Adelphiasophism
The Gospel of the Goddess: William Bond Replies
Abstract
A co-author of Gospel of the Goddess replies to our review
© 1998 The Adelphiasophists and AskWhy! Publications. Freely distribute as long as it is unaltered and properly attributed
Contents Updated: Thursday, July 22, 1999
Science
Although I was happy to see you review our book; “Gospel of the Goddess”. I have to say in your review portraying us as “Dreamy new-agers” is not exactly a image either Pamela or I have of ourselves. I admit that both Pamela and I have been in the new-age movement. But we both got out of it because we got into too many arguments as we both reserved the right to think for ourselves. In fact I would like to say our book hasn’t gone down well in the new-age community because we clearly are not “politically correct”.
We were also portrayed as being anti-science: I can’t say we are against science, as we both read scientific books and magazines. It is just that we get pissed-off with scientists claims of being “wise-men” who know everything. I’m afraid that the attitudes of many scientists are not much different to the gurus you get in the new-age movement. They are as just as arrogant as each other.
To the general public science is portrayed as being ultimate truth. Yet anyone who has a interest in the history of science soon finds that science can be altered arbitrarily to suit the fashionable ideas of the time. Science is not only about gathering data, it is also about how you interpreted this data. Most so-called scientific “facts” are just interpretations of facts that could be interpreted in many different ways. And probably will in time be interpreted new ways when new data is gathered. Many so-called scientific laws are just the story we know so far.
For instance scientists in the early half of the 20th century believed that mankind originated in Asia. Because the evidence at the time pointed to this fact. Then fossils of early man began to be discovered in Africa. So scientists had to change and say mankind originated in Africa. Yet this is not the end of the story. Because of what has been discovered in the genetics of humans, some scientists are claiming that man originated in Asia after all. I can give many more examples of the changing beliefs in science. This is how science evolves, if scientists themselves believed in a ultimate true then progress in science would cease overnight. The fact is that in science the gaps in knowledge is papered over by theories and speculation but I’m afraid these theories and speculations sold to the general public as being the ultimate truth.
Also the myth that scientists are objective in what they do is dangerous. It is what all scientists are taught to do. But the fact is that scientists are human beings and no more objective than the rest of us. So we all have a right to question what scientists tell us because it comes from imperfect human beings. So when they tell us something like “genetic engineered food is safe” we have a right to question this. We also have the right to question there objectivity and ask; if they are being employed by food and drug companies. And does the commercial interests of their employers or the organizations who pays their grant funds influence there "scientific objectivity".
Boring
It is clear that the reviewer had real problems with us talking about a utopias in the past and future. Which is understandable; as I agree that utopia has got itself a bad name because of the many failures of those who try to put it into practice. But because of these failures is that a reason to give up on it all? After all we are not trying to recycle ideas of the past that have clearly failed. We are trying to understand what was the cause of these failures. And present something that hasn’t been tried in all of recorded history namely a matercentric society.
The reviewer also says a loving Mother Goddess is very boring. I suppose it is true for a society that is addicted to conflict and violence. But don’t you think that conflict like we see on our TV screens is a very crude form of entertainment? Don’t you get piss-off with the idiotic behavior of wars, genocide and intolerance and want to move on from this?
The paradox of this is that we have no problem in believing and understanding a society of deep hatred like in Northern Ireland or the Balkans. Yet we say that a society based on deep love is sentimental garbage. Why do we believe so strongly in hatred and not love? When we know that human beings are capable of loving others very deeply? I would say that this is because we believe in either a avenging and judgmental father god. Or no god at all. Which means we live in a universe ruled by a insane old man or live in a pointless and meaningless universe. I don’t think we appreciate just how negative these beliefs are and what effect it has on us all. If we did believe is a caring Mother Goddess then we can get away from these negative beliefs and set about creating a truly loving and caring society.
