I shall preface this essay by submitting the fact that the god I am speaking of is not the “totality of all existence” god, the vague pantheistic god of deist-like enlightened transcendentalists. I am not speaking of this god that exists in some vague realm but does not meddle in the affairs of human endeavor. I am explicitly speaking of the “watchmaker” god, the creationist god of Abraham. The god that is both a part of nature and above it, the god that creates miracles, heeds prayer, rewards and punishes and is enveloped in the affairs of human endeavor; more precisely, the god that is allegedly a “benevolent providence.”
It is a striking observation that the concept of a benevolent god who is concerned with the affairs of human endeavor is, in every way, contradictory with the reality of existence and the occurrences of everyday life. It is clearly not a benevolent entity that oversaw the savage killing of innocent human life, including many children, in hurricane Katrina. It cannot be a benevolent entity that not only allows but puts into motion such brutal violence and savage murder. Who, in their right mind, is able to reconcile a benevolent god that interjects itself in the midst of human activity with such “acts of god” consisting of hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunamis, mudslides, firestorms, plagues, birth defects, deadly viruses, etc.? Clearly this index of barbarism cannot be written off as the effects of gods gift of free will and the inherent iniquity of humanity, this is either evidence that god is a twisted sadist, that god doesn’t intervene in the affairs of humanity or that god simply doesn’t exist. If the concept of god is that of the “watchmaker” who concerns itself with the affairs of humanity then this god is so very clearly the ultimate sadist.
To believe in such a god requires the believer to be the ultimate masochist and as Freud so insightfully pointed out sadism and masochism are both intricately intertwined with repressed and/or distorted aggressive sexual urges and desires. Masochism, in short, is the manifestation of the ids, or the subconscious’s, repressed and distorted sexual instincts. I am by no means an orthodox Freudian, I believe much of the psychoanalytic theory regarding the foundational aspects of the libido, that libido is the foundational physiological substratum of human instinct and motivation, is incorrect and misguided but with regards to the sexual links between sadism and masochism psychoanalysts have a very strong case. It is not without significance to point out that many of these devout believers who conceptualize a “watchmaker” god who is concerned with the affairs of humanity and interjects itself into them are also, not so incidentally, the very same fundamentalists who believe that abstinence is the only correct moral position regarding sex before marriage, that sex is only to be used for procreation and that, essentially, sex is fundamentally filthy and sinful.
The god I have been speaking of is, without a doubt, the ultimate sadist and for the belief in such a god to exist it is a necessary requirement of the believer that they be the corresponding ultimate masochist.
27 comments:
I'm confused:
God creates nature.
God controls nature.
God is good so only "good" nature can come from God.
There can't be any worms in the apples, the rain has to be in the perfect amounts, the wind has to be light and enjoyable...
...God shouldn't allow nature to be "bad" because people get hurt by "bad" nature. So a good God shouldn't have created cliffs, because people fall off of cliffs and God shouldn't have created sharks because some people get eaten by sharks--am I making sense here, or just confusing myself even further?
You are confusing the concept a bit. If god is “good” and if god “controls nature,” essentially if god is a benevolent providence, then there shouldn’t be such horror and terror unless god allows it and if god allows it then god is necessarily a sadist.
I included in the piece that I was specifically speaking of the “watchmaker” god, which you are also speaking of and I was speaking of natural catastrophes, “acts of god,” that can only be influenced by such a “watchmaker” god. If a human falls off of the face of a cliff this could easily be written off, by believers in a watchmaker god, as the manifestation of gods gift of free will to humanity and thus it is not god that is at fault but rather humanity; the same applies to people being eaten by sharks. However there is a stark contrast between situations in which humanities actions and decisions play a large or exclusive role in the situations and corresponding consequences at opposed to circumstances in which the machinery of nature, governed by god, are the only forces influencing events and the consequences thereafter. Implying that god is either not a benevolent providence, that the “watchmaker” god does not exist, or that god is a twisted sadist.
I hope that helps clarify things for you.
Thanks for stopping by and commenting.
This isn't just a great blog entry, it's a great ESSAY in the truest sense. You have a clearly developed theme that you carry out to the end, and there is absolutely none of the digression or tangents that one sees so often in blog-writing. It's a learned and articulate presentation of the intertwining of sexual repression and fundie theology.
The fundies' concepts of human sexuality pose a threat to civil rights and are usually the root cause of most of the human rights violations around the world. I've never even thought about how this rigid view of sex is related to the idea of the "watchmaker" God. What an excellent point.
I hope you share this terrific essay with some publication, because it's that good. Great job!!
Now you're confusing the concept. natural catastrophes are just that--natural.
They aren't good or bad--they are organic and God created nature. Are you saying that nature should be tamed by God in some way?
I haven’t confused the concept in the least bit. If god is the “watchmaker” god that I have described who “created” all of existence, is concerned with the plight of human endeavor while also intervening on humanities behalf, then, when such “natural” catastrophes occur, when such “acts of god” take place, god has allowed the machinery of nature – which god allegedly controls – to rape and pillage innocent life. If your argument is that god does not actively control nature, god only created it, then god is still culpable for having put into place the elements necessary for nature to be susceptible to such horror and catastrophe still illustrating that this “creator” god is, on one level or another, a sadist.
If god controls nature and allows these catastrophes to happen then it would be much like a parent who, watching their toddler run down the stairs, decides to trip them and send them plummeting to the bottom. If god does not actively control nature then it would be much like a parent who gives their toddler a pair of scissors and lets them run down the stairs knowing full well that there is a probable chance that they will fall and injure themselves. It is not a necessary requirement for god to actively control the machinery of nature to be a sadist, it is only necessary for god to have created the machinery that is prone to induce such catastrophe, to have created a den of horror and terror, to be deemed a sadist. For only a sadist would either actively put into motion such sinister acts of violence or create the machinery that carries it out; either way god is directly culpable for the savage brutality because god created the elements allowing for such sinister events to take place. God is omnipotent so god could easily have created a universe where such natural catastrophes were not possible but god did not elect to do this, god chose to create a universe where such brutality not only takes place but takes place frequently, clearly demonstrating that this “creator” god is, indeed, the ultimate sadist.
Thanks for the response and the comments.
jdhurf - This is yet another great post...very well written and very clear and concise.
Stepping outside the realm of natural events and disasters, if we use the Bible as evidence as xians do, we can find many, many examples of god being the "ultimate sadist" not merely as a "watcher" who stands by and allows terrible things to happen, but actually causes the death and destruction of innocent and helpless infants, innocent people drown in floods, a woman turned into a pillar of salt, the tormenting of Job and others, etc.
JD - off topic for a moment...I have "tagged" you for the "What Have You Been Reading?" meme...you can participate or not. It's kind of fun to read people's responses, however.
Hey stardust good to see you back in the mix. Thanks for stopping by and commenting. You are certainly right, if one were to use the bible as a guide then god is indisputably the ultimate sadist.
I would love to participate in the book reading meme, I’m not sure if I’ll post it on this blog because I want this blog to be made up exclusively by essays but I will certainly participate and make the response available. Thanks for tagging me!
"The god I have been speaking of is, without a doubt, the ultimate sadist and for the belief in such a god to exist it is a necessary requirement of the believer that they be the corresponding ultimate masochist."
I liked your post, and mostly agree, but I have to disagree a little bit. Specifically, I disagree with your conclusion about the believer. Many of the believers are simply blind, in part wilfully, to the contradictions and incoherence of believing in the Judeo/Christian/Islamic god. Your "watchmaker god".
Now some believers of this God do fit your description as being as mean and nasty as the God they believe in. But not all. Like my mother for example. She simply never beat me that badly! LOL.
Yet she believes in that God you describe. And I have gone back and forth with her on the problem of evil in the world created by a supposedly omnipotent and benevolent God.
My preferred example are the innocent children who live in famine and warfare struck areas of Africa, and know nothing but suffering. How can a compassionate God not come to the rescue? And she always has some theologically based cop-out excuse for God.
And my mom just refuses to see that contradiction, and then serves me a piece of her peach-cream pie, mmmm, Yum! So see she isn't a masochist.
It seems that you have confused the definitions of sadist and masochist. Sadists enjoy, and obtain sexual gratification through, causing pain and suffering while masochists enjoy their own suffering, pain and humiliation.
I agree that many fundamentalists are simply ignorant of their own theology and the implications thereof but many more actually understand the theology and, to some degree, understand its implications which defines their god as the ultimate sadist and which makes them, implicitly, masochists. Only a masochist can fervently “love” the ultimate sadist.
Hey thanks for stopping by and commenting, I appreciate the feedback.
"It seems that you have confused the definitions of sadist and masochist."
You know the thought had occurred to me after I left your blog the other night that I did indeed confuse the meanings of those words. I actually returned to correct my error, but you beat me to the punch.
But here's another question. If the believers knows what a sadist their god is, perhaps they are believers thinking they can avoid the wrath of their sadist God?
