# God must be a sadist **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 25, 2012, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080 "2012-12-25T01:04:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/241 "2013-01-16T17:29:15Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Because of this: > > She wasn’t the first person to idealize suffering. You’ll have to expand on this. If Mother Teresa was a sadist, that means the Christian God should be understood as a sadist? Because the Christian God should be understood as a sadist, Mother Teresa’s actions were compatible with Christianity? I honestly don’t know what you mean here. > [@Marley23](#): > > Yes. _That’s_ a fringe view. Agreed. > [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t think that’s what **QuickSilver** was talking about. He was saying you’re picking ideas that support your view and ignoring the fact that a lot of people believe otherwise. I agree that religious beliefs evolve and Christian views have certainly changed over time. That’s why fundamentalism got started, of course. I don’t think so, because **QuickSilver** was talking about **pchaos** , by name: > [@QuickSilver](#): > > We may have come a long way since the vengeful god of yore, but for **pchaos** to claim that he does not wish to be part of religion that contains a sadistic god is simply picking sweet cherries among the sour fruit. I understood **QuickSilver** to mean that **pchaos** takes the parts of the Bible he/she likes (the afterlife, for instance) and discards the parts he/she doesn’t (God’s cruelty). This is a valid criticism of Christians, I suppose, that they don’t embrace all the tenets of their holy book. However, this criticism is true of effectively ALL Christians, even the fundamentalists you mentioned. I would wager that the number of people in America that would like to stone to death those who break Sabbath or get married as though a virgin when not a virgin, or that menstruating women [must give two turtle-doves or pigeons to a priest to sacrifice to make her “clean” again on the eighth day of her menstruation](http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(American_Standard)/Leviticus#15) is probably under 100. > [@Marley23](#): > > So this wasn’t really true, then, was it? Ok, I see your point. Amended: That’s what modern Christianity is, the sweet cherries: the words and works of Christ, a social club, and a tool to support or condemn things you like or dislike, such as tolerance of homosexuals. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/242 "2013-01-16T17:37:15Z")
> [@simster](#): > > These are all actions that describe a vengeful and petty god that seems to take pleasure in the death and destruction of others that disagree with him or his “chosen people” . > > Since alot of misery is associated with “God’s plan” - it must follow that the majority of his followers think that “God’s plan” requires misery - and since ‘God’ is omnipotent and omniscient, he not only has the power to prevent said misery, he must take some ‘pleasure’ in it happening since it is ‘his plan’. > > QED - ‘God’ is a sadist - But that’s attributing human motives and emotions to a non-human being, that is beyond human understanding. If you accept that there is a God, and that this God is omnipotent and omniscient, then you must also accept that this God is beyond your ability to comprehend, as a mortal human. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/243 "2013-01-16T17:38:50Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > You’ll have to expand on this. Let me make sure I understand what you’re saying, then: you’re arguing that her views just aren’t representative of Christianity at large, right? Because calling a god who loves human suffering (and caused it) sadistic is not that much of a stretch. > [@](#): > > I understood **QuickSilver** to mean that **pchaos** takes the parts of the Bible he/she likes (the afterlife, for instance) and discards the parts he/she doesn’t (God’s cruelty). This is a valid criticism of Christians, I suppose, that they don’t embrace all the tenets of their holy book. It’s a valid criticism of all religious people- we don’t disagree about that. But I think they should be willing to admit it. > [@](#): > > That’s what modern Christianity is, the sweet cherries: the words and works of Christ, a social club, and a tool to support or condemn things you like or dislike, such as tolerance of homosexuals. That’s more accurate. Now how do you differentiate between the extreme stuff and that new clause? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/244 "2013-01-16T17:52:18Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Let me make sure I understand what you’re saying, then: you’re arguing that her views just aren’t representative of Christianity at large, right? Because calling a god who loves human suffering (and caused it) sadistic is not that much of a stretch. Her practices aren’t representative of Christian\* practices. See: the [600+ hospitals of the Catholic Heath Association](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Health_Association_of_the_United_States). - I don’t claim to speak to non-American Christian practice or belief. > [@Marley23](#): > > It’s a valid criticism of all religious people- we don’t disagree about that. But I think they should be willing to admit it. **pchaos** admitted it, for one. And since for the time being religion isn’t going anywhere, I’d much rather it evolve with the times than not. > [@Marley23](#): > > That’s more accurate. Now how do you differentiate between the extreme stuff and that new clause? The same way you spot all extemist views, I suppose: the radicality of the view and its fringe support. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/245 "2013-01-16T17:58:58Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Her practices aren’t representative of Christian\* practices. See: the [600+ hospitals of the Catholic Heath Association](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Health_Association_of_the_United_States). I know there are plenty of Christian-run hospitals- although that does raise the question of why she didn’t open some hospitals in India. That doesn’t address the view of suffering. > [@](#): > > And since for the time being religion isn’t going anywhere, I’d much rather it evolve with the times than not. I agree. > [@](#): > > The same way you spot all extemist views, I suppose: the radicality of the view and its fringe support. So modern Christianity is “the words and works of Christ, a social club, and a tool to support or condemn things you like or dislike, such as tolerance of homosexuals or any number of other potentially extreme views as long as they are embraced by a significant chunk of believers?” ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/246 "2013-01-16T18:00:29Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > But that’s attributing human motives and emotions to a non-human being, that is beyond human understanding. If you accept that there is a God, and that this God is omnipotent and omniscient, then you must also accept that this God is beyond your ability to comprehend, as a mortal human. I’m basing it on his (‘God’) commandments and actions as recorded in his ‘Holy Book’ - that in and of itself is enough to call God a ‘sadist’ - Furhter - if we are to accept the ‘Christian’ notion that “God” has a plan and is responsible for everything that is happening, then it follows that if its his ‘plan’ he is taking pleasure in it being executed. Further - while I accept the notion that I am ‘incapable’ of comprehending said ‘God’, I am still fully capable of judging his actions and his plan on the terms it (god) has granted us. If we were , in fact , created in his image - and those attributes that would call another human a ‘sadist’ applies to God - then God is a sadist. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/247 "2013-01-16T18:15:05Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I know there are plenty of Christian-run hospitals- although that does raise the question of why she didn’t open some hospitals in India. That doesn’t address the view of suffering. Are you asking what the mainstream Christian view of suffering is? > [@Marley23](#): > > So modern Christianity is “the words and works of Christ, a social club, and a tool to support or condemn things you like or dislike, such as tolerance of homosexuals or any number of other potentially extreme views as long as they are embraced by a significant chunk of believers?” Yes. As I’ve said, Christianity is highly mutable. How else would you judge what Christianity was, than some combination of the Bible and actual practice? Neither is sufficient on its own. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/248 "2013-01-16T18:16:46Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > I understood **QuickSilver** to mean that **pchaos** takes the parts of the Bible he/she likes (the afterlife, for instance) and discards the parts he/she doesn’t (God’s cruelty). This is a valid criticism of Christians, I suppose, that they don’t embrace all the tenets of their holy book. Close. I’m okay (in this context) with the cherry picking of tenets; for Christians as well as for any other religious group. What I was pointing out to **pchaos** (and anyone of a similar mindset) was that disavowing one self from documented cruelty, by and of god’s hand/command, does not make the whole premise of “god is a sadist” suddenly go away. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/249 "2013-01-16T18:19:28Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Are you asking what the mainstream Christian view of suffering is? I’d like your opinion on what the mainstream Christian view of suffering is, yes. > [@](#): > > Yes. But not the hellfire stuff and conquest stuff. Just Christ, a social club, and a tool to praise or condemn anything sufficient numbers of people don’t like. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/250 "2013-01-16T18:23:47Z")
> [@simster](#): > > I’m basing it on his (‘God’) commandments and actions as recorded in his ‘Holy Book’ - that in and of itself is enough to call God a ‘sadist’ - Furhter - if we are to accept the ‘Christian’ notion that “God” has a plan and is responsible for everything that is happening, then it follows that if its his ‘plan’ he is taking pleasure in it being executed. > > Further - while I accept the notion that I am ‘incapable’ of comprehending said ‘God’, I am still fully capable of judging his actions and his plan on the terms it (god) has granted us. > > If we were , in fact , created in his image - and those attributes that would call another human a ‘sadist’ applies to God - then God is a sadist. Only if the whole point of the “plan” is to inflict suffering for God’s pleasure. If you accept that you’re incapable of comprehending the hypothetical God, how would you comprehend the plan either? ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/251 "2013-01-16T18:36:55Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Only if the whole point of the “plan” is to inflict suffering for God’s pleasure. If you accept that you’re incapable of comprehending the hypothetical God, how would you comprehend the plan either? I comprehend the plan based on its affect on the population - either direct (deaths, suffering caused) or indirect (actions of followers that also cause, that are not thwarted by said ‘God’). I do not have to understand the ‘plan’ to be able to understand the affects of said ‘plan’. Since the ‘plan’ seems to require the suffering (or suffering is attributed to be part of ‘God’s plan’ by his followers) - in any event, God is sufficiently capable to prevent said suffering - therefore he must enjoy it at some level - either becuase it causes his plan to move forward or because it is a necessary part of his plan. Since he can prevent it - and does not - he is a sadist - regardless of any perceived reward for his ‘faithful’. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/252 "2013-01-16T18:39:34Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Only if the whole point of the “plan” is to inflict suffering for God’s pleasure. If you accept that you’re incapable of comprehending the hypothetical God, how would you comprehend the plan either? I’m over simplifying but, if I manage a project and want things to go well and according to the project “plan”, I don’t set my team up to fail to then bring my wrath upon their heads. I make adjustments and corrections before things get that far. Else I’d be forced to regularly drown the bastards and start fresh. Unless I enjoy that sort of thing. Though it can get expensive in terms of flood insurance. I imagine an all knowing and all powerful god would be able to do a much better job than me in similar circumstance. You know… depending on the project goals and objectives. