HOME   People do good because they are human, not because they are religious! 

Do not give God any credit for the good they do, they did it!

 

RELIGIOUS BELIEF MAKES HATRED MORE FIERCE
 
Hate is the urge to hurt another person just because you want to see them hurt. Most who discourage hate argue that it is to be avoided for it gets too easily out of control and your perception gets distorted more and more all the time as it becomes a habit. Your view of others becomes polluted and bitter. Most people see hate as a Pandora's Box and this is their main reason to oppose hate. Such a view suggests that hate is not bad in itself as long as it can be kept within boundaries. This makes you suspicious of those who claim to believe in hating the sin and loving the sinner - they are trying to smugly hide their hate and are examples of passive aggressive hate. And there are people who seem - who seem! a seem does not amount to an are! - capable of restraining hate. Incredibly, religion claims to be good while it makes the desire to hurt sin or hurt people far more fierce.
 
God is supposed to be the only perfectly and absolutely good being. He supposedly made us and it is our duty to him as our maker to obey him. Disobedience to God is called sin. God will judge sin if he is fair.
 
God expects us to obey his moral code. A moral code is based on the idea that must do good or suffer punishment. A moral rule is not a rule at all unless it compels through the threat of punishment for disobedience.
 
The good person is like a moral person but the two are not the same. The good person may be totally anti-punishment. The moral person has to believe in punishment.
 
Nobody likes moralisers. Yet they have been fooled by Christianity to worship one! Strange world!
 
Christians say that if you do not love your neighbour who you see then you do not love the God you cannot see. If you say you do then you are a liar. But this presupposes that you have to obey God to love him. But what about wives who do not obey their husbands and who undoubtedly love them? The love of God is about control thus it is a nasty and abusive love. Like the love a brute uses to manipulate his wife. If God's love is to be praised then hate is not wrong. The Christian faith slanders the person who sees through the notion that love of God and neighbour have to go together. The person is called a liar for exposing the truth.
 
Christ said that you must love your neighbour as yourself. This does not actually say we must love ourselves. It only assumes we do love ourselves. It does not indicate approval for loving yourself. Loving yourself is so natural that it cannot be commanded. It is as absurd and impossible as commanding your dog to breathe. Even those who have bad feelings towards themselves love themselves - they just have warped self-love. The commandment implies that the neighbour actually comes first. How? Though we cannot be commanded to love ourselves, part of us would like to be. Also, if my self-love is warped, I am not allowed to inflict warped love on others. In that case, the commandment means, "If your warped love for yourself makes you want to starve yourself, give the food to your neighbour because you want them to benefit from real healthy love."
 
Such a teaching is repulsive to us. We will end up with no need for encouragement to hate if we really take it seriously.
 
Suppose God and the Church find it regretful that somebody is in Hell. What they regret is that the person abused his will. What they don't regret is that owing to the choice he made the person is there. They hold the person deserves it. It is foolish to warm to God and the Church when they lament the soul being in Hell for that is not the whole story. They have found a way to celebrate it too. If I regret the fact that the murderer of my child abused his will for his sake and the child's, that is not only compatible with gloating over his fate which is rotting in jail. IT IS THE REASON I CAN GLOAT! 
 
Christians like to say they love the sinner and hate and judge only the sin. They say they do not condemn or judge the sinner or the person but that they leave that to God. They say that we must love sinners not by judging them but by judging their sins. So they say that to judge a person as bad is to hate that person. Their God is a God of hate. If they were honest they would not pretend that judging an act as wrong or bad or without excuse is not to judge the sinner.
 
