There is no God but man

[Guest]

I will quote this short article in full as it perfectly summarises my beliefs :

These are the words written atop “

Liber OZ,” a short work describing “the rights of man” in the New Aeon.

The old Aeon was the Aeon of Osiris, the Father and the Suffering man, encapsulated in the figure of Jesus Christ; before that was the Aeon of Isis, the pagan era. This is now the Aeon of the Crowned & Conquering Child.

Even Jesus foretold of this mystery when he said “And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven” (

Matthew 18:3).

Thelema asserts in its own

Bible that “Every man and every woman is a star” and that godhead is “above you & in you” and “the flame that burns in every heart of man, and in the core of every star.”

God is not some Being outside of ourselves. He is not some cloudy figure, perhaps an old man of sorts, that watches our every move and judges us. He is not a stern father that judges and rebukes you, but “the Child-Voice of Love in thine own Soul!”

In a sense, Jesus was an example of the Man-God, who was both Man and God. In him was God made Man and Man made God. Even as he says, “I and my Father are one.” (

John 10:30)

In the symbol we sign each message with, the Unicursal Hexagram, we show God and Man as One. Traditionally, the Hexagram is formed of two separate triangles representing interlocking opposites of male & female, god & man, spirit & matter, etc. The unicursal hexagram – which literally means a hexagram that can be drawn in one stroke without lifting up a pen – symbolically asserts a unity between these complements.

One reason Christianity is dead is that the symbols are unbalanced. We praise good & life, and fear evil & death. In Thelema:

“My adepts stand upright; their head above the heavens, their feet below the hells.” (

Liber Tzaddi)

Since God is All, and since Man’s true identity is One with God’s (and God’s true identity one with Man’s) we move beyond opposition into unity with All things from Highest to Lowest. As it is said: “Love is the law, love under will” and Love means Union. Again it is written:

There is no grace,

There is no guilt,

This is the law:

DO WHAT THOU WILT.

God is expressed by Doing one’s own Will, which if pure is one with God’s will and God’s will is one with your own Will, and in that Thou art God. This is not a judgmental god of sin and hell and fear of punishment and endless retribution.

“Remember all ye that existence is pure joy; that all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass & are done; but there is that which remains… Beauty and strength, leaping laughter and delicious languor, force and fire, are of us.”

Thelemites even go so far as to call themselves Atheists because they identify so closely with God. As it is said: “To admit God is to look up to God, and so not to be God. The curse of duality.”

We simultaneously deny the dogmatic Theistic god of superstition and assert our identity so closely with the God who is All that we admit of No Other. This is the secret meaning of saying “There is no god”: “This refers to the spiritual experience of Identity. When one realizes one’s Truth there is no room for any other conception.

It also means that the God-idea must go with other relics of the Fear born of Ignorance into the limbo of savagery. We speak of the Idea of God as generally understood, God being “‘something ‘not ourselves’ that makes for righteousness.””

The true God is one with ourselves, for “There is no god but man!”

http://christianityisdead.wordpress.com/2010/01/02/god-in-thelema/

Br Cornelius

[White Crane Feather]

I will quote this short article in full as it perfectly summarises my beliefs :

http://christianityisdead.wordpress.com/2010/01/02/god-in-thelema/

Br Cornelius

Nothing but creative writing and manipulation of context :(

Edited November 5, 2014 by White Crane Feather

[Grandpa Greenman]

The difference between Thelema and nature based is man is only God as he is apart of God. Nature is God and man is part of nature and as are all things. So all things rocks, trees, birds, dog, cat, sun, moon, etc are god also. To say man is god and only man just puts a different aspect to another form of duality.

[Guest]

Nothing but creative writing and manipulation of context :(

Not really, there are profound concepts of personal morality and responsibility embodied in those statements. It also highlights the total inadequacy of fixed moral frameworks - every decision has to be made within its own unique circumstance, as such the concept of the ten commandments and the Torah are totally redundant in our age.