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/253 "2013-01-16T18:39:41Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Close. > > I’m okay (in this context) with the cherry picking of tenets; for Christians as well as for any other religious group. What I was pointing out to **pchaos** (and anyone of a similar mindset) was that disavowing one self from documented cruelty, by and of god’s hand/command, does not make the whole premise of “god is a sadist” suddenly go away. Ok, I understand you. I agree, a Christian must still address the issue, though “That’s the not the God I believe in” seems adequate to me. > [@Marley23](#): > > I’d like your opinion on what the mainstream Christian view of suffering is, yes. Well, Jesus accepted suffering in order to redeem mankind. Some amount of self-denial and asceticism is viewed as conducive to spiritual growth, and decadence and hedonism is destructive of spiritual growth, but amongst Protestants, at least, salvation comes from [faith alone](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_alone), not works, so nothing like that is _required_ for salvation. Not many Catholics in my area, so I’m much more versed in Protestantism. > [@Marley23](#): > > But not the hellfire stuff and conquest stuff. Just Christ, a social club, and a tool to praise or condemn anything sufficient numbers of people don’t like. Ok, now two things are being conflated. 1. What is Christianity? Some combination of the Bible and actual practices. 1. What is Christianity right now, in the United States? The words and works of Christ, a social club, and a tool to support or condemn things you like or dislike. Generally, you won’t hear much of necromancers and bloody conquests, much more focus on salvation, virtues, and the lessons of Christ: turn the other cheek, love thy neighbor, and such. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/254 "2013-01-16T18:44:12Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Only if the whole point of the “plan” is to inflict suffering for God’s pleasure. But God created suffering, and Christian doctrine values suffering as a way to know God and Jesus. Is that supposed to be something God dislikes? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/255 "2013-01-16T18:46:15Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Ok, I understand you. I agree, a Christian must still address the issue, though “That’s the not the God I believe in” seems adequate to me. But it is the God you believe in. That’s the point. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/256 "2013-01-16T18:46:19Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > I’m over simplifying but, if I manage a project and want things to go well and according to the project “plan”, I don’t set my team up to fail to then bring my wrath upon their heads. I make adjustments and corrections before things get that far. Else I’d be forced to regularly drown the bastards and start fresh. Unless I enjoy that sort of thing. Though it can get expensive in terms of flood insurance. > > I imagine an all knowing and all powerful god would be able to do a much better job than me in similar circumstance. You know… depending on the project goals and objectives. Good way of putting it. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/257 "2013-01-16T18:48:06Z")
> [@simster](#): > > I comprehend the plan based on its affect on the population - either direct (deaths, suffering caused) or indirect (actions of followers that also cause, that are not thwarted by said ‘God’). > > I do not have to understand the ‘plan’ to be able to understand the affects of said ‘plan’. > > Since the ‘plan’ seems to require the suffering (or suffering is attributed to be part of ‘God’s plan’ by his followers) - in any event, God is sufficiently capable to prevent said suffering - therefore he must enjoy it at some level - either becuase it causes his plan to move forward or because it is a necessary part of his plan. > > Since he can prevent it - and does not - he is a sadist - regardless of any perceived reward for his ‘faithful’. What if things aren’t going perfectly ‘to plan’, due to free will? Then it’s humanity that’s wanting, not God. What if there is no “plan”? It’s not [as settled a point](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination) of Christianity as you might think. I’m surely capable of preventing some suffering. I could sell everything I own and fly to Africa and starting handing out food and condoms. If I don’t, does that mean I enjoy the suffering of others on some level? Or that I have other responsibilities, just as God could hold maintaining free will to be an ultimate responsibility? > [@QuickSilver](#): > > I’m over simplifying but, if I manage a project and want things to go well and according to the project “plan”, I don’t set my team up to fail to then bring my wrath upon their heads. I make adjustments and corrections before things get that far. Else I’d be forced to regularly drown the bastards and start fresh. Unless I enjoy that sort of thing. Though it can get expensive in terms of flood insurance. > > I imagine an all knowing and all powerful god would be able to do a much better job than me in similar circumstance. You know… depending on the project goals and objectives. Exactly, the goals and objectives are largely unknowable, if you accept an omnipotent and omniscient divine being. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/258 "2013-01-16T18:50:27Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > What if things aren’t going perfectly ‘to plan’, due to free will? Then it’s humanity that’s wanting, not God. Except free will was created and given to people by God. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/259 "2013-01-16T18:51:21Z")
God: A poorly written fantasy character in public domain. Christianity: One of many groups of overly dedicated God-LARPers that take the game far too seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2013, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080/260 "2013-01-16T18:55:12Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > But God created suffering, and Christian doctrine values suffering as a way to know God and Jesus. Is that supposed to be something God dislikes? But it’s not suffering as an end to itself; THAT would be sadism. > [@QuickSilver](#): > > But it is the God you believe in. That’s the point. I agree that holding such a view means that you cannot reasonably hold that the Bible is the perfect Word of God. If you are willing to let that idea go, then you can pick and choose tenets if you wish. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/god-must-be-a-sadist/645080.md?page=14)