premise or conclusion contrary to present standards of proof and without real foundation, they reject that which has been formerly accepted as standard and correct and move forward from new foundations.

The divine prophets have revealed and founded religion. They have laid down certain laws and heavenly principles for the guidance of mankind. They have taught and promulgated the knowledge of God, established praiseworthy ethical ideals and inculcated the highest standards of virtues in the human world. Gradually these heavenly teachings and foundations of reality have been beclouded by human interpretations and dogmatic imitations of ancestral beliefs. The essential realities which the prophets labored so hard to establish in human hearts and minds while undergoing ordeals and suffering tortures of persecution, have now well nigh vanished. Some of these heavenly messengers have been killed, some imprisoned; all of them despised and rejected while proclaiming the reality of divinity. Soon after their departure from this world, the essential truth of their teachings was lost sight of and dogmatic imitations adhered to.

(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 224)

Just answer the question: is God a god or not?

God is not a God, God is merely an extremly complex makeup of all there is in the universe. Every concept, feeling, expression, and idea; ever. He is all, continously battling with himself, but he is not a God in the old judeo-Christian sense, or the mythological one.

Hence I have amalagated it with logic, and added more mysticism.
Wait...logic doesn't apply to religious texts, so you've amalgamated (I assume that's what you mean) them with logic...I see :confused: http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/misc/loopy.gif

Anu? Is Padomay somehow involved as well?

If you want him to be. As I said, no member shall be faulted for the God(s) they choose to worship

Wait...logic doesn't apply to religious texts, so you've amalgamated (I assume that's what you mean) them with logic...I see :confused: http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/misc/loopy.gif

The temple of Anu does not adhere to any particular text, rather it focuses upon the members own needs. It is partially about personal progression, and about the progression of the temple as a whole.

God is not a God, God is merely an extremly complex makeup of all there is in the universe.

Ah right. Hello, Spinoza.

Every concept, feeling, expression, and idea; ever. He is all, continously battling with himself...

If God is everything and all things, then the actual question of his existence is irrelevant. Anything which is everywhere is effectively nowhere and anything which is all things is effectivelty nothing. This is Spinoza's main point: he was sneaking in atheism under a theist camoflague - and is unavoidable in any pantheist system.

...but he is not a God in the old judeo-Christian sense, or the mythological one.
Then why call him Yahweh?

There are four means of knowledge. Among scientists and philosophers a method of attaining knowledge is through the senses, principally through observation. Light shows us that light exists. Reality is limited to the perceptible thing; all that is not perceptible is subject to doubt.

Among the ancient philosophers the infallible way to knowledge was through logic. The different schools of logic weighed everything in the scales of cold scholasticism. As to religious people their criterion has ever been the sacred text which must be accepted as final. One is not allowed the slightest reflection. "The word of God," they say, "is truth." Inspiration is the fourth criterion. Occultists say, "I have had a revelation. This truth has been revealed to me." For them everything outside direct revelation is viewed with doubt. So we have indicated the four criterions: the senses, reason, the sacred text, inspirations. There is no fifth.

Let us speak of the first criterion -- that of the senses. Contemporary philosophers say, "We have spent our time in universities and laboratories analyzing composition. We have not encountered the spirituality of God, or any sign of the soul's existence. We are people of truth, intelligent, learned men, but we can find no proof of the existence of a divine being."

The senses mistake a mirage for water; the eyes see the sun move; your train or boat seems immobile and the landscape seems to pass by, planets look like fixed points of light; but they have measurable dimensions. A lighted point set in rotation appears like a circle. These examples show the senses subject to error. How can we put our trust in them?

The test of logic is just as imperfect, for were this criterion perfect there would never have been the continual clash of opinion as to the sacred texts. How can they be interpreted by logic if the means be at fault?

(Abdu'l-Baha, Divine Philosophy, p. 92)

Ah right. Hello, Spinoza.



If God is everything and all things, then the actual question of his existence is irrelevant. Anything which is everywhere is effectively nowhere and anything which is all things is effectivelty nothing. This is Spinoza's main point: he was sneaking in atheism under a theist camoflague - and is unavoidable in any pantheist system.


