A Tale of Two Theisms

I have often wondered what makes me tick. To no avail, I have pondered that which drives my reasoning, and which hitherto placed limitations on the scope of my Socratic schism from the sanguine doctrine of teleology [1]. As an avowed idealist with a symbiotic bloodline of freedom and justice coursing incessantly through my veins, I have found myself at odds everyday with the blatant realities of the diabolical practices of humankind. As a citizen of the loose confederation of Negro humanity (Ebonia) that is linked together principally by a common ancestry, I live a dysteleological [2] reality, perceive a history full of prejudice, and suffer an interminable life of last-class citizenship in the racial hierarchy of humanity’s existence. Although I seldom succumb to feelings of despondency, and struggle to censor the dirge of Dystopia [3] that heralds the clear and present demise of my race, I am confronted by relentless onslaughts that threaten the very foundations upon which my sanity and humanity rest. Despite the fact that I am partially protected from these onslaughts by an intrinsic essence that refuses to buckle (even in the face of these ruthless blitzes on my senses and sensibilities), my sanity has begun to bear the effects of accumulated punishment. It almost seems sensible to me that some form of euphenics should be applied in addressing the outrageous imbalance in the race relations of humankind. These assaults, coordinated and championed by the Status Quo in Ebonia, have driven me to explore – among other issues – the quandary of two of the three “great” monotheisms in Ebonia in 2002 A.D.

Before I embark upon my radical thesis, I need to lay down one significant precept: I do not expect love from humanity or any of her children, but I demand respect from humanity and all of her children. I am cognizant of the fact that respect is earned and not assured, as such I distribute the culpability for Ebonia’s prostrate state between internal and external forces, in a roughly 80/20 ratio respectively. After a careful analysis of the Negro’s last-class citizenship, I have come to the conclusion that it has origins in both the inferior psychodynamics ravaging Ebonia’s Status Quo (internal forces) and the initially survivalist, but presently racist logic of the rest of humanity (external forces).

There are certain advantages and disadvantages of monotheism a propos Ebonia, however the quandary that I speak of lies in weighing both pros and cons, and then making a determination and arriving at a conclusion as to the role (if any) that the “Big Two” should play in the renaissance of the Negro. The monotheism that I speak of refers to the foreign religions of Islam, Christianity, and (because of its influences on both) Judaism. The conclusions of this treatise are not binding in any way on Ebonians, but it is simply meant to spark a flame of curiosity and self-determination to consume the lethargic quintessence and drought-stricken desert of contemporary Ebonia’s awareness. All avenues (including the least traveled ones) must be explored and all barriers torn down so as to complete an unemotional analysis of the Negro’s predicament. In other words, the acme of philosophical enterprise must be attained in an attempt to arrive at a complete understanding of our dilemma. Although numerous Ebonians might be offended by what they might deem as an assault on their various faiths, I choose to evoke belief in a renascent Ebonia by tackling the awkward issues that surround the vestiges of foreign influences (chief of which are the twin monotheist religions of Islam and Christianity) in Negro humanity. In the final analysis, it might be argued that ‘exitus acta probat’, because the ends do justify the means in this instance.

