The use of Religion to control, manipulate, and gain power

[MusicLovingAtheist]

I have often pondered this idea. It would seem that with such an immense organization there must have been some foul play, somewhere along the lines. I watched a video by Darkmatter2525 called power corrupts. In this video it proposed the origins of religion: man claiming that god spoke to them through a cave that only the elders were allowed to enter. They claimed they had authority from god so they could manipulate the people into doing what they want. There was no god in the cave when the common people investigated the cave and the elders were just using the notion of god to manipulate the people all along. There were more examples but I can't recall them off the top of my head.

I read Chapter 1 of The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins yesterday (we're reading it for a secular club at my college). Richard Dawkins pointed out that religion can be used as a trump card. When someone is bigoted on their own, they are pressed hard for reasoning, when someone is bigoted for religious reasons, they aren't questioned. Or someone writes a Nobel Peace Prize winning paper on how war is bad, they will still have a hard time dodging a draft. However if someone has a parent who is Quaker, they can sail through without conflict. I am eager to read more of The God Delusion.

So obviously religion gets used to push other bigoted beliefs, such as homosexuality is wrong and woman can't expose their skin. It's obvious that religious beliefs can corrupt politicians and individuals minds. Would you say that at the core of a Church is nothing more than a successful Ponzi Scheme? A Ponzi Scheme being an investment that the operator you gave your money to tells you you'll turn around a profit and instead takes your money and you never get anything? That would seem to me what a Church really is. Just telling people they will go to heaven and then takes their money and gives it to the priests and building maintenance (as well as not paying taxes). That is my hypothesis on religious institutions, albeit a very cynical one. Maybe they truly believe in an afterlife, but to me that is all Church really is is a Ponzi Scheme.

So I guess the question is, is anyone to blame for religion? I would imagine that most people today don't know any better. I am not trying to invoke a conspiracy theory, I don't think there is one. Perhaps religion simply can't be helped. It's simply a cancer that arises out of nature, instead of the foul play of individuals. I really want to know how religion itself caught on. I guess people have been mystical since the beginning of time. Maybe it's just in our nature to be religious. That seems unfortunate to me. Or maybe it's the result of a few people who created incredibly successful scams. I often imagine that was the intention behind writing the bible. What do you think causes religion? How corrupt is it?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Of COURSE religion is manipulative. I'll go a bit further and say that the chief purpose of religion IS to manipulate people. I can't prove it, of course, but I wouldn't be a bit surprised to learn that every pastor, pope, imam, rabbi, etc etc, has - at his core - not believed the tripe they were spooning out. Clearly, however, they believed in belief.

Twain once said, 'Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool.' I've seen no evidence to doubt the truth of this.

Boru

[Cyberman]

Religion is a great way to obtain wealth, power and status while doing the least amount of work to earn it. From a tribal perspective, you get different castes radiating down from the tribe's focal centre, the leader. As (usually) the strongest, fiercest warrior called upon to protect his people, he and his immediate family get the best of everything: food, clothing, possessions, shelter and so on. However, suppose you want some of that status for yourself, but don't have the clout to get it. One thing you might do, to earn yourself a seat at the top table, is take advantage of people's primal fears - death, the dark, thunderstorms etc - and the superstitions surrounding them. Control the populace by controlling their fear.

As far as xtianity is concerned, borrowing from the Ancient Egyptian model no doubt, or even earlier, the game was perfected in the Middle Ages. Here, you have the overwhelming majority working constantly in the shittiest conditions, to provide comfort for a single family and their retinue of advisors, toadies and similar hangers-on. What you don't want happening is for the peasants to get ideas above their station, to get jealous of all that food, wealth and power, or spending precious hours enjoying sex when they could be tilling the fields and waging war. You most certainly don't want them to realise that those big and pointy farm implements might just have a secondary function; especially as there's far more of them than there is of you.

Enter the priest. Which is not a phrase I get to use in a sentence very often, so make the most of it.

