Are There Any Objective Truths?
Quick answer: Yes. Nothing never exists. That is an objective truth.
Longer answer: To say that “there are no objective truths” is an attempt to speak an objective truth, that if it were true, would not be an objective truth, but therefore a falsehood.
There Is No God
The Abridged Syllogism
Premise 1: Nothing Never Exists
Premise 2: Something Exists Forever
Conclusion: God did not Create Everything, and therefore, does not exist
…hence, adeology.
Supernature = Nature
An extraction from the book, Adeology
If it turns out that we find something or someone out there more intelligent and powerful than us, that would be, in fact, a natural occurrence.
…hence, adeology.
Refuted: The Kalam Cosmological Argument
An Extract from the Book, Adeology
From the section: Unapologetics
The Kalam Cosmological Argument
Premise 1: whatever begins to exist has a cause
Premise 2: the universe began to exist and therefore has a cause
Conclusion: therefore god
-
The Refutation
Premise 1: nothing never exists
Premise 2: something always exists
Conclusion: everything is not created, therefore, everything is not created by god
-
Thus, the Kalam cosmological argument, refuted. Truly. And, to deny it, would be to demonstrate the efforts of delusion.
…hence, adeology.
Re: Defining Atheism
An extraction from the book, Adeology
From the section: Unapologetics
I am an ardent, anti-theistic atheist, dear reader, but I’m more than that—I am an adeist. Indeed, debating theology with believers can occasionally help liberate them from the shackles of their mind-made-belief. But, it is the opinion of this author that we need to do more than just attack religious ideology, we need to attack the belief in god—hence, adeology.
It is why, if you haven’t noticed by now, that I haven’t quoted and will not quote a single holy book in this book. I will not help them spread their message. You won’t find me narrating holy books aloud to anyone. They aren’t going to turn me into their street-preacher. I will not proselytize for them.
It is one of the most frustrating things to witness in this debate, an atheist quoting the bibles or the quran to believers, trying to convince them that their faith doesn’t make any sense. Because, if the believers would just read their own book, they should be able to see themselves out of the delusion. And, if they can't, then reading their holy book to them is certainly not going to help.
Let me be clear: we need atheism, and we need atheists—I am one—theocracy is well on the rise. But you won’t find me publicly debating the validity of any religious practice other than those that cause direct harm to children or people in general. For example: the jewish practice of sucking the freshly circumcised and bleeding penises of baby boys—in the name of god; or the muslim practice of cutting the labia off of little girls—in the name of god; or the christian practice of child sexual abuse and young daughters wedding their fathers—in the name of god: or the dali lama having children suck his tongue—all in the name of god. How can anyone consider themselves moral while being a part of these religions? Indeed, we need to debate the idea of religious practices, but most importantly, we need to debate the very belief that allows for such heinous actions.
God Does Not Exist
The Unabridged Syllogism
Premise 1: that which cannot exist, does not exist.
-
Premise 2: nothing never exists.
-
Conclusion: something always exists, will always exist, and has always existed—everywhere, forever; and, that which always exists has neither beginning nor ending; and, that which has no beginning has no cause and is not created, and therefore, has no creator; and, that which has no ending, is not destroyed, and therefore, has no destroyer and therefore has no savior—thus, a deity that is believed to have created everything, and is the savior of the souls of mankind, does not exist, because it cannot exist; ergo, god does not exist.
…hence, adeology.
Re: Defining Deism
An extraction from the book, Adeology
From the chapter: Define God
Now that we’ve established there are no experts regarding the belief in god, but that the belief in god does in fact come before the practice of its religion, and that there are more people who believe in god than do practice any religion, we can determine, and in fact I declare, that deism comes before—is the antecedent to, theism—not the other way around. However, in common theist nomenclature, and all-too-often atheist rhetoric and approach, deism is often described as a subset of theology, because the theist often believes that “god creating us,” and then “leaving us alone,” would mean that that god is no longer “intervening,” and to them, that means, it is no longer a god, or their god. Do you see how dumb and ridiculous this all sounds, dear reader? But, if god created anything at all, that, in and of itself, would be an intervention—the intervention. In other words: typical theists believe that if god, the deity, doesn’t play a hand in every element of your life, it isn’t a god. And, to that I say, fair enough. However again, if god created anything at all, and especially if god created everything, that in and of itself, is an intervention—again, the intervention. The belief in god comes before the practice of its religion. Which is why this author refers to themself as an adeist; as it encapsulates atheism by extirpating the root of belief.