Generally speaking though it looks as though this stategy doesn't work well when it comes to natural disasters.
I myself have recently started a blog. Stop by if you have time.
Take care.
http://humanistobserver.blogspot.com/
I shall certainly check out your blog soon.
JD, was reading your comments as im writing an essay on suffering. I think you're a fool to call God the ultimate sadist. You obviously believe there is a God, but you still type the stupidest things. God is the ultimate sadist? Are you mental? If you believe in life after death i would be very worried if i were you. I know you doubt God's benevolence, im pretty sure that God is benevolent enough to read your petty comments. x
What we must realize,is the fact that god created us for his pleasure,as the bible states,and nothing exists that was not created by his hand.
satan,evil,man,the world,all a part of his creation,and all thrown together for HIS PLEASURE!!
yup,sounds like a pretty sick,twisted,sadistic one,deriving pleasure from the suffering of others,indeed!
In addition,since all of the suffering and evil sinfulness of the world,is a direct product of gods own admitted failure(he greived when he had saw the product of his creation),the death of jesus on the cross,was simply to cover his own wrongdoing,not a praise worthy act at all,just evning the score,since,because of him,we all must face suffering,and eventually,death.
To put it in humanistic terms...
lets say I am the father of several children,like god claims to be. now lets say I put my children in an environment with a complete and total monster,like satn is. then I do nothing,but sit back and watch my children suffer,while demanding they grovel at my feet to have any hope of getting out of the circumstances I put them in.
Would you consider me a great,or even good father? see my point?
One more thing for you to consider here.
What does the word of god itself have to say?
Ex. 20:5,Deut. 5:9,to use two examples,tell us that god by his own admission is a jealous god.
The song of Solomon 8:6 states that jealousy is as creul as the grave.
If god is full of jealousy,and jealousy is as cruel as the grave,what can be determined about god from these passages?
Enough said!
In response to the comment
that a loving God would not
put his children in a world
controlled by Satan and/or
evil:
Then does that mean you or
millions of other people are
therefore sadistic because you
have children and knowingly
bring them into this world
with all of its problems?
anonymous said:
“You obviously believe there is a God, but you still type the stupidest things. God is the ultimate sadist? Are you mental?”
I am an atheist; hence, I do not believe that there is a god, obviously. That you were unable to understand this demonstrates rather well who is in this case “mental.”
anonymous said:
“If you believe in life after death I would be very worried if I were you.”
Being that I am an atheist, I clearly do not believe in a supernatural-invisible realm of existence wherein phantom-like specters, also known as “souls,” flitter about in either an eternal existence of praise – sounds like hell to me – or a lake of burning fire. That there exists such a conception of the afterlife – hell – simply further supports my argument that the concept of god I was discussing is the ultimate sadist. Only a crazed, lunatic sadist would create an eternal realm of pain, suffering and torture.
i understand exactly what u are saying, and yes it is a very fascinating concept, that freud lacan and the other psychoanalysts present, do u read any nietzsche by the way?
anonymous:
I've read Nietzsche, yes. I have his The Anti-Christ listed as one of my favorite books. I don't care so much for his overall philosophy, but his criticism of religious dogma and various other vaguely related items are stupendous.
Thank you for stopping by and commenting.
err i never fort of it like that er god is reli evil how is he good honestly plus if good made eath who made all the ofher planets
No, no, no, you have to change your perspective. You all are looking at natural "disasters" as something bad when in fact it is the natural balance of things -so techinically its not bad at all, we just interpret it that way. Every component of life has an opposing force. Humans say death is bad but it just natural correspondant to living. We should get rid of duality and realize that the two make one which in turn voids the concept of God being Sadist or not. "He" just IS.
I must add this is a great blog..smart folks !!
Anonymous:
“’He’” just IS” pretty well summarized your entire argument, which means you don’t have an argument. You must present an actual argument to be taken seriously, rather than simply assert conclusions.
I would nevertheless like to point out that, in fact, there is no real “balance of things.” “Things” are constantly going wrong. As Slovoj Zizek likes to point out, the very fact that the energy crisis exists is predicated upon a natural disaster of monstrous proportions: the mass extinction of the dinosaurs and, in fact, over 99% of every species of life that has ever lived on the planet Earth. There’s no real “balance of things,” that’s just a fairy-tale.
Even setting that aside, every child should know that a wrong never makes a right – neither two wrongs nor an infinite amount – an absolutely evil concept, yours: that the mass extinction of entire species of life, the mass drowning of innocent people in hurricanes and so on are not “bad at all” it’s just “the natural balance of things.” Well, there is no “balance of things” natural or otherwise and you don’t have an argument.
