Challenger: I hate the “us vs them dichotomy”, so let me do just that while claiming not to…

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

My response, So you don’t like labels (short expressions that transfer a group of information you know like hashtags but I get to you they are all good, well good for you. Do you not get you said not one thing that makes you better, but different.

“Labels are intellectual poison to any society, and they are almost always divisive.” – Challenger

My response, sounds like a claim evidence, please?

“Really just open up a history book. Even secular ideologies such as communism and socialism have supported tribalistic thinking, and violence. Even atheism has why don’t you read up on the league of militant atheists. Any time we start using labels to define people it leads to disaster.” – Challenger

My response, I am kindly waiting for your proof?

“No you are being a troll. Every war humanity has ever fought has been based in an us vs them dichotomy derived from people joining tribes, and movements. Do you want this explained in further detail? exactly what kind of proof would you find sufficient? The answer is none, because your entire persona is based on these labels, and you are too damn lazy to actually read a book.” – Challenger

My response, Well, it is you that is more like the one being a troll. I am answering your challenge.

“Your labels are redundant, unnecessary, divisive, and in some cases illogical. “Axiological Atheism” is not a thing. You are trying to build a belief system around a concept of disbelief. You are no different than any other religious fanatic. Atheism is the disbelief in god. That is it, end of discussion.” – Challenger

My response, you saying, “you are too damn lazy to actually read a book.” look is this a logical fallacy trying to strawman me then use it as an invalid character attack as if you make a real challenge against me. If you wish to challenge me intellectually try not using logical fallacies, just a pro tip.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

My response, Well, the end conclusion stemming from atheism is a lack of belief or a disbelief but that does not mean the reason one sees this conclusion are reached the same way, held the same way, applied the same way or defended the same, actually it’s quite varied. What do we see? Well, you have not demonstrated much that you have read much on atheism but try to say I don’t read. Atheism and Agnosticism: (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/) You, still are not making any valid arguments why it is bad to be informed on atheism or have labels to transmit one’s views. 10 facts about atheists: (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/01/10-facts-about-atheists/)

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

My response, you minored in philosophy but yet debate me supported with a few logical fallacies?

“You are the result of what happens when an uneducated dolt spends too much time on the internet, and begins to imagine himself to be an actual intellectual. When I want advice from an unemployed truck driver living on disability I will let you know.” – Challenger

My response, You saying, “college education much unlike yourself..” There you go again, yet another logical fallacy straw man, you are bad at this logical debating thng. I have a degree in psychology, by the way. lol

“Yeah, that is not straw man, I think you meant to say it was an ad hominem, but even that would not be accurate because I am not attacking you to discredit your argument, I am simply pointing out how ridiculous it is for you to be posting links to encyclopedias as if I had no idea what information was contained there. As I do in fact have a degree, and you do not. It is sort of like if you were trying to debate physics with an actual physicists, and then posted a link to a page that has information on it which every first year college student is already aware of.” – Challenger

My response, You saying, “When I want advice from an unemployed truck driver living on disability, I will let you know.” Well, yep more troll behaviour and the choice of all losing a debate the character attack not one thing to do with what we are talking about. You really should value your character more than how you are behaving, and yes someone needs to call it out. straw man, as what you said was untrue and made up in your head. And, yes you have done several, ad hominem too.

“You have demonstrated that you have no idea what a strawman or ad hominem even is.” – Challenger

My response, now you are again making ridiculous claims like the lies you so easily utter. Funny how it’s the same person who claimed his way was not us against them but look at you that is just what you have been doing all the while claiming that it is me but I have strived to be civil, not attacking you with the logical fallacies that you have given me, plus you deep vitriol is quite us vs them, you show yourself not to be different than that you say you are not.

“Like I said you have no idea what you are talking about. Virtually every comment you make demonstrates your ignorance. You have a rudimentary understanding of the words you are using, and not to be too particular about this, but it is the sort of thing that makes it obvious that you have never learned about these concepts in any type of formal educational setting. You are using words out of context, and in nonsensical ways. And again I never said I like everybody, or feel any obligation to be nice to everybody. It is okay to hate some people especially demagogues, ideologues, and people who hold divisive or abhorrent tribalistic views such as extreme religious fanatics, or in your case just your average everyday despicable fast talking used cars salesmen trying to gain a following on social media. we have no need for people like you.” – Challenger

My response, well as you have tried to make this about me a poor move as a debater and not the truth of your arguments, even acting as the very thing you claim to not do, “you vs me or us vs them.” You should truly think about what you do and what is valued behaviour in one who is rational.

