Dystheism: what would you do?

I got into a debate elsewhere earlier today with a group of Calvinists that were making fun of some meme that depicted a person saying that even if God existed, they would not worship God.

Several people pointed out that this was likely because of things like the Problem of Evil: the meme-maker was basically saying that God would be unworthy of worship even if one existed. That’s all beside the point, just background.

What caught my attention was one poster (one of the Calvinists I presume) that was saying such people were fools: that even if dystheism were true, they should worship the god to avoid infinite suffering in Hell.

Now, I disagree with this, of course. I don’t act on behalf of my values to gain anything, and I don’t avoid causing harm in order to avoid punishment. I act on behalf of my values because they are my values.

This person just kept saying that it would be foolish not to worship the god, and praise it, and do what the god commanded, and so on: even if the god commanded to harm people, or wanted praise for causing harm. I said I would never do this willingly. He again said this was foolish (and trust me, by this point I do not trust this man’s ethics/morality, because this seems like exactly the line of argument I imagine some Nazis gave: “I better follow orders for my own safety.” I would rather die than be a Nazi.)

So anyway, this got me to thinking of a horrible hypothetical. In the case of dystheism, where there is just an awful god, but said god is omnipotent and can cause you to suffer a lot for an infinite amount of time unless you followed its harmful commands or praised it for harming people or any number of nasty things: am I alone in saying that while my mind and will are my own (before I go too crazy from whatever tortures would be put upon me), I’d choose Hell over going against my values of not harming people and not praising monsters?

I can see your point and I agree with it in principle, he could do what he wanted with me. But I am not so sure I could be so tough if he was threatening family or say a load of kids. Reluctantly I would have to kneel. And then spend my life plotting against the god.

Why would anyone choose to believe in a God like that?

Justanatheist said:

I can see your point and I agree with it in principle, he could do what he wanted with me. But I am not so sure I could be so tough if he was threatening family or say a load of kids. Reluctantly I would have to kneel. And then spend my life plotting against the god.

Click to expand...

This would still be acting in accordance to your values (you’re given a trolley problem in this instance).

I would also kneel if I thought it would prevent harm to someone; but my praise would not be genuinely felt.

RestlessSoul said:

Why would anyone choose to believe in a God like that?

Click to expand...

I have no idea. I have coincidentally known at least 2 Calvinists that have basically described dystheism; and I am not saying this is typical of Calvinists or Calvinism though.

Some gnostics also hold the Demiurge not to be benevolent.

I really don’t know.

It depends on the vision of God someone has.
Some people believe God made us autonomous from Him. Some others, like Calvinists believe in a very solid bond between man and God.

Meow Mix said:

I have no idea. I have coincidentally known at least 2 Calvinists that have basically described dystheism; and I am not saying this is typical of Calvinists or Calvinism though.

Some gnostics also hold the Demiurge not to be benevolent.

I really don’t know.

Click to expand...

Hm. Come to think of it, the Greek and Roman Gods weren’t a particularly benevolent bunch were they? Capricious and always needing to be appeased.

I don’t know much about Calvinism. I think John Calvin was a determinist? He thought the future was already written?

RestlessSoul said:

Hm. Come to think of it, the Greek and Roman Gods weren’t a particularly benevolent bunch were they? Capricious and always needing to be appeased.

I don’t know much about Calvinism. I think John Calvin was a determinist? He thought the future was already written?

Click to expand...

Every Calvinist I’ve ever known pays a lot of attention to Romans 9, and have opinions on predestination, election, and so on.

The hyperCalvinists I’ve known went pretty far into it: God makes some people only to destroy them for His own glory (hence the “vessels unto wrath” passages in Romans and so on). It’s really metaphysically gross in my opinion, and really does describe a monster.

I should stress again that hypercalvinism doesn’t represent all of Calvinism and the term hypercalvinism is not well defined.

edit: neat, RF automatically links to the verses.

So look at line 21 for instance. This translation says “dishonour” instead if “wrath” but you get the idea.

edit 2: testing whether this will form a link on its own or not: Romans 9:20-23

Well, better yet, let's say the only real god was Moloch, and he demanded infant sacrifices among other terrible things... This isn't just a "hey, that's your god, not mine" situation. Nope. Moloch is real, and he's the only one. What then?

RestlessSoul said:

Why would anyone choose to believe in a God like that?

Click to expand...

If one can believe a god exists, then one can believe a god like that exists -- and wouldn't be the first human to believe it, either.

SigurdReginson said:

Well, better yet, let's say the only real god was Moloch, and he demanded infant sacrifices among other terrible things... This isn't just a "hey, that's your god, not mine" situation. Nope. Moloch is real, and he's the only one. What then?

