Why the pamphlet series titled “God, godless, godly”

I have used the words “philotheos” and “philotheism” to identify the two key aspects of a God centred system of philosophical thinking.

Philotheos refers to the fundamental conceptual idea  of God. That conception must reflect the essence of Who or What God must be.  The conception identified is the Name of God given to Moses:  “I AM”. It is this manifestly accurate, God derived conception of God which I intend to elaborate in this series of 3 parts, namely:

  1. God – Who God is
  2. Godless – What we are
  3. Godly or Godless: relating – or not – to God

The series is titled, “God, godless, godly”.

The word “philotheos” is appropriate because it places God first, not ourselves. It means, “God love” or “God lover”. It means we place God and God’s assessment above our human view and our human understanding. It rejects the man first, man derived perspective of our existence – it therefore rejects outright the human centred notion that everything is determined according to human perception – objective reality does not exist. I assert that, while everything may well be distorted by man’s perception [he is a self deceived sinner !] there is nevertheless an objective reality susceptible to being distorted by man’s perception !

I use the word “philotheism” to describe the paradigm which necessarily arises on the basis of the concept of God as “I AM”. The suffix, “-ism” indicates  teaching of a system of belief, such as Communism, or Buddhism, or fascism, or socialism. A body of teaching necessarily arises from the fundamental concept or idea which the teaching exists to explain. In so doing, it necessarily delineates itself from other belief systems; it usually adopts parameters of reference to reinforce and explain its perspective and its assumed norms of how to look at the world.

Philotheism therefore elaborates the perspective, mindset and system of thought which necessarily arises from the fundamental assertion that God our Maker is “I AM”. It necessarily thinks in and promotes a particular way of thinking, in accordance with its assumptions and key ideas. It even has vocabulary reflecting this thinking. It is therefore a paradigm.

Accordingly I will explain “What” we human beings are and “How” then we relate – or fail to relate – to the God who is “I AM”, by referencing the terms and assumptions of God-centred thinking. That will necessarily contrast such thinking from human centred thinking and assumptions. Notice that human centred thinking has its own paradigm which it seeks to impose as THE paradigm by which we all live. The systematic elimination of the Christian festivals in the annual calendar is both example and symptom. We witness now a human centered calendar being imposed in order to cause us to live by the conceptions and assumptions of human divinity: hence Pride month; Black history month; International Women’s day etc.

But, if God is the essence of existence, then our existence is necessarily predicated upon the existence of God – otherwise humanity becomes ‘god’.  In philotheistic terms that is ‘nonsense’ – we entertain such ‘nonsense’ because we deceive ourselves by saying God does not exist.  In so doing we exalt ourselves to the place of God and thereby expose our foolishness – a foolishness manifest in the fundamentally untenable idea that our existence is merely a matter of perception. This is clearly implicit in Descartes ‘Cogito’, “I think, therefore I am” – we know we exist because we are aware of ourselves.  That contains a great deal of truth. Indeed, Descartes would not necessarily see a contradiction with that and the existence of God. But note the words of Descartes ‘Cogito’ represent an anthropocentric appropriation  of the God declared Being, “I AM”. While himself not rejecting the idea that God must exist, Descartes in fact subconsciously reflects the real, underlying attitude of the human ‘heart’ which revolts against God,  demanding for itself instead the status of god.

Today’s Western world has rejected a theistic view in favour of a merely human centred view of the world. Accordingly, we now have laws which require us to think as if our existence were self dependent and self conceived, not God dependent and God conceived. We are each to determine our own identity according to our individual feelings and thoughts, not according to any objective criteria.

