Further below- Threat theology, as in apocalyptic mythology, deforms human personality with (1) fear, (2) anxiety, (3) shame, (4) guilt (i.e. ‘bad to the bone’ people blamed for causing the decline of life toward apocalyptic ending, God angry at humanity for ruining paradise), (5) despair (catastrophe looming as in climate change alarmism, the end of life imminent so why have children, why grow up into a doomed world), (6) depression, (7) nihilism, and (8) violence.
The apocalyptic theology of an angry deity who threatens to violently end the world, dominates world religions and secular ideologies. And we wonder why it drives so many people crazy, even to committing horrific acts of nihilistic violence?
Also below- The impact of pathological ideas like “salvation through destruction, achieving a better world by killing the right people”.
Notes: Many are questioning what happened with the shooting in Minneapolis, Minnesota where a crazed man fired on a group of praying children in a Catholic church. People are asking- What motivated that man? Others below comment on meta-narrative themes promoted in public and the impacts on fringe people (e.g. the Megyn Kelly interview of Matt Walsh).
And comment on the domination impulse that drove the creation of apocalyptic mythology. The earliest elites constructed the “Fear=control” formula still used today by wannabe totalitarians.
The varied strains in developing apocalyptic mythology, Wendell Krossa
“Instantaneous transformation/purification”: The historical development of one of history’s most dangerous and destructive ideas- i.e. the apocalyptic myth that continues to dominate public meta-narratives, both religious and secular. This mythical fallacy continues to incite and validate violence today. It drove Marxist revolutions, Nazi Holocaust insanity, and now fuels the climate alarmism crusade to radically overturn and eliminate our fossil-fueled civilization. And its splattered all over far-left Woke Progressivism. It also deforms major strains of narrative beliefs on the conservative right.
Arthur Mendel opens his book “Vision and Violence” with some comment on the state of the world today (i.e. technological advances making mass-violence a greater threat). He points to the dangerous influence of apocalyptic in this context, especially its feature of “violent social transmutation” as the strategy for purging the existing “evil society” and achieving the “good society” (the utopian element). Apocalyptic promotes “salvation through mass-death destruction”. Again, we saw that (and still see it) played out in recent Marxist revolutions (note the “recent” Venezuela), and in the Nazi holocaust.
Salvation through destruction is now pushed in “climate crisis apocalyptic”. Apocalyptic advocates the destruction of what exists, the “corrupted evil society”, in order to open the way for the purified new society, the collectivist utopia. In its environmentalist version it promotes the purging of “evil fossil fuel-based” society in order to achieve transmutation/transformation into the good society of Green energy.
Mendel says, “As for the existing evil society and its sinful oppressors, they would be justly punished in the catastrophic destruction needed to sweep away the old and make room for the new… emphasis on the terrible violence that will accomplish the miraculous transmutation.”
This from the ‘Introduction’ to Mendel’s “Vision and Violence”:
“The prophecy of universal devastation…. Tens of thousands of nuclear warheads controlled by leaders still strongly influenced by two of the most powerful apocalyptic movements in history- Christianity and Bolshevism- make that prophecy disturbingly realistic, especially given the current worldwide revival of fundamentalism.”
“Violent social transmutation, of the kind that characterized late medieval religious millennial upheavals and modern secular ideological revolutions, is the strategy of those who are committed to a swift and total realization of the ideal (of achieving the “good society”) and who are not constrained by doubts about the maximalist ends and means”, (End of Mendel quotes).
Adding to the destructive influence of apocalyptic in Christianity and Marxism, is the same apocalyptic strain in Islam and the belief of a significant minority there that if they incite the final Armageddon battle against their evil enemies then their God (and/or the Mahda) will descend to finish the destruction for them and then install their “millennial utopia” (the Caliphate) across the Earth. This vision drove the ISIS eruption of violence in Syria (2014) and it still simmers throughout extremist factions of Islam (the 15% approving/affirming violent jihad), awaiting the next opportunity to erupt again. The same old “Salvation through destruction”.
The same apocalyptic mythology shapes environmental alarmism and its belief that the present industrial/technological civilization, and its material consumers, is the great evil enemy that must be purged from the world by “violent social transmutation” in order to achieve the good society- the millennial vision and hope.
Far-left Woke Progressivism (with its DEI “Woke Racism”, joined with “climate crisis” apocalyptic) is just another gussied up front for the older Marxist version of this basic belief system.
Here below is an outline of Mendel tracing out the historical development of apocalyptic in the Judeo-Christian tradition. He presents the varied themes that contributed differing features to the final potently destructive version of this mythology. Mendel’s unique contribution is revealing the shift in ancient Hebrew religion from a worldview of this planet as our home to denigrating this world as too corrupted and in need of either abandonment or radical violent renewal/renovation.
The original Hebrews were not concerned with some spiritual realm, but were focused on living here in this material world and improving life in this world, gradually working to achieve the good society of peace, justice, freedom material well being. All by “gradualism”- the gradual evolving struggle of humanity to improve this life and world.
Mendel then shows how the Jews shifted away from that original worldview to, along with the Greeks/Hellenists, despising this world as corrupted, evil, and to be abandoned for a more perfect spiritual world, outside of this world.
Mendel notes the Israelites tried to maintain their original concern for life in this material world, initially not embracing the Hellenistic and Gnostic emphasis on full rejection of this world as too corrupted and hence needing to be abandoned for otherworldly existence in some perfect realm.