Click to expand...

Then we’re all well and truly ****ed

Which may indeed be the case, but I prefer to think not

RestlessSoul said:

Then we’re all well and truly ****ed

Which may indeed be the case, but I prefer to think not

Click to expand...

But would you follow a god like that?

The choice is to follow him, or not to follow him (the one, and only god).

SigurdReginson said:

But would you follow a god like that?

The choice is to follow him, or not to follow him (the one, and only god).

Click to expand...

Unequivocally no.

Meow Mix said:

So anyway, this got me to thinking of a horrible hypothetical. In the case of dystheism, where there is just an awful god, but said god is omnipotent and can cause you to suffer a lot for an infinite amount of time unless you followed its harmful commands or praised it for harming people or any number of nasty things: am I alone in saying that while my mind and will are my own (before I go too crazy from whatever tortures would be put upon me), I’d choose Hell over going against my values of not harming people and not praising monsters?

Click to expand...

Fortunately for me, God has never commanded me to do anything.

Evangelicalhumanist said:

If one can believe a god exists, then one can believe a god like that exists -- and wouldn't be the first human to believe it, either.

Click to expand...

Apparently so. There appears no limit to the things human beings are capable of believing in. And perhaps, by believing in something to the point whereby we allow that belief to direct our decisions, we manifest that something.

Which is rather a troubling thought, but also a liberating one; because if we can imagine horror into being, then we can also imagine love and compassion into being.

Meow Mix said:

So anyway, this got me to thinking of a horrible hypothetical. In the case of dystheism, where there is just an awful god, but said god is omnipotent and can cause you to suffer a lot for an infinite amount of time unless you followed its harmful commands or praised it for harming people or any number of nasty things: am I alone in saying that while my mind and will are my own (before I go too crazy from whatever tortures would be put upon me), I’d choose Hell over going against my values of not harming people and not praising monsters?

Click to expand...

I think it is quite easy to tell ourselves this in a scenario that we consider unrealistic or impossible.

However, what if we considered the issue of going against your values or harming others in a more realistic situation.

For example, you and a group of other people are taken hostage by terrorists. The terrorists are using you and the other hostages as a shield to give them time to execute their goal which will result in the death of many times more people. How do you behave? Do you comply with the terrorists demands and do as they say, or do you resist to the point of being killed? Even if you resist, what are the odds the rest of your group will follow suit in an attempt to disrupt the terrorist plan? If your efforts would be in vain, wouldn't it be more likely that you would comply in hopes of some outside intervention?

What about the historical scenario whereby you find yourself in a death camp and a certain percentage of prisoners get favorable conditions in order to ensure the smooth running of the camp. Everyone else will be worked to death or outright killed. Do you take the opportunity to be one of the select few to enjoy favorable condition in the hope that it will allow for an extended period of time for some outside event to change conditions, or do you resign yourself to be one of the many to die a slow, miserable death. Or, on principle, do you fight and resist such that you are killed outright?

What if we consider the torture that US airmen where subjected to in the Vietnam War in order for them to comply with Vietnamese propaganda efforts? Can you realistically predict how you would behave under those conditions having no real understanding of what it means to be tortured in that way? Still, these servicemen did not see their experience as eternal. There was always belief that their circumstance was not permanent.

Now, if your evil god could somehow be made real to you, and eternity meant eternity, how likely do you think it would be that anyone would resist compliance, especially if you got a taste of what existing in suffering for eternity would feel like.

As a follow-on thought, isn't George Orwell's book 1984 an examination of human compliance in the face of an omnipresent, omnipotent force? How do you envision yourselves behaving under such conditions?

Meow Mix said:

I got into a debate elsewhere earlier today with a group of Calvinists that were making fun of some meme that depicted a person saying that even if God existed, they would not worship God.

Several people pointed out that this was likely because of things like the Problem of Evil: the meme-maker was basically saying that God would be unworthy of worship even if one existed. That’s all beside the point, just background.

What caught my attention was one poster (one of the Calvinists I presume) that was saying such people were fools: that even if dystheism were true, they should worship the god to avoid infinite suffering in Hell.

Now, I disagree with this, of course. I don’t act on behalf of my values to gain anything, and I don’t avoid causing harm in order to avoid punishment. I act on behalf of my values because they are my values.

This person just kept saying that it would be foolish not to worship the god, and praise it, and do what the god commanded, and so on: even if the god commanded to harm people, or wanted praise for causing harm. I said I would never do this willingly. He again said this was foolish (and trust me, by this point I do not trust this man’s ethics/morality, because this seems like exactly the line of argument I imagine some Nazis gave: “I better follow orders for my own safety.” I would rather die than be a Nazi.)

