Saturday, August 14, 2010

With God/Jesus dead, where lies theology?


It is exceedingly clear, to those with normal reasoning powers, that God – the reality of an incarnate God anyway – and Jesus as God have been rationally demolished.

Certainly, the idea of a Supreme Force or Creative Entity remains intact for philosophers, theologians, and even physicists.

But for everyone else, the existence of God and Jesus as His beneficent offspring is, or should be, a matter of idle conjecture and/or insane belief.

The God of the Hebrew Bible was a maniac. Jesus of the New Testament was a deluded prophet, or a transitional divine entity whose living presence has become an exoteric concept for the intellectually deficient.


Jesus/Christ, as a concept, is useful and interesting, insofar as He provided, like K’ung fu tzu (Confucius) and other avatarae who’ve dispensed enlightened wisdom for humanity.

But as a Divinity, with eternal existence and salvational dispensation, He has lost His cachet for rational human beings.

God, as represented by Yahweh, in the Old Testament, is not like Allah in the Koran.


Allah is nearer to what philosophers deal with, as the mysterious First Cause.

Yahweh is a metaphorical nightmare.

Jesus doesn’t identify with Yahweh, or the God above God. Jesus merely behaves like the character in Michael Moorcock’s “Behold the Man.”


If one takes away the assumed divinity of Yahweh and Jesus, and recognizes the gods of Hinduism or Greek Mythology, along with the Mormon divinity or other imagined presences thought to be divine as erroneous, what is left?

A residue of mythology – which is accurate or true, in essence, as Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell made abundantly clear.


So what happened in the aetiology of human religious beliefs?

That is, what caused mankind to cogitate upon the Divine Entities that allegedly interacted with humans and show up in the precipitative stages of human history?

Erich von Daniken’s “ancient astronaut” theory is an acceptable alternative to the divinity origins of early human design, and makes the most sense, if one examines the hypothesis,


Are there other alternative theories or theologies addressing the incarnate God idea?

Mac Tonnies, recently deceased Science Fiction writer, conjectured in his posthumous book, The Cryptoterrestrials, that there is another, concomitant race of beings inhabiting the Earth along side humans.


(Mr. Tonnies didn’t proffer a conjecture that his race of cryptoterrestrials account for the religious-oriented divinities, but the hint is there.)

E. J. Hammond’s “Parallel Beings and the Gods of Yore” proposes that entities from other dimensions (qua universes) account for the Divine reminiscences of early chroniclers of tracts that have become the bases for various religions.

Gnostic writings of the early Christian era present a theology explaining the nature of Yahweh, Jesus, and other gods that make up the pleroma.


The Gnostic view, however, is just a muddy as the Jewish/Christian theologies, and just as unsubstantiated.

Unfortunately, all religious or paranormal presentations of a Divine presence, in the early accounts of humanity or even today, fall short of credible acceptance by persons with acute thinking faculties.

Thus atheism and agnosticism have attained a healthy cachet among scientific writers and thinkers who skirt the issues of religion and philosophical theology.


But something happened to create the God myths of early man.

If it wasn’t a truly Divine Being, what was it?


Parakletos said...

If we can both admit that God is perfect, which is more perfect? A mythological savior? Or a real historical savior?

For some, the answer is certain -- reality trumps mythology. A real Christ beats a 'fake' Christ. So a real Christ must also beat a mythological Christ....or so the logic went.

The Church had this argument rather early on, and branded as heretics anyone who maintained that the story of Christ is mythological.

RRRGroup said...


Your point is well-taken, but you might check out the comments at our other blog:

where the "conversation" is a little more animated and extensive.