Mr. Narisetti not only wants to protect children but to stop what he calls ‘psychological abuse’ on society’s future.

In the June/July “Free Inquiry” magazine published by the Council for Secular Humanism, an article “Religion and Child Abuse” appeared, written by Innaiah Narisetti.

Mr. Narisetti’s premise is clear when he states, “In one form or the other all religions violate the rights of children.” He questions at what age society ought to allow children “access to religion.” He wants the United Nations to restrict the “automatic” rights of parent’s to expose their children to religion. Mr. Narisetti also says, “Religious beliefs thrive by imposing themselves upon impressionable [children] minds...” and adults use these religious beliefs as a pretext to fight wars and promote other inhumane acts. Mr. Narisetti not only wants to protect children but to stop what he calls ‘psychological abuse’ on society’s future.

Atheists throughout history have deemed religion as the quintessential villain for most of society’s woes. Karl Marx taught religion was used by the rich to keep the working class in poverty. The author, Arthur C. Clarke considers religious beliefs a form of “superstition and barbarism.” Friedrich Nietzsche thought Christian virtues inspired weakness, not strength in man.

They plead their case against religion noting the brutality of theistic wars while ignoring the brutality of an atheistic Stalin. Certainly atrocities have been committed in the name of religion as well as non-religion. When arrogance is applied to any belief system, whether atheistic or theistic, the end result is oppression.

Christianity teaches man has separated himself from a perfect loving Creator but in evolution all men have risen up from an impersonal organic slime. Atheists, just like theist, are looking to explain the paradox of mans simultaneous greatness and cruelty. Atheists condemn religion as abusive but teach, by default, all thinking patterns come from the same micro organic pool. How can evolutionist claim authority to condemn one belief system over another? If the micro organic pool we all came from is the “designer” this friction between theism and atheism could be “its” purpose. If all humans came from the same impersonal organic source, our evolutionistic origins make us cohorts in all cruelty throughout history. Atheists have no authority to claim “any” belief system as abusive, unless they can prove that belief system came from defected micro organic pool “billions” of years ago.

On the inside cover of the magazine carrying the article “Religion and Child Abuse” there appeared a list of 21 principles called “The Affirmation of Humanism.” The following is number 4 (emphasis mine):

“We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities.”

Mr. Narisetti and the Council for Secular Humanism have proclaimed their evolutionistic belief system superior. In seeking to protect children from so called, abusive religious beliefs, atheists are on their way to becoming the authoritarian elites and the repressive majority. In their attempt to inflate the greatness of man, they violate the freedoms of man. Atheists believe all men evolved from the same micro organic pool, however the atheistic view came from a superior non-defected pool.

Oprah Winfrey has said, “Luck is a matter of preparation. I am highly attuned to my divine self.”

A shooting star was seen the night after the murder of Julius Caesar of Rome and since the Romans were very superstitious they believed Caesar had become a god. Caesars’ successor erected “The Temple of the Divine Julius Caesar” where Caesar’s body was cremated.

The superstition of humans possessing divinity is still with us. Oprah Winfrey has said, “Luck is a matter of preparation. I am highly attuned to my divine self.” Dr. Wayne Dyer, of PBS fundraiser fame, tells us, “You are a divine, infinite creation making the choice to be on purpose and to be connected to the power of intention.” One may start to wonder how we explain Darfur and the last two World Wars in light of the promotion of man’s divinity. (emphasis mine in both quotes)

The belief of divinity in humans also leads to an elitism, which makes the “Divine” believe they have the power to control circumstances by their thinking. Oprah has said, “The more positive you are about your life, the more positive it [life] will be,” (emphases mine). Dr. Dyer’s, “Power of Intensions” is nothing more than a formula to teach that your “thoughts” can alter life’s circumstances.

This belief of a divine spark or ‘piece’ of God in man has infatuated the church in the teaching God is within us. This idea comes from the scripture were Jesus says to the Pharisees, “the kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke 17: 21) Ignoring the fact Jesus just told the “Pharisees” the kingdom of God was in them we have taken this to mean some divine part of God’s divinity is within our human nature. The phrase, “the kingdom of God is within you” was a Jewish idiom meaning the kingdom was very close at hand. The Pharisees were demanding an answer to their question, “when” the Kingdom of God would come and Jesus being the representative of God’s Kingdom was letting them know it was right in front of them. Jesus was not telling the Pharisees or anyone else they possessed divinity.

The Bible never teaches humans or Angels to be divine. Man and Angels are created effects of God and although the effect bears the image of his Cause man is in no way equal to it. For the church to accept or purport anything close to the mentality of humans possessing a divine spark or the ability to alter our circumstances with our thoughts is totally against Biblical teaching. To accept a human divinity is to put ourselves on an equal status with God.

The Bible teaches we are fallen creatures of a sinful nature. Paul tells us, there is none righteous and every man’s heart is wicked. (Romans 3.23) Although we may not like being called fallen creatures this explains Darfur and World Wars more consistently than “human divinity.”