The Hebrew belief was then adjusted further across subsequent history, shifting, with input from Hellenism and Gnosticism, to a view of immediate violent transformation of life as necessary to attain a utopian society, but in this physical world. This was the rejection of former “gradualism” for violent revolutionary transformation of society (Mendel uses the term- “transmutation”). It was a shift that viewed progress to the good society through instantaneous purification, through instantaneous coercive and violent purging that would enable the attainment of perfection now. It was a rejection of democratic gradualism, and it revealed the impatience with the slow processes of daily mundane and ordinary struggle to improve oneself and society. It was the impatient demand for perfection right now, for utopia. An impossible desire to fulfill.
How the shift from gradualism to “violent instantaneous purification” unfolded:
Mendel begins his tracing of the shift from gradualism to violent transmutation noting the original Old Testament view that humanity was created and assigned to live in this world and to improve themselves gradually over time, to “sufficiently control the ‘evil inclinations’ in human nature (in order) to establish the good society of peace, freedom, justice, and material well-being”. Progress toward a good society was focused here on Earth, (p.11).
The Hebrews believed that God gave such things as laws on ethics to help humanity achieve the goal of a good society. And the harsher elements of life, obstacles, were viewed as necessary for people to labor against as part of the gradual development toward something better. The achievement of a good society was to be by gradual evolution, to struggle against suffering, to go on an adventure of attaining dominion of the world by gradual refinement of things like reason. The project in this world was to carry on and complete the work of God’s creation, to engage the long-term process of “moral repair” in this material/physical world.
“Such, in essence, is the Hebrew bible’s gradualist project and its assumptions. Made in the image of God, man has freedom, reason, and conscience to undertake the repair and completion of the world”, to attain the good society (p.17). “It was assumed the realization of these ideals lay in the future and could only be achieved slowly…. There was no role for apocalyptic-revolutionary violence in this vision” (p.18).
Mendel traces other developing features of apocalyptic in the Old Testament, noting for example:
“The phrase ‘Day of the Lord’ would be used to mean what it would later mean in the Apocalypse, a time- perhaps today- when God chose to destroy the sinner and reward the saved remnant as compensation for their unjust suffering. With this, we are already well on our way to one of the distinguishing features of religious and secular apocalyptic movements: the radical division between the sinners and the saved, with the saved assigned the duty to execute the judgment of God… against the sinners” (p.23).
Add here the element of God sometimes, though still in the process of historical gradualism, intervening with horrible judgments to punish the oppressors of the Israelites, or to punish the backsliding Israelites themselves.
Mendel is outlining the history of developing features in human belief systems that reveal the shift away from the original Jewish gradualist vision, of humans who are slowly improving life as they seek to achieve a better future society, and now shifting toward a vision of immediate divine intervention to instantaneously transform life from a present corrupted state, to instantly installed utopian perfection. This shift in thinking will eventually embrace the hope in a violent revolution to purge the existing corrupt society in order to open the way to instantaneously install the new.
He adds other details on the Greek and Hebrew shift away from viewing this world as home where early people held no interest in another metaphysical world. That view was eventually challenged and rejected due to the experience of decline in Greek culture and society where “This world was no longer a pleasant home and the search for another begins”. This becomes clear in the philosophy of Plato who separates the material world from a transcendent world of “pure, timeless, immaterial, unchanging perfection… a world of divine spirit, mind, Idea, Ideal, Light…the authentic Reality”.
In contrast, while here in this world, Plato taught that we are imprisoned in our bodies and absent from our true home in another perfect realm.
He notes that Gnosticism also played a role in the development of apocalyptic, adding the view that “the material and spiritual realms were radically separated” and “the trapped soul could get back to its true home in the spirit world by gnosis (knowledge), by becoming aware that its authentic home was in the spirit world where it was born but was trapped in a body in this material world” (p.27).
Also, in the Gnostic worldview, a “messenger is sent from above, a Prince by his Father the King, to bring the liberating knowledge/gnosis and lead the trapped souls back home” (p.27). The messenger/savior frees trapped souls by teaching them who they truly are, how they got caught in bodies, and how by purity and detachment they can go home again. This points to a coming Savior to deliver humanity from its suffering in this world.
There is a growing sense among early Hebrews/Jews of the corruption of the world and the suffering that entails, hence the longing to be freed of this corrupted world of pain and suffering.
“Much of this was to become part of the apocalyptic despair and withdrawal. There are several aspects of Hellenistic Gnosticism that are especially important in comparing it with the apocalyptic vision: its attitude toward the body and sexuality, its predictions concerning the future of the physical world and the place of violence in its expectations. For the Gnostics the world of flesh, and other matter, reeks of darkness, pain, falsity, corruption, and all other evils… Only one human passion was right and pure- the yearning to detach oneself from that corruption, withdraw inward to the inner soul itself, and thereby begin the return homeward to the realm of the spirit” (p.29). This world of the Devil could not be redeemed and purified.
In that progression in early human thinking, violence was not yet a paramount concern. The view was not about destroying the world but just abandoning it for something better outside this world.
“The gnostic and Jewish apocalyptic worldviews differed on this central issue of violence- the destruction of this sinful temporal world in the belief that another ideal world would replace it” (p.29).
The Hellenistic Jews, suffering defeat and subjugation under the Romans, had reason to escape their sorry world but they found another answer that permitted them to remain loyal to this divinely created, earthly world, as in their original (Jewish) vision of this world as home to be improved gradually over history.
Their solution, says Mendel, “Change, at once, the existing, natural, physical, temporal world into the good society of peace, justice and material abundance that had long been their ideal” (p.31). And it would no longer be humanity bringing the change gradually toward the good society by the struggle with improving themselves and life.
