NOTE: Copying or republishing of this article is encouraged but only if it includes the title and names of both authors and a link to the article: https://trickedbythelight.com/tbtl/A-Case-Against-The-Christian-God-Yahweh.html
As of 2024, 84% of the global population identifies with some form of faith. Christianity, with approximately 2.5 billion followers, is the largest religion in the world, encompassing nearly one-third of humanity. In the United States, around 80% to 90% of people profess belief in God, and 80% percent of Christians specifically believe in the God of the Bible. The remaining 20% either believe in a higher power but not the biblical God, or they don't believe in any higher power. Globally, about 45% of people believe in a deity as described in holy scriptures. This divide—where roughly half of the world's population believes in the God of religious texts, while the other half does not—contributes to significant tension and conflict across cultures and societies.
In this article, we present the seven most convincing arguments demonstrating that the Christian God (i.e., biblical God, Yahweh) is not worthy of allegiance. We are not arguing that this so-called God does not exist. We are presenting arguments for reconsidering allegiance to this self-professed God due to issues surrounding his character, motives and actions.
Throughout this article, when we refer to the Christian God, we are referring to the mainstream Christian God, Yahweh. We realize there are those who identify as Christian who do not believe in or follow the biblical God (such as Gnostics). This article is not intended for them. However, some of the arguments in this article can also apply to gods of other religions.
We also want to add that both of us once identified as Christians for decades and delved deeply into theology, which ultimately led to our departure from this religion and even faith in the Christian God. We don’t claim to be experts who have all the answers. We are researchers and experiencers trying to find the truth. We are always evaluating new information and discoveries, which may revise and reshape our position.
We acknowledge that some aspects of this article may be open to debate influenced by opinion, subjectivity, interpretation and speculation. We don’t feel we have to be right about every single point we make to be correct in our overall assessment. Therefore, we encourage readers to set aside these considerations and focus on assessing the most compelling evidence rather than cherry picking what you feel is the lowest hanging fruit.
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
--The Epicurus Paradox
The existence of evil, especially in its extreme forms, is one of the most convincing reasons to reject allegiance to the Christian God. As Epicurus posed: if God is both all-powerful and all-loving, why does he not prevent evil? Some argue that God refrains from intervening because preventing evil would limit human free will, which is necessary for love to be meaningful. However, this does not explain the occurrence of "natural evil," such as natural disasters or diseases, where human free will is not involved.
We argue that an all-loving and all-powerful God should intervene not only in cases of "natural evil” but also in all instances of extreme evil and suffering. A loving parent is not expected to remove every challenge from a child’s life. However, we do expect parents to intervene when extreme harm—whether physical or psychological—is imminent. Some examples of such extreme harm include war, human trafficking, rape, torture, murder, famine and psychological abuse. If God is aware that an innocent child is about to be kidnapped and tortured but chooses not to intervene, such willful negligence exposes that so-called God as unworthy of allegiance or devotion.
Some argue that divine intervention in extreme cases would negate human free will and render genuine love impossible. However, preventing evils like war or rape would not diminish anyone’s ability to love their partner, child, or parent. It would only limit the free will of those who intend to commit egregious crimes. Moreover, free will is already constrained by factors such as biology, brain chemistry and psychological conditions, yet we still retain the capacity for meaningful love. Even social pressures limit free will. For example, statistics show that a person born to an Islamic household in the Middle East is highly unlikely to become a Christian. Conversely, a person born to a Christian household in the Midwest is highly unlikely to become a Muslim.
Additionally, the claim that extreme evil is required to appreciate extreme goodness is unconvincing. Goodness is understood and valued without needing to contrast it with extreme evil. Everyday acts of kindness, love and generosity are inherently meaningful and appreciated without experiencing atrocities. Duality, in fact, can exist without evil, as contrasts like light and dark or joy and sorrow show that opposites need not involve moral categories. We can experience varying degrees of goodness—such as small acts of care versus grand gestures of heroism—without needing evil for context. In fact, theological depictions of heaven describe a place of perfect goodness, free from evil. If heaven can exist without evil, then the existence of extreme evil is not a necessary counterpart for extreme goodness in this world.
Christians argue that God’s plan is to do away with all evil eventually, but he is waiting for all to be saved. But more and more are born and millennia have passed, and still, there is no end to the suffering and injustice in the world. The pain of innocent children, the horrors of war, rape and torture—all of this continues under his watch. A good father wouldn’t allow his children to suffer unnecessarily. Why, then, does God delay his intervention? Such indifference to the suffering of his creation is the mark of a heartless, useless god.
