Nothing without god? It's a beautiful concept!

[BlackL1ght]

So, today I was forced to come along on a "home teaching" assignment. Basically, two men go visit a couple of assigned people in the church every month, and share a church message with them. This month's message was about missionary work (bleh), but somehow, at one of the apartments we visited, the conversation turned to the doctrine that we were "nothing without god". I was pretty sick of preaching for the day, so when our home teachee mentioned that "everything good about us comes from god", I questioned that. I'll recall the conversation to the best of my ability here:

"We shouldn't be prideful, because everything good about us comes from God."

"I disagree. There are a ton of really good people outside of the church."

"God still made them, and all their good traits come from god." (despite the fact that some of those people don't believe in god)

"But I find that a really depressing concept. I think that we should give ourselves some credit for accomplishments or good things that we do."

"It's a beautiful concept!"

My companion chimes in: "Well, the whole point of the church is to progress and improve ourselves."

"The improvement comes from god!"

"Well, that doesn't mean that we haven't improved independently of god."

"We are completely dependent on god!"


From that point, it became a discussion of semantics. It's hard to argue with believers from a believer's point of view. I can't exactly throw out atheistic concepts in my situation, although later in the discussion, I tried to bring up some points to make them think. Slipping into the gospel teacher is disturbingly easy for me. I know all the answers and the psychological ways to teach them. I had to stop myself a couple times from teaching the lesson well. It's weird.

But anyway, I thought it very strange that this girl dismissed any and every shred of self-dependence I tried to give her. She had [s:2lyptqby]bragged about[/s:2lyptqby] humbly mentioned throughout the lesson that bringing up the gospel in everyday conversation came naturally to her. Which is ironic, considering that she sees herself as so dependent on god, adamantly opposing herself. You'd think that a religion with the concept of free will brought in would concentrate more on individual deeds, instead of heaping all the good on god. I wonder if it's a side effect of living in such a misogynistic culture. She has always been told that she is not important, so she takes it and tries to replace self-worth with god? I don't know, but either way, I find it disturbing.

[the_antithesis]

"We shouldn't be prideful, because everything good about us comes from God."

That's a very prideful thing to say.

[ApostateLois]

If people can be good ONLY through the Christian god, then what about Hindus? Buddhists? Muslims? Atheists? Pagans? Anyone at all who is a good person but does not worship the Christian deity? Presumably, being a good person is some kind of gift from God, without which nobody could ever be kind, compassionate, loving, helpful, etc. Why would God grant this gift to people who don't even believe in him? Some, in fact, have never even heard of him and would be unimpressed if they did. Yet they are decent people, too.

Everything your friend says flies in the face of the notion that God punishes disbelievers and has a place of everlasting torment for them if they die without repenting. Why the fuck would he reward them with goodness here on Earth, even though they don't believe in him, then punish them for eternity for not believing in him?

And let's not forget that some of the great men of God in the Bible were absolute assholes. I would consider a person to be very, very bad if he believed he heard the voice of God telling him to murder his own son, but Abraham is hailed as a biblical hero! Noah was a drunkard, David had a guy killed so he could fuck his wife, etc. Did these bad traits come from the devil? Why would God have anything to do with such horrible people?

[Thumpalumpacus]

To be honest, I think it's better to not argue, sometimes -- rather, just converse.

Some of the best conversations I've had about religion were with a couple of young Mormon door-beaters who stumbled upon me, sitting on my porch having a beer and a go at my guitar, when my neighbor whom they'd come to visit wasn't home.  These two young guys were cool, not pushy or preachy, and willing to have a conversation even after I told them I'd been an atheist longer than they'd been alive.  On that basis, we had several hours of conversations which did not focus on their faith at all, but which did not shy away from our divergent views, either.

I hope that some of the seeds I planted about "thinking for yourself" and the problem of evil and other tenets of my outlook  fell on fertile soil.  

If you come across someone who chalks everything up to the Christian god, ask them about cancer.  They will answer blaming Satan, usually ... but who created him?  Who knew everything before Creation ever happened?

These aren't hard questions to ask; they're only hard to answer, and that only for the believer.

[Savior2006]

So, today I was forced to come along on a "home teaching" assignment. Basically, two men go visit a couple of assigned people in the church every month, and share a church message with them. This month's message was about missionary work (bleh), but somehow, at one of the apartments we visited, the conversation turned to the doctrine that we were "nothing without god". I was pretty sick of preaching for the day, so when our home teachee mentioned that "everything good about us comes from god", I questioned that. I'll recall the conversation to the best of my ability here:

"We shouldn't be prideful, because everything good about us comes from God."

