Writings On Man, Masculinty And The Emerging Patriarchal Renaissance

Why Should Man Believe In God?

Maximus Decimus Meridius | October 28, 2017 | 12 minute read

Failure. In life. In love. In finances. These are things no one wishes upon themselves and always walks a wide berth around those it does happen to in order to not catch any of it. I wrote about failure in life because it is something no one writes about for that very reason. If it has not happened to you, to any significant degree, you need to give thanks. It is in being grateful, for what one has and for that which has not happened to him that a Man, if he is wise, begins to see the workings of God in his life.

I may lose a lot of atheist readers with this article. I would hope they would give me the opportunity to simply explain why belief in God is natural for Man, for them to use their intelligence and keep an open mind.

For any patriarchal renaissance in The West to take place, Man will have to find his way back to God.

And it is in failure, in loss, in complete desperation wherewith western Man finds his present condition that God is giving him the opportunity to remember his true nature and his maker once more.

Today or tomorrow sickness and death will come (they had come already) to those I love or to me; nothing will remain but stench and worms. Sooner or later my affairs, whatever they may be, will be forgotten, and I shall not exist. Then why go on making any effort? How can man fail to see this? And how go on living? That is what is surprising! One can only live while one is intoxicated with life; as soon as one is sober it is impossible not to see that it is all a mere fraud and a stupid fraud! That is precisely what it is: there is nothing either amusing or witty about it, it is simply cruel and stupid.

Tolstoy - A Confession

It would be hard for any young man to not agree with Tolstoy's assessment of life, especially in the materialist 21st century. When we ask why should one believe in God, we are asking many other why questions all at once. Why is the only question that gives purpose and meaning to life.

Without a why, Man slowly dies, both within and without.

To illustrate this, let's start from the logical end point to there being no God as the ground for Man - the perspective of the nihilist, the atheist.


"There is no God nor divine purpose to Man or life. All is random chance and when we are gone, we are gone. Fini."

"Why do anything then?" you inquire. "If there is no purpose, no reason for my being here, then there is no rational or logical argument to justify my taking any action to accomplish or do anything.

"Look," your atheist interlocutor smartly replies, "You... create your own meaning from life!!! Life is what you make it. Do something because you want to do it and enjoy the doing of it."

"Well, I got no money to do anything. Might as well go rob someone so I can do something I guess."

"No man... you can't do that!"

"Why not?"

"Well, you just can't, it would be wrong."

"Wrong to who, to you? Say... how much money do you have on you right now?"

"You can't steal my money, it's mine! I worked for it, go get your own!!!"

"Why did you work for it when you can steal it instead? How stupid are you?"

"Because it's the right thing to do."

"Says who? You again? Do you know how annoying you sound with all your 'morals.' You can't take it with you and when you die, you die. So you worked for your money and I stole it from you. Them's the breaks, now fork it over before I am forced to curb stomp your ass... for no purpose or reason of course, you understand."


Justice is why you should believe in God.

What the above dialogue demonstrates is that without God, there can be no justice. Without an abstract, independent, pure and perfect outside power / force to render judgement, there can be no justice in this world or the next.

Kant sought to ground both morality and God’s existence in practical human reason. However, it should be noted that Kant’s argument is less about God and more about justice in the hereafter: moral behavior is rational; it is only rational if justice is done; justice will only be done if God exists; therefore, God exists.

Andrew Levinson - Philosophical Approaches To Proving The Existence Of God

While Kant may be the rallying cry for many an atheist, what the atheist fails to understand is that for Kant, the sole purpose of refuting weak proofs for God's existence was to make way for a stronger, and singular, unified proof. A proof that appealed to the rational mind of the Man of the Enlightenment; to come to know God by his reason, by logic, and not by papal authority or blind faith.

Not only do we find powerful defenses of religious belief in all three Critiques, but a considerable share of Kant's work in the 1790s is devoted to the positive side of his philosophy of religion.

Just as with Luther's own negative polemics against religious despotism and scholastic arcana, we see in Kant a parallel dialectic, where he, rather than opposing religion, sought to free it from the “monopoly of the schools” and set it on a footing suitable to “the common human understanding” (Bxxxii). Hence, as we will discuss through this entry, the aforementioned passage, that he sought out the limits to knowledge [Wissen] in order to “make room for faith [Glaube]” (Bxxx), is not an empty bromide, but is rather the key anthem for his overall philosophy of religion.

As a result, Religion, despite its daring and original philosophical theology, has been given only a small fraction of the attention that his other books have received.

So, despite all that Religion contains, philosophers and theologians have instead assumed that the negative elements of the Critique of Pure Reason adequately capture Kant's views on religion.

Pasternack, Lawrence and Rossi, Philip, "Kant's Philosophy of Religion", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.)

Far from destroying God and religion, Kant sought to do precisely what I am now (scarily realizing) also trying to do - find a way to God that fits with the common man's understanding of reality in his day and time. A God that does not insult, but instead celebrates, Man's use of his divine reason and intelligence.

For Kant, Justice was a key proof for why men will always come back to God.

It also fully explains his most famous quote on justice - human life has no meaning without it. If Man walks away from God, he is walking away from justice, from moral behaviour, and thus from any meaning to living life.