The earliest known incidence in recorded human history of concrete steps taken toward conventional monotheism occurred when the “Heretic King”, Pharaoh Amenhotep IV Neferkheprure Waenre (who later changed his name to Akhenaten), abolished all other gods and declared Aten the one and only true God (the father of all creation), about 5 years into his reign during the Amarna Interlude of Ancient Egypt. Akhenaten, who was the tenth king of the 18^th dynasty during the New Kingdom, was married to the famed Nefertiti whom he renamed Nefer-Nefru-Aten, which means ‘Beautiful is the Beauty of Aten’ [4], and ruled from about 1352-1336 BCE. The Pharaoh is credited with composing ‘Hymn to the Aten’ [5], a poignant spiritual masterpiece that captured the whole ethos of the monotheistic Aten faith which he established. This hymn to Aten bears striking similarities to Psalm 104 [6], even though it was written at least 300 years earlier. And although Aten as a god and deity had existed and was worshipped centuries before Akhenaten was born (especially in the area surrounding Heliopolis), it was him (Akhenaten) that propagated and consolidated the intolerant and monopolistic temperaments that have remained as hallmarks of the great tri-monotheisms ever since. The heretic king persecuted all other cults and deistical sects in ancient Egypt with the exception of the cult of Aten, and finally moved away from the traditional capital of Ancient Egypt, Thebes – after much strife with the Aten-averse religious power structure, especially the priesthood of Ra – by the sixth year of his reign, and established a new capital in Middle Egypt, halfway between Thebes and Memphis. The Philosopher-Pharaoh Akhenaten named his new capital Akhetaten - The Horizon of the Aten – and today that site is known as el-Amarna. One conspicuous parallel between the king’s worship of Aten and the practice of the pre-reformation church (papacy and Christianized-sovereigns alike) headquartered in Rome, was that he claimed an exclusive knowledge and direct connection to the “one true God”, which the Pope and Europe’s sovereigns (as God’s spiritual and temporal “representatives” on earth respectively) steadfastly claimed. The Pharaoh declared himself Akhenaten which means ‘He Who is of Service to Aten’ [7]. Unfortunately for Aten, this brief practice of monotheism only lasted during Akhenaten’s reign and for a very short while afterwards – during his successor’s (Smenkhkare’s) brief 2-year reign – as the monotheistic worship of Aten was deracinated and abolished by succeeding Pharaohs beginning with Tutankhamun, the boy-king; and earned Akhenaten the title of “Heretic King”.

In order to understand the didactic traits and the eventual ascent of monotheism in contemporary Ebonia, it is important to understand the origins of religion and its role in society. The tabula rasa [8] of pre-monotheist Ebonia was composed of various indigenous polytheist beliefs and practices that were eventually deemed “pagan” by foreign influences. These “pagan” or “animist” practices are still practiced in contemporary Ebonia though to a significantly lesser extent than the foreign monotheist faiths that supplanted them. Having been denigrated and belittled by the supremacist logic of colonial influences in Africa, the original belief systems of Negroes and their understanding of the relationship between the supernatural and the natural dimensions of human existence, are now relegated to the trashcan of philosophical logic and spiritual convictions.

The bi-theonomous [9] circumstance of a great majority of Ebonia in the present-day is often characterized by a rabid competition and mutual suspicion between the adherents of two-thirds of the Trilateral Commission on Monotheistic religion (consisting of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). Ebonian adherents of Islam and Christianity fail to realize that –except for some theological and doctrinal differences – there exists an astonishing bilateral symmetry between their faiths, neither do they question and investigate the underlying political tenets and historical antecedents of these twin theisms. Blind faith is espoused ad nauseam to the detriment of reason or logical analysis, as adherents of this religious dichotomy are locked in a vicious battle for supremacy, that the elite on both sides surreptitiously manipulates to advance their political goals. Human nature being what it is, the elite’s agenda has always been the ultimate control of the masses and – baring any drastic genetic transmutation – will always be the eternal domination of this docile class. Since societal life in its purest or most basic form is really one big class struggle between the elite and the masses they control, it is inevitable that religious doctrine will be utilized to advance the agenda of the former. Proponents and adherents argue that the seeming political connotations of religion in general and monotheistic faith in particular, are distortions of the “true word of God”; they fail to realize that regardless of religion’s initially noble intentions or goals to make sense of the pandemonium surrounding the universe since primordial times, it is really with the acquiescence and nurturing of the elite that it has flourished and been legitimized to serve as a backdrop to the politics of class control. As such the agenda of the elite employs faith in order to supersede the agenda of the people. This controlling agenda of the elite is disguised and then transformed into the voice of “God” – as understood by the Clergy and the Ulama who are really collaborators of the elite moonlighting as defenders of their faiths – and subsequently this “divine faith” becomes the voice of the people, replacing the voice of reason as the ultimate determinant of societal interaction and development.