"I disagree. There are a ton of really good people outside of the church."

"God still made them, and all their good traits come from god." (despite the fact that some of those people don't believe in god)

"But I find that a really depressing concept. I think that we should give ourselves some credit for accomplishments or good things that we do."

"It's a beautiful concept!"

My companion chimes in: "Well, the whole point of the church is to progress and improve ourselves."

"The improvement comes from god!"

"Well, that doesn't mean that we haven't improved independently of god."

"We are completely dependent on god!"


From that point, it became a discussion of semantics. It's hard to argue with believers from a believer's point of view. I can't exactly throw out atheistic concepts in my situation, although later in the discussion, I tried to bring up some points to make them think. Slipping into the gospel teacher is disturbingly easy for me. I know all the answers and the psychological ways to teach them. I had to stop myself a couple times from teaching the lesson well. It's weird.

But anyway, I thought it very strange that this girl dismissed any and every shred of self-dependence I tried to give her. She had [s:2o522a08]bragged about[/s:2o522a08] humbly mentioned throughout the lesson that bringing up the gospel in everyday conversation came naturally to her. Which is ironic, considering that she sees herself as so dependent on god, adamantly opposing herself. You'd think that a religion with the concept of free will brought in would concentrate more on individual deeds, instead of heaping all the good on god. I wonder if it's a side effect of living in such a misogynistic culture. She has always been told that she is not important, so she takes it and tries to replace self-worth with god? I don't know, but either way, I find it disturbing.

It all boils down to double think that you have doubtless heard before. Something good happens? It's due to God because of God's unchanging will. Something bad happens? Somehow it's NOT due to God because of God's unchanging will. Remember all the stories you ever heard about any kind of domestic abuse? Remember how the battered victim (oftentimes a female) would deflect blame from the abusing asshole of a husband no matter what he did? It's like that...except with invisible magic.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Including my dad's terminal cancer.

Got to love the stupidity.

[Noodle]

Dude,
You're a Mormon, right? I recognize the patter. Born in the Church?
Been there, done that, got the scars.
I was also born a Mormon, way, way, back.

I know exactly how you feel. Over 70 years I've seen the 'Only True Church as restored by God' change its Doctrine whenever subjected to legal, political, or social pressure. Before it was, supposedly 'Perfect' 'unique', 'different', and 'Restored' exactly the way God wanted it to be, but not any more. Apart from the belief in the Book of Mormon, and the ever weakening 'Word of Wisdom', its become exactly the same as any other Jesus cult.

The 'Articles of Faith' are recited by rout, but nobody thinks about it, and mostly cling to beliefs that they or other converts brought with them from other 'Churches', that bear little real resemblance to the 'Articles of Faith'. Members born in the Church usually just get swept up in the tide, and any disagreement with new trends simply gets slapped down.

The 'Book of Mormon' that is supposedly a perfect book, translated by God, through Joseph Smith, has changed over the years. Although, once when I challenged my Home teachers on this, they denied that it had been changed.
When I took out an old copy, one I was given at my Baptism in 1951, and compared it to one they were using, they went like 'Umm... er... ah... we'd like to discuss the matter further, but we can't right now, we have other visits to make, can we close with a word of prayer?'

The next month they showed me even a newer 'Book of Mormon', and in the front it said clearly: 'Some minor errors in the text have been perpetuated in past editions of the Book of Mormon, This edition contains corrections that seem appropriate to bring this material into conformity with prepublication manuscripts and early editions edited by Joseph Smith.'
Joseph Smith edited God's word??
Maybe God isn't such a good proof reader after all, seeing as mere mortals have to correct His work.
Nice cop-out. I was a printer for 50 years, I know what these 'revisions' to newer editions of any publication entails.
My Home Teachers said that it was only to correct minor 'printer's errors' (a BS excuse used by everyone for 'bad copy') such as spelling and minor errors in grammar. They forget to mention that such 'minor' corrections to grammar and even such 'minor' things as punctuation, can, and do, have a massive effect on the text, that can change the meaning of whole sentences.
The seem appropriate bit, seems to mean 'change anything we like, to suite our thinking'
You can see for yourself how 'Mormon Doctrine' has been changed and manipulated, If you can get your hands on an old (like 50 or more years old) 'Book of Mormon', and compare it to the new one.
I still have some old Sunday School, MIA  (Not sure if it still exists under that name), Priesthood, and even some Relief Society lesson manuals. They've all changed over the years with regards to Church Doctrine.