The despicable character of God, especially as depicted in scripture, is another convincing reason to reject the Christian God.
The cruel nature of God is evident in the world he created, a world full of predation, suffering and sacrifice. God confesses he created evil (or calamity or disaster) himself: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things” (Isaiah 45:7).
Creatures must kill and consume one another to survive, often in brutal ways. Does a compassionate creator really need to make creatures suffer and kill just to survive? Surely, a more humane system—perhaps one where creatures could sustain themselves through sunlight or air—would be more fitting for a compassionate creator.
Additionally, God’s demand for animal sacrifice in the Bible and finding the aroma of its burning flesh pleasing is both cruel and disgusting. The senseless slaughter of innocent animals to appease a deity’s wrath or gain his favor is not only barbaric but reflects a callousness toward life. This ritualistic violence reflects a primitive mindset where bloodshed was not just tolerated but actively desired by God.
The cruel nature of God is also reflected in the fragile, deteriorating bodies he created for humans. These bodies, prone to decay, demand constant care just to stay alive. From birth, we are set on an inevitable path toward aging, suffering and death. Our later years are often marked by physical decline—endless aches and pains—often culminating in a drawn-out, painful death. While many hope and pray for the peace of dying quietly in their sleep, the reality is often far harsher. Countless individuals endure senseless suffering, whether through terminal illness, chronic, untreatable pain, the loss of identity caused by diseases like Alzheimer’s or the torment of severe depression and mental illness. Such suffering seems built into the very design of human life.
God’s creation is riddled with inequality and unfairness. Some people are born into wealth and privilege, while others are born blind, paraplegic or into extreme poverty. This arbitrary distribution of fortune and suffering suggests that God plays favorites, rewarding some and punishing others for no apparent reason. The fact that some are born with a "silver spoon" while others suffer lifelong deprivation is a deep injustice. Why would a loving God create a system where life is so unfair and arbitrary?
God's prolonged absence from human life mirrors that of a "deadbeat dad." Like an absentee father, he is nowhere to be found when needed. We are told to pray, but unlike a loving father who is accessible by phone or in person, God remains silent, often responding only through cryptic signs that leave us guessing. We wouldn’t tolerate such behavior from a parent—why should we tolerate it from a deity?
Christianity teaches that God created all things, including Lucifer, who becomes Satan—the embodiment of evil. Why would an omnipotent God create a being who would become the Devil? This raises questions about God's role in allowing evil to flourish.
When something good happens, Christians often say “praise God” or “God is good.” But when bad things happen, the blame is shifted to human free will or Satan, with phrases like "The Devil made me do it." Christians give god the credit and praise for the good, but when it comes to the bad, he remains unaccountable, deflecting responsibility onto humanity or using a convenient scapegoat.
Christianity’s teaching that salvation is only possible through belief in Jesus raises ethical concerns. Many people throughout history have lived and died without ever encountering Christianity. Is it just for God to condemn these individuals to eternal punishment for failing to believe in a doctrine they never had the chance to learn? A just and loving God would not impose such arbitrary consequences.
Consider the following Bible verses:
Deuteronomy 13:6-10 (NIV) – "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, ‘Let us go and worship other gods’... do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death."
This passage essentially instructs that if a close family member, such as your spouse or child, encourages you to follow another religion—like Buddhism—you are obligated to kill them.
Exodus 22:20 (NIV) – "Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the Lord must be destroyed."
These verses exemplify the exclusive nature of the biblical God, fostering intolerance and hypocrisy.
While God’s followers are permitted to make sacrifices to their own God, anyone of another faith who offers sacrifices to their deity must be put to death.
An example of taking on the intolerant personality of the God of the Bible can be seen in the persecution of the Gnostics, a sect of early Christians. Gnostics were executed, and their texts were destroyed because some Gnostic sects rejected the biblical "god," referring to him as the Demiurge, a false deity.
God’s moral code condones horrific practices like slavery and the abuse of women. In Exodus 21, God outlines rules for owning slaves, including the ability to beat them. There is no condemnation of this system—only regulation. Similarly, it was commanded that the Israelites kill men and women and to keep all the virgins for themselves. “So kill all the boys and all the women who have had intercourse with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves” (Numbers 31:17-18). Such treatment of women as property to be owned or claimed is certainly misogynistic, dehumanizing and criminal. How can a god that endorses such behavior be seen as a moral authority?