It is a very strange fact that in our so-called under-resource world we grow more than enough food to feed everyone on it. Yet millions of people die every year from starvation. I don’t think anyone seems to stop to think just how badly our world is being run. The poorer countries are poor because they have corrupt and incompetent leaders. And the effort by the richer western countries to help them have been just as incompetent. Like lending billions of dollars to corrupt third world leaders who squandered the money. So then the whole country has to suffer to pay back the debt by cutting back on health care and education. Or grow cash crops when the people in the country are starving. So the attempt to help poorer countries only made things worse for them. I could go on and on with examples like this. Don’t you think that if men have done such a terrible job of ruling the world for the last few thousand years it is time Women have a go to see if they can do any better? Over the last 4 or 5 thousand years it has been men with masculine ideas that has ruled the world. Perhaps if we started to give more respect to the feminine side of human kind. We might be able to live in loving and caring societies.
Anti-Men?
I don’t know if we didn’t explain things properly. But we have been accused of being anti-men. What we were trying to say is that both Women and men develop together to learn how to love. Women first of all learn how to love others and men learn how to love themselves. One form of love is not greater then another. When the Matriarchal age comes into being the role of the sexes change places. Spiritually one sex is not greater than the other and both sexes develop and evolve together.
In learning to love themselves men dominated society. When it is Women’s turn to learn to love herself society she will in turn dominate society. But it won’t be a straight swap. As she has already learn how to love others and won’t have to make the mistakes that men made. Although we can point out the stupidity of the patriarchal age we have to take the attitude of Jesus in saying: "forgive them for they no not what they do". It is a learning process and the only sin we have is the sin of not understanding as we learn by our mistakes.
We might be critical of the way men have ruled society. But this is only because men had in spiritual terms and first shot at doing this. Women will have the advantage in a Matriarchal age because she will learn from men’s mistakes and will also have will be more spiritual advanced when it is her What we try to put across that society in the patriarchal age has been out of balance by being far too masculine. It is true that feminine love is about sacrificing yourself for others. I think what we tried to put across that love that is balanced is not just about sacrificing yourself to others. Love is about both loving yourself and loving others at the same time. So the loving Mother Goddess is not a patriarchal sacrificial Mother. She has more wisdom than that. The problems we all have in learning how to love both ourselves and others. Women have learnt in the patriarchal age how to just love others while men learnt just how to love himself. We need now a matercentric age where women can learn to love themselves and men learn to love other. And so restore the balance.
It is also claimed in the review that we are trying to reinvent Jesus as a woman. I have to say there is some truth in this. But I also have to say their is a lot of difference from the Yehouah god of the old Testament and the loving father god advocated by Jesus in the New Testament. The Yehouah god was a god of judgment, fear and hatred. To worship such a god creates a society also of fear and hatred as we see clearly in Europe of the Middle-ages. I am sure Jesus saw clearly what the worship of this type of god does to a society that worship it. And tried to change people beliefs and worship a loving father god. The reason he failed in this was that the Jewish and later Christian priests found that they had more power over society and it people. If they promoted the avenging and frightening Yehouah god. Rather than his loving father god who seemed to be like Jesus a bit of a wimp. Because all patriarchal rulers rule through fear and the priests turned god into a patriarchal ruler.
Also I don’t think people could get their head around the idea of a truly loving father. After all how many men abandon their children to be left for the mother to be look after by herself on her own.
Anyway I don’t wish to be critical of the reviewer. Because if we have given the impression of being unrealistic dreamers. Then perhaps we hadn’t explained ourselves clearly enough. But then I suppose once you mention utopia and the pre-historic Golden age. Then people assume we are dreamers. So perhaps we needed to be more direct and argued case more assertively.
“The Gospel of the Goddess,” William Bond and Pamela Suffield, (1994), Artemis Creations Publishing, 3395 Nostrand Avenue, 2J Brooklyn NY 11229-4053. $19.95. Telephone Orders: Call Toll Free on 1-800-247-6553 with your Optima, Discover, Visa or Mastercard ready.
