God Is Propaganda

[Fidei Defensor]

Not saying I agree with this article, but I'm interested in your responses.
[quote]"God is love," and also the author of hell. Yes, and hell was made infinite to make God's love infinite. Thus, to square the equation, we may legitimately say that "Hell is love." Or, as Dante preferred, he made hell to say, "I too was created by Eternal Love."

Such theological word games as these turned me off from Christianity. It was hell, really, that made the word "Christian" sour in my mouth. But afterwards I began to wonder, "Yes, but if God is not love, what then is he?" Richard Dawkins' impressed me: "God is a virus." That is, God is an effective meme. And as an effective meme, he was readily able to spread through our collective minds. With this stroke of metaphor, the argument that "The voice of the people is the voice of God," or, that God is proved because so many people believe in him, is ruined. What is most believed is not a farthing more true. Perhaps just the opposite. Perhaps what is easiest to believe is the easiest to think. Perhaps God was the appeal to laziness--"Oh don't worry about thinking. God knows the truth and that's all that matters."

However this metaphor--God as virus--misses two crucial facts about God:
1) That God was consciously created by man before he infected other men, and,
2) God is used as a weapon of control.
Thus, the proper metaphor for God became clear to me: God is propaganda.

The obviousness of this might shortsight the reader to its subtlety. Of course God was used as propaganda throughout history. Most wars begin with a consultation of the priests (God's spokesmen) or otherwise the assurance that God wills this war, and those that we oppose are blasphemers, heathens, infidels, or otherwise immoral according to the standards of our God. The examples for this are too numerous to bother with. One need only think of the Jewish' Final Solution towards the Canaanites, as described in the book of Joshua, the glories of the Crusades (from which CS Lewis has the nerve to cull an ideal: the Christian warrior), or the endless and grotesque antics in the Middle East for the last 100 years.

Yes, God is used for propaganda, as everybody will admit. But he is made to say at one point, "Do not take my name in vain." Despite the threat of curses on those who do, God has done nothing to counter those who misuse his name. God is made to support Nazis, crusaders, jihadists, genocides, and despite this, he never corrects his "spokesmen." He is seemingly powerless to contradict his interpreters, but offers us silence as his support is claimed to justify atrocity after atrocity.

I don't think this fact bothers enough people. The only justification for history's lack of providence is the claim that in the afterlife, God will make everything all right again. According to this theory, there is conceivably nothing history can do to disprove God. Whatever happens, whoever gets killed, whoever is the victim of genocide, whatever is blown up, atomized, vaporized, gassed, roasted, and/or tortured can make absolutely no comment on God's action in history--in a word, "providence" is a completely empty word, because we have no clue when, how, or if God acts in history.

This is well-known to the students of history; I won't overstate it. Instead, let's look more closely at the phrase "God is propaganda." Obviously I don't mean that Propaganda is God. There are propagandas against God, after all. What I mean by this is that God is nothing more than an instance of propaganda.

Consider it. What have the last 1,000 years of theology--the "logic of God"--demonstrated? Theology has demonstrated nothing about God, but it has remade God. The first God was a fictional character. The theological God however, is nothing more nor less then a list of adjectives. God is just, God is wise, God is omniscient, omnipotent, omniloving, omnipresent--indeed he is all of these things in that he is the list itself. Which is to say, the theological student can contain the whole body, heart, mind, and soul of God in his spiral notebook.

Therefore, it doesn't matter if omnipotence, omnilove, and omniscience contradict reality. Who cares? God is therefore also a contradiction of reality. But there is a crucial definition of God. God is the concept whose essence entails believing his essence entails existence. This adjective on the list, "existing," is also a quality of God because man created God and defined him as such.

God is propaganda. And to narrow the term, God is a rhetorical device of propaganda. "Godisms" are the rhetorical use of God to justify a claim, affect cheap profundity, or instill instant importance to any bit of trash.

We know that the philosopher's God is a set of adjectives--no more!; that the "God of Isaac and Jacob" is a set of narratives--hardly more; and Jesus?--a set of episodes, surely, but more importantly, a set of 1st century BCE rabbinical quotes--that's all. Jesus is essentially and completely encapsulated in a set of plagiarisms from the Jewish tradition. Whatever the historical Jesus may have said or done is irrelevant and irretrievable; to us, he is these quotations, and also the rhetorical cradle the preachers offer them in.