How can an atheist say this is wrong? He can't. This is the entire leftist/feminist/LGBTQ argument. There is no absolute morality, and thus no recourse to justice EXCEPT the 'justice' of mob ideological rule, justice by force. No one can say the above is wrong ABSOLUTELY, for they would only be giving their personal opinion. This... is what happens when you remove God from society.

As I showed in my thought dialogue above, when Man adopts a nihilist/atheist perspective of reality, there is no support for even the concept of justice and can only lead to immorality. If Man and creation are all just some cruel cosmic joke, there is no reason for you to get upset if some drag queen, cross dressing transexual wants to put on five... FIVE... satanic horns and white clown paint to read to your children, there just isn't. With God as the embodiment of pure Justice - incorruptible and absolute - Man has recourse to justice, both here on earth and ultimately, after death.

The reason Kant grounded belief in God to underpin belief in justice is that for it to exist, justice MUST have an ultimate reality for judgement to be rendered. Without God, there is no ultimate judge, no supreme executor of justice. If there is no justice beyond this life, there is no possible chance for justice to be found during this one. And if this is the case, then the whole scheme and concept of trying to determine what justice is and how to apply it on earth is, ultimately, an exercise in nothing but delusion. (Note, I am not fully versed in Kant, but this seems to my mind a logical conclusion to this line of logic.)

To many, these are all metaphysical concepts and perhaps a lot of mumbo jumbo. If they should ever have a real injustice perpetrated upon themselves and start to rage and scream about how badly they were mistreated or maligned, you can just laugh in their faces and say "Why are you so upset? According to your view of reality, shit happens and there is nothing, nothing that can be done about it." The scarier version is that of SJW's - justice is NOT in the hands of God, but in that of Man. Thus, if their brand of ideological 'justice' is not currently being rendered, they will FORCE it to be so.

The concept of God as ultimate judge and executor of justice at least implies, on some level, that while justice is imperfect here on earth, those who commit injustice WILL get what they deserve, in the ultimate sense. If you have no ultimate sense of justice (as SJW's and feminists do not), then 'justice' is only ever rendered when Man dishes it out. If you have ever been puzzled at the logic of 'social justice' and why SJWs can be so hypocritical in their violent response to not getting there way, there you have it.

Without the concept of God, and thus a concept of ultimate justice, we have a Hobbesian world of might makes right.

The United States Of America is the bastion of free speech.

If that liberty is lost here, it will die in every corner of the world.

Trevor Loudon - America Under Siege: Antifa

2017 America is looking a lot like 1917 Russia... and that is NOT a co-incidence.

Communism... is atheism, period. The entire globalist agenda rests upon and finds its power and force in denying and rejecting God and everything He represents.

While SJW's have gone and thrown an adjective in front of it, justice is what they declare themselves to be warriors for. But is their justice your justice? Is it justice that adheres to the truth? To what is right? To what is moral? Or is it simply... their justice, by decree, by 'feels', by dictate and thus dictatorship.

Implied in Kant's concept of God and justice is that we are rational beings. We are rational beings because we are able to use our intellect to think, use logic, to conceptualize what is good, what is right, what is just and moral. We can do this because God exists and is the ultimate form. If Man is able to conclude that moral behaviour is rational, and can only be so if justice is done, this implies that man can use his reason to rationally find a way to administer justice on this earth because justice is possible in the ultimate sense. Without God as the source for the grounding of ultimate justice, we have nothing.

This is why Kant (in my opinion) was so keen on refuting the weak arguments for God. He wanted to create a more rational foundation to believe given the context of The Enlightenment and the radical new knowledge being discovered. The Renaissance, quickly followed up by The Enlightenment, was destroying the foundation of God in The West. Kant could see the consequences from this and fervently set his intellect to try and prevent what we are all now living in in The West - the break down of law and order and the destruction of morality, of justice. I have not yet read Religion by Kant, but it sounds like it might be just what many men in The West are looking for.

The Red Pill - Game, hustle, money - is a great HOW philosophy for life, but it is not a WHY philosophy and never can be.

The question of Man and his place in the world, the greater world of spirit and meaning, trumps (see what I did there?) all the utilitarian aspects of any philosophy on how to live life well. We are a tribe, a community of men, and while we can all agree on how to live easily enough...

Why is the question that turns strangers into blood brothers, men willing to die for one another and one's country.

And that bond, that brotherly love and trust among men, begins with knowing each man will be treated justly by his fellow man.

Without justice, there is no patriarchy.

Without God, there is no justice.

No God then means no justice and no patriarchy.

For any society, especially a patriarchal one, to function sanely, there MUST be an absolute moral guide that underpins justice. A moral justice code that everyone agrees is beyond question, not because "I said so," but because it has been proven to be so. This is why Kant was writing. To come up with a NEW intellectual foundation for God BECAUSE Justice is lost without this proof.

The reason why the left - feminists, atheist/secular liberals & LGBT - have been so viciously and insanely focused on destroying God, Christianity and patriarchy could not be more clear.

They don't want justice.

They want domination.

Whether I have convinced you to believe, or at least ponder, if God needs to exist in the life of Man, there does seem to be something... divine in the political air in America.

Divine Justice... is making a comeback. And when it arrives, it is going to be one seriously bad mother fucker.

Strength & Honor

READ MORE: Why Belief In God Will Make Or Break A New Patriarchy

CATEGORIES