Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

Patrick H
Gormley


IS GOD AND THE WORSHIP OF GOD AN EXCUSE FOR HYPOCRISY?

GOD - IS THE BELIEF A CRUTCH FOR THOSE WHO NEED SOMETHING TO BE A HYPOCRITE TOWARDS?  

A hypocrite is a person who tells a lie by their outward deeds. They pretend to be good and just and pure when they are in fact not and don't intend to be. They hide their sins while banning and condemning the sins of others. Hypocrites are arrogant - they have a saint mentality. If you would suggest to a hypocrite that they might steal or have sex outside marriage they will be incredibly outraged. They think they would never do such things. And more importantly, they want others to think they wouldn't.
 
Christianity is notorious for its hypocrisy. Christians reply that the critics of this hypocrisy often use it as an excuse for discrediting the Church and their motive is their own self-justification. They feel they are morally superior when they reject the Church and claim that it is because it is such a hypocritical Church.

Is God and the requirements of worship and service that go with that concept an excuse for hypocrisy?  If some people just have to be hypocrites then God is the ideal solution. They can channel their hypocrisy drive towards him and avoid the bad results if you choose to target it towards people.  People find you out. 

CHRISTIANS:
Self-deception is a sin.
 
SANITY SAYS:
Deceiving myself does me barely any good. So why do I do it? It is so that I can fool other people. It is hard to lie - except when you have tricked yourself into thinking you are not lying. It fools others better.
 
If religion makes people behave better, it does not follow that their goodness has improved. If you need self-deception and/or religion to be good then you are not truly good in the first place. If you are good in the Church you will be good if the Church collapses.
 
Belief is when you perceive that something is more likely to be true than unlikely. Often people are just pretending that they know something is true. They call it belief or faith. The more outrageous and unbelievable the doctrine, the more likely they are to be pretending. An example. The person who thinks X committed the murder of Y may or may not believe it. The person who thinks that a demon murdered Y is more likely to be only fooling himself that he believes.
 
The Catholic who believes that a person can be sinful enough to want to spend eternity away from God and reject God forever cannot really believe such a claim. You need proof before accusing people of having the potential to be that bad.

Everybody who is in a bad or shifty religion makes the excuse, "If I stay I can maybe help improve it." That is all it is - an excuse. Go and find something better.

If self-deception has moral implications then it is the most immoral if you are deceiving yourself about what God is like if he is not like at all or even does not exist!  The reason it is so bad is that God refers to the all-loving being who should come first in all.

CHRISTIANS:
Why is there something rather than nothing? The answer is God made all things from nothing.
 
God creates everything now. Creation is not mere act he carried out in the past. He sustains and this involves an uninterrupted series of creating.
 
SANITY SAYS:
The how is more important than the why. If all things were made by chance and not by God, then it follows that the why is answered by saying, "It's random." That is actually a reason. The reason for something can be no reason. We do not look for a why in many things. If I don't win the lottery I don't ask, "Why not me?" So why ask about the origins of things?
 
CHRISTIANS:
Atheists like to shift the burden of proof from themselves to their debating opponents. The believer in God must prove or defend the existence of God. The atheist assumes that the universe either always existed or appeared by accident or chance. The atheist will not try to prove or defend this. Many atheists and believers are agreed that you cannot prove God or atheism 100%.

Some atheists do say that we can know that God does not exist.
 
SANITY SAYS:
The atheist knows that there could be something similar to God but which is not the personal God of perfect goodness and power and therefore not a God at all. The atheist can agree with religion that this entity is a mystery. The atheist has more choice than the theory of an accidental universe or the theory of an eternal universe.
 
Proving God is certainly impossible so the burden of proof is on the believer.
 
Not all impossible things are equally impossible.