Ebonia has become a house divided against itself, smothered by religious strife, convulsed by ethnic conflict, overwhelmed by disease, besieged by poverty, and on the verge of extinction. It is against this milieu and into this environment that I inject this perspective examining the quandary of monotheism as the ultimate determinant in reclaiming the Negro’s dignity and essence. The quandary arises however, in attempting to answer one simple question with subsequently complex follow-up questions. Who do the alien monotheistic religious faiths of Christianity and Islam owe their allegiances to? Is it to the millions of Africans dying in their ancestral homes on the African continent, confused as to the path to redemption, desensitized to emotions by the sadism of their elite, detached from their ancestral essence? Or is to the millions of Africans bewildered by their present predicaments in the Diaspora, trapped in the straightjacket of a conflicting heritage, miles away from their ancestral homes, dislocated from their original ethos, victims of the greatest injustice and inhumanity in recent human history? This bi-partite religious order which pays obeisance to and legitimizes the Status Quo, offers its adherents little in the terms of physical reprieve from misery in the temporal world, but promises “spiritual enrichment” on earth and eternal enjoyment in “paradise”, must be analyzed with skepticism. It is foolhardy for it (the bi-partite religious order) to profess the teachings of a loving and omnipotent Creator, and at the same time demand the devotion of the impotent Ebonian masses without physically eliminating their tribulations, and yet brazenly champion the cause of the elite. This constitutes a serious conflict of interest. Why not petition the omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent Creator to reverse Ebonia’s predicament with immediate effect? Why not implore upon “God” to grant them immediate respite from immeasurable suffering, instead of commiserating with them and promising everlasting life in paradisiacal peace? Enough said.

Historically, all societies and civilizations despite their antecedents and machinations to obscure reality, have consisted of three main strata: the elite; the religious and security order – the legitimizing buffer between the elite and the masses – that protect the elite and reinforce their authority or legitimacy either by physical force or “divine” order; and the masses. Even in democratic practice – the widely acclaimed contemporaneous system of governance – this stratification of society still exists though in a more indistinguishable form. The principle of inequality vis-à-vis social Darwinism wittingly or unwittingly implies that as long as disparities exist in the capabilities and faculties of individuals that constitute any society, these stratifications will remain constant. The only changes will be in the mobility with which members transit from one stratum to the next, and the manifestation of the religious cum security order. Members of the elite rise to the top of the societal food chain occasionally on merit, but mostly by nepotism (hereditary and otherwise). By colluding with the religious order and security forces in society, the elite is able to control the masses according to their whims and caprices. Throughout history, the elite has used various methods to dominate the masses, but none has been more effective than religion. Wielding it as a tool for shaping the daily nuances and interactions of societal existence, the elite by conspiring with the religious order has been able to assert its “divine” right or “moral” authority to rule the masses. By combining this religious faith with a loyal and ruthless security force, the elite has been able to fashion a uniquely remarkable carrot and big stick permutation to dominate the masses in society.

By alternating between religious doctrine and authoritative decrees backed up by the religious and security orders respectively, the elite has been able to impose its will on and elicit the utmost obedience from the masses. Since most societies have had underlying

spiritual traditions, it has been relatively easy for the elite and the religious order to manipulate belief systems for their political agenda, which is to dominate and control the society. This sometimes-delicate balance has not always held, but it has consistently survived metamorphosis from one manifestation to another. Even when societal atheism is proclaimed, as was the case in the Soviet Union, this religious doctrine is replaced by a quasi-religious dogma that serves as the moral basis for the elite to dominate the masses, thereby disproving once and for all the theory of a classless society. The idea of a society being classless is in itself a contradiction, since the individuals that make up the society have different capabilities and are therefore unequal. All men may have been “created” equal, but variations in physical and mental abilities, survivalist instincts, and the itch to dominate our environments, has led to disparities in physical and mental development, and as such an inequality in status.