Worship of God and service to God are major themes in the Bible. Why would an all-powerful, perfect deity need worship and service? This insistence on being adored, glorified and served reflects neediness more than divinity. A truly omnipotent being wouldn’t require constant affirmation from his creation. This paints God as a narcissist, creating humans for the sole purpose of gratifying his own ego. The Bible reinforces this by stating that "every knee shall bow" (Philippians 2:10), demanding total devotion and obedience. This desire for worship and service are characteristics of a tyrant, not a loving and benevolent creator.
The Bible explicitly states that not only is God a jealous God, he will stalk the children of dissenters to the third and fourth generations (Exodus 20:3-5). His wrath is unleashed on those who do not bow to him, and he threatens eternal punishment for disobedience. A god who cannot tolerate the existence of other beliefs or ideas is not a god of compassion or love but a dictatorial figure obsessed with control. His tendency to lash out in anger, punishment and condemnation resembles the behavior of a psychopathic ruler, not a loving deity.
Another example of God's questionable character is his willingness to gamble with human lives, as found in the Book of Job. Here we see God fraternizing with and making a wager with the Devil at Job's expense. He conspires with the Devil to allow Job to suffer unimaginable torment just to prove the point that Job would not forsake him. This capricious behavior of playing games with the lives of his creation for sport is psychopathic.
The Bible is replete with examples of God's violent nature. From the flood that killed all of humanity except for a few, including all innocent children, to the mass slaughter of the Canaanites, God is repeatedly portrayed as a vengeful deity who sanctions genocide. In Deuteronomy 20:16-18, he commands the Israelites to “not leave alive anything that breathes” when conquering cities. This level of violence is beyond comprehension for a being supposedly defined by love. The fact that God would drown every child during the flood or command Abraham to brutally murder his son Isaac raises serious ethical questions. Would a benevolent god demand such barbaric acts?
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of God’s character is his establishment of hell as a place of eternal punishment. The concept of eternal torment for finite crimes on Earth is not only disproportionate but also reflects extreme cruelty. Many people are born into circumstances where they may never encounter Christianity or have the ability to understand or accept its beliefs. Yet, according to some Christian theology, they are still condemned to hell.
Ironically, this eternal punishment represents the ultimate injustice. No loving father would punish his child infinitely, especially for finite mistakes. This exposes God NOT as a merciful deity, but as a merciless dictator who revels in control and punishment, even to the point of torturing souls for eternity.
Even if one wants to argue that the punishment is only temporary, the descriptions given are more reminiscent of a vengeful psychopath than a loving father. The darkness, fire, separation and torment resemble a retributive punishment rather than a rehabilitative effort. If God is infinitely resourceful, why couldn’t he find a way to heal the person’s brain chemistry or trauma suffered that likely led to such behaviors?
The Christian narrative, at its core, presents a perfect God who creates an imperfect system, only to blame his creation for the failures of his own design. This story is riddled with contradictions and absurdities that call into question the logic and morality behind it.
Christianity teaches that God is perfect, omnipotent and omniscient, yet he creates a world that becomes fatally flawed through the “Fall of Man.” This notion that an all-knowing God would create a system where his creatures inevitably fail and then blame them for it strains the limits of logic. Adam and Eve’s original sin is said to be the source of all human suffering, death and the corruption of the natural world. We inherited the sin of Adam without choice or conscious awareness of it, so why can’t we inherit the salvation of Jesus without choice or conscious awareness of it? This imbalance is not only unjust, God cursed us against our free will or consent, yet ironically, he refuses to extend grace because he doesn’t want to violate our free will.
Why would a perfect being create something that becomes imperfect? The very fact that God wrote into the script the possibility of sin and evil suggests that he could have created a sinless world but deliberately chose not to. If heaven is a place where no one sins, why didn’t God create Earth in the same way? This implies that free will operates differently in heaven and Earth. If free will is required for us to genuinely love God, then we must still have free will in heaven. Why didn’t God just create it that way in the first place?
God's solution to the problem of sin is where the narrative becomes more irrational. Instead of finding a peaceful solution such as simply forgiving humanity or intervening in a way that reflects his omnipotence and mercy, God opts for a dramatic and violent plan: sending his own son (who is also somehow himself) to be tortured and killed to redeem humanity. This passion play, rife with bloodshed and suffering, is presented as the ultimate act of love, but it raises serious concerns. An omnipotent God could have easily devised another way to save humanity without resorting to such gruesome theatrics.