CHRISTIANS:
Belief in God helps us to be more positive and optimistic for he is with us by our side
 
SANITY SAYS:
Religion is forced to tell this lie these days in order to make atheism look antisocial and to hide the fact that the belief has nothing to commend it. The doctrine can hardly be described by them as espousing optimism when they hold that he sends some people to Hell forever. Better that there be no God than that happen. They are so malicious that they refuse to admit that. Also belief does nothing to prevent depression and sickness. It only makes depressed people worse to tell them they should find peace in God meaning its their own fault for not having peace. We should do good for itself and not because there is a God. If we don't then we are doing good for the sake of dogma and not good - the good is really false goodness. If the belief is just for keeping us in line then why care what people believe as long as they believe in some force maybe even karma that returns wrong for wrong or metes out punishment? To promote God then would be a sign of having greater interest in getting people to flatter you by believing what you believe than in keeping them good. You only can believe in God. Suffering is proven to exist and God is not and it is evil to condone suffering for a belief. It is simply inexcusable to come up with a doctrine that requires you to condone God allowing suffering. Its even worse when that doctrine fails to cause people to do good. People are going to do good anyway.

CHRISTIANS:
Jesus taught that the most important commandment of all is to love God above all things and with all ones heart and the second commandment is to love ones neighbour as oneself.
 
SANITY SAYS:
A belief is clearly put before people. It is callous to do that. No matter how much a Christian does for others, if he loves God the way Jesus wanted, he or she is only using people to please God. It is not real love for them. Jesus said that if you don't visit prisoners for example it is really God you are not visiting. That highlights the point. If there is a choice between loving God and loving neighbour clearly the neighbour should lose out if Jesus is right. The doctrine that both loves go together is only meant for people who can do one and the other.
 
CHRISTIANS:
God loves you.

SANITY SAYS:
To love someone because they can give you money, happiness or health or anything is not real love. A God that enjoys perfect happiness cannot lose it. He can never know he really loves you. You cannot feel happy about his love.
 
Doing good because God HAS been good to you is no better than doing good to get something off him. Its the same thing in reverse.
 
CHRISTIANS:
We love Jesus with all our hearts and souls and minds for he is God.
 
SANITY SAYS:
If he is not then they are worshipping as God what is not God at all. Some use the excuse, "But if Jesus is not God, it is really God we intend to worship when we worship Jesus." That isn't even coherent. I cannot expect praise and say I gave my wife a birthday card if I give my wife's birthday card to the wrong woman. It was still not given to my wife.
 
If the excuse were valid, then it should be the major teaching of the Church and the New Testament but it is not. Do they not care if people accidently worship the wrong thing as God? If the teaching were valid you would need to be aware of it to avoid the sentiment, "I will worship Jesus as God whether he is God or not and whether or not God is pleased."
 
CHRISTIANS:
God is a mystery.
 
SANITY SAYS:
 
The chief reason that God is called a mystery is that Christians do not want you to see if evil and suffering contradict the love of God. No truly good person would say a child molester did right and it is a mystery regardless of how it looks and how much suffering happens.
 
The problem with seeing God as a mystery is that you end up like an agnostic not a believer. The agnostic says God is unknowable so we cannot know if the God idea makes sense and if there is a God.
 
CHRISTIANS:
Heaven is a state of great happiness caused by being with God for all eternity
 
SANITY SAYS:
Many of the saints reported that they felt terrible though God was with them. They reported decades of depression called the dark night of the soul. The happiness does not come from knowing God but must be implanted by him for happiness is a power. Religion says Heaven is about being with God who is good and not about being happy though the happiness will be given to us. From that it follows that anybody who is comforted by Heaven in their suffering is after the happiness more than God and is sinning and so will not get to Heaven. The Church offers a futile heaven and a superficial salvation.
 
CHRISTIANS:
The universe like the Bible shows forth the glory and goodness of God
 
SANITY SAYS:
Then why do you try to do better than him by vetting couples who intend to adopt children?
 
CHRISTIANS:
God gives babies to anybody whether they are suited to having a family or not.
  
John was forced by the man who threatened to kill John's family to rob the bank so he is not guilty of sin
 
And you accept the repentance of people on their deathbed as valid when they panic that they might go to Hell for all eternity as if it were a free sane act.

God does not need to actually send punishment to a person, sin takes care of the punishment itself. For example, if you have unrestricted sex with random strangers you will get diseases and end up depressed.