Then why call him Yahweh?

I have yet to think of a name for the "one" God, the creator. So to get my point across I use a name that is familair.

If you want him to be. As I said, no member shall be faulted for the God(s) they choose to worship

*chuckles* Fair enough.

If God is everything and all things, then the actual question of his existence is irrelevant. Anything which is everywhere is effectively nowhere and anything which is all things is effectivelty nothing. This is Spinoza's main point: he was sneaking in atheism under a theist camoflague - and is unavoidable in any pantheist system.


Except that there is a difference between a universal God and a universe: a God has free will, a universe does not. What this means is that a God-universe has the power to reshape and change its own laws to serve its purposes. The real universe, by comparison, has no purposes and obeys its laws.

I've decided. You're either crazy or you're not.

Except that there is a difference between a universal God and a universe: a God has free will, a universe does not. What this means is that a God-universe has the power to reshape and change its own laws to serve its purposes. The real universe, by comparison, has no purposes and obeys its laws.

Yes, there is a difference. What I am saying, is the universe appears stagnant becuase God is busy with things so complex, no man could even begin to understand. He will rarely do anything to change the course of the universe, becuase he did give us free will after all.

Except that there is a difference between a universal God and a universe: a God has free will, a universe does not. What this means is that a God-universe has the power to reshape and change its own laws to serve its purposes. The real universe, by comparison, has no purposes and obeys its laws.

Ah, but if there is a difference between the God-Universe and the Universe-Universe, then the earlier statement is false:

"God is not a God, God is merely an extremly complex makeup of all there is in the universe."

I have yet to think of a name for the "one" God, the creator. So to get my point across I use a name that is familair.

'Prime mover' would seem to fit your needs best as far as I can ascertain.

'Prime mover' would seem to fit your needs best as far as I can ascertain.

I would rather find something latin, to make it sound "cooler"

Yes, there is a difference. What I am saying, is the universe appears stagnant becuase God is busy with things so complex, no man could even begin to understand. He will rarely do anything to change the course of the universe, becuase he did give us free will after all.

Here's a question: why free will?
For that matter, how free will?

I would rather find something latin, to make it sound "cooler"

PRIMUM MOBILE.

Here's a question: why free will?
For that matter, how free will?

He decided to give us free will, becuase it would be rather boring. We are sort of like a "game" for him, we are his amusement.

http://s14.invisionfree.com/Temple_of_Anu/

God is not a God, God is merely an extremly complex makeup of all there is in the universe. Every concept, feeling, expression, and idea; ever. He is all, continously battling with himself, but he is not a God in the old judeo-Christian sense, or the mythological one.

Is this a personal being, or just the whole or sum total of nature?

Using personal pronouns, and even trying to call him "Yahweh",implies personality and individuality. But that also implies separation of the creator from the creation.

Can the creator be the creation? Is that even a logical or understandable concept?:confused:

The Temple of Anus?

Worship at the Temple of Anus and be granted from on high the right to act like an ass. Ooops, sorry, wrong religion.

One simple question. Pardon my ignorance if it as already been asked.

But Anu was the sky god of Sumeria. He was the one who told Gilgamesh's ancestor to build the arc so he could flood the world. He was the one repsonsible for many of Sumeria's epic tales. Also involving Gilgamesh who angered Ishtar, and then later found the fruits of immortality but the snake ate them.

One simple question. Pardon my ignorance if it as already been asked.

But Anu was the sky god of Sumeria. He was the one who told Gilgamesh's ancestor to build the arc so he could flood the world. He was the one repsonsible for many of Sumeria's epic tales. Also involving Gilgamesh who angered Ishtar, and then later found the fruits of immortality but the snake ate them.

...and the question is...?

...and the question is...?


Who knows, hehe.

I apologize everyone, but there is a hurricane about, so the power went out suddenly. If anyone has any questions, feel free to ask. We are not about vagueness(which almost all modern religions are) nor are we extremly precise, trying to tell you how exactly to live your life.