In reality this entails a reductio ad absurdam;  it creates the extreme nonsense whereby a person with a facial beard, a penis, and all the physical attributes associated with being a “man” can become a “woman”. This person must be treated as a woman and be referred to as “she” in legal documents. If someone has the audacity to refer to that person in the historic understanding as “he” they risk prosecution. This reveals the triumph of self centred perception over God centred objectivity and reality;  and in fact it is also represents the triumph of nonsense over reality. ‘Paradoxically’, this is where godlessness actually leads …

Traditionally, a person of one sex identifying with the “opposite” sex was thought to have psychological issues to resolve. But today, society must be forcibly conformed to that individual’s conception of themselves. That individual is no longer the problem; Society’s preconceptions have become the problem.  The individual is exculpated and justified.

But it has meant that if dishonest individuals make a self assessment to deceive society as to their criminal motives, such individuals nevertheless remain entitled  to maintain their manifest falsehood. Why ? Because the ruling philosophy applied imposes an extreme individualism to the total denial of all other factors.  There are incidents on record where a dishonest individual has raped women in a prison to which only women may be sent. The abuse of self declaration by an individual is foisted onto Society but  Society may no longer make any objective assessment of that person and their actions. Why ? Because the only assessment now acceptable is self assessment –  considered to be their fundamental “Right” .

We have, then, the conditions for the breakdown of the traditional conception of the rule of law; this philosophy leads directly to a situation where the criminal’s rights over-rule any consideration for the rights of the victim and of Society. The strong may abuse the weak, and the institutions of the State must nevertheless protect the notion of self identifying identity. This type of reasoning has become dominant among many intellectuals and academics over the last 20 to 40 years. It represents the triumph of human centred, human-only determined reality where human beings have displaced all accountability to their Creator and become, instead, accountable solely to their own perceptions and judgements.

Such anthropocentric  thinking has been revealed time and again to create a situation of domination by the powerful few over the obsequious majority who are conceptually and psychologically intimidated into accepting the minority view. Witness the extremist authoritarian regimes of the 20th century and the atrocities which they committed.

Such thinking reflects the default mindset of godless human beings. It is the mindset which appears time and again where certain human beings believe fanatically that humans are themselves god; the corollary is that human beings must therefore determine both the moral order and their own destiny. Control of the majority by a self promoting minority citing the pretext of “the good of all” becomes the order of the day.

This man-centred and domineering mindset has become so overwhelming that the governments of western democracies resorted to unprecedented control of their populations during the Covid 19 pandemic. The most everyday and normal actions of the population as a whole became subject to government diktat  and control.

The pretext of extreme individualism has in practice caused the most extreme denial of the most ordinary, fundamental liberty. It is so extreme that the very dignity of the individual is now demeaned in the name of this minority conception of ‘the good of all’.

This paradox, however, is entirely explicable in the philotheistic worldview. Indeed it is predictable.

An objective God who is supreme over all human beings is replaced by the idea of human beings as god. This defies the fundamental reality of our God centred, God dependent and God ordained world. Such self deceit is invariably practised and imposed by the few. Both the psychology and the strategem of control were identified long ago by Plato when he articulated his ‘Noble Lie’.

Philotheistically, however, God creates and therefore owns every human being. All human beings, both dominant and submissive,  must see themselves as accountable at all times to a Power beyond themselves as individuals. It necessarily therefore means that all those in positions of power are required to see themselves as accountable to that greater Power for all their actions towards those for whom they have responsibility. That constraint and counter balance to human arrogance disappears, however,  in the man-oriented system of thinking. The descent into abuse of our fellow human beings is inevitable when this mentality gains complete control. This is what we witness today.

This becomes blatant once the actual God is removed from our thinking.  Certain men then exalt themselves above all others, appropriating to themselves the accountability which belongs to God alone. This is the ultimate blasphemy. And the history of the 20th century demonstrates the wickedness which atheists are capable of as they seek to exalt mere men as god – Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Pol Pot. They were all deniers of their Maker and they obsessively imposed their particular versions of human centred thinking as the answer to all human problems. They refused to see therefore the even bigger problem which they themselves represented, indeed which they incarnated…

My allusion to the God incarnate concept in Christianity is intentional.

