God 3.0? Fundamentalism is dangerous in any release

Comments

2 comments posted
Excellent post, but the common denominator...

is "God" - specifically a monotheist deity called Y*weh/Jehovah/Adonai who came on the scene a few thousand years ago with the declared purpose of replacing all other deities, especially the Goddess who was worshipped throughout the world at that time under various names. "God" declared himself jealous, something unknown in the ancient world, where Gods and Goddesses were actively shared, imported and acknowledged as a matter of personal choice. This jealousy led his followers to insist that he be given special reverence, always, which is why my capitalization in this post looks odd to you. I refuse to yield that deity any special treatment. My Goddess will be capitalized, too, because I won't yield to the monotheist conceit that pervades Western and Middle Eastern culture.

"God" had a specific purpose in opposing the Goddess, referred to in the Bible as Ashteroth, the Asherah, Leviathan, the "Whore of Babylon" and the serpent, to name a few of her images there. The purpose was to establish a patrilineal system of inheritance so that wealth and power could be concentrated to the control of men in general, and into the hands of an elite class of Kings and Priests specifically. In order to assure that only the king's own progeny benefit, strict control of women's sexuality was required.

The maidenhead and the womb became items to be bartered for and owned by the man in charge, and scripture appeared which reinforced the view that women must be subject to man's will. Very convenient to have this new morality ordained by the "one and only deity" whose followers would kill anyone who said otherwise. Likewise, women became easier to control when they saw their sisters stoned to death for transgressions like being raped.

By the time we get to "God 3.0", women are so oppressed that they may not leave their homes unescorted by a man, and are generally swathed in cloth so oppressive and restrictive that most of the people who die in Tsunamis and floods are women dragged down by their dresses and burkas.

We had a brief opportunity from the oppression of "God's" new patriarchy in a prophet named Yehesua/Iasus/Jesus, whose first apostle was a woman and who preached peace and generosity. Unfortunately, his doctrine took a decidedly nasty turn when a deformed former thief changed his name from Saul to Paul and twisted the "evangel", i.e. good news, of Jesus' message back into the dysangel of it's woman-hating roots. Thus we have the birth of "Christian legalism" as opposed to the state of Grace that Jesus tried to teach.

Around this time the power center that had been Rome was run into the ground by the new "Christians", who destroyed the libraries at Alexandria and eventually created their own Roman center of power known as the "Holy Sea", aka the Vatican. Once in place, the Vatican's members set about re-editing the "word of God" so that women's books, among others, were excluded, and men's power over women and heretics strictly enforced.

At that point, "God" had enough clout to start killing heretics and invading cultures. When King James had yet another revision written under the watchful eye of his Pope, a new resurgence in religious fervor brought us the Crusades and the Witch Trials. Both were enormously profitable for the Crown and the Church. "God 2.0" and "God 3.0" have been at war ever since. 2.0 is a little ahead because he has allowed his women enough freedom to add to the general wealth, but not enough to share in it. 3.0 produced, ironically, some of the most educated women in the world, but then locked them away and forbad them to work or even share their knowledge.

And so here we are. Two extremist forms of worship of a young Hebrew "God" killing each other and everyone else in "His" name. Most of them are completely unaware of the origins of their sacred texts, or even the content of the current, commonly used interpretations of them. They'll kill for them, mind you, but they haven't studied them. This is particularly true for 2.0's followers. There are a shocking number of preachers in the South who are illiterate, but their parishoners will join the Army and kill for what they teach. The majority of Catholics don't follow the Papal doctrine anymore, either, but they still give their votes and their tithes to the Church that would name them fornicators and adulterers if they only knew. They'll march one Saturday morning to keep a grown woman from emptying her womb, then kill a living breathing Iraqi woman because someone declared her government a "rogue entity", though she didn't have a vote on that, either.

To sum up, we're dealing with only one religion here, and only one fundamentalism. A Yawist thug is still a thug whether he prays to "Allah" or to "God". I have no problem with a person believing in this deity. Most people do. I have a real problem in killing people over something you haven't bothered to study yourself; a problem with keeping women enslaved because an old scroll says you can; and the fact that people who think they have the one and only answer are dangerous.

Fundamentalism is a state in which you are convinced that your opinions are truth and will kill to enforce them. A little bit of critical thinking would show that, in fact, they are opinions, and might just be wrong. The minute you stop allowing for the fact that you might be wrong, you become a danger to yourself and others. This is not religion - this is pathology. But that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

Morgaine-ism© #8

"A Woman's Sexual and Reproductive Autonomy is Sacred and Absolute."

Morgaine Swann's picture
Posted by Morgaine Swann on 15 July 2005 - 8:34pm
Indeed

Well said. I can't say I disagree. Hate is the faith. But I can't fob the judgment off on all faithful. I see more darkness and danger in those who treat Jesus or Mohammed or Yahweh as a gang sign and scripture as the drumbeat to war.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 15 July 2005 - 11:59pm