The reliance on blood sacrifices—whether of animals in the Old Testament or of Jesus in the New Testament—highlights the grotesque nature of this approach. The practice of killing animals to atone for human sins is both brutal and unnecessary for a supposedly loving deity. Why is blood sacrifice the only solution an infinitely resourceful God can come up with?
The narrative becomes even more illogical with the concept of the incarnation, where God becomes a man to die for his own creation. In the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus (God in human form) prays to God the Father, essentially praying to himself. This creates a bizarre theological paradox.
The Bible presents a convoluted tale where God plays both the villain and the hero. As the villain, he creates the problem of a flawed system where his creatures are doomed to fail and have to endure suffering. Then, as the hero, he stages a dramatic resolution by sacrificing himself to save them from the problem he created.
There are quite a few commonly made criticisms of the Bible pertaining to logistic and scientific impossibilities when taken literally. We realize some will attribute the events to miracles. However, we would be remiss not to mention them. A few examples include: the housing of millions of animals on Noah’s Ark; Tower of Babel reaching heaven; Jonah surviving three days inside a whale; Moses parting the Red Sea; the virgin birth; Lot’s wife turning into a pillar of salt; a talking donkey; and three men surviving being thrown into a fiery furnace.
The Bible, supposedly God’s word or message to the world, is often vague which has led to division and the thousands of denominations existing today.
Evidence of God's poor messaging can be seen in vague platitudes like "God works in mysterious ways" and “Trust in God rather than your own understanding.” These sayings often serve to dismiss critical thinking and questioning. Additionally, God’s reliance on parables and cryptic language (e.g., “He who has ears to hear”) in key passages only adds to the confusion, leaving interpretation open to a wide range of misunderstandings.
Additionally, why would a benevolent god choose only one man – such as Abraham or Moses -- to deliver his message or commandments to the world? Similarly, why would a priesthood or clergy be necessary? Like the game of "telephone," the content of these supposed “divine” encounters was often passed down orally through generations where the original message became distorted over time. This lack of consistency and clarity is a recipe for misinterpretation, division and even conflict among people trying to understand God’s will.
There are many religions worldwide. We have been presented with fragmented accounts of supposed “divine” interaction—stories of God allegedly “appearing” to different groups of people in different parts of the world at different points in history. If God wants everyone to make an informed decision about his message, then why would he allow so many people worldwide to be lied to and led astray?
If God really wanted his message to be heard and understood clearly, he would have delivered his message himself. God could, for example, holographically project himself into the sky for all to see, or communicate directly with people telepathically. In such a scenario, everyone would know God exists and then could make a genuine choice about whether or not to worship him. This would not infringe upon free will but would simply provide people with the information they need to make an informed decision.
God has not clearly communicated his message to the world, so either his communication skills are lacking or he is trying to be vague on purpose. This unclear messaging has created and continues to create confusion.
Christians often stress the importance of faith over evidence, sometimes to the point where evidence is overlooked or undervalued. But what really matters is what we place our faith in. If we put our faith in something unreliable, that faith becomes meaningless. In the case of Christianity, there isn’t much clear evidence that suggests faith is truly justified.
Many people believe in a God who keeps himself hidden, requiring faith to believe in him. But in everyday life, we usually base our decisions on evidence, not blind faith.
For example:
We trust that a plane will fly because we know about aerodynamics, engineering and safety rules.
We believe that our phones and computers will work because of testing, user reviews and our own past experiences.
In both cases, we aren’t just blindly trusting — we have reliable evidence and repeated experiences that back up our belief. So, our faith in these things is well-grounded. But when it comes to faith in God, the evidence is much less clear, and belief seems to require much more faith than facts. Should something as important as one’s eternal fate be based mostly on faith, rather than solid evidence?
Christians argue that God wants us to live by faith, not by sight (2 Cor. 5:7), and that’s why evidence isn’t always obvious. But that raises questions, since we weren’t alive 2,000+ years ago to know what really happened. And, as we know, human testimony can often be wrong or misleading.
Christians believe God wrote the Bible or, at the very least, ensured its accuracy. But if that’s true, it raises questions about the character of God. And, when asked why we should believe the Bible, the reasoning often becomes circular: we’re told to trust the Bible because the Bible says it’s trustworthy. This logic doesn’t hold up.