God – Who is God ?

WHO IS GOD ?    The answer to that question will tell you a lot about the person who gives the answer – but may not actually tell you much about the meaning of the word, “God”.

Ask an atheist and they will tell you that God does not exist. They maintain that the God idea is just that – an idea, nothing more. An idea which human beings cling to for all sorts of reasons:  often because they find it comforting; or because some people can use God as a means to gain control over the hearts and minds of other human beings. The supporting evidence for this view is, indeed,  abundant.  You can cite historical evidence for abuse by  people who promote a god belief of one sort or another. Historically, there are the Crusades, for example. Today there are the manipulative control techniques of cults and sects and, even worse, the terrorist activities of some religious fundamentalists in recent years.

But in fact this is evidence of what human beings do, not what God does.   I could equally cite the millions upon millions of lives lost in the last century alone to the atheist fanatics who imposed various forms of communism and national socialism in Russia, in China and in Europe.

All such evil activity is perpetrated by human beings with human distortions about God or human conceptions denying the existence of God.

That human beings abuse belief and abuse other human beings is evident. It should, instead, cause us to ask the question: “What are we ?” The answer to that  will explain Why we commit the most atrocious acts against each other. Indeed the worst offenders are those who patently believe that they  have THE answer; those who are most committed to putting the world right. People who invariably cite the “good of all” as their purpose.

What such people fail to see is that the answer does not start with human beings. It starts with our Creator, God. And the ostensibly religious can be as bad as the non-religious and ‘un-believing’ atheist. In fact religious people too are often deceived by their human perception of God, and by their own interpretation of God. Without realising it, the religious can commit the very same error as the atheist i.e start with our human needs, wants, interests and ambitions. Human ideas about God warp and damage the reputation of God who made us – and damage our understanding of God.

Of course the atheist reading this will respond that everything is subject to our human perception. We all have interests, perspectives, inclinations, ideas which affect our conception of God. And that explains why there are so many religions, cults and sects. It therefore must all come down to human perception.  That, of course,  reinforces the atheist’s assertion that God does not actually exist.

But God does exist. And if God does exist, then God must surely manifest and communicate.

My fundamental contention is that God has declared who God is and that God’s declaration is both self evidently and demonstrably true. [footnote]

God has declared ‘himself’ as


It is on this basis, and on this basis alone, that we must conceive of God, and understand God. On this basis we can correctly identify who God is and how God operates. Many observations I make on this basis have often been made before by theologians and believers in the past.

What I am trying to do by articulating philotheism is to challenge the pervasive Materialistic assumptions and doctrine of the 21st century’s worldview. By articulating the essence of God as the correct way to view our existence, I want to counter false ideas and attitudes, both among god believers and atheists. The central concept –  “I AM” –  is key. I assert fundamentally that we must start with the God declared name of God; that God’s name is “I AM” and that reveals God’s very nature and therefore all else; I assert that all we understand and do must start and end with that central conception – a conception I regard as the vital, fundamental, critical truth. It is the failure to start, continue, and end with this central concept which results in all the problems we have. Without that conception, we inevitably fail; with it, we have the opportunity to succeed.

I firmly hold that the Philotheistic view corresponds to the reality of who we are and explains how we need to be and behave to succeed – i.e.  to live in harmony with ourselves and with the natural world on which we depend for this physical life.  This world – and especially the Materialistic western mindset  – desperately needs to hear this alternative perspective and understanding. Otherwise, we will persist in exacerbating the very problems which we need to solve.

By accepting the fact of God as our premise we can actually begin to see our existence in its true light – a light which reveals us as we really are, and this world as it really works.  By looking at the world from this standpoint, we have the opportunity both to see and to live this life as we all need to, together.

the fundamental facets of the I AM

God is recorded in a Biblical account agreed by all 3 monotheistic world religions to have self declared by the name “I AM”. In the second book of the Old Testament of the Bible – the book of Exodus chapter 3 – God communicates a self revelatory name to the lawgiver and founding Statesman of the Jewish nation, Moses. God states categorically that God’s name is “I AM THAT I AM” which is rendered later in the same record as simply “I AM”.