The difference between Thelema and nature based is man is only God as he is apart of God. Nature is God and man is part of nature and as are all things. So all things rocks, trees, birds, dog, cat, sun, moon, etc are god also. To say man is god and only man just puts a different aspect to another form of duality.

I don't think the highlighted bit is the intent or the belief of any Thelemite. The point of the statement is to highlight that you as an individual have sole responsibility for the outcomes of all your decisions and actions - which is a God like power. We should do nothing to placate an external deity. Whether we live in a pantheistic universe is never explicitly stated in Thelema so many people choose either to believe in pantheism or atheism.

Br Cornelius

Edited November 6, 2014 by Guest

[Stubbly_Dooright]

I will quote this short article in full as it perfectly summarises my beliefs :

http://christianityi...god-in-thelema/

Br Cornelius

I find this interesting. My point of view, I think is mixed up in all of this, (although I can't help picking out a scene in Star Trek 5's movie((yeah the worst one)) in which Kirk says 'isn't God within ourselves? or something close to it, ) I thought of how I saw it then and now. I hear that a lot through out life, if it means God is within ourselves. Kind of like pointing their thumbs to themselves when talking about where is God.

I don't know, I also think is people saying we are representing God, or we see ourselves in such a light. I have found there is really never a true way of knowing that. I may not be getting your point, Cornelius, and I can understand if you point that out, but I sense my own version of this when I read your post.

by GreenmansGod:

The difference between Thelema and nature based is man is only God as he is apart of God. Nature is God and man is part of nature and as are all things. So all things rocks, trees, birds, dog, cat, sun, moon, etc are god also. To say man is god and only man just puts a different aspect to another form of duality.

And this too, enlists various thoughts in me. (I'm just chuck full of self-imagery aint I?) and I like this. I often wonder on duality and what is going on. Are we dual personalities and if we are, is it all us, or something us guiding us.

I find that there is so much, that can prove, atleast to me that you cannot pinpoint that only one thing exists to believe in.

Well, that's just me.

by br Cornelius:

I don't think the highlighted bit is the intent or the belief of any Thelemite. The point of the statement is to highlight that you as an individual have sole responsibility for the outcomes of all your decisions and actions - which is a God like power. We should do nothing to placate an external deity. Whether we live in a pantheistic universe is never explicitly stated in Thelema so many people choose either to believe in pantheism or atheism.

Ahh, now I get it. And I think I agree with this. Edited November 6, 2014 by Stubbly_Dooright

[White Crane Feather]

Not really, there are profound concepts of personal morality and responsibility embodied in those statements. It also highlights the total inadequacy of fixed moral frameworks - every decision has to be made within its own unique circumstance, as such the concept of the ten commandments and the Torah are totally redundant in our age.

I don't think the highlighted bit is the intent or the belief of any Thelemite. The point of the statement is to highlight that you as an individual have sole responsibility for the outcomes of all your decisions and actions - which is a God like power. We should do nothing to placate an external deity. Whether we live in a pantheistic universe is never explicitly stated in Thelema so many people choose either to believe in pantheism or atheism.

Br Cornelius

I think most theists would not argue to much with you on these points. Thinking theists don't try to placate their God they recognize that their God is holding them accountable for their actions, non thinking theists need the simplicity of the Ten Commandments so they are not redundant even in the slightest. Some people simply need a set of well defined rules. And yes most theists would agree that man has God like abilities.

[Guest]

Godly retribution is a powerful motivator for many theistic individuals. there focus is always on heaven and getting in and that is the way the belief system is organised.

Br Cornelius

[Grandpa Greenman]

Thank you Br for clearing that up. I guess I didn't understand it correctly. The concept of we are responsible for our actions is right on the mark with my philosophy. A major issue I have with many of the mainstream western religion is they put man above nature and having dominion over it. That may work in the short term, but in the end nature will have the upperhand and we will be in a world of hurt that is our own creation. We are responsible for the mayhem we create in our lives.