It would be God intervening to effect “world transformation swiftly completely and at any time” (p.3).
This feature of instantaneous transformation was not entirely new to Jewish understanding.
“As for the existing evil society and its sinful oppressors, they would be justly punished in the catastrophic destruction needed to sweep away the old and make room for the new, the kind of violence that God had often previously used to punish both the enemies of the Israelites, and (at times) the backsliding Israelites themselves. Neo-Platonists and Gnostics could achieve their aims immediately by simply abandoning the world and society. Destruction was superfluous. Those committed to the world and society who similarly wanted to realize their ideals at once could only do so by violent transmutation” (p.31).
“The result was an outpouring of apocalyptic themes in the popular Jewish literature of the time, particularly in the so-called Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha works (Book of Enoch, etc.). Considered together, these works present all the essentials of the apocalyptic pattern: total rejection of the present world; absolute faith in the imminence of an ideal divine kingdom of the saved; certainty that a divinely sent messiah will bring this salvation; and- the key feature generally missing in Neo-Platonist and Gnostic works- emphasis on the terrible violence that will accomplish the miraculous transmutation” (p.31).
“The apocalypse reached its final form in the most influential of all Hellenistic Jewish apocalyptic works- the Christian gospels, together with the accompanying texts, particularly Paul’s writings and John’s Revelations. The Judeo-Christian gospels differed from other Jewish apocalyptic works of the time, however, in two basic ways. First, they told the story of a Messiah who had already come rather than one whose arrival, while imminent, still lay in the future. Second, they moved Jewish apocalyptic thought and expectations much closer to Gnosticism. Most Jewish apocalyptic expectations remained far more attached to the natural, physical, temporal world” (p.32).
Take Mendel’s points and relate them, as his colleagues Richard Landes and David Redles also do in their books, to current secular apocalyptic crusades like Marxism and environmentalism. These apocalyptic crusades embrace the rejection of gradualism through liberal democracy and embrace the view of world transformation through immediate violent revolution, to attain the good society through terrible violence that will accomplish the goal of immediate “transmutation… instantaneous purification…”, salvation through violent destruction that purges the existing “evil” society and achieves the pure, utopian millennial kingdom.
Add here the apocalyptic feature of “imminent” apocalypse that further intensifies the urgency for “instantaneous purification” because, in the view of apocalyptic true believers, there is no time for the gradualism of liberal democracy when the existential threat of looming apocalypse demands that they “save the world” right now.
Landes notes also the important point that people committed to apocalyptic are at their most dangerous when it becomes publicly obvious that their prophecies are wrong and their crusade is failing. Disillusioned, and desperate to keep their crusade going, they then become most dangerous and double down on their prophecies and threats, even shifting to the dangerous phase of “exterminate or be exterminated”. We see this now in the fading Net Zero decarbonization crusade with the increasingly hysterical claims of the lead prophets (e.g. the comments of an increasingly angry Al Gore) that the “end is nigh”, nigher than ever before.
As with all comment here, I encourage the recognition that we have the alternative to the despair and nihilism of apocalyptic. We have had the insight of Historical Jesus for two millennia now- i.e. his stunning new theology that God is no conditions love, a non-apocalyptic God, a non-violent God. Jesus’ new theology stated there must be no more eye for eye retaliation but instead we must love our enemies because God does. God does not retaliate but generously loves God’s enemies, as evident in that God gives sun and rain to all alike, to both good and bad people.
As “Q Wisdom Sayings” scholar James Robinson has stated, Jesus presented a “stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory God and that was his greatest contribution to the history of human ideas”. Here is a summary of Jesus’ non-retaliatory theology from Luke 6:
“Do not retaliate against your offenders/enemies with ‘eye for eye’ justice. Instead, love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then you will be just like God because God does not retaliate against God’s enemies. God does not mete out eye for eye justice. Instead, God is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. God causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. Be unconditionally loving, just as your God is unconditionally loving”.
My “theological” logic: A non-retaliatory God will not retaliate in the greatest of all “eye for eye” responses- i.e. the apocalyptic destruction of the world to punish sinners as portrayed in John’s Revelation. God has nothing to do with the perverse and barbaric mythology of apocalyptic.
Paul, to the contrary, rejected the non-retaliatory, non-apocalyptic theology of Jesus and re-affirmed the primitive belief in a retaliating deity. He stated that in Romans 12:17-20, affirming his theology with this Old Testament quote, “’Vengeance is mine. I will retaliate’, says the Lord”. Paul continued his affirmation of retaliatory, apocalyptic theology in his Christ myth, stating- “Lord Jesus will return in flaming fire to destroy all who do not believe my Christ gospel” (his Thessalonian letters).
Added note:
We also have (developed over the past few centuries) the contemporary gradualism alternative to violent instantaneous transformation of society. We have the principles, systems of law, and representative institutions of Liberal Democracy, as expressed in our liberal democracies, with their gradual processes of improvement through the protection of the freedoms and rights of all citizens, equally. Mendel concludes his book with good comment on this.
You doubt the domination of apocalyptic in contemporary narratives? Check this on Hollywood story-telling:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_apocalyptic_films
A list of alternative themes for narratives: “Humanity’s worst ideas, better alternatives (Old Story themes, New Story alternatives),” Wendell Krossa
http://www.wendellkrossa.com/?p=9533
We have a complete set of alternatives to the list of bad ideas posted in sections below, including the feature of a stunning new Cohering Center (i.e. God), the most critically influential idea of all that has long functioned as Ultimate Ideal, Ultimate Authority.
