Needing God is dangerous and degrading

Your browser does not support inline frames or is currently configured not to display inline frames. NEEDING GOD IS DANGEROUS

The Christian Church opposes good and puts a clever counterfeit in its place.

Himmler believed he should inflict horrors on innocent people because his leader persuaded him it was best for Germany. This does not excuse what he did (page 14, Ethics: The Fundamentals) or anybody who approves of what he did. Islam and Christianity with their doctrine that certain sinners such as heretics or homosexuals will suffer in Hell forever without any hope of release just make a caricature of that principle. They approve of the horrors these sinners may face.

The Church says that God comes first and not only that but all we do should be entirely done for his sake. So what God thinks matters and what we think does not. But real good requires a lot of discerning what good is and doing that and trusting entirely in yourself for you have to decide for yourself what is good for you and others. So God is in opposition to goodness and therefore love. It is in opposition to difference. All are called to become clones of God for he is perfection itself. The view that God has made some people to be good at nursing and others have the talent for teaching does not refute this but actually supports it for all are made weak and are called to be perfect at everything and these talents are only encouraged for when we are weak there is no other option but to zoom in on what we are good at and develop that as a prime concern. Think of it this way. People are asked what they would have on their gravestone for an epitaph. When God comes first and loving him with all your being is the supreme law it follows that the epitaph should be, “She tried to love God”, or, “He did not try to love God.” Whatever is not best is what is wrong. Such a God cannot give meaning to life except by the craftiness of the Church which deludes people to think that they need him and which corrupts their thinking and makes their emotional needs abnormal. We need a world that celebrates diversity not one that tolerates it. God is in opposition to such celebration. Any version of God that is not is just a pile of inconsistency and not a real God.

I will spell out another way that God removes a sense of purpose in life. Christians say they get meaning in life from the fact that God loves them no matter what they do. So they have to pretend the shamelessly absurd lie that the sinner can be loved while their sin is hated is true. Believing that God loves us unconditionally may make us feel safer but it should not. In real life, we tend to feel safe if we prove ourselves to be worthwhile people. God’s love cannot make us feel safe without that so to derive comfort from it is indicatory of disordered self-esteem because you need the God-crutch. God’s love can ask for some horrible things so there is no sense in feeling safe with him. It would be presumptuous to feel safe.

Top of the Document

The Church says that God has put a need for him inside all of us. That follows from the doctrine that God is completely good and that he has created all things and done so for himself. But if it is the good you want you don’t really want him. The Church says then that he is his goodness so to want goodness is the same thing as wanting him which doesn’t really make any sense. A man can want his wife’s beauty and though her beauty is her to love her beauty is not the same as loving her. Jesus said there is no greater love than giving your life – all you have – for your friends. The Church says that the purest love seeks nothing in return. “To pardon rather than be pardoned, love rather than be loved”, as the awful prayer of St Francis of Assisi puts it.” Therefore to love God as Jesus commanded you have to love God alone as if he had no good points at all. You would have to love him even if he were bad. But then why God alone and not somebody else? Why not your mother or your spouse? It would make more sense to love your mother or your spouse for at least you can see and hear them. Why not yourself? No they want us to love God instead for no sensible reason meaning that we should let God and his emissaries run our lives. The fact that we are to love God alone proves just how perverse and malign Christian – or any God-centred - morality is despite its outward appearance. God is arbitrarily chosen for conferring all love on which means that there is no morality (or right and wrong) if this should be done because morality is supposed to be right and you cannot arbitrarily make anything right. Morality and arbitrary don’t mix. The God doctrine denies that morality, or right and wrong, exists.

If God is a need then he is the most important need of all for he is supreme good and our creator. It follows then that secularism and atheism are endangering that need and must be regarded as being opposed to human rights and worthy of suppression. Rights are based on needs not wants. I may want a child but that does not give me a right to have one. I need food so I have a right to food. I don't have a right to have a child for I have no need to.

Now back to the doctrine that God put the need for him in us. Why did he do it? For our good? For his? Or for both? It is not for our good for if he made us see the need for happiness and how to get it better there would be no need for him to interfere or get involved. There would be no need for us to need him. He created a need where there should be none and since love respects freedom above all else it is unmistakeably true that God does not care about us when he constricted our freedom by making us need him. So he put the need in us for his good alone (further implying that nothing and nobody matters but him – what a callous monster!). And he does not need us to need and worship and work for him for he is almighty and perfect and self-sufficient. You cannot be a perfect being without being self-sufficient. So he just wants us to adore him though he does not need that adoration. A person who has to work for a God who does not need it, is just a slave even if he does get rewards. What benefit would the rewards be when you have not really achieved anything? How can you achieve anything or feel you have achieved, by loving a God who does not need you or your love? Jesus declared in the John gospel that his disciples are not servants or slaves for they know the master’s business. A slave can know his master’s business and still be a slave so that was another of Jesus’ many peccadilloes. Though Jesus said we must be perfect as our Father in Heaven is perfect, he emptied this adage of any meaning whatsoever when he emphasised our overwhelming and eternal dependence on God. To be perfect is to be self-sufficient but when God’s help is what makes a person good according to the Christian gospel it is obvious that we are never perfect in ourselves. We only act that way for we have the props. The need for God is created by the Church and it is created for its own benefit and not ours or God’s.