So anyway, this got me to thinking of a horrible hypothetical. In the case of dystheism, where there is just an awful god, but said god is omnipotent and can cause you to suffer a lot for an infinite amount of time unless you followed its harmful commands or praised it for harming people or any number of nasty things: am I alone in saying that while my mind and will are my own (before I go too crazy from whatever tortures would be put upon me), I’d choose Hell over going against my values of not harming people and not praising monsters?

Click to expand...

I don't think I'd be able to obey a God like that.

It isn't even necessarily a matter of carefully thinking out the best stance based on my values; reflexively, I just don't think I could do it. It would be like asking me to hold my breath underwater for a long time: on a physiological level, I think my mind and body would fight back at the idea of obeying an evil god.

RestlessSoul said:

Unequivocally no.

Click to expand...

Me too! Even if the threat to do so was eternal torture. Still, we have the gift of understanding in regards to coming to the conclusions that we have vs. Moloch.

The problem though is when something like this is already the norm. It's already culturally acceptable, and to not take the knee to Moloch would go against the grain and require thinking outside of the box. It would take some serious thoughtfulness to decipher that Moloch was even an evil deity to begin with.

It's like when you go to Walmart and buy a new pair of swimming trunks for super cheap. Why is it so cheap? It's cheap because it was made by slave labor in sweat shops. How many people realize this, and still buy those swimming trunks? It's the cultural norm - these horrors have already been accepted and incorporated into daily life, and it doesn't just stop at modern day slavery.

Now with Moloch, how many do you think would just accept the infant sacrifices they were brought up with as "well, it's just how things are." Add on top of that the threat for going against Moloch being eternal torment and ehhh... I'm not so sure very many people wouldn't bend the knee to this god.

Meow Mix said:

I got into a debate elsewhere earlier today with a group of Calvinists that were making fun of some meme that depicted a person saying that even if God existed, they would not worship God.

Several people pointed out that this was likely because of things like the Problem of Evil: the meme-maker was basically saying that God would be unworthy of worship even if one existed. That’s all beside the point, just background.

What caught my attention was one poster (one of the Calvinists I presume) that was saying such people were fools: that even if dystheism were true, they should worship the god to avoid infinite suffering in Hell.

Now, I disagree with this, of course. I don’t act on behalf of my values to gain anything, and I don’t avoid causing harm in order to avoid punishment. I act on behalf of my values because they are my values.

This person just kept saying that it would be foolish not to worship the god, and praise it, and do what the god commanded, and so on: even if the god commanded to harm people, or wanted praise for causing harm. I said I would never do this willingly. He again said this was foolish (and trust me, by this point I do not trust this man’s ethics/morality, because this seems like exactly the line of argument I imagine some Nazis gave: “I better follow orders for my own safety.” I would rather die than be a Nazi.)

So anyway, this got me to thinking of a horrible hypothetical. In the case of dystheism, where there is just an awful god, but said god is omnipotent and can cause you to suffer a lot for an infinite amount of time unless you followed its harmful commands or praised it for harming people or any number of nasty things: am I alone in saying that while my mind and will are my own (before I go too crazy from whatever tortures would be put upon me), I’d choose Hell over going against my values of not harming people and not praising monsters?

Click to expand...

I don't have an answer for you. I like to think that I would hold fast to principle and refuse to worship an unworthy god, but who can say what would one would do after 100 or 1000 years of torture (or 10 minutes)?

Aren't huge swaths of people worshiping a horrible god now?

How about a god that would set up a couple of babes to fail in a garden in which it planted a tree that it knew in advance they could not resist, especially with the snake this god left them with, and then when they fail, punishes all of their descendants? How about a god that regrets its mistakes, but rather than simply modifying its engineering failure, elects to drown virtually all terrestrial life instead. This god also created a master demon and cast it into our world to wreak havoc. This god also created a torture chamber that ti stocked with demons for the purpose of gratuitously keeping souls that failed to believe in it despite poor evidence conscious to torture dead souls to the benefit of nobody but a sadist, knowing that most of the human race would not be "saved" and wind up there? And toward what purpose did this god put humanity through this? To have a chorus of worshipers. This is what they were created for.

How much worse of a universe can one imagine, one in which the overwhelming majority of souls born into it are slated for eternal torture? How much worse would it be for humanity if this master demon were running it? 100% damnation instead of only 90%?

Is this an unfair depiction of this Abrahamic deity? I know that its adherents like to describe it a pure love and benevolence, and look forward to an eternity praising it, but what I described is not love or benevolence. If this god really existed, is this not close to the worst universe imaginable to have been born into? Is that dystheistic enough?