“Also you do not understand what axiology is, and should probably stop calling yourself and axiologist as it is really just advertising to the world that you have no idea what you are talking about.” – Challenger

My response, Yes I do. Axiology is both a philosophy and a science of value. Value is how you make an assessment of what is good, invaluable, worth, helpful or moral and what is bad, unvalued unworthy, harmful, or immoral. Axiology can be thought of being an alternate title: theory of value. Axiology, (from Greek axios, “worthy”; logos, “science”), also called the philosophical study of goodness, or value, in the widest sense of these terms. Its significance lies (1) in the considerable expansion that it has given to the meaning of the term value and (2) in the unification that it has provided for the study of a variety of questions—economic, moral, aesthetic, and even logical—that had often been considered in relative isolation. The term “value” originally meant the worth of something, chiefly in the economic sense of exchange value, as in the work of the 18th-century political economist Adam Smith. A broad extension of the meaning of value to wider areas of philosophical interest occurred during the 19th century under the influence of a variety of thinkers and schools. Because “fact” symbolizes objectivity and “value” suggests subjectivity, the relationship of value to a fact is of fundamental importance in developing any theory of the objectivity of value and of value judgments. Whereas such descriptive sciences as sociology, psychology, anthropology, etc. all attempt to give a factual description of what is actually valued, as well as causal explanations of similarities and differences between the valuations, it remains the philosopher’s task to ask about their objective validity. (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/value-theory/)'”Value Theory (axiology) – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

“You are just making stuff up now, good bye. .” – Challenger

My response, Here is a video of me interviewing formal axiological atheist Dr. William Kelleher: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aClnoupJ4Hk&t=9314s) And (http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_atheism.html) in this link there are a few lines about axiological atheism.

My response, First, you are wrong that my ideas or are is not valued because it is and yes people do care, you saying they don’t is that you trying that (us vs them) as in what you don’t like get to be made into you get to speak for others against me, interesting how you have to use so many personal attacks just to feel better, I feel sorry for you. Oh, no, not more of my good ideas. Lol

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

“Epistemology is just another word for saying knowledge. Just so you know religious claims trespass overtly on scientific knowledge so they in fact are not different fields of knowledge. The methods being used to obtain knowledge are different, but both science, and religion are making claims about the world, and are therefore overlapping matters. The only people besides you who think they should be separate are religious moderates who want to be able to also say science and religion cover differents fields of knowledge so as to avoid reconciling their own cognitive dissonance. The above posted meme really is just an expression of how impressively bad you are at this. As in an attempt to make an argument against religion, you actually make one for it. But just keep these idiotic photo replies coming, and I am not going to keep debunking them here. I am saving them for later original post whenever I see once again trolling atheist groups.” – Challenger

My response, you make a claim about epistemology is more than just a word or term. A scientist-philosopher agreeing that my outline was basically correct. And here is another meme.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

My response, So, I see all you really seem to commonly like to make personal attacks and putdowns, like one disregarding their own critical thinking, so I am done talking to you. Have a good night.

“Yeah, whatever buddy, go back to school, don’t do drugs, and stop spreading you BS ideology around every single atheist group as if there was no escape from your stupidity.” – Challenger

“I stopped halfway but we have a clear winner. Challenger, is a dumbass who only attacks a person rather than an argument. Winner Damien, and it’s not even close.” – Commenter

My response, Thanks for your support Commenter. ????

“Commenter, I have had in depth conversations with this Damien Marie AtHope he is a complete idiot, and is using philosophical terms out of context with incorrect definitions, He has never been to college, and does not understand even the foundational basis for the arguments he is attempting to make. I understand how he may seem like some deep thinker to other equally uneducated idiots like yourself, but you are only indicting your own stupidity by declaring him “winner”. This is not even a contest, i was not even attempting to engage Damien in a debate as he is not worthy of the intellectual effort, and apparently neither are you so have a nice day, and fuck off.” – Challenger

“Lmfao!!! This is why u suck. Out of that entire engagement, you never said anything. U just put ppl down like that makes you cool.” – Commenter