Now normal, human conditions such as lust, envy, even independent thought, are all 'criminalised' and punishable, if not by literal torture and death, then by the post mortem equivalent. And eternity is a bugger of a long time.

All that is understandable in a culture that is still growing up and finding its place in the cosmos. What baffles me more is that people in the modern era, in the most so-called civilised nations, would willingly shackle themselves body and mind to such a parasitic pyramid scheme.

[Endo]

Video I saw a while back said that it was possible that our "god belief" evolved as our societies became more complex, because a person would act more in line with the rules of the group if they felt or believed in some way that someone was always watching them.

[The Grand Nudger]

Well, we do tend to feel that way even without the re-enforcing structure of religion. We see things a certain way ourselves - and it leads to us imagining that other "stuff" has a similar experience. I think religion is more of an opportunist than any sort of causative agent in that behavior.

Evolution doesn't really work that way, in any case - evolving into some solution to a defined problem. If religion increased your progeny (either absolutely or in a relative sense) then it would be actionable on the population level - it wouldn't really matter -why- whether it was toeing the line and thus being seen by propspective mates as more "fit" or simply a willingness (and justification) to kill everyone else's children.

Much more likely is that the same equipment that inculcates religious thought has other, more concrete, reproductive and survival benefits.

[Vicki Q]

I have often pondered this idea. It would seem that with such an immense organization there must have been some foul play, somewhere along the lines.

<snip>

Or maybe it's the result of a few people who created incredibly successful scams. I often imagine that was the intention behind writing the bible. What do you think causes religion? How corrupt is it?

There's a lot of very important questions here.

I'm sure your picture of religion is incomplete. Those churches that survive and have survived in very hostile environments aren't doing so out of any possibility of power. The best they get out of it is to not get killed or hurt. You really have to believe to put up with all the suffering you get in some places.

That's been the case since the foundation of Christianity. In the beginning, the Church was a handful of very scared but highly motivated people. The declaration that Jesus was Lord resulted in extreme hostility from the Jewish authorities, the Jewish people, Greek cities, all pagan authorities, the Romans...pretty much anyone who owned a torch or a pitchfork...

That's not to say that religion hasn't been used for bad ends by bad people. I remember a few months ago watching a 'Christian' TV channel target viewers in debt with a promise that if money was sent, God would sort the debts out. It made me feel sick to watch it.

There were various motivations behind writing the Bible, depending on which part you refer to. Proverbs is a collection of Wisdom sayings recorded like a book of advice. Romans is a pastoral letter trying to support a young church. Matthew is a biography of Jesus designed to get things on paper before the best evidence went.

I don't rate The God Delusion, I'm afraid. I get far more challenge from atheist websites (such as this one!).


BTW, what sort of music do you love?

[The Grand Nudger]

I thought we've been down this road before. No one brought the pitchforks. No one even noticed. Remember, the romans didn't realize that they were dealing with christians (in the minor dealings that they -did- demonstrably have with them), they thought they were jews, or simply atheists. It isn;t until the christians assumed positions of power in the state that the pitchforks really build up steam - especially with regards to persecuting "other" christian sects and christians. Perhaps that's not the story that christianity likes to tell about itself (and clearly lengths have been gone to in order to distance themselves from this sordid affair), but it -is- the story that history tells us about christianity.

I can understand your position on books like the god delusion. A book is wonderful and all - sometimes they can be fairly comprehensive - but since you never really know what bit of minutiae arcanum is propping up any given persons view of faith (theirs or another's) it's unlikely that a general book for a general audience will ever assault that pillbox. That's where an interactive medium like our forums really shines

[Vicki Q]

I thought we've been down this road before. No one brought the pitchforks.

<snip>

That's where an interactive medium like our forums really shines

I'm not sure what road you've been down, but please travel it again with me.