[Guest]

Thank you Br for clearing that up. I guess I didn't understand it correctly. The concept of we are responsible for our actions is right on the mark with my philosophy. A major issue I have with many of the mainstream western religion is they put man above nature and having dominion over it. That may work in the short term, but in the end nature will have the upperhand and we will be in a world of hurt that is our own creation. We are responsible for the mayhem we create in our lives.

Its nicely explained in some of the comments below that article when someone thinks it gives license to pollute. To pollute causes direct and indirect harm to the individual who pollutes and therefore cannot be in conformity with their will which must ultimately be in balance with the needs of all elements of the universe. Only one who doesn't internalise responsibility (such as a Christian who receives judgement from on high) could pollute without feeling it as a direct personal hurt. Hence we have many company directors of polluting industries who claim to be good Christians in the Calvinist mould.

Br Cornelius

[White Unicorn]

I will quote this short article in full as it perfectly summarises my beliefs :

http://christianityi...god-in-thelema/

Br Cornelius

I can buy into a lot of the interpetations of religious figures being misperceptions by your average believers. I believe in the unity of god nature and man and when there is UNITY, there is a higher Cosmic Consciousness involved and there is the ONE because It encompasses all with a mysterious "spirit" that is in all things creatures and nature as well as other dimensions. It sees through Its creatures eyes when it has the unity, and the creature is connected to Its natural powers and compassion. When the creature and the universal unity comprehend each other they are ONE.

But Brother Cornelius I can't buy into the quote below because that is why the world has always been in a mess.

People do for their self and initiate all sorts of bad consequences engrained in the laws of nature, instead of the thinking and doing for the benefit of the Oneness of all.

Do what thou wilt ...is our right of choice but becoming the peaceful unified ONE involves making the right choices!

This is the only thing I can think about any religious doctrine that engrains hell as punishment and heaven as reward is to try to control the unchecked evils of man's nature by making it a selfish quest to avoid hell and do what is the right choice.

The grace and the hell is here and now caused by our own free will. I wish we could avoid the last line but it is true and look where it got us

There is no grace,

There is no guilt,

This is the law:

DO WHAT THOU WILT.

[back to earth]

Its nicely explained in some of the comments below that article when someone thinks it gives license to pollute. To pollute causes direct and indirect harm to the individual who pollutes and therefore cannot be in conformity with their will which must ultimately be in balance with the needs of all elements of the universe. Only one who doesn't internalise responsibility (such as a Christian who receives judgement from on high) could pollute without feeling it as a direct personal hurt. Hence we have many company directors of polluting industries who claim to be good Christians in the Calvinist mould.

Br Cornelius

More 'natural religions' seem in harmony with nature , where as Abrahamic religions still seem to have adopted the Genesis 'instruction' to 'have dominion over' nature.

Crowley was a recent blossom ( Ha! I just called Crowley a blossom ) on the tree of 'metaphysical anarchy' , let's not forget the older tradition of Thelema ( Rabelais , etc .) , it goes back quiet a way ! Maybe even to the Greek concept of demokratia ?

Also God being Man ( or Man attaining to Godhead is routed in the hermetic precept ( the 1st on the Emerald Tablet) ... but this was based on earlier ideas , and should not really be accepted as a 'given' as it stands at present ( or back in 1400 ) :but perhaps back to Plato , , who made offerings relating to this doctrine which continued to influence western philosophy up to Hegel .