Had a brother-in-law who was a Bishop, and he always sneered at other Churches, (which good Mormons never do), and called them 'Foam rubber' religions that cave in where there's pressure. Pity he didn't look closer to home.

As you see, Mormon Doctrine, is as flexible as cooked spaghetti. Members seem to interpret things as they see them, if they don't see them, they make them up.
I've moved around a lot, and attended many wards, and they all interpret doctrine differently, even changes in a Bishopric can result in another interpretation of the 'Gospel'. I've seen Changes in the First Presidency result in massive changes, but then, the Prophet, like the Pope, is Infallible.
So, don't bluff yourself, it's not really about 'Mormon Doctrine'
Members arguing around points of 'Doctrine' merely distract them from the main agenda.

So, what's the main agenda?

Bottom line: It's all about Money, Dude.

Ask what happens to your Tithes - It goes directly into the Church coffers, and from there into the pockets of the General Authorities.
The Church is a Corporation, and the General Authorities are all shareholders and directors.  

Mormons supposedly don't have any paid ministers  but these guys do get paid - handsomely. They're all stinking rich. (Romney for example) They say that these guys were independently wealthy before they became members of the Presidency. Okay, so how come there are no 'poor' people in the Presidency? Can only rich people be ordained to the Presidency? Can only rich people become Prophets? (used to be the President was 'the only true Prophet', but it seems everyone from the 'Council of Seventy' on up, are now considered Prophets)

So much for 'blessed be the poor...' and rich people getting into Heaven with more difficulty than '...a camel going through the eye of a needle.'

Think about it, here's a Corporation with hardly any running expenses:
Rich people raking it in, at the top.
You pay your Tithing which makes these rich men richer.
In return, you get to work for them without pay.
You get the 'privilege' of raising money for them to partially cover the cost of building new Chapels, Temples, and other Church buildings, which become Church property, and as such, a Church asset, enriching the fat cats even more.
And you are further required to pay 'Levies' to cover the cost of maintenance for these buildings. - No expense to the Church there.
You get to join their 'Sales Force', aka Missionary program, work for two years, (or is it longer now?) without pay, and you get to pay your own living and traveling expenses. It seems to me that everyone, even ol'farts are expected to serve a mission sooner or later, these days. - Only income, no expense to the Church there.
Plus, if you're not actively on a mission, you get to support their 'Sales Force'  by making cash donations to the 'Missionary Fund', to help those who simply can't afford to serve on a Mission. - No expense to the Church there either.
You also get to pay for all the tracts and 'Books of Mormon' they give away, by donating to the 'Book of Mormon Fund' - No expense to the Church there.
Plus, in theory, you get to take care of the poor and needy by starving yourself for 24 hrs. every month, and giving the money you 'saved' to the Church as 'Fast Offerings'. Personally, I've never seen any kind of assistance being given to even 'strong' members in distress from this fund, never-mind 'outsiders'. Usually fellow members have to dig into their own pockets to help out.

So you see, its all comes down to the money. If you don't honor your 'financial obligations', (and they don't just take your word for it either, they check up on you, just like the IRS, via the annual 'Tithing Settlement'.) then you don't get a 'Temple Recommend'. No 'Temple Recommend', no visit to the Temple. No visit to the Temple, sorry for you but, at best, you only get to go to some kind of second class Heaven. At worst, bend down real low, put your head between your legs, and kiss your ass goodbye!

Money, Money Money!

Sorry Dude, This was supposed to be just a short post, but its turned into a bit of a rant, didn't mean for that to happen. :oops:

Usale kahle,
Noodle.

[SGOS]

I find it disturbing.

Baseless assumptions that are used to "prove" one's point of view should be disturbing.  It's even more disturbing that this kind of stuff is the norm.  Over and over again, God is given credit for so much by so many people.  It's odd that this continues, considering that no one has ever proven he even exists in the first place.

Anyway, I enjoyed your post, even though it was disturbing.

[BlackL1ght]

[spoil:7d48x3vs]Dude,
You're a Mormon, right? I recognize the patter. Born in the Church?
Been there, done that, got the scars.
I was also born a Mormon, way, way, back.

I know exactly how you feel. Over 70 years I've seen the 'Only True Church as restored by God' change its Doctrine whenever subjected to legal, political, or social pressure. Before it was, supposedly 'Perfect' 'unique', 'different', and 'Restored' exactly the way God wanted it to be, but not any more. Apart from the belief in the Book of Mormon, and the ever weakening 'Word of Wisdom', its become exactly the same as any other Jesus cult.

