To understand the purpose, place, and dangers of religion, we should consider the possibility that the religions most readily presented are there to benefit rulers and not the people.

If you wish to skip right to my critique of monotheism, scroll down to the tilde. ~

Occultists (dark and light) follow what is secretly known as The Old Religion. This faith contains no morality. It’s like The Force in Star Wars. Some use it for good and some use it for evil. The Old Religion is animistic. It holds that Spirit, or the divine, simply is. It never assumes that God, or any other being, is perfect or all-powerful. Writers like Manly P. Hall contend that there is a secret government ruling every nation of the entire world and that this secret government is globally united. Those who study history and world events with an open mind tend to reach similar conclusions.

Assuming this is true, why would the major religions of the world promote the idea of a god that is all-powerful, can produce any result instantly, and yet remains loving despite the reality of suffering? This idea creates atheism in the reasonable and stupidity in believers. If I was in power, I could predict the behavior of both types of people and could easily benefit from that knowledge.

The Egyptians knew that monotheism leads to tyranny in rulers and insanity in the population. We know that Plato promoted the idea of a religion for the people, a religion with one all-powerful creator to whom there is no alternative and who cannot be questioned. In such a belief system, rulers must be appointed by God and cannot be questioned. This idea is known in philosophy as The Noble Lie. If we assume Plato was well-meaning, then we can call it noble. Maybe Plato meant well. Maybe he never assumed that any ruler can ever be perfect and would produce tyranny whether he meant to or not. We know he believed that control over the people is needed for a desirable society to exist, even if no system of government could ever be perfect.

Giving Plato the benefit of the doubt leads us to conclude that he knew he was lying. After all, The Noble Lie was his name for the idea. If we wish to think well of Plato, we must believe that lying can be good in some cases. Friedrich Nietzsche considered unwavering honesty to be a product of what he called slave morality. To understand this, consider a German home owner sheltering Jewish refugees in Nazi Germany. When the SS officers come to his door, should he tell the truth? Should he lead them to the attic and betray his friends, or should he lie?

Clearly, telling the truth to those who would use it for evil is wrong, and lying to preserve innocent life is right. Therefore, we cannot fault Plato for promoting the idea that lying can be noble.

But if we agree that belief in one all-powerful god lends itself to the consolidation of power, then in today’s world, it is obvious that such a belief is harmful. A good government would try to use its divine appointment for good. An evil government would use it for evil. We must consider the fact that every government and every organization is vulnerable to being co-opted by bad actors who only crave power. This is known as institutional capture, a well studied phenomenon.

If we wish to continue to think well of Plato, then we also need to assume that he was unaware of or at peace with the danger of institutional capture. Any endeavor comes with inherent dangers, including inaction. So I think we can forgive Plato.

~

My critique of monotheism is simple. It leads to stupidity and atheism. Atheism leads to the deification of the government and stupidity leads to every imaginable problem. If we believe that there exists just one being with the power to create existence, then we must assume that being is either all-powerful or not.

I remember playing at a neighbor’s house as a child. One day, I was sitting on top of a dog house and a little girl was standing on the grass eating a lollipop. She dropped her lollipop and started to cry. Then she turned her head toward me. Her face twisted into anger and she picked up a dirt clod and threw it at me.

In her mind, I was responsible for her fallen lollipop. I think of that often these days. I imagine that she must have thought I had magic powers. That little girl believing I was to blame for the loss of her lollipop is a lot like us believing that God can prevent human suffering.

I see this kind of stupidity in adults almost every day, with more sophisticated explanations behind them, making it possible for the throwing of fallen lollipops to never end. Being all-powerful or omnipotent means any flaw in existence is by design. It means the Christian god created the devil and tolerates evil. It means God made you drop your lollipop.

Theologians try to excuse this by saying that humans have free will, that Eve disobeyed God, that we are her descendants, and that guilt is inherited. All of this suggests that God is not omnipotent. It suggests that he could not make a perfect being or a perfect world. But they then turn around and make their god the biggest, bestest ever – and the eye-rolling never ends.

Christianity is not the only offender. All monotheistic religions have this problem. The Abrahamic god started as a regional storm god and was gradually promoted to a perfect, loving, omnipotent man in robes of light. It’s similar to how Superman started as just a very strong being and developed into one that can fly faster than light and reverse time. Both ideas come from a similar level of emotional dysregulation.

The eastern resignation ideologies like Buddhism also encourage the faithful to abstain from action in the world, but in different ways. Modern Western spirituality, (the New Age), has the same feature. These are just different ways to get the population to not interfere with those who seek power. If history has taught us anything, it’s that power cannot be trusted. Which means either God cannot be trusted or governments are not divinely appointed.

In my personal cosmology, I see God as having found Herself in a state of ultimate loneliness and created beings who could alleviate Her suffering. She wanted company. This means She had to make us with limited awareness, otherwise we would know that we are parts of Her and the illusion would vaporize. The resulting good is that we are born into a world full of hazards, and when we become aware of Her we respond with adoration. I’ve described this cosmology in more detail in my entry entitled Explaining Evil.

She wants us to raise ourselves up from ignorance into a state where we can be like Her. This way, She can enjoy our company, respect us, and experience love from beings that are outside of Her. I think She wants connection, just like humans do. For Her to enjoy that we have to be autonomous and at least partiality self-created. I think of this as the creation of a Grand Lover, a being that begins in ignorance and through its own effort, becomes divine. I think that is what She wants.

I do not wish to proselytize my own religion. I only offer it as an example of how we might see creation as a place where human beings have agency, where what we do matters, and where we actually have something of value to offer God.

I reflect on the Great Mother much in the same way the Egyptians thought of Nuit. I look up at the stars and feel Her gaze. I feel Her looking in on us, desperate to get inside the world and help us save ourselves from ourselves. I feel She is remorseful for creating us in a condition of suffering as a remedy for Her own loneliness. I believe She weeps for us, and forces us through trials to speed up the process like ripping off a band aid.

This is another way of saying that God is responsible for evil. But I believe She deserves to be forgiven. All at once, I fear, forgive, and adore Her, dreaming of a moment at the end of time when She finally smiles.

That will be Heaven.

Recommended listening: Soundgarden, Black Hole Sun