With this assertion all 3 monotheistic world religions must agree. There is nothing here to contradict their particular explanations of God our Creator who demands our worship and obedience.

[The Christian religion of course identifies its Founder, Jesus Christ, as God with his claim to be “I AM”. Personally, I accept that claim and the teaching of Jesus Christ to be fundamentally true and therefore apposite to all human beings in all situations at all times. But Judaism and Islam do not accept this claim by Christ, indeed they regard it as blasphemous. They make no claim for divinity for their founding figures]

But even someone who does not agree that God actually exists, can presumably agree that if God does indeed exist, then this claim to be “I AM” must necessarily be central. The god idea or concept must incorporate this idea or concept. That being so, certain fundamental facets of God must also follow.

  1. God must exist at all times, everywhere
  2. therefore God is the author of life because God’s existence necessarily predates  all other existence; God is the source, the origin of all that exists – this world is God’s creation; Gods’ property
  3. God has all ultimate power and all ultimate authority
  4. God’s creation indicates that God is creative, constructive, and harmonious
  5. God both provides – and is – THE Purpose
  6. God being the source and power behind all, God must be the constant reference point for all understanding and knowledge
  7. God  knows what is true and how reality works – therefore we need to see God as the central moral reference for all our thinking and decision making in life


Historically, people refer to God as male. However, that too indicates that human beings view God via their own framework of thought rather than via God’s.  If we take the Genesis record which is accepted by all three monotheistic world religions, then we find that humankind was made in the image of God:  not male and female after separation, but male and female before separation. God is neither exclusively male nor female but incorporates the harmony and unity of both sexes in one.

Godless – What are we ?

Having considered seven implicit characteristics of God arising from the quintessential definition, “I AM”, we now have a conceptual reference point from which  to determine where the human race finds itself in relation to God and to itself.

If God exists, then human existence necessarily takes place in relation to, and because of, God. Given this premise, the perspective in which to consider humanity follows.  What is it ?

God necessarily existing, and having the attributes already defined on the basis of the quintessential definition, “I AM”, certain axiomatic observations about the condition of human beings must follow.

  1. denial of God is a denial of the comprehensive and representative Truth about existence
  2. that denial necessarily warps our perception of our existence and about our nature, such that we censor the truth about ourselves, and so undermine our ability to diagnose properly and adequately the predicament we are actually in
  3. our very nature is therefore characterised by the allied states of DECEPTION and DISTORTION about our existence
  4. this causes us to invert the actual order of God’s supremacy and our dependency
  5. instead we make ourselves ‘god’ and so  presume the right to determine our moral code and therefore how we behave
  6. we therefore exalt our perception of reality above the truth of reality – we begin to believe that our perception determines reality, and we begin to minimise the importance of reality in framing our thinking and behaviour
  7. we then live in a state where we begin to behave as gods in our individual lives, in direct contradiction to our fundamental need for discipline [the constraint of the deluded Self] in order to live in harmony with other human beings
  8. having lost the idea of God –  or having so distorted the idea of God with manifestly outrageous religious ideas  – most people become fundamentally insecure and frightened by the idea that they must take control of their destiny because they no longer conceive of any Providential and Supervising Moral Power to assure human well-being
  9. the forceful characters among us react to this fundamental insecurity by taking control not just of themselves, but over their circumstances and over other people – after all, there is no God to hold them to account; they are their own god, beholden only to their own judgement which is, of course, as self deceived as the next person’s state of delusion
  10. we end up with human beings behaving as god over other human beings – this ranges from criminal gangsterism on the streets and in multinational board rooms to callous dictatorships characterised by authoritarianism and totalitarianism; this last is especially pronounced in the centuries since the so called “Enlightenment” which dispelled the “darkness” of supersition about God….

