Comparative Religions Part 11... Atheism....By Ben Klassen

 

 

 

Atheism is commonly not recognized as a religion, but rather as a non-religion. Be that as it may, the fact is that anyone, or any group, can claim that their philosophy, belief or non-belief, weltanschauung, or whatever, is a religion, and justifiably so. We of the Church of the Creator defend this position as vigorously as we do the First Amendment, Freedom of Speech, and/or Freedom of Religion. We fully agree with Voltaire when he said, "I may disagree violently with what you say, but I will defend unto death your right to say it." Similarly, we may disagree with many religious faiths which we consider pure hokum, but we will defend their right to espouse their beliefs, no matter how silly we might think

they are.

In the same context, we will also defend unto death our right to criticize and articulate how ridiculous we may find some religions to be and we have done so repeatedly in the last 10 segments of "Comparative Religions."

Within this framework, we accept that Atheism is a religion in its own right. There are now officially incorporated religions that have received tax exemption and official governmental recognition as such under the aegis of Atheism.

Most Christian churches are quick to hang the label of Atheism on the Church of the Creator and our members. It is the objective of this article to again, for the umpteenth time clarify this issue to these muddle-headed spook chasers. (See page 68 of Expanding Creativity, "We are not Atheists, We are Creators".)

We are not atheists we are Creators By Ben Klassen

 

I want to draw a clear line of distinction between Atheism and Creativity, so that there can be no doubt, no misunderstanding about the difference, a difference that is fundamental and as wide as the Grand Canyon.

Basically, that difference is this: whereas an atheist says I do not believe in the other fellow's spooks, he makes no claim to what, if anything, he docs believe in. We Creators have common ground with the atheists in that we also do not believe in the other fellow's spooks of whatever stripe, but we do state clearly and at length what all we do believe in on the positive side. And what we do believe in is plenty. It is positive and it is comprehensive and we spell it out clearly in our several Basic Books.

Having laid this initial groundwork, let us briefly review the history of Atheism, which has been around for thousands of years before even Jewish-Christianity raised its ugly head.

Webster's big dictionary (Third New International) defines atheism (small "a") as "a disbelief in the existence of God or any other deity", and an atheist as "one who subscribes to atheism." This is a rather brief and vague definition, and until we look up the word "God" we really have no idea what the poor fellow doesn't believe in. So we look up the word "God", and we find a whole passel of definitions under "god" spelled with a small "g" and another set, under "God" with the big "G". They vary all the way from "one who wields great and despotic power" to one that says "Principle; Mind; Soul; Spirit; Life; Truth; all substance; intelligence."

 

There are so many other diverse, vague and conflicting definitions in between that by the time you get through reading them all, you become as confused as the little boy who had just accidentally dropped his gum on the floor of a chicken pen. No wonder the poor atheist finds it hard to swallow all that garbage. (Read again, "What is a Spirit?" in Racial Loyalty No. 29, in this book.)

What is a Spirit By Ben klassen

Since Atheism, by definition, is purely negative and the Atheist himself may, or may not, have any number of positive beliefs or philosophies, it is really a loose and meaningless term, and would be completely useless, had not the Christians made it such a widely utilized and derogatory

term. Because it is so loose and vague, it would be hard to find literature on "atheism" before Christianity. However, one could probably classify Socrates (469-399 B.C.E.) as an atheist, since he went around telling the youth that the Greek gods of the times were most probably spurious and nonexistent. For this crime of honesty and freethinking Socrates was hauled into court, condemned to death and given the hemlock cup.

He was by no means the last. When the Christians finally grabbed the reigns of temporal and ecclesiastical power, things really began to heat up for the poor atheist. By the Middle Ages (better known as the Dark Ages) heads really began to roll. By the time the Inquisition was instituted, and later the Reformation cut deep into the once supreme power of the Catholic Church, running down heretics and confiscating their physical assets became one of the more lucrative pursuits of the times.

 

A "heretic" need not even be an atheist. He could believe in spooks in the sky until hell froze over, but if he did not toe the official line, (and there were any number of official lines, depending upon whose jurisdiction you were under) well, it was curtains for him or her. Such gentle persuasive means of retribution as the Spanish Gag, the Iron Band, Breaking on the Wheel, Burning at the Stake, or dozens of other refined means of death and torture were employed. (Read again, "Thumbscrew and \ Rack" Page 326 of the White Man's Bible.)

As the Renaissance began to dawn in the 13th Century and victims of the all-powerful Catholic Church began to slowly extricate their minds from its clutches, and, as the Reformation further cracked and split the power of the church, the people of Europe slowly began to become more aware of Nature and the real world around them. Writers and philosophers, guardedly at first, writing in parables and couched phrases began to voice their doubts about the supernatural, the world of spirits and the hereafter.