“yeah, Commenter, well I may suck, and I may be an asshole, but what you can’t say is that I am wrong, now fuck off. I never claimed to be cool.” – Challenger

“You’re wrong, Challenger. There I said it. You lose again.” – Commenter

“Commenter Do not care about being “cool” I am right, and Damien is a dumb ass. As if that settled anything, I am right and you are an idiot.” – Challenger

“How do you know? Claims require demonstration on this page. “Admin” Don’t ya think? Several made in this thread with no demonstration.” – Commenter

“I am under no obligation to teach a philosophy class here. There are people who spend their entire careers just trying to define terms such as epistemology, ontology, and axiology. It would take literally hours to go through the incoherent word salad Damien Marie Athope spews out every other minute.He has no idea what he is talking about, and I am not inclined to attempt to provide an entire college education to him in a FB thread. And “Admin” since we are tgging admins now I guess. You should know this Damien Marie Athope spams atheists groups on a regular basis with his nonsense, using scientific jargon to provide the appearance at least that he knows what he is talking about. His arguments do not, and never have stood up to scrutiny, they could easily be debunked by any first year philosophy student, and unless you want your group filled full of illiterate people putting forward nonsensical arguments against religion I would recommend putting a check on this. Damien Marie Athope has only one real goal and that is to promote himself, and some future book he plans on writing. Only thing he does not know is a book covering so many philosophical concepts would for sure be sent to a person with an actual degree in philosophy before any publisher would even look at it, and it will never make it out of that stage.” – Challenger

Damien Marie AtHope you’re the Kent Hovind of atheism. I think it would be accurate to describe you as Kent Hovind’s intellectual doppelganger.” – Challenger

My response, Kent Hovind, I had a street debate with him when I was protesting the creationism conference. Here is a video, that man in the pic was working with Kent Hovind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jFBmgIgM-g

Atheist Activism Training #1: Know You, Know Your Motivations and Understand Others

Atheist Activism Training #2: Ontology, Epistemology, and Axiology (methodological use of philosophy)

Atheist Activism Training #3: Navigate the Discussion, Control the Questions, and Turn the Argument

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

People don’t commonly teach religious history, even that of their own claimed religion. No, rather they teach a limited “pro their religion” history of their religion from a religious perspective favorable to the religion of choice. 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Do you truly think “Religious Belief” is only a matter of some personal choice?

Do you not see how coercive one’s world of choice is limited to the obvious hereditary belief, in most religious choices available to the child of religious parents or caregivers? Religion is more commonly like a family, culture, society, etc. available belief that limits the belief choices of the child and that is when “Religious Belief” is not only a matter of some personal choice and when it becomes hereditary faith, not because of the quality of its alleged facts or proposed truths but because everyone else important to the child believes similarly so they do as well simply mimicking authority beliefs handed to them. Because children are raised in religion rather than being presented all possible choices but rather one limited dogmatic brand of “Religious Belief” where children only have a choice of following the belief as instructed, and then personally claim the faith hereditary belief seen in the confirming to the belief they have held themselves all their lives. This is obvious in statements asked and answered by children claiming a faith they barely understand but they do understand that their family believes “this or that” faith, so they feel obligated to believe it too. While I do agree that “Religious Belief” should only be a matter of some personal choice, it rarely is… End Hereditary Religion!

Opposition to Imposed Hereditary Religion

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

We are like believing machines we vacuum up ideas, like Velcro sticks to almost everything. We accumulate beliefs that we allow to negatively influence our lives, often without realizing it. Our willingness must be to alter skewed beliefs that impend our balance or reason, which allows us to achieve new positive thinking and accurate outcomes.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Low Gods “Earth” or Tutelary deity and High Gods “Sky” or Supreme deity

“An Earth goddess is a deification of the Earth. Earth goddesses are often associated with the “chthonic” deities of the underworld. Ki and Ninhursag are Mesopotamian earth goddesses. In Greek mythology, the Earth is personified as Gaia, corresponding to Roman Terra, Indic Prithvi/Bhūmi, etc. traced to an “Earth Mother” complementary to the “Sky Father” in Proto-Indo-European religion. Egyptian mythology exceptionally has a sky goddess and an Earth god.” ref