The Romans noticed long before Constantine. Pliny's writing to Trajan; his standard practice appears to be to execute those who refused to deconvert (and now we have ISIS- plus ca change). Any philosophy that declared Jesus as Christ (translation 'King') was immediately challenging Roman rule- and supposed sedition appears to be why execution was the process here.

The Greek cities had a whole network of assumptions about the city gods, which gave rise to hopes and fears both civic and personal. Along with many long cherished traditions and vested interests, when Paul rolled up and said that Jesus was to be worshipped as Kyrios, and the normal gods left out in the cold, people got angry. When the mob in Phillipi declared he was throwing the city into uproar by “teaching customs that it's illegal for us Romans to accept”, and a similar uproar breaks out in Thessalonica (Acts 16,17), that fits exactly with how we would expect the towns to react. There is plenty of evidence that those who denied the gods were banished or worse. (e.g. Diopeithes decree.)

The Jews even more so. By denying the role of the Temple, the Early Church were incurring the potentially lethal anger of the the Jewish authorities By denying the place of Torah, land and people, the Christians managed to alienate pretty much anyone else in Israel who wasn't already offended. The various accounts of persecution in the NT fit excellently with what we know about C1 Israel.

How did all this play out? Much like a modern tele-evangelist on tour, Paul is asked by the Corinthians to provide a 'biog', so they could big him up like a classic Greek hero. His reply? A stunning piece of merciless teasing (while making the serious point that suffering is a badge of being a member of this new family).

Here.


As to God Delusion- I think it's a classic case of someone who is brilliant in one sphere of learning being mediocre in another. Forums are useful, but are lacking in depth. One finds oneself trying to reduce an argument developed over 1000 pages of a book down to 3 lines.

[Mr Greene]

It certainly fits with regards the origins of Judaism which doesn't seem to have existed (in monotheistic form) until ~450 BCE. Indeed the biblical "history" directly contradicts the physical archaeology prior to this date.

After this point the province of Judea was run by a theocratic priesthood, thus there is a fairly blatant motive and opportunity being exploited. We can even identify a prime suspect; Ezra, a scribe who allegedly was released from captivity in Babylon and seized power in Jerusalem.

[The Grand Nudger]

The Romans noticed long before Constantine. Pliny's writing to Trajan;

Circa 111-113 ad. just so we're clear, and one roman...just so we're clear.

his standard practice appears to be

-to consult with Trajan upon things which he has little experience of, like christians - as he states in the opening sentences. In fact, he states plainly that he has had -no- experience with them prior to the matter which lead to his writing. So, by 113, christians have yet to establish any appreciable foothold in Pliny's Turkey (or Syria)- and our dear letter writer has no fucking clue whether or not he did the right thing - except insomuch as Romes line on it's authority is absolute and that they were clearly guilty of sedition (or forming forbidden political alliances). Just in case he was wrong...he sent a few to the "home office" and shot off a memo.

to execute those who refused to deconvert (and now we have ISIS- plus ca change). Any philosophy that declared Jesus as Christ (translation 'King') was immediately challenging Roman rule- and supposed sedition appears to be why execution was the process here.

Perhaps, or perhaps they just didn't worship the roman gods (state engforced religion). And? Take a look at Trajans reply. He seems unconcerned. He also states that Pliny is not to go door to door looking for them, that he is to ignore anonymous finger pointing, and that if they so much as bend the knee to a pagan altar they are to be set free.

Persecution indeed. Even before they took the reigns of power whomever that marginal cult was they never had a better friend. Something tells me that the jewish authorities (also protected by rome) would not have been so kind........So long as christians -quietly and privately- engaged in sedition.....they'd be aight.

That's assuming, of course.....that it isn't a forgery. Why would he be so ignorant of christians...wasn't Nero persecuting them in his childhood? Wasn't he a well placed lawyer, well educated, well connected (and particularly so to Nero)? Seems a strange thing to find oneself so uncertain of, given his background, upbringing, position, and where he held those positions.