The Rant Institute

 'ΦΙΛΗΜΩΝ answered: “These dead rejected the God of love, of the good and the beautiful; they had to reject him and so they rejected unity and community in love, in the good and the beautiful. And thus they killed one another and dissolved the community of men. Should I teach them the God who united them in love and whom they rejected? Therefore I teach them the God who dissolves unity, who blasts everything human, who powerfully creates and mightily destroys. Those whom love does not unite, fear compels.' Carl G Jung (The Red Book)

 Any belief in a God is necessarily inseparable from a future state the person imagines for themself. This is why the idea of a "God" is always paired with the word "good," regardless of whether the plan for the future includes suffering. A future state in heaven, since heaven cannot be defined in any concrete terms, is therefore always detached from any logic or rational experience or even expectation.  Instead, all "beliefs" in the Christian God are based solely on a hope in a future state of being that is purely emotional, not rational. And it is emotional because the "believer" always imagines themselves in a state in the future in which they are free of the worries they suffer from in this life.  Among those worries, the foremost is the fear of hell and punishment and sin and feeling rejected by God.  Heaven, as such, is a wishful place in which all of the suffering of this life, whether from aging and dying to suffering endlessly in the nex...

The greatest danger to the planet in general, and the human species in particular, is a mindset of certainty, the same mindset championed by religion that teach a person to see doubt of their own beliefs as not only wrong and potentially evil, but something for which they deserve eternal torments.  Catholic priests sell this kind of thinking in every mass they perform.  Ironically, the same Catholic priest who threatens his flock with hellfire for doubting his claims, which are often at odds with other Catholic priests and even Catholic popes, requires those same faithful flocks to doubt and distrust whoever it is the Catholic priest tells them to doubt and distrust.  If CNN reports that scientists around the world agree that climate change could end life on the planet, the Catholic priest may well demand that his flock "doubt" such claims or risk being cast into eternal hell for failing to do so.  If FOX News, on the other hand, reports that the Virgin Mary is float...

 “My words will either attract a strong mind or offend a weak one.” Anne Sexton

 the difference between being a Christian and being human is that the latter delights in discovering they're wrong, and learns and grows as a result. The former would rather kill everyone on the planet, while insisting that doing so is totally moral if the people they are killing disagree with their "sacred" beliefs, rather than ever admit they could ever be wrong about their "sacred" beliefs. 

Christians seem to always try to explain suffering as being something that serves some higher purpose. Of course, the "higher purpose" they insist it serves is only ever their own, while they oppose and deny that it could serve any other higher purpose offered by others that differs from theirs. For example, they assume suffering always serves some greater good, according to a "good" God's plan, even while they oppose that that same suffering may only serve a worse plan, from a "bad" God, even though the latter is more in line with the evidence (especially of how Christians behave).  Naturally, not a single Christian ever accepts that their own behavior is the cause of such suffering. Or, if it is, the only kind of suffering their behavior causes - like their judgments or passing of laws to prohibit the exercise of one's "free will" - is the kind of suffering that God wants, and will surely apply in the next life anyway.  But, even if we ...