Putting God on Trial

The immorality of divinity

You die. Your spirit ascends, and it transcends beyond. You meet God, your demiurge. He announces the commencement of your trial and judgment for a life of defiance and sin. “Prepare for your judgment,” the Lord says. Your response: “My judgment? Judged by whom? You, of all entities? You who have abandoned your creations in darkness? You have no moral authority to judge me. Who’s going to judge you?” You pause, already at terms with your condemnation since birth, and then add: “If anything, I should be the judge of you.”

If your instinctive response is to resent me for daring to conceive such blasphemy, then you are the primary intended audience for this article. If you stop reading, then good; you wouldn’t have gained anything by delving further, anyway. If, however, you decide to read this regardless, I promise you an expanded perspective; this is the only purpose of existence, after all.

“Nail in my head from my creator. You gave me life, now show me how to live!”

~ Audioslave

The virtue of blasphemy

Philosophy is blasphemy, and blasphemy is philosophy. If philosophy is a virtue, then so is blasphemy, even though, oftentimes, philosophy can be a vice.

You cannot have philosophy without blasphemy; without breaking down all law, authority, cherished self-assuredness, and dogma, not to destroy them, but to analyse and understand them.

Why?

Because you can’t claim to be virtuous unless you understand why you value virtue. If you pretend to be virtuous out of fear or conformity, then your performative sanctimony is meaningless, and you are as “virtuous” as an actor is the character he plays.

There can be no philosophy without intellectual honesty, and there can be no intellectual honesty without speaking truth to power. And there is no greater power to speak to in this reality than the overarching reality that parented ours, if such a thing even exists.

Speaking truth to power is hubris in most religions because, for religions, terror is a virtue. It’s one thing to be fearful of a sadist with more power over you, and it’s another to love, worship, and consider him the paradigm of morality solely on the fact that you’re petrified of him. This is Yahweh or Allah, by the way, the demon-god worshipped by a huge chunk of the population right now.

If those who command fear in you (and absolutely nothing else) are your moral compass, then you are already damned.

It is not blasphemy to point out the immorality of god. True blasphemy is characterising your god as a foreskin-obsessed lunatic with a desperate insecurity of needing your worship (your worship, of all beings), as if you were somehow cosmically important. Imagining your god as an insecure school bully in desperate need of your approval, as if your approval were what your god was missing, is peak hubris and self-deification.

This is hubris, this is peak pride, this is true blasphemy; imagining yourself to be so important that a god, no less, needs your approval. Your deadly sin is vanity.

Existential recap

All religions are simulation theory. They are all about some entity, whether conscious or unconscious, creating our underlying reality. Assuming this is the case, and that the infinite regress problem isn’t the case, then we are created with purpose, likely birthed from a reality less complex than ours. Isn’t this what the theory of evolution is, anyway?

Regardless, all religions are simulation theory or hypothesis. The only difference between simulation theory and religion is that religions presume to add a set of morals into the mix, which are to be enforced under the carrot and stick of a sadistic, tyrannical, bribing “god”; these divinely sourced “morals.”

Again, if your “morality” is driven only by fear, you are immoral; the worst kind. For example, the disgusting pornography of satanic Hebrew superstition has irrevocably poisoned the human spirit with retarded statements like this: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Proverbs 9:10). And no, “fear of god” does not mean reverence, because if you take in context the stories of Abraham, Job, Noa, Lot, and all the other poor souls the demon-god Yahweh tortured, you’ll swiftly realise that “fear of god” means absolute terror of god.

Anyway. If indeed some entity, whether a “god” or a geek in a computer lab, created this reality from their parent reality (which could even be worse or less complex than ours), then we understand that there was a need, a lack, a void in that parent reality; something that needed to be filled. This proves imperfection, lack of wholeness, and an inability to be satisfied without creating something new. The creator proves his imperfection by his act of creation. Whatever it may be, every parent-reality is poorer without its child-reality; otherwise, the child-reality would never have existed.

Human morality outperforms the demiurge’s

Humans demonstrate superior morality than whatever may have created this reality; undeniably, an intellectually honest observation of this reality supports this. Humans, despite our disgusting failings, have the capacity to show compassion, empathy, care, consideration, and voluntary self-sacrifice that no god of any religion has shown, let alone the deaf, blind, and negligent demiurge of this simulation. You want examples?

Here we go.

We understand animal welfare, even if our cruel, god-given nature is such that it constitutes animal food nutritious to us, while being morally conflicted under our compassion for living things. Regardless, we understand the need to be somewhat humane to the animals we enslave, breed, torment, and slaughter, the hypocrisy of which plagues us. I wonder if the demiurge is similarly plagued by the living nightmare it inflicts on us, especially so when it is this demiurge himself who designed our nature and our environment, and forced us into it.

What was that?