“A mother goddess is a goddess who represents or is a personification of nature, motherhood, fertility, creation, destruction or who embodies the bounty of the Earth. When equated with the Earth or the natural world, such goddesses are sometimes referred to as Mother Earth or as the Earth Mother. In some religious traditions or movements, Heavenly Mother (also referred to as Mother in Heaven or Sky Mother) is the wife or feminine counterpart of the Sky father or God the Father.” ref

“Any masculine sky god is often also king of the gods, taking the position of patriarch within a pantheon. Such king gods are collectively categorized as “sky father” deities, with a polarity between sky and earth often being expressed by pairing a “sky father” god with an “earth mother” goddess (pairings of a sky mother with an earth father are less frequent). A main sky goddess is often the queen of the gods and may be an air/sky goddess in her own right, though she usually has other functions as well with “sky” not being her main. In antiquity, several sky goddesses in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Near East were called Queen of Heaven. Neopagans often apply it with impunity to sky goddesses from other regions who were never associated with the term historically. The sky often has important religious significance. Many religions, both polytheistic and monotheistic, have deities associated with the sky.” ref

“In comparative mythology, sky father is a term for a recurring concept in polytheistic religions of a sky god who is addressed as a “father”, often the father of a pantheon and is often either a reigning or former King of the Gods. The concept of “sky father” may also be taken to include Sun gods with similar characteristics, such as Ra. The concept is complementary to an “earth mother“. “Sky Father” is a direct translation of the Vedic Dyaus Pita, etymologically descended from the same Proto-Indo-European deity name as the Greek Zeûs Pater and Roman Jupiter and Germanic Týr, Tir or Tiwaz, all of which are reflexes of the same Proto-Indo-European deity’s name, *Dyēus Ph₂tḗr. While there are numerous parallels adduced from outside of Indo-European mythology, there are exceptions (e.g. In Egyptian mythology, Nut is the sky mother and Geb is the earth father).” ref

Tutelary deity

“A tutelary (also tutelar) is a deity or spirit who is a guardian, patron, or protector of a particular place, geographic feature, person, lineage, nation, culture, or occupation. The etymology of “tutelary” expresses the concept of safety and thus of guardianship. In late Greek and Roman religion, one type of tutelary deity, the genius, functions as the personal deity or daimon of an individual from birth to death. Another form of personal tutelary spirit is the familiar spirit of European folklore.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) in Korean shamanism, jangseung and sotdae were placed at the edge of villages to frighten off demons. They were also worshiped as deities. Seonangshin is the patron deity of the village in Korean tradition and was believed to embody the Seonangdang. In Philippine animism, Diwata or Lambana are deities or spirits that inhabit sacred places like mountains and mounds and serve as guardians. Such as: Maria Makiling is the deity who guards Mt. Makiling and Maria Cacao and Maria Sinukuan. In Shinto, the spirits, or kami, which give life to human bodies come from nature and return to it after death. Ancestors are therefore themselves tutelaries to be worshiped. And similarly, Native American beliefs such as Tonás, tutelary animal spirit among the Zapotec and Totems, familial or clan spirits among the Ojibwe, can be animals.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) in Austronesian beliefs such as: Atua (gods and spirits of the Polynesian peoples such as the Māori or the Hawaiians), Hanitu (Bunun of Taiwan‘s term for spirit), Hyang (Kawi, Sundanese, Javanese, and Balinese Supreme Being, in ancient Java and Bali mythology and this spiritual entity, can be either divine or ancestral), Kaitiaki (New Zealand Māori term used for the concept of guardianship, for the sky, the sea, and the land), Kawas (mythology) (divided into 6 groups: gods, ancestors, souls of the living, spirits of living things, spirits of lifeless objects, and ghosts), Tiki (Māori mythology, Tiki is the first man created by either Tūmatauenga or Tāne and represents deified ancestors found in most Polynesian cultures). ” ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Mesopotamian Tutelary Deities can be seen as ones related to City-States 

“Historical city-states included Sumerian cities such as Uruk and Ur; Ancient Egyptian city-states, such as Thebes and Memphis; the Phoenician cities (such as Tyre and Sidon); the five Philistine city-states; the Berber city-states of the Garamantes; the city-states of ancient Greece (the poleis such as Athens, Sparta, Thebes, and Corinth); the Roman Republic (which grew from a city-state into a vast empire); the Italian city-states from the Middle Ages to the early modern period, such as Florence, Siena, Ferrara, Milan (which as they grew in power began to dominate neighboring cities) and Genoa and Venice, which became powerful thalassocracies; the Mayan and other cultures of pre-Columbian Mesoamerica (including cities such as Chichen Itza, Tikal, Copán and Monte Albán); the central Asian cities along the Silk Road; the city-states of the Swahili coast; Ragusa; states of the medieval Russian lands such as Novgorod and Pskov; and many others.” ref