Man’s inhumanity to man is characteristic of the ultimate denial of the Truth of God, the religion of Material Man – theosanthropos ….

This fundamenal insecurity combined with the propensity to make ourselves god in our own lives, explains the fundamental dynamics at work in all human relations – from the geopolitical right down to the specific and personal which we all live every day.

Reference the geopolitical, big picture I need go no further than to cite the devastating war in Ukraine at the time of writing, in April 2022. Sheer fear drove the Russians to invade Ukraine – fear of the encroachment of western powers and interests right up to their border; and that fear has some sort of basis in reality when you stop to consider what NATO and the USA have done around the world in the last 30 years.

You may, of course, prefer the pervasive propaganda thesis of the West that Putin is a madman. Well, Putin’s position in Russia may have gone to his head. But if he is deluded as to his own importance and as to what he can do, then that simply reinforces my thesis here that human beings delude themselves as to their own importance in relation to the actual importance of God in their lives and the lives of others.

Look at every “terrorist” movement in history – they are motivated by fear of oppression and being subjected to other human beings who presume the right to act like God over them.

But let’s bring this down to the reality we all live every day in our place of work or study, in our homes and in our other social networks. What are the fundamentals at work ?

My wife and I love each other. But we still lie to each other. Why ? Because we don’t want to hurt each other by speaking the raw truth. We fear estrangement, the loss of what is so precious between us. It demonstrates our fundamental human frailty – and I defy any human being to tell me that they always speak the truth regardless of the impact on others, and/or on their own reputation and standing in the eyes of others.

Take the workplace. How often have you made decisions and done things from fear of losing either your job or your reputation ?  Some human beings are so insecure and consequently arrogant that they lie gratuitously in order to harm other people whom they consider to be a threat to their position or their reputation. This behaviour becomes conspicuous wherever position and power are at stake – the ‘politics’ of ambition are notorious in academia, in government and political parties, and in Church – indeed anywhere we find a hierarchy with titles and positions of power over others.

The world of journalism and media is among the most perverse affronts to decent moral behaviour known to human beings.

We all know it is wrong to lie or destroy the reputation of another human being. Yet what happens in the media ? There, success is measured by being the first to break a big story, and by having more readers and listeners than any one else.

Their world epitomises the usurpation of God’s place and God’s manifest moral code: insecure, arrogant human beings bear false witness habitually, defining the truth of events as they see fit.

Godly – or Godless ?

It is self evident that human beings have problems which they cannot solve. History demonstrates that the fundamental problems of our existence persist.  We need only glance at news reports for verification. The age old problems of greed, power and war remain. Despite its horrors, for example, the First World War a century ago did not prevent further armed conflict; it resulted in the even worse Second World War.

Circumstances change of course, but the underlying problem persists. That problem is our refusal to recognise our Creator and to grant that Creator respect and obedience.

Instead we resort to our own human ideas and efforts which may result in changing the issues but not in solving the problem. The fundamental problem persists because it is not truly addressed. Therefore the condition of the human race does not change, and we still have not eliminated the most basic evils of our existence: famine; war; abuse of power; injustice; exploitation – exploitation of each other as well as the very planet on which we rely for physical existence.

With all their technology and their sense of Moral Rights, human beings cannot solve the recurring predicament associated with our humanity. Why ? Because we refuse to face up to the basic problem.

That problem is the rejection of God and alienation from our Maker.

The reason why we are deluded and deceived is our own erroneous sense of what we really are, ie created not emergent.  As I have indicated previously, we have rejected or distorted the truth about our origins and about our dependence on God our Maker. We have instead made our own instincts, ideas and talents the way in which to view and live in this world, even though all our human resources constantly fail us in the most fundamental need we have, namely:

To live in harmony with each other and with the physical environment on which we utterly depend to survive.