…hence, adeology.
Adeism/Atheism: The Fundamental Difference
Adeism = the disbelief in god, spiritualism, transcendence, et al.
Atheism = the disbelief in religious doctrine and the efficacy of religious practices
If you were to count all of the people who believe in god in the world,
and then, count all of the people who practice religion in the world,
you would find that more people believe in god than do religion.
…hence, adeology.
Which Came First: Belief in God, or Religion?
answer: the belief in god comes before the practice of its religion
…hence, adeology.
Re: Defining God
An extraction from the book, Adeology
From the section: A Few Words
In a later chapter of this book, Define God, I “steel man” the argument for believing in god. But for now, for the purposes of reading and digesting the contents of this book, understand that the word “god” in this book refers to the god of anyone and everyone who believes; has believed, or will believe in any and every given god at any and every given time—forever. So, you, reading this book right now, dear reader, if you believe in god, understand that I am referring to that god—your god; and, all the other gods that all the other people—every single person—who has ever, does, or will—ever—believe in god.
*Steel Man: to provide the strongest argument possible for any given topic, especially in debate
A Few Words
An extraction from the book, Adeology
In a project such as this: the book, Adeology, the website, adeology.org, and the organization, The Adeological Society, it is crucial that the author and reader be on the same page. So too, for any debate, it is of paramount importance that the interlocutors (the debating opponents) be on the same page—agreeing on what the terms are before agreeing to disagree about said terms. To successfully convey my message, and to be succinct in my delivery, the next couple/few pages [blog posts] will be about words: how they come about, their definitions, their meaning, their usage, their purpose, et al. I am going to draw very distinct lines in the sands regarding the debate about the belief in god.
Unapologetics
An Extraction From The Book, Adeology
Unapologetics: the practice of non-belief, opposing the imposition of deity worship in public forums, i.e., public policy, the public school system, political activism, et al.—the arguments and counterarguments against, and in opposition of, the belief in god.
Everyone Is Agnostic—No One Knows A Goddamn Thing
An extraction from the book, Adeology
From the chapter: Define God
Believe what you will, dear reader, but you don’t know shit. And, you should know that you don’t know shit. There are no experts on the subject of god—only speculators. Participants in the conversation, mere spectators, and even those who try their best to abstain, all have an equal right to their own belief system regarding the subject of god, or being the subject of god, or being one of god’s subjects. Indeed, there are plenty of, and I want say, “too many,” supposedly deep thinking, high-order believers out there to point to—what, with their self-prescribed authority and keen insight into the spirit realm and the workings of the divine—apparently reading the minds of, if not interpreting the wills of, supernatural deities. But, their beliefs about the subject are no more valid than yours, or mine, or any others’—nothing more than someone else’s opinion. Everyone has the same access to the Self. There are no chosen people.
So, study religion if you will, study spiritual meditation and the spiritual realm. I have read many modern gurus and ancient holy books alike. You are reading me now. But, when it comes to the belief in god, those books are merely the transcribed inner-thoughts of another human being’s interpretation of their idea of their belief in their god. And, they know no more than you or I possibly could about god. And, you, and they, should know that, too. Everyone is agnostic—no one knows a goddamn thing; hence, adeology.
An Introduction to Adeology
An extraction from the book, Adeology
From the section: A Few Words
Adeology: the study of disbelief in god, deism, and theology, at the point of writing this book, dear reader, is a word yet to be written into human history. Yet, there is a great debate—perhaps the greatest of all debates—revolving around the belief in the existence of God—the Deity. In this book, we introduce adeology as the epistemology of unapologetics: the practice of non-belief, opposing the imposition of deity worship in public forums, i.e., public policy, the public school system, political activism, et al. We explore the debate about the belief in, and definition of, god—examining beyond the traditional apologetics of those who believe in god, while expanding the argument for non-belief further than the traditional atheism of those who believe there is not yet sufficient evidence enough proving the existence of any god proposed by any religion—supplanting such benignity with, adeism: the disbelief in God. Debate the religious if you desire, dear reader, but do not debate their religion—debate their belief in god. Theology is an important word, and one that holds meaning to many, but it has ruled the day without a proper counterpart for over two thousand years. It is time to redefine the argument—hence, adeology.