Although religion originated and has persisted as a means of explaining the interactions between the physical and supernatural spheres of human existence, it was hijacked by the elite as a means of fostering their domination of the masses. Since religion has existed for most of history solely as a camouflaged political instrument for controlling society, it is not surprising that the colonial influences in Africa used it with the utmost skill and dexterity in imposing their political will on the continent. In actuality, religion exists ipse dixit [10], and in the final analysis reflects the epistemological consciousness of its original adherents. The fundamental premise of any religion is that it possesses all the answers to the mysteries of human existence, and as such it is exclusive and not inclusive, giving rise to the twist on a popular axiom, ‘one religion’s adherent is another religion’s infidel’. It is only in the politically correct world of today that the mainstream of most religions has advocated (at least in theory) tolerance of other religions as a rule for its adherents. The preeminent obligation of all devotees to a religion is blind intransigent faith, and should a conflict erupt between logic and religious doctrine, the latter supersedes the former, and devotees are obliged to accept this dogma without question. The greatest curse that has befallen humanity has been the fear and misunderstanding of the unknown. The deep-seated phobia of the mysterious and unfamiliar that ravaged primordial and that still ravages contemporary human psyche, made it easy for the ascendance and incessant preponderance of the irrational and illogical dogma of religious belief. Instead of serving as fuel in the combustible curiosity of human consciousness, the unanswered epistemological questions that persist in the human experience, have served as cannon fodder for the monotonous pounding and numbing incredulity of religious canons. And though human beings possess innate inquisitive minds, most have smothered the raging inferno of the intellectual fireplace that exists in their scientific psyche, with the moisture-laden encumbrances of parochial fanaticism. Once religious belief traversed the threshold of the personal domicile and became a crossover success in the political arena, the elite discovered its usefulness as an absolute mind-control technique, and the fate of the masses was sealed. The death knell that sounded at this important watershed in the human social development life cycle though ominous was inevitable. The jungle mentality that is intrinsic to (and subsequently prevalent amongst) all fauna species meant that eventually, a substitute to religion would have come along to aid the all-powerful elite in subjugating the impotent masses. Law and order, indeed the very foundations of human society are built and maintained on the presumption that chaos would ensue should the masses ever demand and receive equal status and power from the elite. The desires of the elite have therefore been clandestinely transformed into the de facto “goals” and “aspirations” of the entire society. In actual fact, the turbulence of previous societal upheavals convinced the elite to cede illusionary power to the masses, by utilizing that increasingly influential scion of politics, democracy, and his Siamese twin of economics fame, capitalism. Under both siblings, the masses are lulled into a false sense of importance and status, while the elite still retains de facto control. The most important appeal that the conjoined siblings share is the promise of a more mobile and relatively easier vertical traversal of the boundary separating the elite from the masses. In the ceaseless but fluctuating and ever-evolving class struggle between the elite and the masses, religion has become the constant factor that prevents the masses of Ebonia from demanding and receiving a better deal from their elite. Unlike the more sophisticated masses of other racial groups in humanity, the masses of Ebonia have failed to grasp or at least acquire a rudimentary understanding of the antics of its elite. As such, the escalating quagmire of the Ebonian development life cycle has continued, and Negro humanity remains trapped in a state of arrested development.

In spite of the fact that religious beliefs limit human thought processes by placing restrictions on what the human mind can contemplate and discover, it still performs a role in human society. As the guardian of the elite and custodian of “law and order”, the antithesis to “utter chaos”, religious belief has remained a close ally of the Status Quo, and has maintained a delicate balance (together with actual force applied by the security order) between the main strata of society. If the human psyche were unfettered by the encumbrances of religious dogma from the dawn of humanity’s existence till the present day, perhaps the human development life cycle would have reached a more advanced stage than the one it presently occupies. As it is, that determination will remain inconclusive and beyond the grasp of present day and near-future generations. As a mind-control contrivance and an effective tactic of psychological operations through which the elite imposes its will on the masses, religious belief is unparalleled. The pros in the elite’s favor drastically outweigh the pros in the masses’ favor, and produces a huge burden of cons that the masses are yet to come to grips with. Religion however, grants solace and some understanding to its adherents, though the oft-stated moral qualities that it is purported to endow are a figment of the collective imagination of humankind. That which is regarded as moral and right amongst adherents of one religion is likely to be immoral and wrong amongst adherents of another religion. Since religion by nature claims a monopoly on what is right or what the truth is, it does not tolerate practices of competing religions, especially in its purest form. Hence, humanity’s history is replete with unspeakable and countless tragedies of disastrous persecution and counter-persecution between adherents of differing beliefs, especially amongst the monotheist faiths.