Is life not a nightmare to you? Perhaps you’re too blessed to realise, or you’re not aware enough. The more aware you are, the more depressed you are, which is why “Blessed are the poor in spirit”, and “the meek will inherit the earth”. And my favourite: “For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.” Ecclesiastes 1:18.

Observe life for most conscious, living things…

Here is a cat with the lower part of both its rear legs missing, having to walk on perpetual, festering wounds, bones crushing on ripped skin. What’s the point of that?

Video 1

Poor animal suffers with every living moment and doesn’t even have the means or understanding to commit suicide and escape. It’s a conscious thing that suffers with every breath and has no way of doing anything about it. Imagine this happening to a human with even more consciousness of pain and an affinity to assign meaning to pain. Yet a human, who was not responsible for this animal’s suffering, saw this animal, showed compassion, and rescued it. When did your god ever show compassion or rescue anyone, especially when there is no one more morally responsible for our suffering than our creator, who put us here, and can prevent our suffering? And still, people will prefer to believe that their shitty god chose to save a fat, corrupt, warmongering, pedo-protecting billionaire from a fake bullet than to save children from brutal rape and murder — I’m talking about the Trump cult who worship a rich guy while spitting in the face of their Christ who could not be clearer about rich people being denied entry into the kingdom of heaven. These are the hypocrites who presume to claim ownership of all that is holy and good in this world. Let that sink in.

Here are more examples of animals with crippling disabilities, condemned to live in a hell not of their choosing.

Video 2

Video 3

These are poor, sentient creatures, compelled and condemned to obey their biological programming, to labour pointlessly under harsh conditions… and for what? The amusement of the demiurge? The data generation of a cold simulation? The simulation has purpose and meaning for the demiurge, but what meaning is there for the data generators? What meaning is there for each of us, nodes in this matrix?

I chose animals as an example here because they project innocence, but lack the consciousness of a human. I don’t want to get into the horrors of children born to psychopathic parents; parents who brutalise, molest, and sell their children to other psychos. We’re talking about highly sentient beings, cursed with innocence as well as comprehension, having to endure a nightmarish life only to end in brutal murder for organ harvesting so that some demonic billionaire can live a couple extra pathetic years. And I won’t take the example of children born into perpetual war, whose psycho parents pride themselves on breeding child-soldiers for a petty political cause.

What’s the point of all that suffering? Why isn’t the entity who is responsible for this, has the power to prevent it, and chooses not to, not beholden to the same moral scrutiny than any of us? If anything, the more the power, the more the moral obligation and moral judgment. Is your god not powerful enough or not moral enough? Which is it?

---

Here’s another example.

Pregnant women understand that they are responsible for the life they grow in their bodies, even though they are not responsible for their nature; our biological imperatives, limitations, ailments, and genetic traits. Pregnant women understand that they can’t smoke or eat junk food, and that they should be mindful to protect this emerging innocent life, which is helplessly at the mercy of existence. And those pregnant women who smoke, take drugs, drink alcohol, and generally disrespect the life they are bringing into this world without ever asking it if it wanted to be born in the first place — born to such a mother, no less — are scorned. We, as a society, understand that such women are immoral. So why don’t we hold our demiurge or god to the same standard? Because we are afraid of it, and we tell ourselves that fear is a virtue. Fear is not a virtue.

Parents (the sane ones, at least) hold themselves accountable for and to their children. Good parents understand that they are responsible for their children’s happiness and success. When children fail, it is the parents’ responsibility. When children succeed, good parents claim none of the credit. This is what pure accountability and leadership look like.

Yet, our psychopathic image of “God” is of a piece-of-shit demon who takes all the credit for whatever petty, meaningless win we get in this pointless existence. In contrast, it takes none of the responsibility for our failings, as if it hadn’t created this world, hadn’t instilled in us disgustingly horrendous urges and needs, and hadn’t forced us into a hostile world of scarcity and antagonism where dog eats dog. And no false idol of deity represents this piece of shit better than Yahweh, the demon-god of Abraham.

Here are some memes that abundantly illustrate this point.

---

We understand that birth control and even spaying animals are morally justifiable strategies when circumstances don’t favour the potential offspring, when newborns will likely be condemned to experience a life of strife, scarcity, fear, hunger, and overall suffering. This proves we are morally superior to whatever created this reality in that we, at least some of us, have the foresight and consideration for the lives we bring into this world. God, or the demiurge, or whatever made this reality, no less, should be even more careful with the sentient being he or it condemns into this laughable creation. Should, that is, if he (or it) believes itself to be superior to us in every way. It isn’t. Morally, God is beneath us, demonstrably so.

Despite my dead dream of having a family, I now choose not to have children, since this belated clarity I received meant that the only women available to me now are either beyond childbearing capabilities or they wouldn’t make good mothers. Plus, I’m not even sure I’d make a good father, despite my commitment to peaceful, positive parenting. I choose not to bring a life into this world, condemned to suffer my horrible circumstances. I won’t repeat my parents’ mistakes, and I won’t repeat your God’s mistake.