“The Uruk period (ca. 4000 to 3100 BCE; also known as Protoliterate period) of Mesopotamia, named after the Sumerian city of Uruk, this period saw the emergence of urban life in Mesopotamia and the Sumerian civilization. City-States like Uruk and others had a patron tutelary City Deity along with a Priest-King.” ref

“Chinese folk religion, both past, and present, includes myriad tutelary deities. Exceptional individuals, highly cultivated sages, and prominent ancestors can be deified and honored after death. Lord Guan is the patron of military personnel and police, while Mazu is the patron of fishermen and sailors. Such as Tu Di Gong (Earth Deity) is the tutelary deity of a locality, and each individual locality has its own Earth Deity and Cheng Huang Gong (City God) is the guardian deity of an individual city, worshipped by local officials and locals since imperial times.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) in Hinduism, personal tutelary deities are known as ishta-devata, while family tutelary deities are known as Kuladevata. Gramadevata are guardian deities of villages. Devas can also be seen as tutelary. Shiva is the patron of yogis and renunciants. City goddesses include: Mumbadevi (Mumbai), Sachchika (Osian); Kuladevis include: Ambika (Porwad), and Mahalakshmi. In NorthEast India Meitei mythology and religion (Sanamahism) of Manipur, there are various types of tutelary deities, among which Lam Lais are the most predominant ones. Tibetan Buddhism has Yidam as a tutelary deity. Dakini is the patron of those who seek knowledge.” ref

“A tutelary (also tutelar) The Greeks also thought deities guarded specific places: for instance, Athena was the patron goddess of the city of Athens. Socrates spoke of hearing the voice of his personal spirit or daimonion:

You have often heard me speak of an oracle or sign which comes to me … . This sign I have had ever since I was a child. The sign is a voice which comes to me and always forbids me to do something which I am going to do, but never commands me to do anything, and this is what stands in the way of my being a politician.” ref

“Tutelary deities who guard and preserve a place or a person are fundamental to ancient Roman religion. The tutelary deity of a man was his Genius, that of a woman her Juno. In the Imperial era, the Genius of the Emperor was a focus of Imperial cult. An emperor might also adopt a major deity as his personal patron or tutelary, as Augustus did Apollo. Precedents for claiming the personal protection of a deity were established in the Republican era, when for instance the Roman dictator Sulla advertised the goddess Victory as his tutelary by holding public games (ludi) in her honor.” ref

“Each town or city had one or more tutelary deities, whose protection was considered particularly vital in time of war and siege. Rome itself was protected by a goddess whose name was to be kept ritually secret on pain of death (for a supposed case, see Quintus Valerius Soranus). The Capitoline Triad of Juno, Jupiter, and Minerva were also tutelaries of Rome. The Italic towns had their own tutelary deities. Juno often had this function, as at the Latin town of Lanuvium and the Etruscan city of Veii, and was often housed in an especially grand temple on the arx (citadel) or other prominent or central location. The tutelary deity of Praeneste was Fortuna, whose oracle was renowned.” ref

“The Roman ritual of evocatio was premised on the belief that a town could be made vulnerable to military defeat if the power of its tutelary deity were diverted outside the city, perhaps by the offer of superior cult at Rome. The depiction of some goddesses such as the Magna Mater (Great Mother, or Cybele) as “tower-crowned” represents their capacity to preserve the city. A town in the provinces might adopt a deity from within the Roman religious sphere to serve as its guardian, or syncretize its own tutelary with such; for instance, a community within the civitas of the Remi in Gaul adopted Apollo as its tutelary, and at the capital of the Remi (present-day Rheims), the tutelary was Mars Camulus.” ref 

Household deity (a kind of or related to a Tutelary deity)

“A household deity is a deity or spirit that protects the home, looking after the entire household or certain key members. It has been a common belief in paganism as well as in folklore across many parts of the world. Household deities fit into two types; firstly, a specific deity – typically a goddess – often referred to as a hearth goddess or domestic goddess who is associated with the home and hearth, such as the ancient Greek Hestia.” ref

