Psychoanalyzing God

Has anyone else ever read Freud’s Moses And Monotheism or Jung’s Answer To Job?

Other than agreeing with the obvious (Jews & Christians get their monotheism from the Heliopolitan solar cult) I don’t have an opinion either way, but found them interesting.

Anyone have an opinion on works like these?
*Moses and Monotheism is a book by Sigmund Freud. It was first published in 1939. In it, Freud argues that Moses was actually an Ancient Egyptian and in some way related to Akhenaten, an ancient Egyptian monotheist. The book was written in three parts and was a departure from the rest of Freud’s work on psychoanalytic theory. The book does contain discussion of Freud’s psychoanalytic thinking but was intended as a work of history.

In Moses and Monotheism, Freud contradicts the Biblical story of Moses with his own retelling of events claiming that Moses only led his close followers into freedom and that they subsequently killed Moses in rebellion either to his strong faith or to circumcision. Freud explains that years after the murder of Moses, the rebels formed a religion which promoted Moses as the Saviour of the Israelites. Freud said that the guilt from the murder of Moses is inherited through the generations; this guilt then drives the Jews to religion to make them feel better. Most historians since the 1960’s reject the legitimacy of Psychohistory including Freud’s theories.*

what gave him that idea? :shrug:

The answer is obvious.

Say you have a friend, maybe a young father with unruly kids.

This friend confides to you that he is thinking of devising some new form of punishment. His kids, he says, are so naughty that he wishes that he could burn them for ever. He doesn’t want to kill them. He wants to keep them alive, and suffering, for as long as possible…

This guy sounds like he has a lot of problems! No? I’d say he needs to ease back on the couches of Drs. Freud and Jung, and do some free association!

Well, we can’t put God on the couch, but we can read what he says in his revealed works and make some assumptions based on what we’ve got of his personality. Freud and Jung did the best they could with what they had available.

I read these a long time ago, but I’ve been thinking about them in the last couple of weeks, since hanging out with you fine peeps on the net. I have to repurchase them and I’ll gain new appreciation for them now.

the basis is pure assumption? i dont think its worth taking seriously.

The basis is the revelations contained in the Bible.

God is supposed to be our father and our creator, right? Yet, all through the old and new testaments, he’s revealed his plan to roast the majority of us in everlasting punishment where there shall be weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth etc.

What kind of father would consider such stuff? Sounds like someone who needs some psychoanalysis.

Humanity’s perception of God has matured over the centuries. So what? :shrug:

New Agers and neo-pagans adore Carl Jung and his ideas. Some of that stuff is pretty interesting, but it falls short of adequately explaining the complexities of Christian theology.

Anyone who thinks Jung had it right will feel right at home as a Wiccan.

That’s a revealing admission.

What you seem to be saying is that God doesn’t exist outside humanity’s perception of him. God matures as humanity matures.

I can dig it.

The only thing you’re digging is utter rubbish. My parents are (bar a few wrinkles and grey hairs) more or less exactly the same people now that they were when I was 5, 15 and 25 - particularly my father.

I certainly perceived them differently at each of those ages, not because they’ve particularly changed, but because I have. Same with God, He doesn’t change, humanity does though.

So, if God’s the same petty bully he was when he tortured Job to death, what do you think motivates him?

He doesn’t seem very happy, your God. A horribly abusive parent and someone who delights in tormenting others. I wonder what his relationship with his mother was like?

He’s no more unattractive than Inana, of whom, to judge from your sig, you appear to be fond. Inana-Ishtar is nobody’s model of psychologically well-balanced feminity; she’s a cow - & I’m not confusing her with Hat-hor, either. Ishtar has a filthy temper; she’s not called “lady of battles” for nothing. :eek:

If you want to psychoanalyze Inanna, (or any other mythological figure, aside from the mythological God of the Bible) I’m game. She certainly seems to be a wild character. Sort of an Ares-Aphrodite hybrid (albeit in female, rather than hermaphroditic form).

What are the underlying processes which cause her to behave like such a grouch?

Petty bully? Puh-leeze. And get it right, He did nothing of the sort of torturing Job to death. He permitted Satan to give Job a few temporary disasters to test Him, no tortures, then rewarded Job very richly when he proved faithful.

You see, Satan tempts all of us. Since we have free will WE determine our fate. Both God and Satan can communicate with (and tempt or attract) us, but it’s our own choices for one or t’other that determine our fate ultimately.

God is no more a petty bully than my father was when he used to make me go to sleep early or eat my vegetables or do my homework. Certainly I thought and felt that he was, but I was 10, what did I know? Now I understand the reasons why my father did these things, I know that he was no bully at all, but a normal loving father.

Problem is unless we’re gods ourselves we’re never going to know the good reasons why God does as He does, even to Job, and we certainly can’t hold Him to our standards any more than a ten year old can hold her father to hers.

Lily, he is just baiting. Do not rise to it.

He clearly does not understand important things like redemptive suffering. Instead he wants to mock people. Do not let him disturb your peace.

Oh I’m not doing it for his benefit, there may be other equally confused but more sensible people out there reading this who can be brought to understanding. :slight_smile:

You don’t know the story of Job very well, do you?

Time to study that bible a little bit.

Of course I know the story of Job, read it many times and even thought about it plenty too :wink: You’re just irked that for all my thinking I didn’t reach the same conclusions as you. Time to revise your opinion of your own intellectual wonderfulness methinks.

Not at all, I welcome a different interpretation.

Who’s irked? You’ve been insulting (as you’re being here) in a sort of passive-aggressive fashion which I find common among Catholics. I’m still waiting for you to posit any sort of coherent rebuttal. Your own inability to do more than make things personal is revealing enough.


Welcome to the world of LDS thinking…

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit