Nick Kasten
October 8, 2013
Belief, Unbelief, & the Good Life
Fr. Wathier
Ludwig Feuerbach: The Essence of Christianity
The materialist named Ludwig Feuerbach was a man that was very difficult to
Kasten, 1 comprehend; his ideas along with support of his claims seemed to leave more questions than answers. He is a man that believes that God has no importance in the human world; he is an atheist. He believes that God is a projection of man; that this higher power that is supposed to govern the human race and help them through their journeys of life is nothing more the most inner high qualities of the human species. Feuerbach has come to the notion that “man’s God is man”. He feels that that we have taken the best part of ourselves and projected them outside ourselves to form this ultimate being. Over all he believes that God does not exist and for the human species to advance, they must realize that there is no God, it is just them. If they can achieve this then the survival and advancement of the species will continue to thrive.
Ludwig Feuerbach is a theorist who believes only in the advancement of the human species and once everyone has realized that there is no God, they can move on with their lives and invest their selves completely to the advancement of the species. Feuerbach makes a notion that humans have this very specific nature that is reflected in human objects and objectives. He states “man is nothing without some “objective”. The great models of humanity, such men as reveal to us the essence of man, has attested the truth of the proposition by their lives. They had only one dominant passion – the realization of the aim which was the essential object of their activity” (3). Feuerbach is illustrating to his readers that our drives, our passions, our yearnings for things beyond ourselves are not because of some higher power influencing us, but that it is in the natural instinct that lies inside all humans. When he wrote ‘They had only one dominant

Kasten, 2 passion – the realization of the aim which was the essential object of their activity’ is a clear indicator that our drives come from what we are currently doing and the decision to part take in the activity comes from our natural instinct and not from God. Feuerbach furthers his argument with this statement; “Man cannot transcend his true nature. He may indeed by means of the imagination conceive individuals of another so-called higher kind, but even then he can never get loose from his species and his nature” (3). His statement here demonstrates to the reader his ideas of man’s thoughts of God are no more than man’s own imagination. The use of the word imagination in this context, from Feuerbach’s perspective, is to illustrate that God is not really there. Imagination is what humans have and use to dream of things that cannot realistically happen. He wants his readers to think realistically about how God does not exist. Now from a
Christian stand point, they would argue that in order to have these thoughts and to make these decisions derive from our moral compass; where this moral compass comes from is from God;
God gives us the ability to have imagination and to find our drives.
Christians have come to the understanding that God is a super natural entity that humans will never be able to fully comprehend. Feuerbach wants people to realize that the God humans have created is our best qualities manifested into Him, but Christian philosophers have developed the idea that God has what humans don’t have and vice versa. Furthermore Feuerbach lays out a false sense with these ideas because Christians would argue that these attributes that
God has are attributes that don’t even exist within the human race and vice versa with the attributes that humans have do not exist within God. If they do not exist then the attributes that
Feuerbach argues that the human species places in this imaginative figure cannot prove that God is a projection of man; thus Feuerbach hasn’t actually proven that these attributes we give to God are holding back the progression of the species along with the notion that God existence is false.

Kasten, 3
Feuerbach tries to continue to prove his stance by using other concepts to strengthen his ideas and thoughts, especially through the use of the subject of human intellect.
Feuerbach moves his argument to the subject of human intellect, he feels that our intellect
“in us is neutral, dispassionate, unbribable and unblended, it is that unadulterated light of intelligence which cannot be led astray by passion” (8). He believes that our intellect is governed by ourselves and is powerful enough not to be controlled by a “parent figure” i.e. God. What he wants people to realize here is that our intelligence was always inside of use and that we control what we use it for; it is not guided by some greater power. Feuerbach tries to prove this point with “in contrast to the “finite” mind, the “in”finite mind is therefore nothing but intelligence separated in though from the limitations of individuality and corporeality” (9). Feuerbach poses the thought that the intelligences that humans have placed in God has not happened from God’s intervention but through the human species own act of projecting it outside their selves. He argues that this intellect is our own and we have willingly chosen to give it away; thus we have denied ourselves the ability to progress as the human species. He wants the reader to realize that by doing this they have allowed “the impoverishing of the real world and the enriching of the
Deity” […] “Only an impoverished humanity has a rich God” (15). This statement is intended to strengthens his argument because he presents the thought that we have taken our best attributes and have placed them in a false Deity; thus allowing ourselves to slip into poverty.
Now from a Christian view, one would say that the intellect that we have is a gift from
God given to us at birth. One of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit is knowledge, noted from the religion of Catholicism. Catholics along with other Christians would argue that our intellect is guided by an all-powerful entity because of our sense of morality and the feeling of needing to be individualistic. What is meant by this is that Christians believe that in order to help others