They are pretending that they and their God love even the worst of sinners unconditionally. Unconditional love means that the good person and the bad person are loved the same. Whatever we do will not reduce the love God has for us. It seems that no official Catholic Church document ever taught that God loves like that (page 8, Catholic Voice, 9 May 2010). The Bible says that God loves his servants who are faithful (1 Kings 8:23). Why didn't the author write that God loves everybody? If he loves unconditionally then it does not matter to his love if we are faithful or not. The Bible is trying to encourage people to be faithful by saying that God loves the faithful. That implies he does not love the unfaithful. In John 14:21-23, Jesus says that God loves those who obey Jesus. These qualifiers imply that the doctrine of unconditional love is false. Proverbs 6 says that God hates the heart that schemes. This is another way of saying the person is hated. Zechariah 8:17 says that God hates whoever plots evil against his neighbour and who takes false oaths. Malachi 1:3 and Romans 9:13 teach that God hates Esau. Jeremiah 16:5 has God saying he has taken his love and his compassion away from his people. Hosea 9:15 says that God hates the wicked of Gilgal. He says he will no longer love them. Paul says that nothing can separate us from the love of God in Romans 8. He lists the things that cannot separate us from God such as creatures or calmatives. Sin is not in the list so it is simply untrue that God will keep loving us if we sin. John 15 has Jesus saying that he will only love those who keep his commandments. He uses the word if, the commandments are a condition. The Bible never teaches unconditional love. The Church says that you cannot get to God unless you repent your sins. That is a condition for having a relationship with God. The unconditional love idea clearly implies that God has a relationship with you and if you do not respond that relationship still exists. Its a one way relationship.
 
The Christians say that if you live only for pleasure, you distort and suppress your other instincts such as the desire to be virtuous, useful to others, educated and so on. Thus you make yourself unhappy in the long run for you make yourself unfulfilled over fulfilling one instinct. Clearly if this is true, then God has set up human psychology for this to happen. I'd far rather have a God that vindictively punished directly than one that played games like that. Why is God so ashamed of punishing and why does he have to make it look so self-inflicted? It has more to do with him than what the person has done to themselves.
 
It’s only natural that the more you love God the more you will hate anything that he condemns. If you love your girlfriend a lot you will despise anybody doing anything bad to her. The more you love the perfect God the more the idea of finding happiness in a person seems distasteful. You will end up doing good for others not because you have any warmth for them but because God wants it. Obviously, you have to hate others to love God and you have to hate yourself. Admittedly, the hatred is pushed down into the subconscious but it is still there. God commands that he must be cherished above all things which demands an extreme hatred of people on the subconscious level and hatred of anything that leads them away from the will of God.
 
An unbeliever would hate an evil action intensely. But a believer in God is expected to hate it far worse. Belief in God adds insult to injury for a crime against God is very serious for he is such a good being.
 
You can believe that you love evildoers but hate their evil but if you believe that evil is sin which means it offends God you will naturally have to hate the evil more and more so God increases the hatred towards sinners. Belief in God is evil and anything that promotes belief in God is evil too.
 
What comes first, loving the sinner or hating the sin? Since God, being the best being of all, comes first and commands that he be the reason we do all we do it has to be hating the sin. But this will stupefy and strangle the love you have for the sinner. The hatred for sin which corresponds to love for God has to swamp any affection for the sinner and destroy it. It is just like how love can be blind and condone evil and make you a bad judge of character. The same principle is at work here. You have to loathe sin for God hates it infinitely so the hatred for it has to be very intense. It follows that if you cannot love the sinner and hate the sin then religion is incitement to hatred. Love is made into a polite and hidden way of hating somebody’s guts. It is particularly vicious and crafty to do that for it avoids detection. The hatred often came out when the believers had the freedom to do to their enemies what they had always wanted. Miracles are supposed to be signs from God that show the doctrines of a religion are favoured. This tells us that if they happen then Satan is responsible.
 
You could believe in a God who rewards but who never punishes. To believe in a God that does punish is to believe in God out of spite. The desire is to see people suffer for their wrongdoing because if God does not punish you can believe whatever you want. People do find more comfort in magical items like rose quartz crystals than God.
 
It is hypocritical to hate somebody’s harmless sin say of homosexuality. Christians say it is not for God will punish the sin. But not necessarily. If the act is harmless it should not be punished. Others say that the sin hurts God which is a lie for God cannot be hurt or harmed. The Church rejects this lie (page 21, The Atonement: Mystery of Reconciliation). So it is ridiculous to say you love somebody who loves his harmless sin while you hate his sin that means so much to him. It is insincere. Christianity and Islam agree that most people prefer to sin than do good which means that the idea of hating sin will inevitably lead the egotists to such revulsion against sinners that they will attack them. This happens all the time when homosexuals are condemned. It gives aggressive people more of an incentive to beat them senseless. In this light, loving the sinner and hating the sin is meaningless for whatever is felt for the sinner it is not love.