“The second type of household deities are those that are not one singular deity, but a type, or species of animistic deity, who usually have lesser powers than major deities. This type was common in the religions of antiquity, such as the Lares of ancient Roman religion, the Gashin of Korean shamanism, and Cofgodas of Anglo-Saxon paganism. These survived Christianisation as fairy-like creatures existing in folklore, such as the Anglo-Scottish Brownie and Slavic Domovoy.” ref

“Household deities were usually worshipped not in temples but in the home, where they would be represented by small idols (such as the teraphim of the Bible, often translated as “household gods” in Genesis 31:19 for example), amulets, paintings, or reliefs. They could also be found on domestic objects, such as cosmetic articles in the case of Tawaret. The more prosperous houses might have a small shrine to the household god(s); the lararium served this purpose in the case of the Romans. The gods would be treated as members of the family and invited to join in meals, or be given offerings of food and drink.” ref

“In many religions, both ancient and modern, a god would preside over the home. Certain species, or types, of household deities, existed. An example of this was the Roman Lares. Many European cultures retained house spirits into the modern period. Some examples of these include:

• Brownie (Scotland and England) or Hob (England) / Kobold (Germany) / Goblin / Hobgoblin
• Domovoy (Slavic)
• Nisse (Norwegian or Danish) / Tomte (Swedish) / Tonttu (Finnish)
• Húsvættir (Norse)” ref

“Although the cosmic status of household deities was not as lofty as that of the Twelve Olympians or the Aesir, they were also jealous of their dignity and also had to be appeased with shrines and offerings, however humble. Because of their immediacy they had arguably more influence on the day-to-day affairs of men than the remote gods did. Vestiges of their worship persisted long after Christianity and other major religions extirpated nearly every trace of the major pagan pantheons. Elements of the practice can be seen even today, with Christian accretions, where statues to various saints (such as St. Francis) protect gardens and grottos. Even the gargoyles found on older churches, could be viewed as guardians partitioning a sacred space.” ref

“For centuries, Christianity fought a mop-up war against these lingering minor pagan deities, but they proved tenacious. For example, Martin Luther‘s Tischreden have numerous – quite serious – references to dealing with kobolds. Eventually, rationalism and the Industrial Revolution threatened to erase most of these minor deities, until the advent of romantic nationalism rehabilitated them and embellished them into objects of literary curiosity in the 19th century. Since the 20th century this literature has been mined for characters for role-playing games, video games, and other fantasy personae, not infrequently invested with invented traits and hierarchies somewhat different from their mythological and folkloric roots.” ref

“In contradistinction to both Herbert Spencer and Edward Burnett Tylor, who defended theories of animistic origins of ancestor worship, Émile Durkheim saw its origin in totemism. In reality, this distinction is somewhat academic, since totemism may be regarded as a particularized manifestation of animism, and something of a synthesis of the two positions was attempted by Sigmund Freud. In Freud’s Totem and Taboo, both totem and taboo are outward expressions or manifestations of the same psychological tendency, a concept which is complementary to, or which rather reconciles, the apparent conflict. Freud preferred to emphasize the psychoanalytic implications of the reification of metaphysical forces, but with particular emphasis on its familial nature. This emphasis underscores, rather than weakens, the ancestral component.” ref

“William Edward Hearn, a noted classicist, and jurist, traced the origin of domestic deities from the earliest stages as an expression of animism, a belief system thought to have existed also in the neolithic, and the forerunner of Indo-European religion. In his analysis of the Indo-European household, in Chapter II “The House Spirit”, Section 1, he states:

The belief which guided the conduct of our forefathers was … the spirit rule of dead ancestors.” ref

“In Section 2 he proceeds to elaborate:

It is thus certain that the worship of deceased ancestors is a vera causa, and not a mere hypothesis. …

In the other European nations, the Slavs, the Teutons, and the Kelts, the House Spirit appears with no less distinctness. … [T]he existence of that worship does not admit of doubt. … The House Spirits had a multitude of other names which it is needless here to enumerate, but all of which are more or less expressive of their friendly relations with man. … In [England] … [h]e is the Brownie. … In Scotland this same Brownie is well known. He is usually described as attached to particular families, with whom he has been known to reside for centuries, threshing the corn, cleaning the house, and performing similar household tasks. His favorite gratification was milk and honey.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref

