More on the God Conspiracy

 

‘People who think with their reptilian brains are susceptible to cults, to conspiracy theories, to rallies, to slogans, to simplistic us-or-them formulas.’ Robert Harrington

One point that has not been addressed regarding conspiracy theories about ‘god’ is the part addressing the assertion that there exists a powerful (and sinister) group which in turn upholds the conspiracy theory as fact. 

 

To address this is more problematic I that fingers need to be pointed at specific targets such as ‘The Illuminati’, the ‘Free Masons, etc. Allegations made against specific, actual groups tend to attract lawsuits. This is a morass into which this writer would rather not descend. That said, if the Roman Catholic and Apostolic church did not spring to mind when a powerful group was mentioned then perhaps the reader has been living under a rock. 

 

No offense.

To backtrack a bit, one must consider the role of gods and divinity in the formation of society. It is generally acknowledged that the first urban centers were in Mesopotamia. The cities of Babylon, Asher and Ur are renown though there must have been others in Africa and Asia which predated those; smaller cities which would have necessitated moral codes, laws, law-givers and law enforcement of some type. 

 

One cannot image a congregation of humans in a group which did not have a code of ethics and behavior. (Here, one might refer to the extensive writings on morals and morality.) Apart from the codes of behavior necessary for tribal groups to exist, more extensive and specific laws would be required to assure public safety when two or more such tribal groups cohabitated. 

 

Such laws would need to be enforced and adjudicated by some authority. Such authority would need to be unassailable. That authority might come in the form of a deity; the authority might then be conferred on the priests which ‘served’ that deity. The priesthood, not being warriors and strong-men would then require a strongman to enforce the adjudication of laws. The priesthood and the strongman would exist symbiotically with the priesthood beholden to the strongman who was, in turn, beholden to the priesthood and their connection to the deity. This would be the fundamental ‘con’ upon which civilization rests.  This relationship would lead to the concept of the divine right of kings. 

 

Leaving aside the usurpation of the priestly power by the king, it is logical to assume the necessity of such a relationship of priest and strongman for the establishment and functioning of a proto-society. Codes of behavior most surely were in place for any group larger than a tribal one to exist together and form an urban center, a nation or a state. Lawlessness is not conducive to the formation of a coherent and sustainable coalition of people as in a city. Chaos is not a good medium for cohesion; laws must be in place and those laws enforced.

 

The god, through the priesthood and the strongman, would be claimed to be the originating source of those laws. By this logic, the conspiracy is shored up; god, its priests and the strongman/chieftain are the symbiotic triumvirate which allows for nascent cities to exist and therefore allow for the establishment of civilization. Without the god, there would be no priesthood. The priesthood, then, requires its alliance with the muscle of the strongman/chieftain for protection from the less privileged and for the enforcement of the codes or laws of conduct ‘decreed’ by the god. 

 

This brings up the privileged positions of the priesthood and strongman.