Buddhism, on the other hand, would be completely safe if the Buddha were disproved. If we could demonstrate that Buddha never existed, the faith would shrug and say, "but it was never the person of the Buddha that mattered to us"--not to say that it is only Semitic theism that is propaganda.

But let us consider another Semitic religion: Islam. Here we have another God: the idol of epithets. The corpus deim here is a set of adjectives reverently attributed to the divine. Scarcely more.

If God is propaganda, what then is essential to propaganda? What is essential is that the beliefs, attitudes, and practices associated with it spread. Thus God was knit carefully. What he was said to be, say, and do were worked out through observing folklore and folk mythology, through the attempts of thousands of propagandists (prophets) to speak for God, for the inevitable failures to be dismissed as false prophets, and the most rhetorically convincing to be canonized.

Thus the practice of worshipping becomes clear. The worship of God is advertising. By praising God through worship, songs, chants, pictures, and sacrifices, his role as "the most important thing" is demonstrated. God is sold. The priests, traditionally the most educated--and also the most shrewd--maintained their power by carefully painting and quoting God. It was their profession and life to make God their puppet.

Worshipping is advertisement, and competitive advertisement at that. The wrong God, called an idol, is lambasted by priests with such distasteful vehemence, that if they were to make modern day advertisements we would gape. God, if you want a definition a theist would agree to, is essentially "the thing we must obey." This characterizes the effect the theists use him for. God said it, God demands it, God wills it, thus you must obey. What better propaganda is this?

And this also explains the arms race of the religions each putting forth their own "God." God's favor of a group of believers is measured by how many converts they can dupe. I recall a couple of Mormon missionaries smugly telling me that they were the fastest growing religion on the earth. As if truth were ever popular! As if a perfect being would want to be popularized in the first place!

By now you have guessed my joke. The word "Propaganda" is Latin, from the phrase Congregatio de propaganda fide, "congregation for propagating the faith." That is, it is a Catholic neologism for their tactics for converting foreign peoples.

Consider, then, what the missionary field is all about. The missionary is in essence a person specially trained to convert foreign people who have no training in resisting it. I think of the na've aboriginal faced with the university students who spent years training on how to propagate the "word of God." Even a brief study of the missionary field will show you that no trick is too ruthless, no lie too wicked, if it converts but one soul.

Hell, which is really just a form of God, is the most infamous propaganda, and, like much other propaganda, is based on a trick of catastrophizing. Jesus repeats John the Baptists saying "repent, for the end is near." The end was not near. The world did not end. But if you listen to many Christians nowadays, they will assure that they have "read the signs of the times," and know that Jesus will rapture away his chosen in a matter of years, if not months.

"For the end is near," Jesus says, in the tone of the waterbed commercial warning us that "supplies are limited, act now!" or the car sale that warns us "Sale ends Monday!" Pure propaganda, and, of course, complete bullshit. Jesus unequivocally promises us that the world will end "before this generation perishes," and "while many of those standing here are still alive." Paul believed the end was near. John the revelator swears it. Bullshit. And, like effective bullshit, it still keeps stringing them in to the fold to this day.

Yes, religion preys on our fears and ignorance, this is clear. Or as a true believer acknowledges: "all the other religions prey on the fears and ignorance of men." Well then, is this a virus? And if it is, what can cure us from it?

The cure for religion is a healthy mind, one that recognizes the forms of propaganda and defends itself against them. As I often say, "Knowing how to ask questions is a form of omniscience." In other wards, know how to use logic and inquiry to blast the claims of salesmen. Study everything closely. Wash your eyes with cynicism so that you can see clearly. But always approve of your eyes, your mind, your own rational ability to understand. If you trust yourself, you will not be cheated.[/quote]

[XIX]

not bad for a position that I completely oppose...

I will say that the mere notion that I can just trust myself has proven to be an absolute joke. I doubt many people are actually different.

[KnightofChrist]

I dont have time to state much at present, hope to get back to this later, but like many atheistic arguments against God, the article has a taste of bitterness and hate. We only have to look at Communist nations to see the fruits of Atheistic utopias where casting off God, and "freeing" our minds, ends in millions on millions dead.

The article seems to what to use morality against God, but without God there is no morality, no meaning to life. No right or wrong, no good or evil, everything would be permissible. There would be nothing wrong with killing off the millions of Christians, Jews, Muslims, and etc after all theses groups would be brainwashed, and the enemies of freeing the mind.