Nobody can say it is ever good to believe in God. Those who are made happy by the belief are in delusion and to say this delusion is a good thing is to talk nonsense. These people are being used by the clergy. When you are deluded you might think your delusion is one that makes you cheery but when you are deluded you will never know if you would be happier with another delusion or none. It’s still bad. It’s still degrading. When all is said and done, the main reason religion and God thrive is because there are so many questions that people never think to ask themselves or don’t take the time to. Atheism wants people to ask themselves the questions about religion and faith that they wouldn’t normally ask and that is a vital part of the therapy the system offers. When they do that many surprises will surface. For example, the person who would insist that he or she is a 95% Catholic in outlook and faith may when he or she asks himself or herself the right questions could discover that he or she is really only 10% Catholic! The Church takes advantage of people not getting to know themselves and what they really think. It takes advantage of the human tendency to believe something because of the arguments presented while forgetting to look for and ask for missing information that would give you a totally different outlook.

We can be content with imperfect happiness and yet we have the Church trying to condition us to believe that we want perfect happiness and hey presto the solution for getting this happiness is God! This is a cruel set-up and shows the Church is an evil confidence trick.

If you err even with the best of intentions you still do harm. You harm your power to perceive the truth every time you err. You harm yourself though you feel no pain. You harm others by giving an example of error to them. To err is to take the side of error even if you never get the chance to express and live out your error. If somebody is wrong but sincere we can praise them for the sincerity but not for being wrong.

Moral fictionalism is common in modern philosophy. It teaches that morality is incoherent logically but it is better to go along with it. Its fictitious but stick with it, is the advice given. For example, they will say that the law do the greatest good and the least evil contradicts the law that you can't kill a person to get their organs that are needed to save five lives through transplants. They say a mother is not obligated to give her kidney to save her son from certain death. Then they say that you should kill two other people to save your own life.

They can't say their rules are about preventing people from taking advantage of them. If the law is good that lets you kill to save five lives by providing transplants then it is good and can't be banned just because people abuse it. Knives are abused and you don't ban them. They are not concerned about people taking advantage when they make their rules and then make other ones that contradict them!

If moral fictionalism is true, then it is making things worse if you begin bringing the moral laws of God and religion into the debate. If morality is fiction or myth, it is therefore immoral if you try to justify any moral code by saying God revealed it and God never lies and never makes mistakes. Most people even religious ones don't worry about religious rules all the time. They just get on with life. Fictionalism would justify the morality of secularism better than religion. For example, all want to believe that animals should not be gratuitously tortured to death. But in religion, there is disagreement about what we should do. Some want us to hold Sabbath on a Friday and others on a Saturday and others on a Sunday! And so on ad nauseum!

If moral fictionalism is true, then to say morality is right for God gave it and enacted its laws is to make it even more fictitious not less. If you tell a lie, you make that lie worse by saying God told you it was the truth. To make morality more fictitious than it is is to work for its demolition.

If fictionalism is true, there is nothing belief in God or religion can do to make it untrue. The religions all claim they are able to make it untrue and they cannot all be right.

The view that if somebody has harmful religious beliefs that it is none of our business as long as they are sincere is wrong. If it would be our business if they were insincere then the fact that they are sincere makes them more dangerous. It is even more our business then! At least if they are insincere they know they are wrong and on the side of wrong. The whole point of it being our business is stopping the harm. It is not about interfering with their intentions as intentions for we can't change anybody's intentions for them. Belief in God endangers morality. If you suppose that the belief has no relevance to morality then it follows that emphasising God like religionists do is bad. The more you emphasise, the worse it is.

Catholicism should believe that birth control is evil - its part of its identity as a religion. Catholicism can't be the true religion if it is wrong about how sinful birth control is. But people should separate from it so that there will be no Catholicism left to believe it. If you belong to or claim to belong to a religion that should believe evil things, then even if it doesn't, you are being evil and supporting evil. A religion that doesn't understand or admit or see how evil it is meant to be is a religion that is being praised for going against itself. It is no compliment to praise it for you are praising ignorance and disobedience. Separate from it.