Talk:Self-deification

	Religion portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
	This redirect is within the scope of Left Hand Path work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.
	This redirect has been marked as needing immediate attention.

The word "autotheism," which does not suffer from the awful mixing of Greek and Latin, has had this meaning in English since 1619 according to the OED. The only problem with using autotheism in the sense of self-deification is that it had an earlier technical meaning in Catholic writings, actually two of them:

The doctrine of the self-existence of God
The heresy that Jesus was God in his own right

Therefore, I'm proposing to edit "suitheism" right out of the neopagan page.

I can do that, since I am God.

Freeman 19:25 Jan 23, 2003 (UTC)

This article really doesn't deserve an encyclopedia entry. Practically no one uses this term; it is just a neologism that was made up by two authors to describe themselves. People in the real world just don't use this term. Authors make up thousands of self-defined phrases every decade; should we waste our time on encyclopedia writing about them, when real topics need work? RK

Surprisingly enough I have been a "suitheist" since I can remember and not until I stumbled on this did I realize there were others who felt the same. Leave the entry up for all those who stumble (even gods need to know where to look). ~nameless walker

For an example of Suitheism, see Ludwig Feuerbach. In 1841 he published "The Essence of Christianity".

Ironic

I am also God, and although this is not a trolly forum it is an encylopedia, I will point out something obvious: *Arguing* that you shouldnt waste time on a 'useless' encyclopedia entry is even more pointless than the original waste of time. Yes, and this message is even more of a waste. Talk to the divine hand.

If you're god, how come you've been blocked three times (there is a history bit at the top I can look at, see?) This bit is also incredibly useless... ~ Ghelæ ^talk_contribs 16:10, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He was blocked for your vandalisms.

If suitheism and apotheosis aren't going to be merged, they should at least be linked together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rootsofamericanorder (talk • contribs) 05:09, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is wikipedia not wiktionary

The word Suitheism needs to have a home, however it should not be here. Suitheism is not a new word, and is a valid concept of spiritual understanding. The problem with suitheism being on Wikipedia is that this is not the proper forum for this word. Suitheism should be only in Wiktionary (spelling?). Encyclopedias are not places for the meaning of words of this sort. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.240.246.253 (talk) 03:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I have only just come across this page as a result of an Afd concerning one of the coiners of the term "suitheism". As a neologism used by a remarkably small number of people (and with no reliable sources to back it up; Cunningham's book is obviously not reliable), I am confused by its inclusion. I suggest it is removed. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 23:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Viiolation of the Three Revert Rule

User:Jupiter Optimus Maximus has just violated the Three Revert Rule (WP:3RR) at this article. I have asked him to please refrain from this behavior as it is considered to be WP:Edit warring, and to provide a WP:Reliable reference to support his contention that the Russian Orthodox Church was shut down and Stalin was worshiped as God, after a 24 hour period. I would like to return the article to its status before this last, improper edit.--Editor2020 (talk) 23:10, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'm sorry. --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 08:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theism in Advaita?

The reference to Advaita is problematic, because in a non-dual reality, by definition there is no God and no individual soul (as, say, in the Christian sense) to begin with. Therefore, there can be no act of "uniting" them. If there is a union between them, that notion is redundant, as talking about two separate entities that are in union is, again by definition, nonsensical. I understand that the analogy to dualist religions and other systems is tempting, but theism has no place in Advaita and many other similar "systems" (for lack of a better word). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.89.175.205 (talk) 23:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A term based on the apotheosis- Perhaps Apotheism would be better

Apotheosis has a historical basis for its meaning true to LHP practices. So adapting it to a noun as Apotheism may be better. I think auto theism is inappropriat due to its historical connections as noted already. I really think deletions is the best route. Clearly it is a Suitheism is made up- wasn't denied by creator, and it is used by probably less than a dozen people. For these reasons it is not worth an entry. Notice pointedly that there are no users outraged by the possible deletion or stepping up to offer credentials or historical references for why they along with the creator of the term us either autotheism or suitheism for LHP work. It seemed like true unwarrented self deification to create the entry in the first place. - Waron Ignoratus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.28.66.172 (talk) 01:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]