[rkwright]

I'm not sure if replying to this is going to be a waste of time since I don't think we'll have the original author to defend his position, but I'll give some generic responses.

The beginning of his article says he has rejected God because of the idea of hell. If God is love, how can he create such an awful place... I think he misses the point of what 'God is love' means. God loves us so much to let us choose. Those in Hell, choose to be there. God does not send someone to hell who doesn't choose to be there. God manifests His love by giving us free will knowing that something could go radically wrong, ie someone could choose to reject Him. Hell can be spoken of in terms of 'punishing the sinner', but this to me seems to be more of a scare tactic (though it certainly works and is true... if you do X you'll go to hell! will make most people stop doing X). But it is more accurate, at least to me, to say Hell is the absence of God, inhabited by those who hate God because they freely chose to. Why all the torments of hell? We'll now I'm guessing, but those in Hell probably hate God so much they hate each other also; any goodness in each other reflects the goodness of God which they hate.

There is a similar reality in our world; prison. The prisoner choose to go to prison when they choose to break the law. The prison itself is no more than isolation from the rest of the world; the prisoner has chosen that he cannot interact with society so we give him what he wants, isolation. The torments of prison? I'm guessing now, but people in close proximity of murders, rapists, ect. seems to be what makes prison a "mini-hell".

Most of the rest of the article is a glorified 'problem of evil'. Why are there wars in the world? Why do bad things happen to good people? How can God be in control of all it? How can God be all loving and sin exist? There are plenty of responses to this... I really don't have time to get into it right now, maybe a bit later...

The above is the only real argument against God. When he says God is a list of adjectives and no more, he really hasn't stated any proof as to why God doesn't actually exist. I can fill a whole spiral notebook on adjectives of my girlfriend - it doesn't prove one way, or the other, that she does or does not actually exist.

I'd say ignore the whole God is propaganda claim. Its a pretty theme to conceal the real arguments, no more.

[CatherineM]

I don't believe that God created Hell. I believe that we have. My father told me that Hell is basically the absence of God. The only people who end up there are the ones who consciously turn their back on God and do not want to have God in their life. So I suppose in a way, when we die, Catholic and Atheist will get what we think we will get. The Catholic will find judgment and eternity, and the Atheist will find nothing, just what each of us thought we'd get.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='XIX' post='1472389' date='Mar 2 2008, 12:51 PM'][quote]"God is love," and also the author of hell.[/quote]
[/quote]
The above comment – according to the Eastern Christian tradition – is false as far as hell is concerned.

Man, not God, is the author of hell.

God, as St. Maximos the Confessor said, gives ever-being to all mankind, but whether it is ever-well-being ([i]salvation[/i]) or ever-ill-being ([i]damnation[/i]) is in the power of man's own free will in cooperation with the gift of God's energies, which are poured out upon all of humanity.

Edited March 2, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1472442' date='Mar 2 2008, 04:02 PM']The above comment – according to the Eastern Christian tradition – is false as far as hell is concerned.

Man, not God, is the author of hell.

God, as St. Maximos the Confessor said, gives ever-being to all mankind, but whether it is ever-well-being ([i]salvation[/i]) or ever-ill-being ([i]damnation[/i]) is in the power of man's own free will in cooperation with the gift of God's energies, which are poured out upon all of humanity.[/quote]
Very good observation, and I tend to agree with that. Man chooses his fate because God loves man enough to let him choose. God planned for eternal happiness, it is man who chooses hell and thus makes hell.

That being said, I don't necessarily believe in everything that Christianity has to say, but I always accept it's own explinations of it's beliefs, not made up strawmen proposed by those who disagree.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

The problem I have with it is that it is flawed from the start: hell doesn't come from God's love, hell comes from an individual's choice not to participate in God's love.

[carrdero]

[quote]KnightOfChrist writes: I dont have time to state much at present, hope to get back to this later, but like many atheistic arguments against God, the article has a taste of bitterness and hate. We only have to look at Communist nations to see the fruits of Atheistic utopias where casting off God, and "freeing" our minds, ends in millions on millions dead.[/quote]

Have you read the Old Testament? What accounts can you personally cite of God protecting or staving off death in your lifetime?

