Our God — Page 202
202 with his protection. Thus, his longing for a father figure is a motive identical with his need for protection against consequences of his human weakness. The defence against childish helplessness is what lends its characteristic fea- tures to the adult’s reaction to the helplessness which he has to acknowledge—a reaction which is precisely the for- mation of religion. ( The Future of an Illusion, pp. 41–42, Sigmund Freud) Freud has further elaborated his theory in his writings and has also written a great deal about the Oedipus Complex. Though many Western philosophers have rejected Freud’s theory, it is nec- essary that we analyse it briefly. First of all, it should be realised that this theory is an offshoot of another theory which we have discussed in the beginning in the context of ‘universal acceptance’ and is based on what is gener- ally known as, ‘Inferiority Complex’; i. e. a feeling of weakness and inferiority before a superior and more powerful being. We have already sufficiently dealt with this in the aforementioned discus- sion and need not repeat it. However, it is particularly remarkable in that although a Jew himself, whether he was aware of it or not, Freud seems to have borrowed this idea from Christianity as he spent his life in Christian surroundings. Jesus, in contrast to the dry and philosophical religious teachings of Judaism, presented God metaphorically as a father figure. The Christians later on started believing in God as Father and Jesus as the real son of God. This ‘father-son’ concept is well-known and publicised amongst Christians everywhere. In spite of being a Jew, a competent scien- tist, and an authority on human psychology, Freud’s mind could