Religious doctrine imbues adherents with some sense of sanity in the topsy-turvy world of the unknown, and provides a safety net for them in making sense of the mysterious. As a result, the supernatural plane is explained to the masses (who by the way are mere “mortals”) by the “divine” religious order (acting on the directions and in concert with the elite) in such a way that it determines and controls the daily routine of human societal endeavor. Thus, the drudgery and misery of the masses’ everyday life is alleviated and buoyed by the promise of an everlasting lifetime in a wonderful afterlife paradise, provided that they adhere strictly to the tenets of the religious faith, without question or an iota of doubt. The alternative of course it to perish in the damnation of everlasting hell, hence, a tactful carrot-big stick variation is employed in preventing chaos and maintaining the Status Quo in this life. It never occurs to the masses to wonder why the elite should enjoy life in an earthly paradise combined with the same promise of heavenly paradise, while they (the masses) can only wait for and experience a heavenly version. In response to any questions arising and often times prior to doubts forming, heavenly paradise is described in very vague terms (such as gold-paved streets and other ridiculous aspects of an opulent and decadent existence; at least that is what I was told as a child) as being one million times better than the elite’s earthly paradise, and therefore more desirable. This last interplay between the emotions and desires of the masses on the one hand, and their fear of the unknown on the other, is one of the most fundamental roots of class control. Karl Marx, (probably after exasperatingly reviewing the enigma of religion in society), declared in February 1844 that “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.” [11] Zealots of the affiliates of the Trilateral Commission on Monotheism would argue to the contrary though.

Ebonia suffers from an absolute and severe failure of leadership, followership, and consequently, society. The mutually exclusive relationship (or non-relationship) between reason and religion is at the core of the problems propagating this failure. Reason dictates that Ebonians act decisively to retrieve some semblance of a future for their offspring. However, like humanoid-ostriches with their heads in the grains of passive monotheistic doctrinal sand, they pretend not to perceive the approaching herald of inevitability, the harbinger of the desolation that will replace the soon-to-be extinct Ebonian humanity. Ebonians are morosely and thoughtlessly awaiting the inexorableness of the grim reaper’s visit, and the fallacy of paradisiacal life after this final rendezvous with destiny. The quandary of monotheism in Ebonia lies not in the “spiritual solace” that it grants its adherents, but instead lies in the empowering or undermining role that it chooses to play in the physical struggle for the renaissance of Ebonia. Currently, this role is increasingly negative and undermines the few efforts at resurgence, as can be deduced from the confusion and religious strife that pervades Ebonia, especially in Africa. The monotheist children of Ebonia are distracted from the serious task at hand by religious conflict and competition over what amounts to little more than superficial doctrinal differences in their respective faiths. They cannot see the big picture, and as such are sidetracked from the real causes of the abject wantonness that has become their reality. Ebonia as it is presently constituted does not have the luxury of time to believe the fairy tales about the goodness of a creator that allows them to wallow in the depths of dereliction and tragedy. A God alien in origin and nature to the Negro experience cannot offer the contemporary Negro any iota of self-determination and rebirth. This God of the “Big Three” is a God that is more conversant with the experiences and annals of the Hebrew people. The God that the different members of the Trilateral Commission on monotheism (TCM) worship is one and the same, revered through different messengers: Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed, in that order. This God is the Hebrew God ascribed with different names; Yahweh, Jehovah, Allah among others; and he does not hide this fact. The Old Testament of the Christians and the Torah of the Jews are replete with gory accounts of mass murder and slaughter both by this same God and the children of Israel acting with his full consent. Cities were looted and pillaged, women were raped and forcibly converted into concubines, men were slain, children were enslaved, entire peoples were wiped out, and the one thing that these victims had in common was that they were non-Israelites. The mantra of the monotheists of today is that somehow, this mass murder and evil was part of a grand design, a plan that had been ordained even before humankind was created. They all insist that we as human beings cannot fathom the mysteries of the universe and the idiosyncrasies of the Creator who constructed it; that we are mere mortals who should not think about such things or contemplate the inconsistent actions of the one who gave us the power of reason, that we should just accept it with blind faith. All that is good is attributed to God, while all that is evil is attributed to God’s arch nemesis, the devil. But common sense dictates that I ask; who is then responsible for all the evil that God carried out? Was it the devil that brought on the flood that wiped out all of humanity with the exception of Noah and his family? Was it the devil that slaughtered the Midanites, the Amalekites, the Gibeonites, the Libnahites, the Eglonites, the inhabitants of Jericho, and the people of Ai? The list of both Israelite and non-Israelite victims is endless. Are mass murders and evil justifiable only when God (and individuals acting under his direction and with his consent) orchestrates the magnitude of malevolence found in the Holy Scriptures? So I guess it is from these “Holy Scriptures” that America’s Most Wanted in all his delusional and fanatical paroxysms derives justification from for his terrorist actions. After all, just because the atrocities in the Holy Scriptures were orchestrated eons ago should not condone or excuse them in anyway. Just because the said atrocities were carried out with God’s blessing to punish the Israelites’ enemies does not make them any more appropriate than the atrocities committed by the patriarch of Al Qaeda. If contemporaneous monotheistic adherents can justify terrorist acts by Moses and his soldiers, then Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network are simply millennial reincarnations of this scriptural patriarch. Is it not in the name of the same God that he is perpetuating his terrorist acts? He is accused of killing thousands; I will bet my life on it, between Moses and Joshua and their God, more innocents have been killed in as gruesome a way as Osama Bin Laden killed on September the 11^th 2001.