See the longer version of this list at the link above.
Old narrative themes, better alternatives (short version), Wendell Krossa
1. Old story myth: The idea of deity as a judgmental, punitive, and destroying reality. Contemporary “secular” versions of judgmental, punitive deity include “Vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, retributive Universe, and payback karma”.
Alternative: The stunning new theology of deity as a no conditions reality (the God of “no conditions love” presented by Historical Jesus). There is no threat from an unconditional God, no judgment, no exclusion of anyone, and no ultimate punishment or destruction. All are safe- in the end.
2. Old story myth: The idea of a perfect beginning (Eden) and a God obsessed with perfection, enraged at the loss of perfection, demanding punishment of imperfection, demanding atonement (sacrifice/payment) to remedy imperfection, and further demanding violent purging of all imperfection as the route to restore the lost utopia of perfection.
Alternative: The world was purposefully created as originally imperfect in order to serve as an arena for human struggle, learning, and development. God has no problem with imperfection in life and in humanity. Imperfection (problems, struggle) is essential to human development and maturing. Others include the argument that there can be no such reality as authentic goodness without its opposite- i.e. evil/imperfection (meaning- authentic freedom of choice for good as contrasted with freedom to choose for evil). Good cannot exist alone or be known and experienced without a contrasting reality.
The point? The dualism of good and evil belongs only to this temporary material realm. There is no ultimate dualism of good and evil where we all came from. There is only the “Oneness” of divine love.
This is not to excuse, diminish, or defend any form of evil. From our five-senses and four-dimensional perspective we rightly feel outrage at evil and engage battles against varied forms of evil. This is critical to our gradual development as maturing humans. But if we are open to embrace some speculation on the reason for the existence of evil, these insights may help us to maintain our humanity during our righteous battles against evil in this world.
As Joseph Campbell argued, in this life we are all just “actors on God’s stage”, engaging oppositional roles in a temporary realm of dualism to provide one another with contrasting life experiences. We must not forget that our “enemies” are still our family in the end as we all share in the Ultimate Oneness of love. Yes, this is metaphysical speculation. But what might be a better alternative to explain evil? The ultimate tribal division of humanity? Eternal cosmic dualism (i.e. true believers/unbelievers forever, eternal heaven and hell), versus an ultimate return to our original “oneness”?
(Insert: Put this speculation on metaphysical realities in context with the Jewish OT belief that we are placed in this world to gradually improve ourselves and life in the here and now of the material reality. This ought to be our focus throughout our lives. Mendel’s comments on this are helpful.)
3. Old story myth: Humanity began as a more perfect species (the myth of primitive people as pure and noble hunter gatherers, i.e. “Adam/Eve”, “Enki” in Dilmun). But those original people became corrupted/sinful (i.e. the myth of the “Fall of mankind”). That myth has led to persistent anti-humanism- i.e. blaming humanity for all the imperfections and suffering in the world.
Alternative: Humanity emerged from the brutality of animal reality to gradually become more humane across history (a long-term trajectory of humanity rising/improving, not “falling” into a trajectory of degeneration/decline).
4. Old story myth: The long-term trajectory of all life declines from an original paradise (again, the past was better). After the “Fall”, the overall trajectory of life has been degenerating toward something worse.
Alternative: The long-term trajectory of life does not decline but overall rises/improves toward something ever better (i.e. more complex, organized, advanced).
5. Old story myth: The belief that natural disasters, disease, accidents, human cruelty, and death are expressions of divine punishment, and that humanity deserves punishment.
Alternative: While there are natural consequences all through life, there is no punitive, destroying deity behind the imperfections and natural consequences of life. That has more to do with the “natural freedom” of all the elements of our world.
6. Old story Myth: The belief that humanity has been rejected by the Creator and we must be reconciled via blood sacrifice/suffering.
Alternative: No one has ever been rejected by the unconditional Love at the core of reality. No one has ever been separated from God (see number 17 below). Ultimate Love does not demand appeasement/payment/atonement or suffering as punishment for sin and as required to restore a supposedly severed/ruptured relationship with God. No such separation of humanity from God has ever happened. As King David stated in Psalm 139:
“Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast.”
There is no place that we can hide from or escape from the presence of a loving God.
7. Old story myth: The idea of a cosmic dualism between Good and Evil (i.e. God versus Satan) expressed in human dualisms (tribes of good people versus their enemies- the bad/evil people). Ultimate Good versus Evil validates our inherited animal impulse to tribalism- to view ourselves in opposition to differing or disagreeing others. This is not to deny there is actual evil to be opposed in life, but to challenge the impulse to view differing others as “evil enemies”, others who are equal members of the same one human family.
Alternative: There is a fundamental Oneness at the core of all, and we share that oneness. We all belong equally to the one human family and equally share the ultimate eternal Oneness that is God. Dualism (good versus evil) is an element of our temporal experience in this material world.
8. Old story myth: The belief in a looming apocalypse as the final judgment, the ultimate punishment of wrong, and the final destruction of all things. The final return to chaos.
Alternative: There are problems all through the world but there is no looming threat of final divine destruction and ending. Apocalypse is a great fraud and lie. There will be no apocalypse as in the religious version of divine intervention to punish humanity and destroy the world (i.e. as, for example, in the New Testament book of Revelation).