Many people feel there’s not enough clear evidence of God’s existence or his involvement in the world. If God really wanted people to believe in him, wouldn’t his existence be obvious? The fact that he often seems distant and even absent only makes belief more challenging.
This lack of clear communication from God is unacceptable. If God truly wanted a relationship with each person, why make belief so difficult? For many, this remoteness suggests that God either doesn’t exist, is indifferent, or doesn’t actively engage with humanity.
Christianity values faith over reason to the point of being intellectually dishonest. A God who asks for belief without enough evidence, or who values blind faith over critical thinking, isn’t worthy of devotion and may actually be hiding something, lying or trying to manipulate us.
Throughout history, religion has often been used to shape social and political structures, ensuring compliance and submission to ruling authorities. A striking pattern is evident across the five major world religions, each of which promotes a prince or member of royalty as a central savior or prophet. Is it a coincidence that the saviors or prophets of the five major world religions are all connected to royalty? In Hinduism, Krishna was a prince, born to the princess Devaki. In Buddhism, the Buddha was a prince born into a royal Hindu Kshatriya family. In Judaism, Moses was raised by the Pharaoh as the “prince of Egypt.” In Christianity, Jesus is called the “King of the Jews” and the “Prince of Peace,” descending from the royal line of King David. Even in Islam, Muhammad had connections to nobility, and genealogical sources like Burke’s Peerage suggest he was related to Queen Elizabeth. This demonstrates a consistent link between religious figures and royalty, underscoring how the ruling elite seek to control the masses by intertwining religion with monarchy. As Napoleon Bonaparte allegedly said, “Religion is to keep the poor from murdering the rich,” highlighting the way religion has been used to preserve power and social order.
As Napoleon suggested, religion has often served as a diversionary tactic, discouraging the poor from rising against the elite who hold power and wealth. Teachings such as "turn the other cheek" (Matthew 5:39) promote a culture of passivity and non-resistance, encouraging individuals to endure oppression rather than challenge it. Several verses promote the idea that focusing on spiritual riches in the afterlife are more valuable than earthly possessions. Some examples are: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:3), “The meek shall inherit the Earth" (Matthew 5:5) and "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on Earth" (Matthew 6:19). This keeps the masses focused on the promise of future rewards making them less likely to revolt or seek change in their current circumstances.
The prominence of kings in the Bible has played a key role in reinforcing this control. Figures like Moses, David, Solomon and Jesus are all closely tied to royal lineage. The King James Version of the Bible is an example of religion used to maintain control. Commissioned by King James, it was created to unify religious practice under royal authority and to reinforce the divine right of kings. The translation standardizes scripture in a way that promotes loyalty to monarchs, framing obedience to rulers as a divine obligation. The books of 1 Kings and 2 Kings glorify monarchs who follow God’s will and punish those who do not, portraying kings as God’s chosen rulers. This narrative promotes the idea that defying earthly rulers is equivalent to rebelling against God himself, solidifying a system where obedience to authority is a moral and religious duty.
Constantine the Great ruled as Emperor of Rome. Constantine was committed to Sol Invictus, and he played a pivotal role in establishing Christianity as the official state religion of the Roman Empire. His reign marked a significant turning point for Christianity, transitioning from a persecuted sect to an officially recognized faith within the Roman Empire. The birth of Mithras (Mithraism) on December 25th, in conjunction with the celebration of Sol Invictus, represents a significant connection between early Christian practices and Mithraism.
Manipulation of what is included in sacred texts further strengthens this system of control. For example, some writings such as the Nag Hamaddi texts and Pistis Sophia, a Gnostic text, were not included in the Christian canon. The exclusion of texts teaching ideas like reincarnation shaped a specific narrative of salvation that emphasizes external saviors rather than personal growth or transformation. This exclusion narrows how individuals are allowed to think about life, death and their own purpose, making them more reliant on religious institutions for answers.
The doctrine of Papal Infallibility, which declares the Pope incapable of error, emphasizes the partnership between religious and earthly authority. By elevating the Pope’s authority to an unquestionable level, this doctrine encouraged believers to submit without question, reinforcing a top-down hierarchy. Similarly, the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy—a belief that the Bible is without error—has been used to control thought and behavior. By teaching that questioning scripture is equivalent to questioning God, religious authorities discourage critical thinking and personal sovereignty. Believers are encouraged to accept teachings without scrutiny, leading to a culture where individuals defer to external authority rather than trusting their own judgment.