Perhaps the devil is not really the arch nemesis of this God, but instead the alter ego of God; that side of him that is unleashed whenever he gets upset, kind of like temporary insanity, a split personality disorder à la Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Perhaps God and the devil are one and the same being, like Yin and Yang in ancient Chinese spiritual culture. Speculation about these inconsistencies in the scriptural standards of justice is necessary to grapple with the injustices of today. Whatever the context within which an atrocity is committed or perpetuated, it still remains an atrocity. If not, then why are the Israelites of today calling the Palestinians terrorists? The “Holy Scriptures” of all three faiths describe the devil as the evil one, the jealous one, the one who caused the downfall of man, and brought about death. In addition, Christians will argue that God in a benevolent bid to save humankind and redeem their souls, sent down his one and only son, Jesus Christ to

die for our sins and give us everlasting life in paradise, and all along this was part of “the plan”. What kind of grand divine “plan” can ever justify the mass murder of thousands upon thousands of innocents, whose only crime was belonging to the wrong race at the wrong time in history? This brings me to the radical conclusion that this God who is described in words by men and women whom he inspired, is a racist God. The most obvious reasons being his unbridled partiality; he took sides with some of his creations against others simply on the basis of race; he “ordered” the slaughter of innocent human beings, plunder of cities, and countless other atrocities on a scale that makes the recent terrorist acts of violence seem pale in comparison; all to the benefit of one nation, the Israelites. He took the Canaanites lands and offered it as a Promised Land to the Israelites, who in turn slaughtered and settled the land in accordance with and fulfillment of God’s “promise” to Abraham. If there is a “God” and if we are to take these accounts of Jewish history, culture, and tradition as the true word of “God”, then one has to wonder, while this God was preoccupied with ensuring that his “chosen” people dominated and slaughtered all their neighbors and adversaries, which “God” was looking out for and protecting the rights of the other non-Israelites? Since this is the same God that the TCM [12] worship today with some modifications in doctrine and canons, then how can I trust this God to look out for the interests of Ebonians in today’s dog-eat-dog world? How can Ebonians blindly cast their lot in with a God that from time immemorial – in the furtherance of his Gospel and “divine plan” – condoned the oppression and in some cases the slaying of their ancestors? Why did he stand aside and watch the beastly iniquity of the Trans-Saharan and Trans-Atlantic slave trades? Perhaps these were part of the “plan”. Why does he not wave his hand and create law and order on the African continent just like he did in Genesis to create the world? Why does he sit back and watch the events of the world unfold with utter chaos and ignominy, claim that we as humans have freewill, but assert that he is the omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent God, the Alpha and the Omega, who knows what is going to happen before it does, but did nothing to stop all the atrocities since the beginning of time? What kind of plan entails the destruction of human beings on such a scale as the Holocaust? It still amazes me that the Jewish people did not kneel down and pray to Yahweh for their messiah after what Hitler did to them. I guess they realized that there is a difference between ancestral customs and traditions, and reality. So they got together and chartered a destiny for themselves that had nothing whatsoever to do with Yahweh and everything to do with pragmatism and survivalist expediency. Perhaps when Ebonians are on the verge of extinction as the Jews were under Adolph Hitler, maybe we too will realize that monotheist beliefs are simply documented and slightly different folklores and accounts of Hebrew history and tradition.

