LTTE: Which gods do you serve?

[Synnical]

(Edit to correct typos and name of forum)

Cross posted to C/S Issues Forum

This is Holland, Michigan. Not Holland, Denmark.

http://hollandsentinel.com/stories/041205/opinion_20050412018.shtml

The Rev. Miguel de la Torre

The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) made the scandalous proclamation that "God is dead" in 1882. The church's initial reaction was to condemn him and his brand of philosophy. But what Nietzsche actually said was: "Whither is God? ... I will tell you. We have killed him -- you and I. All of us are his murderers. ... God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him."

For Nietzsche what was important was not that God is dead, but that we have killed God so that we can enjoy the fruits of modernity. I find myself agreeing with his assertion that we have killed god. And in all honesty, the death of god is necessary for the disenfranchised, who must ask: "Which god is dead?"

The modernity project of replacing God with science (reason) has succeeded in constructing a god in its own image. Such a god has been used to justify what Nietzsche called the "master morality." This "master morality" is practiced by the rich and privileged, who encourage power, freedom and strength. From this god flowed an ethical discourse that may challenge humanity to be compassionate (i.e., Bush's compassionate conservatism), yet seldom challenges the structures which caused inhuman conditions, for such a challenge would threaten the dominant culture's privileged space. We may speak about leaving no child behind or supporting our troops but in reality we reappropriated the necessary funds needed to make these moral proclamations a reality by passing massive tax cuts to the wealthiest segments of society.

Yes, we have killed God because of God's defense of "slave morality." This slave morality advocates that the powerful and privileged must learn forgiveness, love, and humility. It is the ethics of turning the other cheek, putting the needs of others before oneself and laying down one's life for another. Killing the God of slaves allows the dominant culture to worship its own gods, all the while defining themselves as Christian moral agents.

But do we really want the god of the dominant culture to exist? The god who is pleased when Iraqis are bombed, the god who remains silent about atrocities at Abu Ghraib, the god who sanctions one-fifth of the world's population to use 80 percent of the world's resources to the detriment of Third World nations, the god who equates blessings with riches? While such a religious experience is important for many of the dominant culture, it remains insufficient for those existing on the underside of that culture.

The question to be asked by the disenfranchised is not so much if God exists, but does God care? The continuation of oppressive structures forces those who suffer due to their race, class, gender, or sexual orientation to wonder about the very character of a God who appears silent in the face of injustice, a silence that was also deafening during the crucifixion of Jesus, and of all those who continue to be crucified today so that others can have their power and privilege saved. If those on the margins are able to determine who is this God that appears to turn God's gaze from the suffering of God's people, then they, as well as those from the dominant culture choosing to stand in solidarity with them, can determine what actions are required so that this silent God can finally be heard.

The Christians of the first century were thrown to the lions on the charge of atheism, because they rejected the god of the dominant culture of their time. What Christianity needs today are more of those kind of "atheists" -- those willing to lose their life or livelihood refusing to believe the god of today's powers and principalities. Hence the real question for us "atheists" to ask is not if God exists, but who is this God whose existence we affirm or deny.

It is my contention that some gods are better off dead than alive -- the gods which justify the present structures of oppression are better off dead, whether they be the god of capitalism, the god of socialism, the god of militarism, the god of Republicans and Democrats, or the god of nationalism.

All gods who bestow privilege to their chosen people based on race, class, gender, or sexual orientation should die. Christianity from the margins of society actively seeks the death of the dominant culture's gods so that the God of the oppressed, the God incarnated in the lives and suffering of today's crucified people, the God that demands justice, can reign.

The Rev. Miguel de la Torre is a religion professor who has published several books dealing with issues concerning race, class and gender.

[Zenlitened]

1. Wow. Very powerful. At first glance, I thought it was going to be...

... just another anti-science screed. But it seems to be a very powerful statement on democratic values, if you regard the "god' talk as simply a useful literary device.

[fshrink]

2. That's what god(s) is (are):

a "useful literary" device mutated into a killer plague.

[Zenlitened]

3. Killer plague -- LOL!!

The idea of gods as a literary device is what prompted me to post the William Blake passage from The Marriage of Heaven and Hell in a separate thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com//discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=263x5075

It's metaphor, folks! The "gods" were just a useful and engaging way for many ancient people to talk about what they saw around them, until the priests made their power grab. Thousands of years later, we've got an angry old man in the sky, and his mild-mannered alter-ego nailed to a cross.

Yeesh. :)

[trotsky]

4. There's still significant anti-science sentiment, though.

The modernity project of replacing God with science (reason) has succeeded in constructing a god in its own image. Such a god has been used to justify what Nietzsche called the "master morality."

I don't think that is the case at all. The Neocons draw their strength from religious nuts who buy into the whole rapture crap as well as the wealthy elite looking to dominate Mideast natural resources.

Blaming science because people now think that riches are blessings from God? Sounds like a pretty big anti-science stretch to me.

[Zenlitened]

5. That's true. It would be a better essay without that statement.

The fact is, the predatory "morality" of the Bushies has nothing at all to do with science, and everything to do with their imagined god.

:hi:

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. "Holland, Denmark"? I think you mean "Holland, the Netherlands"

I think the Dutch and Danish both get a little annoyed at being mixed up with each other - they're not even contiguous.