Even some animals choose not to procreate in captivity, probably because they have a sense of decency not to bring any offspring into the same horrible circumstances they find themselves in, which is more than I can say about certain human cultures that think having kids to make them martyrs for petty political causes is somehow a virtue. Palestinians and Hebrews, again, I’m looking at you.

Conclusions

If speaking truth to power is a virtue, and blasphemy is speaking truth to ultimate power, then blasphemy is ultimate virtue.

Objection:

“Aren’t you afraid of what God might do to you for blaspheming?”

I don’t think I’m important enough to merit an audience with a god. I mean, scarcely anyone reads my substack shit, and most of my subscribers seem to be inert bots, judging from the lack of engagement. Why would I expect to have an audience with a god? Besides, why would my opinion, negative as it may be, matter to a god? You think highly of yourself if you think your opinion matters to a god and is important enough to merit an emotional response in a god.

Also, if you consider your god to be so petty, insecure, and sensitive as to get vindictive and punitive over some powerless lifeform’s disapproval, then I believe you are the blasphemer here. I, at least, give your god the benefit of being so far removed, so far beyond us that our petty-by-comparison interactions are of no consequence to him.

“Aren’t you afraid that God will smite you for your insolence?”

Just by asking this question, you prove my point. By asking this question, you first assume you’re important enough to merit a god’s ear, or that your opinion matters to a god — hubris! But most importantly, you confess your opinion about your God: that your God is a smiteful, spiteful, petty, vindictive tyrant. And most people (at least the ones I know) are by far more merciful and compassionate than your idea of “god”. Good people do not maliciously inflict agony on living beings. They understand that, even if they are morally justified to hurt others in reciprocal violence, and even if they have the capacity for superior violence, hurting others is never pleasurable (except to the psychopaths). This is more than I can say about the demiurge.

If you fear blaspheming, you basically agree with my entire thesis here, that “God” lacks the virtues of mercy, empathy, and self-accountability.

Judgement

The privilege of judging is reserved for the consequence, not the cause. Your work says more about you than you can say about your work. Therefore, the children are the ones who get to judge the parents, and not the other way around. The children are the consequence of their parents. The creation is the consequence of the creator. We should judge god, not the other way around.

The parent-reality

I believe that if indeed this is a contrived simulation and not the product of non-conscious randomness, then the parent reality must be less advanced, not more. Much like our AI and simulations are, in many ways, much more complex and capable than we — their creators — are, then we can theorise that a child reality is, in many ways, superior to the parent reality. Children are often superior to their parents. Besides, if there were no imperfection, and therefore no need, then there would be no desire to create anything.

Perhaps the ability to be moral is the thing missing from our parent-reality, because it so obviously lacks it.

A simple deduction proves that god is evil, assuming a conscious demiurge exists in the first place. Only evil could have consciously created this

If there is a god or a demiurge of this simulation, I judge god to be immoral. I do that, I, the mere mortal. No, this is not pride or hubris. This is humility in the face of morality, recognising an ethos that is so beyond us; that it is even above divinity.

It is humility, because it chooses intellectual honesty and moral courage in the face of damnation. Humility, because it detaches from reality, and from the self, and from vain entitlements to eternal life.

Appeal to free will fallacy

We understand that parents are morally responsible to nurture, protect, educate, guide, and support their children. When parents abandon their children, we condemn the parents. Yet the demiurge of this reality gets a free pass for completely abandoning us, even though he is even more responsible for us than a human parent is for their children. Why? Because the demiurge chose our nature and chose our environment, and he has (presumably) more power to prevent atrocities than any human does. And the demiurge chose for us to be here. And there is no accountability here?

This apparent double standard exists because we fear the creator. Truly, who is Abraham to tell Yahweh to fuck off? Yet, Yahweh deserves our total horror and contempt for being a disgusting demon drunk on masturbatory self-aggrandising.

Cosmic abandonment does not equal “free will”. We don’t hold the demiurge responsible for the evils he created and refuses to prevent because we’re terrified of him, understandably so.

But let us not fool ourselves: The “god” of this world is powerful and horrifying, yes. But it is not loving or kind. This is undeniable.

Who is the demiurge to judge you?

You die. Your consciousness ascends beyond spacetime. In the parent plane of existence, you are judged by your demiurge, accused of disobeying your biological imperatives and blaspheming against your creator.

You respond:

“You, God, are not morally equipped to judge me. My ability to conceive and adhere to principle, humility, and accountability is beyond you. I would never deliberately create conscious beings in such a tormenting existence. I would never bring a life into a hostile world of scarcity and then abandon it to the mercy of randomness. This isn’t free will. This is entrapment, manipulation, and slavery. This makes you beneath me.”

Who is the demiurge to forgive me? He should ask for my forgiveness.