I would really like to come face to face with this God, because if the accounts in the “Holy Scriptures” are accurate records of fact, then I have the legal and moral basis to prosecute a civil suit against this God. And since the Holy Scriptures are used to administer oaths in court during legal proceedings, and given that there are no statutes of limitations on murder, and in view of the fact that the law governing violent acts according to Exodus 21 states very clearly: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise, then I am within my legal bounds to seek redress before a criminal court of law (The Hague?) for crimes against humanity. Although this God claims to be just, he will be a defendant in this case, as such the impartial judge-jury hybrid should be those children of humanity who do not ascribe to any of the monotheisms, as they (monotheists) will no doubt find impartiality impossible when they come face to face with the guilt of their own God. My people have borne the burden of humiliation and been the objects of depravity throughout human history. My ancestors were murdered and enslaved by Europeans and Asians, why then should I turn around and worship the God that justified and condoned these unwarranted and unprovoked acts of barbarity against my race as part of his “plan”? My senses and sensibilities are offended each day I open any of the “Holy Scriptures” or I learn more about my history from other sources, because I am confronted with corroborated evidence of a grand scheme to subjugate the children of Ebonia. Yes there was a “divine plan”, but it did not decide to pretend to include me or people like me, until the custodians of the scriptures that contained this plan were themselves victims of the subjugation that I experience everyday, and will no doubt continue to experience based on the present indications and prevailing circumstances on the ground. With the acquiescence of the Status Quo and capitulation of the masses within my race, the requiem for the dream of Ebonia has been composed and rendered, the official funeral rites will be performed, it is only a matter of time; the only ray of light on the horizon remains the fervent hope that volunteers will join the small band of adherents, not of monotheist religions, but adherents of the belief in the dignity and renaissance of Ebonia. Lest I be accused of making my arguments ad hominem, I wish to state categorically that my appeal to Ebonians to arise is not based on pathos or sentiment, but rather on a common goal of resurrection. This resurrection is unlike the biblical account of Christ’s three-day theory; instead it is a reawakening of race wide consciousness and essence, and of renewed fortitude, if not for us, then for our progeny.

It is obvious from this article that I have abjured my belief in any concept of monotheism, as I feel that I cannot adequately serve two conflicting masters. I cannot serve a God who is in direct conflict with my belief in the rebirth of the Negro. This is because no matter what monotheists may claim today, theirs is a religion that urges support for the Status Quo in this life while promising eternal life in paradise. I am violently and passionately opposed to the Status Quo in this life and I cannot wait for paradise to invalidate this anomaly and to seek redress, as such I will do everything within and without the limits of my physical and mental abilities to reverse the course of Ebonian history here on earth, by any means necessary, the monotheists can wait for “paradise”, good luck to them.

The Christians say we should pray for those in authority regardless of how they got into power, because they would not be there if God did not want them there for a reason; Jesus commanded the people to give unto Caesar, what was Caesar’s, even though Caesar was ruling the people against their will and was running an illegal government more or less. Christians claim that the Son of God took on form human form, and came down to earth to save our souls. Then some mischievous characters (with active imaginations) in 325 AD (about 300 years after Jesus died) at the council of Nicaea came up with the incredulity of the Holy Trinity: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, co-eternal, co-equal, and co-existent, three in one. Only in matters of blind faith could this kind of illogical doctrine become accepted with conviction. Even the Jews, the original adherents of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob could not accept this “heresy” and could not understand the passivity of Jesus’ message. They expected an all-conquering Messiah, not a pacifist Nazarene, and so Christianity and Judaism parted ways. For their part, the Muslims advocate a frame of mind that can be summed up in one phrase, “Allah Karim”, and ask that each individual accept whatever position in which they find themselves in society, since this is the will of Allah. The few times when there have been upheavals against despotic regimes, it is caused by the political interests of those who engender the revolt, in some cases using resentment and despair to whip up popular sentiment, much like the Zealots of old.

After a somber analysis, I have come to understand what bothered me in the first place about monotheism as practiced by the “Big Three”. While pondering the scriptural accounts in the Torah, Bible, and Koran, I decided that either the God who is portrayed in these scholarly texts was a complex combination of emotions, alternating between good and evil just like humans, or that the texts are erroneous. I decided that either this God was racist or the individuals charged with recording his words (and whom he inspired), did not listen correctly to what he was saying and ended up misrepresenting him. Either way, I could not accept any of the texts as “Holy” because they were filled with too much carnage and crimes against non-Israelite or non-Semitic humanity, depending on which accounts you read.