9. Old story myth: The always “imminent” element in apocalyptic demands urgent action to save something, even the use of coercive violence to effect “instantaneous transformation”. (Arthur Mendel, in “Vision and Violence”, details the difference between the approaches of totalitarian “instantaneous transformation” and democratic “gradualism”.)
Alternative: While unexpected worldwide catastrophes could still happen, there is no “imminent end of days” on the horizon, inciting the urgency to “save the world”. Rather, life improves through gradual democratic processes as creative humanity cooperatively solves problems.
10. Old story myth: The demand for a salvation plan, a required sacrifice or atonement (debt payment, punishment).
Alternative: Unconditional deity does not demand sacrifice, atonement, payment, or punishment as required for appeasement. Deity loves unconditionally.
Additionally, this comment from Bob Brinsmead:
“The area often touched on superficially and skirted around like a root out of the dry ground is the matter of the anti-sacrificial movement launched by John the Baptist and brought to a head by the very issue that led directly to the death of Jesus. This is the matter of the real nature of Jesus’ temple protest. This was always destined to become the central issue of all Jesus research. No one disputes that Jesus died. If the temple event is seen as Jesus carrying forward the anti-sacrifice mission of his cousin John, then Jesus has to be seen as utterly against the whole religious idea that a sacrifice, an act of violent blood-letting to make an atonement for sin, should ever be required for reconciliation with God or with one another.
“This would mean that the Christian religion was founded on a false interpretation of the meaning of the death of Jesus, and it was out of this grave misunderstanding, that the whole edifice of its Christology arose– the Christology of a divine, virgin born and absolutely sinless man by whom God supposedly defeats evil by an act of apocalyptic violence, first in the Christ event and finally in a holocaust at the end of the world.
“Or to put it more simply, Jesus died protesting at the temple, the place where sacrifices were offered, affirming that God requires no sacrifice (no blood-letting violence) to put us right with God; yet the Christian religion turned the death of Jesus into God’s supreme sacrifice to put us right with God. Rightly understood, point 9 resolves the issue of point 8, that is, whether the historical Jesus was an apocalyptic Jesus or a sapiential (i.e. wisdom) Jesus.” Bob Brinsmead
11. Old story myth: The belief that retribution or payback is true “justice” (i.e. eye for eye, hurt for hurt, humiliation for humiliation, punishment for punishment). This is based on the primitive belief in the “holiness” of God and that any human sin is an offense against that holiness, an offense against God’s honor. Consequently, God’s “offended honor” must be re-affirmed and restored through punishing offenders. This pathology is expressed in such barbaric practices as “honor killings”.
Alternative: Unconditional love keeps no record of wrongs, forgives freely and without limit. And yes, there are natural consequences to bad behavior in this world (i.e. incarceration of violent people in order to protect others), but all justice should be humanely restorative/rehabilitative in response to human failure.
12. Old story myth: The belief in after-life judgment, exclusion, punishment, and destruction (i.e. hell). This pathology adds unnecessary sting to the natural human fear of death.
Alternative: Unconditional love does not threaten ultimate judgment, exclusion, punishment, or destruction.
13. Old story myth: The idea of a “hero” messiah who will use superior force to overthrow enemies, purge the world of wrong, and install a promised utopia.
Alternative: A God of authentic love does not intervene with overwhelming force that overrides human freedom and choice. It is up to maturing humanity to make the world a better place through long-term gradualism processes that respect the freedom of others who differ. Freedom and love are inextricably united. You cannot have one without the other.
14. Old story myth: The fallacy of biblicism- the belief that religious holy books are more special and authoritative than ordinary human literature, and the related fallacy that people are obligated to live according to the holy book as the revealed will, law, or specially inspired word of God.
Alternative: We evaluate all human writing according to basic criteria of right and wrong, good and bad, humane or inhumane. Holy books, written by fallible people like ourselves, are not exempted from this basic process of discernment/evaluation.
15. Old story myth: The idea of God as King, Ruler, Lord, or Judge. This myth promotes the idea that God relates to humanity in domination/submission forms of relating. This is based on the primitive idea that humans were “created to serve the gods”. Ideas of divine domination have long been used to validate human forms of domination over others (i.e. the “divine right of kings, authority of priesthoods”).
Alternative: There is no domination/subservience relationship of humanity to God. True greatness is to relate horizontally to all as equals. The “greatness” of God is to relate to all as free equals, and not to “lord over” others.
16. Old story myth: The idea that humanity is obligated to know, serve, or have a relationship with an invisible reality (deity), that we are to give primary loyalty to something metaphysical that is separate from and above people.
Alternative: Our primary loyalty is to love and serve real people around us. Their needs, here and now, take priority in life. Loyalty to realities that are placed above people (laws, institutions, or higher authorities) has always resulted in the neglect or abuse of people.
17. Old story myth: The perception that God is silent or absent during the horrors of life (i.e. “Where was God during the Holocaust?”). This myth of absent deity is based on the primitive belief that God is a sky deity (dwelling in heaven above, separate from humanity), a deity that descends to intervene in life and change circumstances, to override natural law in order to save or protect people.
Alternative: There has never been a Sky God up above in some heaven. The reality we call “God” has always been incarnated equally in all humanity. Hence, God has always been immediately present in all human suffering and is intimately present in all human raging and struggle against evil. God is inseparable from the human spirit in all of us and is expressed in all human action to prevent evil, to solve problems, and to improve life. We are the embodiments/incarnations of God in this world, and nothing saves us except our choices and actions to oppose wrong and to help one another, to make life better in this world.