Hinduism around 3,700 to 3,500 years old. ref

 Judaism around 3,450 or 3,250 years old. (The first writing in the bible was “Paleo-Hebrew” dated to around 3,000 years ago Khirbet Qeiyafa is the site of an ancient fortress city overlooking the Elah Valley. And many believe the religious Jewish texts were completed around 2,500) ref, ref

Judaism is around 3,450 or 3,250 years old. (“Paleo-Hebrew” 3,000 years ago and Torah 2,500 years ago)

“Judaism is an Abrahamic, its roots as an organized religion in the Middle East during the Bronze Age. Some scholars argue that modern Judaism evolved from Yahwism, the religion of ancient Israel and Judah, by the late 6th century BCE, and is thus considered to be one of the oldest monotheistic religions.” ref

“Yahwism is the name given by modern scholars to the religion of ancient Israel, essentially polytheistic, with a plethora of gods and goddesses. Heading the pantheon was Yahweh, the national god of the Israelite kingdoms of Israel and Judah, with his consort, the goddess Asherah; below them were second-tier gods and goddesses such as Baal, Shamash, Yarikh, Mot, and Astarte, all of whom had their own priests and prophets and numbered royalty among their devotees, and a third and fourth tier of minor divine beings, including the mal’ak, the messengers of the higher gods, who in later times became the angels of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Yahweh, however, was not the ‘original’ god of Israel “Isra-El”; it is El, the head of the Canaanite pantheon, whose name forms the basis of the name “Israel”, and none of the Old Testament patriarchs, the tribes of Israel, the Judges, or the earliest monarchs, have a Yahwistic theophoric name (i.e., one incorporating the name of Yahweh).” ref

“El is a Northwest Semitic word meaning “god” or “deity“, or referring (as a proper name) to any one of multiple major ancient Near Eastern deities. A rarer form, ‘ila, represents the predicate form in Old Akkadian and in Amorite. The word is derived from the Proto-Semitic *ʔil-, meaning “god”. Specific deities known as ‘El or ‘Il include the supreme god of the ancient Canaanite religion and the supreme god of East Semitic speakers in Mesopotamia’s Early Dynastic Period. ʼĒl is listed at the head of many pantheons. In some Canaanite and Ugaritic sources, ʼĒl played a role as father of the gods, of creation, or both. For example, in the Ugaritic texts, ʾil mlk is understood to mean “ʼĒl the King” but ʾil hd as “the god Hadad“. The Semitic root ʾlh (Arabic ʾilāh, Aramaic ʾAlāh, ʾElāh, Hebrew ʾelōah) may be ʾl with a parasitic h, and ʾl may be an abbreviated form of ʾlh. In Ugaritic the plural form meaning “gods” is ʾilhm, equivalent to Hebrew ʾelōhîm “powers”. In the Hebrew texts this word is interpreted as being semantically singular for “god” by biblical commentators. However the documentary hypothesis for the Old Testament (corresponds to the Jewish Torah) developed originally in the 1870s, identifies these that different authors – the Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist, and the Priestly source – were responsible for editing stories from a polytheistic religion into those of a monotheistic religion. Inconsistencies that arise between monotheism and polytheism in the texts are reflective of this hypothesis.” ref

Jainism around 2,599 – 2,527 years old. ref

Confucianism around 2,600 – 2,551 years old. ref

Buddhism around 2,563/2,480 – 2,483/2,400 years old. ref

Christianity around 2,o00 years old. ref

Shinto around 1,305 years old. ref

Islam around 1407–1385 years old. ref

Sikhism around 548–478 years old. ref

Bahá’í around 200–125 years old. ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope (Said as “At” “Hope”)/(Autodidact Polymath but not good at math):

Axiological Atheist, Anti-theist, Anti-religionist, Secular Humanist, Rationalist, Writer, Artist, Jeweler, Poet, “autodidact” Philosopher, schooled in Psychology, and “autodidact” Armchair Archaeology/Anthropology/Pre-Historian (Knowledgeable in the range of: 1 million to 5,000/4,000 years ago). I am an anarchist socialist politically. Reasons for or Types of Atheism

My Website, My Blog, & Short-writing or Quotes, My YouTube, Twitter: @AthopeMarie, and My Email: damien.marie.athope@gmail.com