 

Like Thomas Paine, they first hedged their positions by calling themselves Deists, a vague term, but inferring they believed in a Supreme Being. Webster (same volume) defines "deism" as "a rational movement of the 17th and 18th centuries whose adherents generally subscribe to a natural religion based on human reason and morality, on the belief in one God, who, after creating the world and the laws governing it, refrained from interfering with the operation of those laws, and on the rejection of every kind of supernatural intervention in human affairs." These fellows were beginning to come over our way and were almost there, had they not thrown in a few unnecessary disclaimers and non sequiturs to protect themselves. That this God (about whom no one really has the slightest information that he, she, or it really exists, or any other information) "created it all" and then sat back and let it run by itself, is pretty ridiculous. After such a busy session creating it all, what would he do with his time? Play with himself?

During the 19th century, writers, especially in Germany, began to come out more openly. In America, Col. Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-1899) was a most brilliant advocate of the atheist point of view and in both oratory and writing was most effective in marshalling arguments and logic in tearing to shreds the spooks-in-the-sky swindle. He has left a volume of 12 books that recapitulate his speeches and philosophy. (We have all of them in our library except Volume 1.

We would be most grateful to anyone who could supply us with the missing volume.)

 

In my opinion there are, however, several flaws in his advocacy. For one thing, there is no positive replacement for Christianity, which he denounces so effectively. Secondly, he is not racially conscious. Thirdly, he seems to have not the slightest awareness of the part historically played by the Jews, both in perpetrating Christianity on the goyim, and also in their tyrannical control of world finance and power.

When I first began to promote Creativity, I presumed that the existing atheist groups would be one of the most fertile areas which would be attracted to our superior creed and program. After all, we were as militant and aggressive in denouncing Christianity, the spooks-in-the-sky swindle, and the whole bag of paraphernalia as they were, but, we had so much additional creed and program to offer on the positive side.

Surely, I thought, here was a natural. The first thing I did was to get a list of all the atheist groups in America and send them a copy of Nature's Eternal Religion. I was wrong. The response was negative - absolutely dismal. Some of their return literature was astounding. Some were devil worshippers, some were espousing witchcraft. Many denounced me for my racist position. An astounding number were Jews, and therefore, of course, openly hostile. That was 12 years ago.

One of the best known, most effective, most articulate and most intelligent organization among the atheists groups is Madalyn Murray O'Hair's American Atheists, Inc., out of Austin, Texas. They have officially proclaimed themselves as a religion and have been so recognized by legal authorities. They have been most effective in instituting legal suits for the separation of church and state, taking prayers out of schools and other measures that have attenuated the special privileges usurped by churches and religions. We have no quarrel with them on any of these issues.

However, the experience of history has shown that attacking religion per se without having a positive and more powerful replacement for it has repeatedly failed to influence its onward march in the slightest. Hitler has made the same observation about movements, any movement, in general. It was his observation after World War I that communism could not be thwarted by merely exposing it. What was needed, he said. was "cingegengift," (literally translated, "a counter poison") an antidote, to replace it. This he did when he founded the Nazi Party, and it did, indeed, triumph over and expunge communism in Germany.

American Atheists, articulate and logical though they are, lack this very thing. They do not have a positive belief, a positive creed or program as a replacement for Christianity (or any other spooky religion). For this reason, their future success will be minimal, and at best, non-productive.

There are two other flaws on which we fault American Atheists, and they are similar to those of Col. Ingersoll.
 

(a) They do not expose the Jewish peril. In fact, their membership is too heavily infested with Jews to even allow them to take such a stand, and it is not to be expected that they ever will.
 

(b) They take no racial stand, and are not interested in the survival of the White Race.

Nevertheless, a few of our most intelligent converts come from their ranks. There is a much smaller but laudable group that I should mention. That is The Truth Seeker, Inc., of P. 0. Box 1832, San Diego, CA 92112. It is headed by a venerable octogenarian, James Harvey Johnson, who is the successor to the Rationalist Movement, the latter dating back to 1875. Mr. Johnson is one of those rare gentlemen who is dedicated, takes salubrious care of his health and is aware of the racial and Jewish problem. His greatest contribution is the excellent collection of old and rare books he has for sale, all of which either expose religion or promote salubrious living in one way or another.

Our assessment of the whole atheist movement or movements can be briefly summed up in two points:

(a) It is heavily dominated by Jews and will not lift a finger in aiding the survival of the White Race.

(b) It has no positive program with which to replace militant intolerant Christianity. It has not in the past, and, we predict will not in the future curtail Christianity in the slightest.
 

Ben Klassen

Founder Church of the Creator

 

 

 

  
 





                  Article taken from Racial Loyalty # 34
                                April 13AC (1986)

                                     http://creativitymovement.net/