Kasten, 4 progress, we must first figure out ourselves as an individual so they know what they can bring to the “table” to help others out. If we can’t figure out how to better ourselves first how are we going to be able to better the rest of the species? This is where Feuerbach’s argument seems to have loose ends. He is all about how we need to progress as a species and realize that we are here now and there is no after life with God to look forward to. We need to make this realization and once the connection is made, he believes that the human species will be able to move forward and make the most of this life. How would this be possible without God’s guidance? As
Christians we believe that through His guidance we are able to better ourselves so that we can ultimately better those around us. How can this be done if God does not exist? Another notion that he tries to place in the reader is the idea of suffering and also that sin doesn’t really exist.
Feuerbach believe that to suffer is to better the species. He thinks that through our suffering now, and after we have passed away from this world, has ultimately bettered the human species currently and as well as the future generations. He writes “he who suffers for others and lays down his life for them acts divinely and therefor to men” (13). He proposes that the suffering done now will better the species for future generations to come. From a Christian stand point, one would argue that in suffering we are brought closer to God and that it betters us in the end. Feuerbach argues that in the suffering there is no God to turn to and help us out. If people were to take the stand point of coming closer to God, then they have ‘impoverished’ themselves again thus working against the species. Christians would say that this suffering is essential to our growth and that the guidance we receive from God during these times is what helps us better ourselves in the future, thus again proving that Feuerbach’s idea of staying away from the individual and move towards the species is invalid. In order to help out the species, we need to develop ourselves fully and completely through the guidance of God in order to give from our

Kasten, 5 fullest capacities. Feuerbach also argues that sin is not an act against God but an act against the species.
Feuerbach presents the idea that to belong to religion is to impoverish one’s self. He feels that to be Christian is to be automatically saved and is a partisanship. He writes “God, it is true, loves all men; but only when and because they are Christian, or at least only because they can be or want to be Christians. To be a Christian is to be loved by God; not to be a Christian is to be hated by God, is to be an object of divine anger” (29). Feuerbach is trying to present the idea that to not be Christian is a sin. He wants the reader to realize that sin doesn’t exist in his atheistic world. The only sin that can be committed is by believing in God and not trying to advance the human species. From a Christian stand point, we do not believe that if someone is not Christian, then God hates them; this is completely the opposite. Our faith branches out from Judaism; we recognize this from the scriptures and gospels read weekly in mass. Thus we recognize other faiths and our taught to love all human beings and that God loves them too.
Feuerbach is trying to illustrate that there is no higher power that will bring judgment upon you in the end. He makes the notion that the only sin that could be committed in this like is the fact of not realizing that we are here now and we need to do anything and everything to help move the species along e.g. forgetting about God. The fact that we hold on to this belief only holds us back Feuerbach would argue. Sin is only relative if it is an act against the species and it can be easily corrected as soon as people realize God does not exist. Now a Christian would argue that to sin is an act against God. Not believing in him is not a sin. We believe that doubt is necessary in strengthening our faith. Sin is also essential to our faith because it helps us grow and to understand how we can correct the wrongs in the world for the future. Feuerbach would argue that if we take God away from the equation, then sin would not exist, thus the world would be

Kasten, 6 sin free and anything could happen. This would ultimately work against the advancement of the species. Without God’s guidance of morality, the world would come to a halt from all of the chaos that would spawn from a “sin free world”. Feuerbach is all about progression; his thought of a sin free world would be against the idea of progression thus disproving his own theory.
In conclusion, Feuerbach presents the idea that the world would seem to progress with the absences of God. This idea is that if humans were to eliminate God from the equation, then they would be able to move forward and not be bound to something that we cannot see nor really explain or comprehend. Feuerbach’s theory has any inconsistencies. First we must remember that he never actually proves that God does not exist and that without God to bring guidance the stability of man would crumble. He wants humans to realize that their own gifts and talents were created by themselves and not from a higher power. These gift are enough to stabilize the human species but how would someone use properly use these gifts if there is no sin in the world.
Feuerbach does not show sufficient evidence this sin free world will allow for the advancement of the species. Thus the need for God to guide and provide judgment is essential to the survival of the species.