Then, in this way know God; as having all things in Himself as thoughts, the whole Cosmos itself. If, then, thou dost not make thyself like unto God, thou canst not know Him. For like is knowable to like [alone]. Make, [then,] thyself to grow to the same stature as the Greatness which transcends all measure; leap forth from every body; transcend all Time; become Eternity; and [thus] shalt thou know God. Conceiving nothing is impossible unto thyself, think thyself deathless and able to know all,—all arts, all sciences, the way of every life. Become more lofty than all height, and lower than all depth. Collect into thyself all senses of [all] creatures,—of fire, [and] water, dry and moist. Think that thou art at the same time in every place,—in earth, in sea, in sky; not yet begotten, in the womb, young, old, [and] dead, in after-death conditions. And if thou knowest all these things at once,—times, places, doings, qualities, and quantities; thou canst know God. But if thou lockest up thy soul within thy body, and dost debase it, saying: I nothing know; I nothing can; I fear the sea; I cannot scale the sky; I know not who I was, who I shall be;—what is there [then] between [thy] God and thee?

http://www.gnosis.org/library/grs-mead/TGH-v2/th223.html

But, for now , forgetting the bastardisations ... I dont mind Crowley ... as a post-Victorian spurious Masonic type I especially like his (?) :

God created Man in His Image :... but Man created God in his image as well.

Oh ... and the Rites of Eleusis ... they are GREAT to perform , magically as is, or as a skeleton for fleshing out

http://hermetic.com/crowley/the-rites-of-eleusis/

His Gnostic Mass is also rather good ; http://hermetic.com/sabazius/gnostic_mass.htm

And his work collating several major rapidly going defunct occult / initiation rites and their contained gnosis (including Freemasonry) into the neat little system of the O.T.O. series of dramatic rituals / initiation rites are rather smashing ! ... I do say so, old chap !

But no link to that

[Guest]

I can buy into a lot of the interpetations of religious figures being misperceptions by your average believers. I believe in the unity of god nature and man and when there is UNITY, there is a higher Cosmic Consciousness involved and there is the ONE because It encompasses all with a mysterious "spirit" that is in all things creatures and nature as well as other dimensions. It sees through Its creatures eyes when it has the unity, and the creature is connected to Its natural powers and compassion. When the creature and the universal unity comprehend each other they are ONE.

But Brother Cornelius I can't buy into the quote below because that is why the world has always been in a mess.

People do for their self and initiate all sorts of bad consequences engrained in the laws of nature, instead of the thinking and doing for the benefit of the Oneness of all.

Do what thou wilt ...is our right of choice but becoming the peaceful unified ONE involves making the right choices!

This is the only thing I can think about any religious doctrine that engrains hell as punishment and heaven as reward is to try to control the unchecked evils of man's nature by making it a selfish quest to avoid hell and do what is the right choice.

The grace and the hell is here and now caused by our own free will. I wish we could avoid the last line but it is true and look where it got us

There is no grace,

There is no guilt,

This is the law:

DO WHAT THOU WILT.

To know your will is to know your place and purpose in the universe. It is not license is is the ultimate discipline.

The task of the individual is to discover their purpose and act upon it. Nothing bad, in the cosmic context, can come from following your will.

Br Cornelius

[SophiaStar]

Lo and behold!

I just realized that I must be an atheist then

[Guest]

Many Thelemites are Pantheists or pagans.

Br Cornelius

[SophiaStar]

Many Thelemites are Pantheists or pagans.

Br Cornelius

What you said resonated with me, but I always fly solo so to speak.. I find it hard to identify any believe systems but rather make my own laws accordance to my own free will and inspiration.

[back to earth]

To know your will is to know your place and purpose in the universe. It is not license is is the ultimate discipline.

The task of the individual is to discover their purpose and act upon it. Nothing bad, in the cosmic context, can come from following your will.

Br Cornelius

Yes. The concept of 'Thelemic True Will and Christian Free Will are often confused by some, and it seems the first 'reaction' (interpretation / assumption) by most.

But then again ; if one becomes attuned to "God', then your Will is too ... so it is more a case, not of "Not my will but Thine be done', but a case of 'Our Will be done. More correctly, just .... will be done ...