I have always wondered where I fit into God’s plan for humanity if none of my ancestors were ever mentioned in the stories that the scriptures recorded. What was the role of the Negro race in God’s plan for his creations? If he was even aware that my progenitors existed, then why is the only individual that is remotely related to me in the “new testaments” of the scriptures, a eunuch? Is there some ulterior motive? I am paranoid about a God that ignored Negro humanity for over two millennia, and then suddenly remembered them and made provisions for them to be “saved” only at the beginning of the first millennium AD. Before then, salvation was the exclusive preserve of a particular race; this is impartiality to the nth degree. Based on what criteria (other than race) did he decide to send his “son” to earth in the form of a human being belonging to a particular people? And why did it take so long after he created humanity before he sent him to redeem the world? So what happened to the souls of all my ancestors that knew nothing about this God? They had no covenant with him, so were they condemned to hell? What about the political tomfoolery that surrounded the inclusion and exclusion of certain “books” in the “Holy Scriptures”? There are so many unanswered questions that are more illuminating than any conceivable answers that God or monotheists may offer, because the questions say a lot about the authenticity of the “holy scriptures” as a moral compass for humanity. Most Ebonians do not ask these questions in private or even ponder them out loud; they are too terrified of “blaspheming” God and being condemned to an eternity in “hell”. Well, Ebonians need to do some serious soul searching to determine if they have been had. What is the difference between foreign folklore and traditional folklore? It is an ingrained and entrenched inferiority complex that prevents Ebonians from asking these questions, and demanding answers from those who profess belief in a loving and caring “God” who will take care of them in this world and the next, but only if they submit to his will. What baloney! The Two Theisms subtly encourage a gospel of obeisance to those in authority no matter how immoral and illegal the despot’s rule might be. It is exactly this kind of dangerous rhetoric and attitude that needs to be expunged from the lexicon and behavior of every right-thinking Ebonian in the Upstart Quo, because if we follow this submissive doctrine, then we should be content with our last-class citizenship in the world today, and that is totally and utterly unacceptable. I am sure that my message is unacceptable to a vast majority of Negro humanity. I recognize that most Ebonians today, regard the honest and logical examination of the historical and political antecedents of the main monotheist beliefs prevalent in Ebonia, as blasphemy. However, the fact that its intended recipients will not acknowledge my message is no reason why I should not deliver it. Like Chinua Achebe so expressively translated from an Igbo proverb, ‘I will perform my sacrifice and leave the blame on the doorstep of the spirits’. [13] In attempting to resolve the myriad questions that surround epistemological reasoning, I quote that poignant dictum of Descartes, ‘I think, therefore I am’. [14] Right now Negroes are under duress. Consequently, we lack any semblance of freewill in determining our path to mental and physical emancipation. We have been chained to the doctrine of an alien consciousness that permeates to the subterranean soul of our existence. We need to break the chains of mental castration that prevent us from thinking freely, and that discourage us from asking valid and far-reaching questions concerning an important part of our psychological development and evolution. As such, I would rather wage a “holy war” of Ebonian Renaissance than sit docilely waiting, watching, and praying until “God” calls me “home” to “Paradise”. To hell with that pacifist logic of appeasement to the Status Quo, go preach that to Neville Chamberlain!

[1] The doctrine that a final cause in life exists.

[2] The assumed absence of purpose in life: a doctrine denying the existence of a final cause or purpose.

[3] Contra positive of Utopia: social or technological trends have led to a greatly diminished quality of life.

[4] “Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten) 1352-1336 BCE 18^th Dynasty”, http://www.touregypt.net/18dyn10.htm

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Something that exists in its original pristine state.

[9] A situation whereby two groups of individuals believe themselves to be under the rule of God, with each group exclusively worshiping their God, believing him to be separate from the other group’s God.

[10] An assertion made, but not proved.

[11] Marx, Karl, “Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right”, Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher, 1844

[12] The Trilateral Commission of Monotheism, consisting of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

[13] Achebe, Chinua, “Africa Is People” Presidential Fellow Lecture: The World Bank Group, June 17, 1998 http://www.africaresource.com/scholar/achebe.htm

[14] Ibid.

DAWODU.COM

Dedicated to Nigeria's socio-political issues

A Tale of Two Theisms: The Quandary of Monotheism in Ebonia