[quote]KnightOfChrist writes: The article seems to what to use morality against God, but without God there is no morality, no meaning to life. No right or wrong, no good or evil, everything would be permissible. There would be nothing wrong with killing off the millions of Christians, Jews, Muslims, and etc after all theses groups would be brainwashed, and the enemies of freeing the mind.[/quote]

What about human law? Would being locked up in a jail unable to freely move about be enough of a deterrent not to murder? What about one’s personal preference not to murder? One’s personal respect or belief in life? Does this not account for anything?

[carrdero]

[quote]Rkwritght writes:I think he misses the point of what 'God is love' means. God loves us so much to let us choose.[/quote]

[quote]Rkwritght writes: God does not send someone to hell who doesn't choose to be there.[/quote]


Contradicting sentences. Does God send us or do we choose?

[quote]Rkwritght writes: The prisoner choose to go to prison when they choose to break the law.[/quote]

The prisoner may be under the belief that he/she won’t get caught. If this individual knew in advance that they would get caught do you think they would make the choice to perform the crime?

Edited March 3, 2008 by carrdero

[carrdero]

[quote]Raphael writes: The problem I have with it is that it is flawed from the start: hell doesn't come from God's love, hell comes from an individual's choice not to participate in God's love.[/quote]
Which is a flaw in God’s love. If God’s love is unconditional and God has provided a penalty or a judgment in not participating in this love, this implies that there is a condition. One should have the decision to accept or not accept another’s love. God has not provided that choice.

[Guest]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1472790' date='Mar 3 2008, 04:28 AM']Have you read the Old Testament? What accounts can you personally cite of God protecting or staving off death in your lifetime?
What about human law? Would being locked up in a jail unable to freely move about be enough of a deterrent not to murder? What about one’s personal preference not to murder? One’s personal respect or belief in life? Does this not account for anything?[/quote]


God knew us before we were even born. The bible says that. So if he knew us that means he had a relationship with us. He has no time restraints so he knows the past and the future.
So with that being said we existed before this. Just like how revelation says one third of the angels will be kicked out of heaven. We dont know when this will happen. God knows though because God knows the future. So mabey some people being so against God has to do with stuff going on before they even got here.
And yet God still gives them a chanch to repent while here.
So to your first claim if you arent even willing to believe in God, how is he gonna protect you ??
And as far as your personal belief, I think you believe what christians and good people do. BUT you dont have faith in Christ so in reality you cannot be seen good by God.
Although I am in no place to judge so its none of my business how God views you. Im just called to try to give you truth.

Edited March 3, 2008 by Guest

[Guest]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1472793' date='Mar 3 2008, 04:41 AM']Which is a flaw in God’s love. If God’s love is unconditional and God has provided a penalty or a judgment in not participating in this love, this implies that there is a condition. One should have the decision to accept or not accept another’s love. God has not provided that choice.[/quote]

Wrong and ur actually saying the choice is the flaw. if ur gonna accuse God and say that his love has conditions thats on you. although thats like saying a starveing kid in africa has to earn Gods love. nope, Gods love is with the least of people. And that love is free and the burden is light.
I believe in a merciful and loveing God. People who are in hell will deserve to be there.

Edited March 3, 2008 by Guest

[Deb]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1472790' date='Mar 3 2008, 03:28 AM']Have you read the Old Testament? What accounts can you personally cite of God protecting or staving off death in your lifetime?



What about human law? Would being locked up in a jail unable to freely move about be enough of a deterrent not to murder? What about one's personal preference not to murder? One's personal respect or belief in life? Does this not account for anything?[/quote]

No, that does not account for anything. God has staved off my death several times. He has even stopped time and shifted my reality (and the two others watching in horror as my father was driving us to our death) so as to save us from certain death or possibly it was just horrible dismemberment but, it was pretty awesome. There was no spoon.

[Deb]

[quote name='carrdero' post='1472793' date='Mar 3 2008, 03:41 AM']Which is a flaw in God's love. If God's love is unconditional and God has provided a penalty or a judgment in not participating in this love, this implies that there is a condition. One should have the decision to accept or not accept another's love. God has not provided that choice.[/quote]


God has no flaws. God is perfect. It is your understanding that is imperfect. You do not have to accept anyone's love but, that does not mean that someone can not love you. If you accept God's love, he gives you more and more and more until you are so filled with love and joy that you really do want to love everyone else!! All at one time too!!! You are like a human sparkler, sending out showers of love. Burning in the night with the brilliance of the Lord. Yes, a human sparker.