And that comes out as; enact (as one has to, as an 'individual experiential God-unit ' ) one's will.

See - 'Do What Thou Wilt was 'short-cut' .

[back to earth]

Also interesting is, that the Man becomes God concept is denied in Christianity ( nowadays) .

http://librarum.org/book/17593/1

Christianity used to be very ' Hermetic' .

[eight bits]

back to earth

Also interesting is, that the Man becomes God concept is denied in Christianity ( nowadays) .

I am unsure what your hedge means. Most Christians today are either Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox. The latter church teaches frankly that the purpose of human life is theosis, man becomes God; the former teaches what it calls the "Beatific Vision" as being parallel to EO's theosis, but is (understandably, maybe) shy about saying "Man becomes God" in as many words. Both churches teach that a certain amount of this alignment can occur during natural life - it is not an entirely "after life" reward. In the Protestant world, the Anglican "middle way" retains a lot of this thinking. The Anglican Communion is the largest Protestant denomation.

GreenmansGod

I guess it was a typo, but I adore this sentence:

(Man) is apart of God.

thread topic

"God" is a word to conjure with, as Crowley would know better than most, but like Abracadabra, I am unsure what it refers to, or even that it refers to anything in particular at all.

There is a passage in Robert Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, a horrid title, and it concerns something a character in the book calls "rational anarchism," which is also a horrid title. But the thing itself seems to be the stance being disussed here, without the abracadabra.

A Rational Anarchist believes that concepts such as 'state' and 'society' and 'government' have no existence save as physically exemplified in the acts of self-responsible individuals. He believes that it is impossible to shift blame, share blame, distribute blame... as blame, guilt, responsibility are matters taking place inside human beings and nowhere else. But being rational, he knows that not all individuals hold his evaluations, so he tries to live perfectly in an imperfect world, aware that his effort will be less than perfect, yet undismayed by self-knowledge of self-failure......I will accept any rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxioius, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.

Grandiose political words to conjure with (State) more-or-less substitute for grandiose religious ones (God). Meh. Many godfearers insist that without belief in god people would act like Vandals. Many politicos insist that without a pervasive supervisor-state people would act like Vandals. The parallelism is there, good that Heinlein notices.

The scene in the book includes a "worked example."

"... surely you would not want . . well, H-(bombs) for example—to be controlled by one irresponsible person?"

"My point is that one person is responsible. Always. If H-bombs exist—and they do—some man controls them. In terms of morals there is no such thing as a 'state.' Just men. Individuals. Each responsible for his own acts."

Given the composition date (1966) and the far-fetched radical libertarian reference (clearly, a "rational anarchist" need not be an anarchist at all), I suspect the above was meant to be read as a commentary on Ayn Rand. Where she, like Crowley (a comparison she would utterly detest, Crowley being the "epitome" of the "hippie weirdo drug addict" type). emphasize the Will, it is typical of Heinlein to emphasize the Responsibility.

In closing, Heinlein's character is a little quick to give humans the monopoly here, IMO. I have seen lots of responsible behavior in other animals, wild and tame. It's hard to shake cultural assumptions, and the Abrahamic crown-of-creation crap is especially sticky.

Edited November 10, 2014 by eight bits

[Guest]

Crowley Thelema is all about responsibility and has little to do with the beliefs of Rand who espoused a selfish individuality.

Br Cornelius

[eight bits]

Crowley Thelema is all about responsibility and has little to do with the beliefs of Rand who espoused a selfish individuality.

That depends on the reader, I suppose. Crowley wouldn't be the first self-appointed moral teacher to talk a good game of personal responsibility while living a dissolute life.

Rand comes up in my post only because I think Heinlein was thinking of her. The contrast between those two writers, then, might help parse out what Heinlein's own views were. What Heinlein's character says in the book speaks for itself. The character's emphasis is plainly on personal responsibility, and the liberating aspects of stepping up to accept personal responsibility even when "cover" would be easily available.