The old, basic problem of deception and delusion is ever present with us. Leaders lie to us; the media exploit our instincts; everywhere powerful figures promise to resolve all our problems. But our basic problem is never resolved because the fundamental issue is not addressed: GOD – the fact that we belong to God and that we are beholden to God.

Even when people acknowledge God, they often just go through religious rituals. In fact, we need to live our lives by the norms which God has placed in our consciousness.  How many people actually endeavour to bring that perspective to the problems of this life ?

Today we find Powers adopting the age old posture of hostility and war in place of understanding and tolerance. The propensity of human beings to resort to hatred and lethal conflict always brings suffering on a scale we can never want. But, while recognising moral right and wrong, people still persist in foolishness which breeds more injustice and suffering.

To seek harmony and the welfare of others lies within our consciousness, but ultimately not within our capability. Instead, our default response is self preservation with all the consequent neglect and even destruction of other human beings. We live in the delusion that we can answer the human predicament if we can only pass more laws or spend more money; if we have bigger armies and more powerful weapons than the nasty nations who don’t see the world the way we do. They of course are wrong because we are necessarily right.

There is no end to the human predicament in sight, despite X thousand years of our presence on this planet. The increase of wealth and its redistribution have been hailed as the means to achieve heaven on earth, but wealth just brings its own problems: persistent inequalities; ambition to possess even more, whatever the cost; the delusion that our happiness is dependent on material possessions.

We are trapped in a conceptual and psychological mindset which tells us that our desires are normal and right; that we are in charge of our destiny; and that we must find our own solutions. There is no God to answer to.

We fail therefore to see that WE are the problem. Our instincts; our perspective; our ideas. We fail to see that our Maker is the Answer; that our Maker has the answers; that our Maker is the answer in every aspect of our existence and of our behaviour. That by referencing our Maker as our God, we begin to identify the problem for what it actually is; we begin to access the conceptual perspective and terms of reference which can mediate that answer to us, conceptually and actually. Then we can begin to align ourselves with reality and with the opportunity to escape DELUSION and identify both problem and consequent solution.

The solution lies in rejecting our self DELUSION that God does not exist and that God has no right to command our lives. We must wake up to the fact that every breath we breathe must come from the one who is called, “I AM”. The one who has demonstrated via the facts of creation that God’s nature is creative and harmonious, desiring justice, peace and security. That God is the source not only of all that is physically necessary for us to live, but of all the wisdom which will enable us to live as we know we should.

But, while we refuse the idea of God the “I AM”, we refuse to identify the disease we suffer, and we refuse to apply the only sure solution.

It comprises:

  1. God as our central point of reference for thought and behaviour
  2. God as our very source of life
  3. God’s manifest generosity and harmony in place of our evident self-centredness and disharmony
  4. God’s demand and God’s right to be God in our lives, causing us to realise that others interests are as important as our own interests for the general well-being of us all

Once we recognise that we are mistaken about God; once we realise that the ever present, all knowing and all powerful Being does exist, then the answer becomes available.

God as fact and therefore as paradigm of thought and expression will help us to align ourselves with God and therefore God’s power to live as we ought:  in harmony with others, the planet, and with God.

But where in practice to begin ? Interestingly, all 3 monotheistic world religions agree the necessity of the ‘Decalogue’ – The Ten Commandments – recorded in the Bible:

  1. obey our creative, harmonious, moral Maker and Sustainer
  2. refuse to misrepresent God, and reject anti-God thinking
  3. respect and never denigrate the concept and presence of God
  4. make respect for God real by observing one day each week as an opportunity for Rest and common attendance on God
  5. respect the primacy of family and parental authority
  6. never hate but understand and forgive
  7. keep marriage sacrosanct
  8. respect others rights – never steal
  9. preserve trust – never lie or twist the truth
  10. never hanker for what others have but be content with who you are and what you have

Such moral commands constitute the acid test. Either we align ourselves with God, or else we align with Self and Delusion. Therein lie both Issue and Answer.