18. Old story myth: The fallacy of “limited good” and the belief that too many people are consuming too much of Earth’s resources, and hence world resources are being exhausted.
Alternative: More people on Earth means more creative minds to solve problems. More consumption means more wealth creation to solve problems and enable us to make life better- i.e. enable us to improve the human condition and protect the natural world at the same time. Evidence affirms that human improvement and environmental improvement have been the dual outcomes of more people on Earth enjoying the good life. See “Population Bombed” by Desrochers and Szurmak, “Ultimate Resource” by Julian Simon, “Humanprogress.org”, and related studies.
Further, we are not exhausting Earth’s resources. With the emergence of some apparent resource scarcity, humanity through improving technology then works to discover more reserves of those scarce resources or makes the shift to alternative resources. There is a superabundance of resources in our world. Note also the “dematerialization” trend in modern advanced societies (the ongoing trend of less material inputs per person, economies of scale with increasing urbanization, etc.)
Add your own to a list of bad ideas and better alternatives.
Added note to Old Story themes: “Holiness” mythology
One of the more common responses from religious people to the idea of God as no conditions love is that God is also holy and just and therefore must punish all wrong. God’s honor is tarnished by the wrongdoing of people so he must be just (exhibit strict eye for eye retaliation) and punish all sin in order to fully satisfy retributive justice. God cannot just freely forgive and love. Holiness in God takes precedence over love, forgiveness, mercy.
This divine holiness myth exhibits an element of barbaric primitivism at its worst. How so? It is the very same reasoning that is behind practices like “honor killing”.
People in varied cultures today still reason that, for example, a daughter embracing modern habits has dishonored her family and their traditional culture. So the dishonored males are required to punish the “evil” daughter in order to restore their tarnished honor. Holiness theology is embracing this very same primitive reasoning that wrongs must be punished thoroughly and severely, or justice and honor are not restored properly.
I would counter that unconditional forgiveness and love is the true glory of God, the highest goodness and love. Authentic goodness and love will just forgive without demanding payment or righting of wrongs first.
The holiness feature in theology affirms the myth of God obsessed with perfection and punishing imperfection, hence the creation of a supporting complex of myths- i.e. original paradise/Eden (perfect creation), Fall of humanity and ruin of paradise (loss of perfection), and the subsequent need for an atonement (sacrifice/payment/punishment) in order to restore the lost perfection.
See full version of “Humanity’s worst ideas, better alternatives” (Old story themes, new story alternatives) at
http://www.wendellkrossa.com/?p=9533
Some big background themes in our meta-narratives, both religious and secular, Wendell Krossa
Consider:
How does an idea like “salvation through destruction” work on human minds? How do you think such ideas work in human minds to provide incitement, guidance, and validation for extremists to act similarly? Consider again, that such beliefs have been revealed as driving violent Marxist revolutions. Giving true believers the sense of becoming heroes in a righteous crusade against evil enemies that threaten the world.
“Salvation by destruction” is the perverse belief that we achieve the “good society” by violent revolution. A related theme/belief is that we attain salvation by murdering the right people (i.e. the sacrifice of a Jesus to gain salvation, utopia/heaven, the Nazi slaughter of Jews to “save Germany”).
These ideas/themes/beliefs dominate the metanarratives of our societies- both religious and secular.
Note also the widespread cheering for Luigi Mangione after he killed the CEO of UnitedHealthcare. Even the comedian Bill Burr shouted during an interview, “Free Mangione”.
Mangione acted on that very belief that if you kill the right people, that is the means to achieve the better society, to achieve salvation.
Consider how the indoctrination of humanity with these common religious ideas over millennia can impact human consciousness, emotions, motivations, and then responses/actions. Note again psychologist Harold Ellen’s comments on this, below.
This post to a discussion group, Wendell Krossa
Note in the link below Matt Walsh’s point that public narratives/themes that validate violence against disagreeing others, do incite and validate mentally unbalanced people and extremist types to act accordingly:
Ignore Kelly’s tendency to go somewhat tribally harsh on her opponents (i.e. on Democrats, the left) and her tendency to use overly harsh and vilifying terms to describe those opponents (e.g. “assholes”). More to the point- around the 5 minute and 30 second mark she discusses with Matt Walsh, a noted commentator on social issues, the trans issues that dominate much of today’s public debates and disagreements. Walsh’s comments get to some critical issues regarding the trans movement…
“Media ignores shooter reality, Megyn reveals Lively subpoena, w/Walsh, Eiglish, Geragos, Holloway”, The Megyn Kelly Show, Aug. 28, 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASCMG8YrgHc
Set aside the tribal element in so many of these issues (partisan divides between conservative/liberal) and note Walsh’s comment that there is a narrative being pushed to people who are already subject to delusions, mental extremism, and dangerous behaviors.
That narrative validates their view of themselves as oppressed victims. They are constantly told by activists and media that there is a “genocide” against them, and they must defend themselves. Hence, their right to use violence to defend themselves against those they view as threatening attackers, against evil enemies that threaten them. So, to defend themselves, as victims, they must act with legitimate force. That narrative is pushed all over in public media.
And even more, many of these extremist types seeking validation to use violence against others, picture themselves as engaging heroically in some righteous crusade against irredeemable evil that must be eliminated, exterminated to “save the world”.
What do you think the constant media obsession with demonizing opposition leadership and followers as “Nazis, fascists, Hitler, dictator, etc.”, what do you think that does in the minds of extremist types?
Also of interest, Walsh shares notes from the shooter’s manifesto confessing his regret for being brainwashed about the trans issue and wishing that he had not fallen for that, among other confessions. He states his refusal to cut his hair as that would be an embarrassing admission of defeat, etc.