Guilt and fear are also central tools in maintaining control. The notion that humans are “born sinners” in need of redemption creates an environment where shame and fear of eternal punishment encourage loyalty.
Finally, Christianity has also been used to justify political actions, such as wars, under the guise of divine favor. The idea of “holy wars” or wars waged in God’s name has been a recurrent theme throughout history, ensuring that political objectives can be framed as religiously justified. This alignment of religion with state power is also seen in modern phrases like “In God we trust” and “One nation under God,” which encourage a sense of allegiance to the state and its institutions, merging religious and national loyalty.
Christianity is not the first or only religion to have developed a system of beliefs regarding salvation, resurrection or divine intervention. In fact, many of the core tenets and stories in Christianity appear to have been borrowed or repackaged from earlier cultures and religions, if not outright plagiarized. This argument explores how Christian narratives bear striking similarities to pre-existing traditions, from creation stories to concepts of sacrifice and resurrection.
One of the most well-known parallels between Christianity and earlier traditions lies in the creation and flood narratives. The biblical story of creation in the Book of Genesis and the Great Flood in the story of Noah are not unique to the Bible. Ancient civilizations, particularly Sumer and Babylon, had their own versions of these events, which were likely passed down and reinterpreted by later religious groups, including the Hebrews.
The Epic of Gilgamesh—an ancient Mesopotamian poem from Sumer, dating back to around 2100 BCE—features a flood story nearly identical to the biblical account of Noah’s Ark. In this tale, the gods send a great flood to destroy humanity, but a man named Utnapishtim is warned by the god Enki and instructed to build a boat to save himself, his family and a variety of animals. This story predates the Hebrew version by centuries and is evidence that early Jewish and later Christian scribes borrowed from existing mythology.
Over 1000 years before Christianity, Zoroastrianism contained many of the core elements of Christianity, including: duality of good vs evil; monotheism; a messianic figure; judgment after death; the concept of heaven and hell; rituals and worship practices; the role of angels and spirits; and eschatology and ethical teachings.
The biblical account of Moses being discovered in a basket on the riverbank by the Pharaoh's daughter mirrors a much older story from Akkadian culture. The tale of Sargon of Akkad (around 2300 BCE) describes how Sargon, the king of Akkad, was born to a humble mother and sent down the Euphrates River in a reed basket, only to be discovered and raised by Akki, a water drawer.
The resemblance between Moses' story in Exodus and Sargon’s birth story suggests this narrative was borrowed and repurposed. Both accounts involve a child escaping death through divine providence, discovered and raised by the daughter of the ruler and later becoming a central figure in history. Given that the Akkadian story predates Moses' by over a thousand years, it’s reasonable to conclude that this is yet another example of Christianity and Judaism reinterpreting existing legends.
Depending on the translation, all Ten Commandments are nearly identical or are very similar to the Negative Confessions found in the Egyptian Book of the Dead, which predates Christianity by over 1500 years.
Here are a few examples:
Commandment: Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
Negative Confession: I have not cursed God.
Commandment: Thou shalt not kill.
Negative Confession: I have not slain men and women.
Commandment: Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Negative Confession: I have not committed adultery.
Commandment: Thou shalt not steal.
Negative Confession: I have not stolen.
Commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Negative Confession: I have not uttered lies.
The concept of a sacrificial god or resurrected deity central to salvation is not unique to Christianity. Many ancient religions predating Christianity incorporated the idea of a god or divine figure who dies and is resurrected, symbolizing renewal, fertility or salvation.
Osiris (Egyptian Religion) – Osiris, the god of the underworld, was mythologically killed, dismembered and resurrected by his wife, Isis.
Dionysus (Greek Religion) – Dionysus, the Greek god of wine and fertility, was torn apart and later resurrected, symbolizing renewal and rebirth.
Tammuz (Mesopotamian Religion) – Tammuz, the Mesopotamian god of fertility, died annually and descended to the underworld, only to be resurrected by his consort, Inanna.
Attis (the cult of Attis) – There are accounts of the god Attis being tied to a tree or a pillar, often described as dying and being resurrected.
Odin (Norse mythology) – Odin, the king of the gods, sacrificed himself by hanging on Yggdrasil, the World Tree, for nine days and nights to gain wisdom. This act of self-sacrifice is emblematic of themes of death and rebirth.
In addition to borrowing stories and theological concepts, Christianity also appropriated and repackaged pagan holidays.
