Dragon
Senior Member
- Sep 16, 2011
- 5,481
- 588
- 48
I mean the God of traditional Christian theology, of course. Consider:
1) He made human beings fallible, then expected them to be perfect.
2) Because they sought the knowledge of good and evil -- that is, tried to develop a conscience -- he condemned not only those who did this, but all of their descendants, to be tortured forever and ever.
3) For thousands of years, everyone (with perhaps a very few exceptions -- theory isn't clear on this) were sentenced to be tortured forever and ever, since he had designed everyone to be perfect but judged them according to an unachievable standard.
4) After thousands of years and millions of victims, who were screaming endlessly under horrible tortures, doubtless to his pleasure and satisfaction, he sent his son to assume human form and be tortured to death. Apparently, although we're not told why, this was sufficient to appease the divine blood-lust.
5) Meanwhile, all those millions of victims continued to scream endlessly under horrible torture.
6) Although Jesus' being whipped with cords studded with sharp metal so that his flesh was ripped apart and then nailed to a piece of wood to die slowly over several hours supposedly appeased the divine sadism, most people continued to be condemned to scream forever under horrible tortures, as the only ones who could take advantage of Jesus' being abused in this way were those who believed in this story (which was offered without evidence) and submitted to the authority of the Church. (Although there is some dispute about that last minor point.)
This, we are told, is the creator of the universe, perfectly good, perfectly wise, and all-powerful. We are asked to believe that the sublime all-in-all is worse by far than any mere human despot, who must be content with torturing people for only finite amounts of time.
In fairness, it's not unlikely that someone like Torquemada or Hitler would have had people screaming endlessly under horrible tortures, too, were that humanly possible. So perhaps God is not actually morally worse than the worst examples of human depravity, but merely endowed with power that gives his depravity more dreadful consequences.
Be that as it may, it is reasonable to question whether this conception of God makes any sense -- and by that I mean, on this occasion, not logical or scientific sense, but moral sense.
Whenever I hear the statement, "For God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son," and I remember the divine blood-lust and cruelty and smarmy pretense that is supposed to accompany this "gift," I want to puke.
1) He made human beings fallible, then expected them to be perfect.
2) Because they sought the knowledge of good and evil -- that is, tried to develop a conscience -- he condemned not only those who did this, but all of their descendants, to be tortured forever and ever.
3) For thousands of years, everyone (with perhaps a very few exceptions -- theory isn't clear on this) were sentenced to be tortured forever and ever, since he had designed everyone to be perfect but judged them according to an unachievable standard.
4) After thousands of years and millions of victims, who were screaming endlessly under horrible tortures, doubtless to his pleasure and satisfaction, he sent his son to assume human form and be tortured to death. Apparently, although we're not told why, this was sufficient to appease the divine blood-lust.
5) Meanwhile, all those millions of victims continued to scream endlessly under horrible torture.
6) Although Jesus' being whipped with cords studded with sharp metal so that his flesh was ripped apart and then nailed to a piece of wood to die slowly over several hours supposedly appeased the divine sadism, most people continued to be condemned to scream forever under horrible tortures, as the only ones who could take advantage of Jesus' being abused in this way were those who believed in this story (which was offered without evidence) and submitted to the authority of the Church. (Although there is some dispute about that last minor point.)
This, we are told, is the creator of the universe, perfectly good, perfectly wise, and all-powerful. We are asked to believe that the sublime all-in-all is worse by far than any mere human despot, who must be content with torturing people for only finite amounts of time.
In fairness, it's not unlikely that someone like Torquemada or Hitler would have had people screaming endlessly under horrible tortures, too, were that humanly possible. So perhaps God is not actually morally worse than the worst examples of human depravity, but merely endowed with power that gives his depravity more dreadful consequences.
Be that as it may, it is reasonable to question whether this conception of God makes any sense -- and by that I mean, on this occasion, not logical or scientific sense, but moral sense.
Whenever I hear the statement, "For God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son," and I remember the divine blood-lust and cruelty and smarmy pretense that is supposed to accompany this "gift," I want to puke.