Feuerbach to Marx.

Francis Wheen's book on Karl Marx also introduced me to Ludwig Feuerbach.
What about his book that is regarded to be one of the first modern books on theology to espouse an atheist christian position, Das Wesen des Christentums (1841; The Essence of Christianity)? 

This entry in the Encyclopedia Britannica sums up the argument thus; 

"Feuerbach posited the notion that man is to himself his own object of thought and that religion is nothing more than a consciousness of the infinite. The result of this view is the notion that God is merely the outward projection of man’s inward nature. In the first part of his book, which strongly influenced Marx, Feuerbach analyzed the “true or anthropological essence of religion.” Discussing God’s aspects “as a being of the understanding,” “as a moral being or law,” “as love,” and others, he argued that they correspond to different needs in human nature. 

In the second section he analyzed the “false or theological essence of religion", contending that the view that God has an existence independent of human existence leads to a belief in revelation and sacraments, which are items of an undesirable religious materialism."

Probably the most famous quote from the book is:-

“As God has renounced himself out of love, so we, out of love, should renounce God; for if we do not sacrifice God to love, we sacrifice love to God, and in spite of the predicate of love, we have the God – the evil being – of religious fanaticism.” 

What I like about this book is the thought provoking challenge to examine the "God in our own image".  Also the idea of a God of Love transmuting into 'undesirable religious materialism'.

An eminently understandable  explanation of the significance of Feuerbach is made by Stephen West on one of his excellent array of podcasts which are offered free for the world's taking (donations gratefully received.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i69Qxzu2l94  Stephen West http://philosophizethis.org 

Without faith in God, it has been often argued that maintaining a moral compass is problematic.  It is with these thoughts that I read 'Reasons to stay Alive' by Matt Haig- recommended by my sister Frances.  
Haig makes almost no reference to organised religion.  He hints that he finds organised religion 'fills him with fear', relating this to problems affecting his mental wellbeing.  His book resonates with love, (though initially it is just him being loved by other.)  Indeed his life is saved by the love of his girlfriend and future wife.  He sees kindness as more important to recovery than pills.

How do we understand Feuerbach's famous quote?  If I look at Haig's book and change 'love' for 'God', I see a translation of his thesis that becomes spiritual. I understand the word 'God' originates from Norse mythology.   Its use in Germanic Christianity is no different from the use of words from other religious experiences such as  'Allah'.  These are words invented by humans used to describe what is greater than us, our originator, creator, sustainer, and terminator. 
 Exodus 3: 13-15 in the Bible says that when Moses asked God to tell him 'by who's name shall I say I have been sent? God say 'I AM...(blank)' sent you (Nemo?). (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God.)

1 John 4:8 in the Bible states that 'God is love'.  Without Love, there is no God, and with Love, there is God. 

I wonder that if we made this translation through all we read, we might be able to turn the secular into the spiritual, and visa versa.  Is this what Feuerbach is saying when he says 'sacrifice God to love'?

How to try to prevent the perception of organised religion in the UK as being purely a Victorian anachronism, with the interest level of  'heritage' or 'our colonial history': change the name of 'God' to 'Love'.