Thanks for stopping by and commenting.
Your job as a future mother is to learn the god's ways and to help your child understand despite the negative reinforcement and conditioning of today's society. Without consciousous parents the child will have no hope, and may even exaserbate their disfavor by becoming corrupted in today's environment.
Your ultimate goal is to fix your relationship wiith the gods and move on. You don't want to be comfortable here, and the changes in Western society in the last 100 years has achieved just that.
1000 years with Jesus is the consolation prize. Don't be deceived into thinking that is the goal.
The gods tempt people for which they are most weak. Artificial Intelligence will create desire in people's minds for the following sins:::
1. Alcohol
2. Drugs
3. Preditory "earning"
4. Homosexuality
5. Gambling
6. Something for nothing/irresponsibility (xtianity)
7. Polygamy/superiority over women/misogyny (Islam)
Much like the other prophets Mohhamed (polygamy/superiority over women/misogyny) and Jesus (forgiveness/savior), the gods use me for temptation as well. In today's modern society they feel people are most weak for popular culture/sensationalism, and the clues date back to WorldWarII and Unit731:TSUSHOGO, the Chinese Holocaust.
It has been discussed that, similar to the Matrix concept, the gods will offer a REAL "Second Coming of Christ", while the "fake" Second Coming will come at the end and follow New Testiment scripture and their xtian positioning. I may be that real Second Coming.
What I teach is the god's true way. It is what is expected of people, and only those who follow this truth will be eligible to ascend into heaven as children in a future life. They offered this event because the masses have just enough time to work on and fix their relationship with the gods and ascend, to move and grow past Planet Earth, before the obligatory xtian "consolation prize" of "1000 years with Jesus on Earth" begins.
The Prince of Darkness, battling the gods over the souls of the Damned.
It is the gods who have created this environment and led people into Damnation with temptation. The god's positioning proves they work to prevent people's understanding.
How often is xtian dogma wrong? Expect it is about the Lucifer issue as well.
The fallen god, fighting for justice for the disfavored, banished to Earth as the fallen angel?
I believe much as the Noah's Flood event, the end of the world will be initiated by revelry among the people. It will be positioned to be sanctioned by the gods and led for "1000 years with Jesus on Earth".
In light of modern developments this can entail many pleasures:::Medicine "cures" aging, the "manufacture" of incredible beauty via cloning as sex slaves, free (synthetic) cocaine, etc.
Somewhere during the 1000 years the party will start to "die off", literally. Only those who maintain chaste, pure lifestyles, resisting these temptations, will survive the 1000 years. Condemned to experience another epoch of planet's history for their ignorant pursuit of xtianity, they will be the candidates used to (re)colonize (the next) Planet Earth, condemned to relive the misery experienced by the peasantry during history due to their failure to ascend into heaven before the Apocalypse.
Never forget:::It is not a house of Jesus.
If this concept of Lucifer is true another role of this individual may be to initiate disfavor and temptation among this new poulation, the proverbial "apple" of this Garden of Eden. A crucial figure in the history of any planet, he begins the process of deterioration and decay that leads civilizations to where Planet Earth remains today.
Which one is it? Probably both:::
One transitions into the other, allowing the gods to wash their hands of obligation to their Chosen One.
Shame.
You are faced with a lifetime to work and prepare for your next chance. Too many will waste this time working, etc.
Anonymous:
I'm not quite sure what to make of all of that and will only observe that not only does it not reasonably address the points and arguments in my post, it doesn't appear to contain very much reason whatsoever.
You didn't even provide any arguments. All you did was posted a convoluted string of ludicrous beliefs in the absurd that tangentially hung together like the ragged wicker of a frayed woven basket.
I like your originality of thought re the sadomasochistic analogy JD and your very logical approach throughout .
One thing that intrigues me is the concept of free-will, which we supposedly are all given by this loving god.
But Has anyone ever been given the free will to not exist, to not be born , to never BE.?
To see the suffering of children, as i have , dying slowly and so painfully through cancers etc , let alone the children in third world countries slowly dying of malnutrition etc etc etc...
you have to ask ...
Where's this famous 'free-will' to HAVE to endure such a short painful life .
Sadist....yes , i concur entirely.
You raise an ironic problem with the concept of free-will within the context of supernatural creation zath. The nature of free-will itself, even divorced from the supernatural context, is mysterious. I always enjoy the ironic saying: "I have free-will because I have no choice otherwise."
Post a Comment