It is also a scandal that many religionists do not oppose wrongs like stealing or murder because they harm us but because God forbids them. When you hate theft or murder for a figment of the imagination that is hating other people who could do or who do such things. It is despising them in favour of an article of blind faith namely God. Also to interpret God in accordance with the tenets of a blind faith religion or a religion with insufficient evidence is offensive to him and is closing him out of any chance he has of enabling you of performing the miracle of loving the sinner and hating the sin.
 
When loving the sinner and hating the sin is not possible it follows that there can be no God for he had no justification for making us for our capacity to love was always his only excuse for all the disasters he allows to happen. To say God exists is to automatically say you should love the sinner and hate the sin so the God belief is meant only for hypocrites. To even suggest that God might exist is still endangering human integrity.
 
Real love does not turn into hate. Christianity by saying that doing serious evil is an almighty insult against such a wonderful God, that it deserves everlasting torment in Hell and that it gives others a bad example that could draw them to Hell is making it hard for love not to turn into hate. It would be a betrayal of your friends and loved ones to embrace such a faith. The love will make you suffer. Love shouldn't do that. It should make you happy to help the other person when the other person is going astray or in trouble. Christianity preaches love but then puts barriers in its path. It encourages hypocritical love not real love.
 
Christians say that to love the sinner is to hate the sin and vice versa. Hate the sin and love the sinner means we must judge the sinner fairly and condemn sin when we see it. To not condemn the sin and to judge it is to hate the sinner. Surely then the more sin we see in a person the better and especially if there is a God who deserves perfect service and obedience. Why? If hating the sin is another way of loving the sinner as the Church says, then the more you see a person as a sinner the more you love them. Even if you mistakenly think they are worse than they are that is brilliant. That the Church does not draw this conclusion is proof that it knows fine well that to hate the sin is to want to maliciously hurt the sinner.
 
God by definition is the only thing that matters. An all-perfect being needs to be given the only place in the heart never mind the first place. To give a place to any creature including yourself would be to refuse him the adoration he is entitled to just because of what he is. Believers in God have to treat belief in God not a belief but as knowledge. You will always hold something back from God in you only have faith in him for faith is not certainty. So believers say that their faith is a form of mystical knowledge. Such a notion makes a precedent for religious fanaticism. Islam is one religion that claims to give knowledge of what God is like and this knowledge is in the Koran. Christianity has a different version of what God is like and what he wants. If faith in a religion is knowledge then it follows that if your religion urges you to execute gay people then you must do it. Strangely, Christianity says that faith is knowledge and then contradicts this by saying God does miracles as signs. If you know in your heart that the faith is true then what do you need signs for? Are the signs only for the unbelievers? But it is only those who have already decided that miracles are signs - have faith already - that regard miracles as signs.
 
 
To use God as a means of making people live moral lives fails for his hatred of sin means he hates the sinner for if you hate the sin as he requires then you hate the sinner. Why? Because a sin is not what a person does but what a person becomes because the person has to become evil. Doing wrong without meaning to be evil is not sin but becoming evil is sin. A few Christians reject the hypocrisy of loving the bad person and hating their badness. They teach, "Sometimes it is said that God hates sin (impersonal) but loves the sinner (personal), but this attempt to mitigate the wrath of God is not really faithful to the biblical witness. Wrongdoing in the Bible is never disassociated from the wrongdoers, who are fully responsible for their actions. Retribution cannot be shifted to an impersonal level without it ceasing to be what it is. We cannot imagine a judge excusing a murderer who says he is sorry and offers to clean up the mess, as if the crime were all that mattered. However sincere his repentance might be, the murderer would still be held responsible for his sin, just as we are held responsible for our sins before God" (page 222, The Doctrine of God, Gerald Bray, IVP, Illinois, 1993). Christianity then should lead to hatred of sinners. If Christians were more coherent in their thinking then it clearly would do that easily and the world would drown in blood.
 
