Of course

No

I wouldn't

So for example, which part of his teachings do you disagree with?

It isn't the place of the average person to selectively choose which portions of the moral system prescribed by God they will observe or not observe, for the same reason that an average citizen cannot choose which laws they will or won't follow without consequences.

I can disagree all I want but what shows that I know better. I didn't create the entire fucking universe now, did I?

^

If a man chooses to pursue hubris over humbleness and obedience, he very well can, but it will only result in his deep lack of satisfaction with life and his distance from God's love after death.

Plus, if you really want to do your own thing you first gotta get out of here and the only way out of the matrix is through it, at least according to Hubbard

So, at the very least you have to accept the rules

"Disagreeing with the Bible" knowingly is obstinate heresy.

Behind the façade of moral posturing and arrogance, I've encountered few, if any godless people who are genuinely happy or satisfied with life. It must suck to exist in this mortal plane when you've made yourself the god of your own world.

So you believe atheism leads to egoism?

It's funny seeing the same people saying "I don't need God for true satisfaction" in the next post claiming they want to die unironically.

You'll also encounter those who talk in psychobabble and other forms of retard speak, but that shouldn't be misconstrued for intelligence or depth of knowledge.

I have encountered happy agnostics before. Plenty of them. Not the ones who blab on and on about atheism though

Few genuinely godless people have a sincere, sophisticated understanding of the world around them. They rely on the internet for their self-worth.

Agnosticism is categorically different from godlessness, uncertainty isn't hubris or arrogance.

It's kinda lame to limit your view of the world to just the material, it makes you too reliant on it. Like the people outsourcing their self-esteem to Instagram.

Or people judging their self value only on their net worth

"What? You're telling me I should recognise there is a purpose greater than serving my own selfish interests?"

Thing is, you don't have to be an atheist to only pursue your own selfish interests. Like wizards, occultists, some popes, etc.

Are you Orthodox?

So, to me, atheism doesn't inherently lead to selfishness or egoism but it puts you in a vulnerable position

nah i wouldn't worship anyone

@Eoppa Not really, I'm currently studying the Kabbalah. I don't think popular religions are meant to serve the highest interest of their followers as a whole package

Define "highest interest"

The true "Will"

Well are you referring to something similar to the Pure Act that a classical Theist would describe

Crowley's definition is what I'm referring to

"What? You're telling me I should recognize there is a purpose greater than serving my own selfish interests?"
Reminder that God, which necessarily contains the Greatest Good, could only ever create Laws that are good for you to abide by! Anything that deviates from God's will for you is inherently not in your self-interest. Hedonism is not in your self-interest.

Yes.

@Ater Votum You are correct but there is an argument to be made whether the laws which are dictated to us by the popular institutions are the same as the whole of God's true will for you

```It is defined either as a person's grand destiny in life or as a moment-to-moment path of action that operates in perfect harmony with Nature.```
So more similar to the Final cause in natural law?

> crowley
i was not expecting this lmao

Mr Crowley, what they done in your head

I would like @alpi if he didn't have acringe pfp

@Eoppa Like Aristotle, right? I guess you could make a parallel but it's within a different context and much less concrete than the classic examples

i don't worship a god lol

Then why wouldn't Catholicism be in the highest interest if this is nearly a cc of it's ontology of natures.