God — A Work in Progress


by Max Musson

MOST PEOPLE fall into the trap of believing that there is either;

1. A fully formed, often anthropomorphised, conscious, sentient, all knowing, all powerful, all loving God, who has a particular interest in, and cares for us; or

2. There is no God.

Dawkins is good at demolishing belief in the first of these possibilities and the mistake that most people make as a consequence is to believe that his arguments therefore prove that the second possibility is therefore correct.

Science indicates that the universe came into existence with the ‘Big Bang’ approximately 13.5 billion years ago. No one knows what existed prior to the Big Bang and the Big Bang consisted of a sudden out-rushing of raw energy from a central point, filling the void of nothingness that existed beforehand.

Whatever existed in the void of nothingness before the Big Bang, and which occupied the central point, was the source of all of the energy from which our universe has formed.

First Graph

Whatever existed prior to the Big Bang — the act of universal energy creation — no longer appears to exist. It appears that whatever it was became completely consumed in the act of universal energy creation.

That source of energy could be viewed as a ‘creator’ of sorts, because from the energy created during the Big Bang, all of the matter of the Universe has evolved, including us.

What we do not know at this stage, is what form the Creator took. We have no way of knowing whether the Creator was conscious, or sentient, or all knowing, or all powerful. Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that the Creator was all loving and certainly none to suggest that the Creator has or had any particular interest in, or care for us.

The universe, or the Cosmos as it should be more accurately described is an immense random generation device in which matter has formed from the energy that was created, and has evolved through many stages, gradually increasing in complexity and the level of consciousness achieved by the most highly evolved life forms.

In searching for the purpose of life and the purpose of the Cosmos, there are many as yet unknowns, but it is clear that the Cosmos is a mechanism that facilitates evolution — the evolution of inanimate matter, but also living matter, through ever increasing levels of complexity, knowledge, power and consciousness.

Graph 2

We humans, as far as we can tell, stand at the pinnacle of that evolutionary process, but there is no evidence to suggest that we are the ‘end product’, in fact the contrary. All of the evidence suggests that we are as Nietzsche describes, a ‘stepping stone’ from sub-man to super-man and beyond.

Cosmotheism asserts that providing we continue the process of evolution, mankind, or at least the currently most highly evolved elements of humanity, such as the White race, will evolve through ever higher and higher levels of consciousness, power and knowledge until our future generations achieve a state of total consciousness and omnipotence. This will be the culmination of the Creator’s work, the metamorphosis of the Creator from a pre-physical state, either with or without consciousness, but with an indefatigable ‘will to be’, through many stages to his/her eventual complete self-realisation as a conscious, sentient, all powerful, all knowing entity — Godhood.

Graph 3

This belief is the fundamental tenet of Cosmotheism, which unlike any other religion, is completely consistent with science and nature, and does not rely on blind faith or superstitious mumbo-jumbo in order to attain credibility.

* * *

Source: Western Spring

For Further Reading

Previous post

Girl Scouts Welcome Cross-Dressing Boys Into Their Ranks

Next post

Nordic Resistance Early Morning Enrichment Program


  1. November 30, 2015 at 6:52 pm — Reply

    Our so called Cosmos is a micro cosmos or universe among an infinite numbers of them in an infinite and eternal Mega Verse that has neither boundaries, center, up and down, left and right nor origin, end or in between. So, it doesn’t need a creator, god, whatever.

    Ideas developed by the integration of Schrödinger Equation by Hugh Everett, Ph.D. Physicist in the Fifties that shows that there are an infinite solutions or universes.

    From a logical point of view this conception is the only one that makes sense.

    • Brian Smith
      July 19, 2017 at 2:51 pm — Reply

      Sophistry, not solution…

      You still have the problem of creation.
      You still have the problem of boundaries, both physical (hyperspatial), but perhaps more importantly the boundary that something/someone/some-part-of-us/the essence of us? is crossing when people die, and return.

      If you understand the physics, and the fellows you mention, then you will understand they simply arbitrarily draw a line around an arbitrarily larger domain of material existence, but they do absolutely nothing more to explain the creation or reason or cause of this existence.

      You have to get over the security blanket and pacifier of “pure science” and “scientist experts”, and deal with things like NDE’s (and other “spiritual” experiences), and the awkward fact (for materialists and scientism blanket-babies), that consciousness is verifiably NOT sourced from the brain (or heart), but from elsewhere/everywhere.

      In other words there really is something “outside” of the box in which we, and our material science, live out our days, and this something is the source of our consciousness, of our, and everything’s existence.

      You can explain it away to your own satisfaction, but to quote der Fuhrer: “The truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie.”

      …you cannot explain it away.

      (LOL – You can also pretend it is an almighty genocidal jew in the sky, but that is just another poisonous lie).

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.