Added note: Someone the other day noted that most of us have no problem with trans people and their freedoms and rights to do what they feel is good for them. They are equals among us, also. But the problem arises when activists demand that we must agree to use only certain words/terms that they approve and they threaten and bully the rest of us for not doing so as they demand (i.e. bullying by censoring, banning, cancelling, ruining lives and careers, shaming and smearing as evil transphobes, etc., even criminalizing).
(End of post)
Note how psychologist Harold Ellens explains this impact of ideas/beliefs on human behavior (posted once again)-
The full quotes of Ellens from Lotufo’s book “Cruel God, Kind God”:
The Introduction states that, among others, “(Lotufo) explores the interface of psychology, religion, and spirituality at the operational level of daily human experience… (this is of the) highest urgency today when religious motivation seems to be playing an increasing role, constructively and destructively, in the arena of social ethics, national politics, and world affairs…”
My insert: The destructive outcomes of “religious motivation” are notable also in terms of the “profoundly religious” climate alarmism crusade and its destructive “salvation” scheme of Net Zero decarbonization (“save the world”), as evident in the spreading harm, from Net Zero and renewables zealotry, in societies like Germany, Britain, and California. Climate alarmism exhibits the same old themes and destructive outcomes of all past apocalyptic crusades. The themes of climate alarmism, as another apocalyptic millennial crusade, are energized by the cohering central theme of an angry deity threatening harsh punishment and destruction through an apocalypse.
Lotufo then notes “the pathological nature of mainstream orthodox theology and popular religious ideation”.
He says, “One type of religiosity is entirely built around the assumption or basic belief, and correspondent fear, that God is cruel or even sadistic… The associated metaphors to this image are ‘monarch’ and ‘judge’. Its distinctive doctrine is ‘penal satisfaction’. I call it ‘Cruel God Christianity’… Its consequences are fear, guilt, shame, and impoverished personalities. All these things are fully coherent with and dependent on a cruel and vengeful God image…
“(This image results) in the inhibition of the full development of personality… The doctrine of penal satisfaction implies an image of God as wrathful and vengeful, resulting in exposing God’s followers to guilt, shame, and resentment… These ideas permeate Western culture and inevitably influence those who live in this culture…
“Beliefs do exert much more influence over our lives than simple ideas… ideas can also, in the psychological sphere, generate ‘dynamis’, or mobilize energy… (they) may result, for instance, in fanaticism and violence, or… may also produce anxiety and inhibitions that hinder the full manifestation of the capacities of a person…
“The image of God can be seen as a basic belief or scheme, and as such it is never questioned…
“Basic cultural beliefs are so important, especially in a dominant widespread culture, because they have the same properties as individual basic beliefs, that is, they are not perceived as questionable. The reader may object that “God”, considered a basic belief in our culture, is rejected or questioned by a large number of people today. Yet the fact is that the idea of God that those people reject is almost never questioned. In other words, their critique assumes there is no alternative way of conceiving God except the one that they perceive through the lens of their culture. So, taking into account the kind of image of God that prevails in Western culture- a ‘monster God’… such rejection is understandable…
“There is in Western culture a psychological archetype, a metaphor that has to do with the image of a violent and wrathful God (see Romans, Revelation). Crystallized in Anselm’s juridical atonement theory, this image represents God sufficiently disturbed by the sinfulness of humanity that God had only two options: destroy us or substitute a sacrifice to pay for our sins. He did the latter. He killed Christ.
“Ellens goes on by stating that the crucifixion, a hugely violent act of infanticide or child sacrifice, has been disguised by Christian conservative theologians as a ‘remarkable act of grace’. Such a metaphor of an angry God, who cannot forgive unless appeased by a bloody sacrifice, has been ‘right at the center of the Master Story of the Western world for the last 2,000 years. And the unavoidable consequence for the human mind is a strong tendency to use violence’.
“’With that kind of metaphor at our center, and associated with the essential behavior of God, how could we possibly hold, in the deep structure of our unconscious motivations, any other notion of ultimate solutions to ultimate questions or crises than violence- human solutions that are equivalent to God’s kind of violence’…
“Hence, in our culture we have a powerful element that impels us to violence, a Cruel God Image… that also contributes to guilt, shame, and the impoverishment of personality…”.
As Harold Ellens says, “If your God uses force, then so may you, to get your way against your ‘enemies’”.
Add also the personality-deforming themes of (1) excluding tribalism (true believers favored and “saved”, versus unbelievers who are rejected and destroyed), (2) domination (deity as dominating Lord, Ruler, King that validates human forms of domination- state leaders, priesthoods, controlling fathers…), and (3) ultimate violent destruction of the differing others (apocalypse, hell)… such themes, sacralized in deity as ultimate ideals and authority, then serve to re-enforce the same features and related behaviors in the adherents of such belief systems.
A brief history of a critical driver behind apocalyptic mythmaking, Wendell Krossa
The “Fear=control” formula in the domination and control practises of elites.
To understand more of what was driving early people to create monstrously destructive myths like apocalyptic, consider the emergence of the elite/commoner divide at the very beginning of the human adventure with consciousness. John Pfeifer probed those first shaman who took fellow tribe members down into those dark caves (e.g. Lascaux, France) to scare them with “anamorphic” art (painted animals appear to move in flickering candlelight) and claimed to know the secrets to the invisible realm of spirits. See his “Explosion: An inquiry into the origins of art and religion”.