Some Christians are very charming to sinners. They will say it is up to God to judge the sinners and not them. Stupid people are pleased to hear that - it makes them feel accepted and not judged. But read what the Christian is saying: "You could be as bad as the Devil himself inside or you might not have the black heart you seem to have and might be flawed but nice inside. I don't know. That is why I don't hate you and want to see you suffer - I am not flattering you or sincerely praising you, I am only giving you the benefit of the doubt." Is that really that nice and pleasant? Christians still try to come across as sweet but you must see that for the manipulation it is.And to say that sin has its bad results attached to it so that God does not do anything is not going to help people stop sinning. The promiscuous person who believes it is a sin to be promiscuous could still end up better off than the promiscuous person who does not know its a sin. The latter does not suffer because he or she means to sin or sins. The Church knows fine well that punishment and sin go together is nonsense.

CHRISTIANS:
Prayer makes us more virtuous
 
SANITY SAYS:
The apostle James says its no good to tell a poor person who has nothing that you wish them well and to keep warm and eat well. He says that faith without good works is as useless as that. A lot of people will give good wishes to people and do nothing for them - they want to feel they are good people but have no interest in being truly good. Compare James teaching to the Catholic who recites in the creed that there is one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church and who makes no effort to bring people into the Church. James would say that his recitation is useless. All Catholics are doing by praying and going to Mass is reinforcing their hypocrisy and turning it into a habit.
 
CHRISTIANS:
Prayer is simply a relationship with God. It is not about us changing God but about us resolving earnestly to become more like him.
 
SANITY SAYS:
Trying to change God is blasphemous. A perfect God will do what is good because it is good and not because he was asked to do it. Hardly any believers understand this and they are in fact insulting God by their prayers and expressing their own arrogance.
 
Nothing helps your relationship with God but prayer. Miracles and revelations from God and sacraments do nothing unless you pray.

CHRISTIANS: We must pray and thank God for what he gives us.  God is all powerful and doesn't need our thanks. Rights are based on needs and since God doesn't need it he doesn't have the right to our thanks. If we thank God for our sake and not for his then that is not thanks at all. It contradicts the Bible which says that we must love consists not in us loving God but God loving us (1 John 4:10) meaning that only God is capable of real love and our love is so much inferior that it hardly counts. Christians commonly teach, "Thank God though he doesn't need it because it is good for you to exercise gratitude."
 
SANITY SAYS:

We will find it hard to be thankful to a God that does not need it. God is a dehumanising concept. The pagans with semi-human gods had more sense than the Jews, Muslims and Christians.

 

CHRISTIANS:

God does miracles - he raised Jesus from the dead. That is not naturally possible so its supernatural.  A miracle is an event that is not naturally possible - only God could do it. In other words, a power greater than nature can do it.

 

SANITY SAYS:

This assumes that God - and God can only be described as a non-corporeal being and not an entity made of matter or energy as we understand them - can act on what is physical. It is a rule of logic that two totally different kinds may not be able to affect one another. God would be totally different say from a grain of sand.
 
A miracle is really an act of magic done by God. Religion bizarrely claims that magic is to be assumed to be nonsense except when we think that God does it. That is hardly fair!
 
The Church says that its not fair to dismiss miracle testimonies from reliable honest people. The Church says these testimonies are evidence but not proof that anything miraculous has happened. Logically, the testimony of somebody you know matters more than the testimony of people who lived centuries ago. Its stronger evidence just because you know the person. But this paves the way for anybody to lie. The good liar rarely gets caught. If a trusted friend tells you of an apparition of Mary he experienced that told him that reincarnation was true and free love was holy it would follow that you should believe him if you believe in miracles and you should base a religion on the teachings he said he got.
 
Miracles lead to the idolatry of believing people who say, "God said this through a miracle." That is not believing God. Also, you cannot believe because of the evidence for the miracle for you pick and choose what miracles you want to follow. All you care about is what you want to believe.

Apparitions of Mary sometimes show strange behaviour - at least in some ways they behave like hallucinations. Take for example the Lourdes entity getting Bernadette to eat dirt.
 
The Church says that Jesus rising from the dead proves miracles happen. It does not. Perhaps there was some scientific genius then who was able to make him seem to be dead and then revive him and heal him rapidly.
 
If Jesus rose from the dead that could prove this in the same way as seeing a computer proves that technological knowledge and skill produced it. It is more natural to assume unknown or lost super-science than a miracle.

Miracles supposedly vindicate the true religion - God does them as signs to show us where the truth is. But religion is lies so they must be lies too if they are really about attempting to vindicate. Even if one religion is true, there are so many different religions that we can understandably trust none of them.