FINALLY
 
Sin is an immoral act forbidden by divine law. It implies you deserve punishment. This is not a helpful idea at all. Sin is a hindrance. So God is a hindrance. And the bigger the emphasis put on God the bigger the hindrance he is. His followers are hindrances. They hinder themselves and hinder others. What matters is not judging a person's actions as immoral or moral. What matters is not judging the person either. What matters is helping the person want to live a better life. To wish punishment on people for sin is worse than wishing it on them for having done harm.
 
An atheist does not believe that hurting another person offends God or offends God's law. The atheist should worry about what the hurting of another says about her or him and what it does to the other person and maybe that person's friends and family. The atheist thinks in terms of hurting others but not in terms of sin - sin is breaking the moral law of God. If atheists hurt another person, they mean to hurt that person. But if believers in God hurt another person, it is not just about what they did to that person. It is about God too and God comes first. So belief makes the intention of the believer to hurt far stronger than the intention of the unbeliever. Faith in God and faith in religion lead to making evil intentions more worthy of condemnation and invent sins which do not exist. It is evil to accuse a person of sinning when we should accuse them of having done wrong - there is a difference that matters hugely. You need proof before you can accuse somebody of a crime against God and that means proving God and that the "sin" be it sex before marriage or whatever really is a sin. Belief in sin and God and religion amplify your wrongful intentions. They make you more evil inside if not outside than you would be if you were an atheist.
 
THE WEB

www.shilohcommunitychurch.org/love_sinr.htm
TRUE OR FALSE? GOD LOVES THE SINNER BUT HATES THE SIN, FALSE, Errol Hale
 
www.ffrf.org/fttoday/back/hatred.html
With Perfect Hatred by Dan Barker
 
http://www.godhatesfags.com/
A Baptist anti-gay site
 
 
BOOKS CONSULTED

BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL, Friedrich Nietzsche, Penguin, London, 1990
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, Veritas, London, 1995
ECUMENICAL JIHAD, Peter Kreeft, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1996
GOD IS NOT GREAT, THE CASE AGAINST RELIGION, Christopher Hitchens, Atlantic Books, London, 2007
HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
HOW DOES GOD LOVE ME? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1986
IN DEFENCE OF THE FAITH, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1996
MADAME GUYON, MARTYR OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, Phyllis Thompson, Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1986
MORAL PHILOSOPHY, Joseph Rickaby SJ, Stonyhurst Philosophy Series, Longmans Green and Co, London, 1912
OXFORD DICTIONARY OF PHILOSOPHY, Simon Blackburn, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996
PRACTICAL ETHICS, Peter Singer, Cambridge University Press, England, 1994
PSYCHOLOGY, George A Miller, Penguin, London, 1991
REASON AND BELIEF, Brand Blanschard, George Allen and Unwin Ltd, 1974
REASONS FOR HOPE, Ed Jeffrey A Mirus, Christendom College Press, Virginia, 1982
THE ATONEMENT: MYSTERY OF RECONCILIATION, Kevin McNamara, Archbishop of Dublin, Veritas, Dublin, 1987
SINNERS IN THE HANDS OF AN ANGRY GOD, Jonathan Edwards, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, undated
THE BRIEF OF ST ANTHONY OF PADUA (Vol 44, No 4)
THE IMITATION OF CHRIST, Thomas A Kempis, Translated by Ronald Knox and Michael Oakley, Universe, Burns & Oates, London, 1963
THE LIFE OF ALL LIVING, Fulton J Sheen, Image Books, New York, 1979
THE NEW WALK, Captain Reginald Wallis, The Christian Press, Pembridge Villas, England, undated
THE PROBLEM OF PAIN, CS Lewis, Fontana, London, 1972
THE SATANIC BIBLE, Anton Szandor LaVey, Avon Books, New York, 1969
THE STUDENT’S CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Rev Charles Hart BA, Burns & Oates, London, 1961