Those first shaman, when they elevated themselves above others as the first elites in human societies, they were unleashing their impulse to domination (the alpha thing that we have all inherited from our animal past). They used the fear of “threat theology” (i.e. beliefs in angry spirits threatening harm or death) to control others and to push their irrational salvation schemes on fellow tribals, even though the salvation schemes would ruin lives with wasted time, energy, and resources (i.e. sacrificed animals and food for the gods).
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary”, H. L. Mencken, “In Defense of Women”.
I try to understand the fundamental drivers in people, like the impulse to dominate and the related use of threat/fear to achieve control of others. This too often destructive pathology is why I go after Paul’s apocalyptic Christ myth, where he epitomized threat theology for Western narratives and consciousness. His “Lord Jesus” has nothing to do with the actual person Jesus who rejected “lording over others for serving others”.
Historical Jesus was an early ‘liberal democracy’ guy, advocating self-determination for all. Instead of making people subservient followers, after healing them, he oriented them to self-help (“Your faith healed you, not me”) and urged others to return to independence (“Go return to your own life”). Bob Brinsmead, for one, doubts that Jesus ever made followers. He certainly did not start another religion of true believers. And what about the bishops and other religious authorities that Paul created for his churches? The non-religious, non-domination Jesus would have none of that.
The early shaman’s creation of threatening deity was the projection of their own base impulse to dominate onto greater reality, onto ultimate reality. They then used the mythology they constructed to threaten their fellow tribe members with tales of spirits/gods expressing their anger at people through natural disasters, disease, accidents, and predatory cruelty (animal and human). The monstrous mythology of angry deity threatening to kill and destroy, incited the survival impulse in people, rendering them susceptible to salvation that demanded costly sacrifices and offerings.
The early shamanic system eventually became the priesthood and sacrifice industry of larger states, the early great civilizations in Sumeria, India, Egypt, and South America, among other places, where priests controlled the distribution of societal resources.
The domination of the priesthoods was evident in the Temples built on ziggurats (raised platforms) at the center of those states. In the early priesthood system, where leaders were combinations of kings/priests, the commoners were obligated to bring their produce to the central temples for redistribution. See, for example, “The first great civilizations: Life in Mesopotamia, the Indus Valley and Egypt. The history of human society”, Jacquetta Hawkes.
The shaman/priests buttressed their validation of elite domination with myths that “people were created to serve the gods” (i.e. provide food/offerings, do the work of the gods, make sacrifices) and that they, the priests that were self-appointed to represent the gods, were divinely authorized to rule the societies, to tell the commoners the will, demands/laws, and words of the gods. The elite priesthood would mediate the will of deity to the common people.
Such mythology would be refined over subsequent millennia in variations like the “Philosopher Kings” of Plato. More enlightened and divinely-favored elites dominating/controlling commoners. Telling the unenlightened masses how to dispose of their property.
Other safe-guards that were created to maintain elite domination included prohibitions/taboos to not question the belief systems of the authorities. Entire systems of subsidiary threats were added to hold the developing religious systems together and thereby to have a backing authority to maintain the elite domination over populations. Prohibitions against questioning what priests claimed were divinely-inspired beliefs, given directly to them by deity. Such heresy would eventually become punishable by horrific death (i.e. crucifixion, burning at the stake, and medieval tortures, etc.). Unbelief was labelled an unforgiveable sin, as being “deceived by the devil” and putting one on the wide highway to hell.
Creative minds, driven to dominate others, created endless versions of threat theology themes and buttressing guards to affirm their control. Apocalyptic has played a critical role in the “Fear=control” formula and its use by elites. Just consider what we have been through with climate apocalypse and decarbonization/Net Zero madness.
The destructive pathology that I’ve outlined above has long darkened and enslaved human consciousness and unnecessarily burdened life and societies and culminating in the modern era of mass-death crusades and entire ruin of major societies (China under Mao, Russia under Stalin and subsequent Communism, Germany under the Nazis, Venezuela under Chavismo and friends, and more).
Hence, my repeated advocacy here for liberal democracy that protects the freedoms and rights of every individual, equally. Backed by new narrative themes that take seriously the liberating insights of sages like Historical Jesus.
A central project of this site is to go after the domination impulse and consequent elite domination and control of commoners, and to go after the ideas/myths that support elite domination.
There are few more important to consider in fighting the domination impulse than Historical Jesus. He cut the taproot feeding the urge to dominate- i.e. the theology of God as Lord, King, Ruler and humanity obligated to serve the “lording over others” God, via servitude to priesthoods and religious authorities. Jesus went after the theology that had long validated elite domination of commoners. He went after the ultimate ideals, the theology, that had long affirmed this base animal impulse.
Jesus straightforward denied the reality of a threatening God who dominated people. He said that true greatness (“God is great”) was not in lording over others but in serving others. If God was great, then God would not lord over anyone but would serve all.
Jesus fought and died for such ideas, protesting the entire sacrifice industry and the God at core of that- the threatening deity who demanded subservience and obedience. He most effectively rejected the domination impulse and rejected the affirming ideas behind elite domination of commoners.
There is nothing more egregiously insidious to grasp than the fact that Paul took the ultimate anti-domination crusader, the ultimate liberator- i.e. Historical Jesus- and turned him into the ultimate Dominator- “Lord Jesus”- who would exercise ultimate totalitarian (“rod of iron”) rule forever over all people.
The extreme opposite nature of these two and their messages- Jesus versus the Christ- is incredibly mind-blowing to consider.