Easter, originally a pagan festival celebrating the spring equinox and the goddess Ostara, was adapted by Christians to commemorate the resurrection of Jesus. Christmas, celebrated on December 25, was likely chosen to coincide with the Roman festival of Sol Invictus and the winter solstice. Early Christians adopted these dates to convert pagans, repurposing their festivals into Christian celebrations while keeping the same underlying themes of rebirth and renewal.
Many scholars argue that the god of the Bible is a composite figure, combining elements from various deities of older religions. Throughout the Old Testament, God is referred to by different names—Yahweh, Elohim, Adonai—which may reflect the consolidation of different tribal deities into one monotheistic god.
We are not Gnostic ourselves, however, we have reason to believe they’re likely correct that the biblical God is a false god imprisoning the spirit in the physical body and recycling souls to steal their light or energy.
Some people who had near death or spiritually transformative experiences claim the light they encountered was God. A couple experiencers even said it was the God of the Bible. Here are some quotes from the website, nderf.org, which contains thousands of testimonies of NDEs, STEs and more:
Mary D shares: “I encountered a definite being, or a voice clearly of mystical or unearthly origin. I heard several voices from different locations around me and within me. One said ‘everything will be alright.’ One responding to my unasked question ‘who are you?’ The response: ‘God of Abraham.’”
During his NDE, a man named Israel was shown that humanity will merge with and be absorbed by a super-evolved super entity. The angel, Lamdiel, told him, “It will create a huge new entity… This huge spirit is quite well known to humanity on Earth…They call him: God, Elohim, Yahave, Allah, the Heavenly Father, and many other names."
After a great deal of research, we have found evidence there are entities in the light manipulating souls. There are far too many to reference here in this article, but here is a quote for your consideration:
“This first being appeared to be the Virgin Mary. Only after asking, ‘Are you truly the Virgin Mary?,’ it instantly manifested (its) true identity.” -- Robert B
And don’t forget that the Bible itself warns us:
“And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.” -- 2 Corinthians 11:14.
We feel these entities are playing both sides as in the “good cop, bad cop” routine. As we previously mentioned, this God plays both the villain and the hero sacrificing himself for a flawed system he created. After all, the Christian God often paints himself more as the Devil than a benevolent, loving God.
As a matter of fact, there is yet another NDE which describes the entities as “harmony makers” and “chaos creators” playing a boardgame with her as the pawn, bringing either harmony or chaos to her life.
We feel the false god or gods of this system are not only deceiving souls here in this life, but also in the afterlife, as evidenced by NDEs, STEs, pre-birth memories, between life memories, hypnotic regression, remote viewing, astral experiences, out-of-body experiences and alien abductions. The shapeshifting entities can take the form of anyone we might put our trust in, such as Jesus, angels, saints, guides, deceased family members, gods, gurus, friends, pets, ascended masters, etc. in order to persuade us to give our authority over to an external source so they can lure us into their domain where they have much more influence over us. This is ultimately to get us to incarnate back on Earth or another “lighter” realm where they can continue feeding off our energy (e.g., as the Gnostic Christians claimed).
In view of all the arguments given above, we feel we have offered ample evidence to show the biblical Christian God is not worthy of praise, devotion and worship. Any one of these points alone should be enough to cause one to pause and reconsider, but when weighed in their entirety, they should be more than sufficient to raise serious doubts.
Again, we acknowledge that some aspects of this article may be open to debate influenced by opinion, subjectivity, interpretation and speculation. We don’t feel we have to be right about every single point we make to be correct in our overall assessment. Therefore, we encourage readers to set aside these considerations and focus on assessing the most compelling evidence rather than cherry picking what you feel is the lowest hanging fruit.
Many people continue to cling to mainstream Christianity, drawn to the comforting notion of an all-loving God who has everything under control and promises a blissful heaven after death. It feels reassuring to believe in a benevolent deity who will take care of us. People yearn to be saved, whether by Jesus, aliens or some other external source—it’s human nature to crave rescue. This comforting belief system paints us as damsels in distress, waiting for salvation.
This framework discourages personal responsibility and inner reflection, urging individuals to seek salvation and answers from external sources of authority rather than fostering autonomy and critical thinking.
Many humans avoid challenging their beliefs because it’s easier to follow the path of least resistance. Lacking the courage, some use religion as a crutch, preferring a beautiful lie over an inconvenient, ugly truth.