The 'Articles of Faith' are recited by rout, but nobody thinks about it, and mostly cling to beliefs that they or other converts brought with them from other 'Churches', that bear little real resemblance to the 'Articles of Faith'. Members born in the Church usually just get swept up in the tide, and any disagreement with new trends simply gets slapped down.

The 'Book of Mormon' that is supposedly a perfect book, translated by God, through Joseph Smith, has changed over the years. Although, once when I challenged my Home teachers on this, they denied that it had been changed.
When I took out an old copy, one I was given at my Baptism in 1951, and compared it to one they were using, they went like 'Umm... er... ah... we'd like to discuss the matter further, but we can't right now, we have other visits to make, can we close with a word of prayer?'

The next month they showed me even a newer 'Book of Mormon', and in the front it said clearly: 'Some minor errors in the text have been perpetuated in past editions of the Book of Mormon, This edition contains corrections that seem appropriate to bring this material into conformity with prepublication manuscripts and early editions edited by Joseph Smith.'
Joseph Smith edited God's word??
Maybe God isn't such a good proof reader after all, seeing as mere mortals have to correct His work.
Nice cop-out. I was a printer for 50 years, I know what these 'revisions' to newer editions of any publication entails.
My Home Teachers said that it was only to correct minor 'printer's errors' (a BS excuse used by everyone for 'bad copy') such as spelling and minor errors in grammar. They forget to mention that such 'minor' corrections to grammar and even such 'minor' things as punctuation, can, and do, have a massive effect on the text, that can change the meaning of whole sentences.
The seem appropriate bit, seems to mean 'change anything we like, to suite our thinking'
You can see for yourself how 'Mormon Doctrine' has been changed and manipulated, If you can get your hands on an old (like 50 or more years old) 'Book of Mormon', and compare it to the new one.
I still have some old Sunday School, MIA  (Not sure if it still exists under that name), Priesthood, and even some Relief Society lesson manuals. They've all changed over the years with regards to Church Doctrine.

Had a brother-in-law who was a Bishop, and he always sneered at other Churches, (which good Mormons never do), and called them 'Foam rubber' religions that cave in where there's pressure. Pity he didn't look closer to home.

As you see, Mormon Doctrine, is as flexible as cooked spaghetti. Members seem to interpret things as they see them, if they don't see them, they make them up.
I've moved around a lot, and attended many wards, and they all interpret doctrine differently, even changes in a Bishopric can result in another interpretation of the 'Gospel'. I've seen Changes in the First Presidency result in massive changes, but then, the Prophet, like the Pope, is Infallible.
So, don't bluff yourself, it's not really about 'Mormon Doctrine'
Members arguing around points of 'Doctrine' merely distract them from the main agenda.

So, what's the main agenda?

Bottom line: It's all about Money, Dude.

Ask what happens to your Tithes - It goes directly into the Church coffers, and from there into the pockets of the General Authorities.
The Church is a Corporation, and the General Authorities are all shareholders and directors.  

Mormons supposedly don't have any paid ministers  but these guys do get paid - handsomely. They're all stinking rich. (Romney for example) They say that these guys were independently wealthy before they became members of the Presidency. Okay, so how come there are no 'poor' people in the Presidency? Can only rich people be ordained to the Presidency? Can only rich people become Prophets? (used to be the President was 'the only true Prophet', but it seems everyone from the 'Council of Seventy' on up, are now considered Prophets)

So much for 'blessed be the poor...' and rich people getting into Heaven with more difficulty than '...a camel going through the eye of a needle.'

Think about it, here's a Corporation with hardly any running expenses:
Rich people raking it in, at the top.
You pay your Tithing which makes these rich men richer.
In return, you get to work for them without pay.
You get the 'privilege' of raising money for them to partially cover the cost of building new Chapels, Temples, and other Church buildings, which become Church property, and as such, a Church asset, enriching the fat cats even more.
And you are further required to pay 'Levies' to cover the cost of maintenance for these buildings. - No expense to the Church there.
You get to join their 'Sales Force', aka Missionary program, work for two years, (or is it longer now?) without pay, and you get to pay your own living and traveling expenses. It seems to me that everyone, even ol'farts are expected to serve a mission sooner or later, these days. - Only income, no expense to the Church there.
Plus, if you're not actively on a mission, you get to support their 'Sales Force'  by making cash donations to the 'Missionary Fund', to help those who simply can't afford to serve on a Mission. - No expense to the Church there either.
You also get to pay for all the tracts and 'Books of Mormon' they give away, by donating to the 'Book of Mormon Fund' - No expense to the Church there.
Plus, in theory, you get to take care of the poor and needy by starving yourself for 24 hrs. every month, and giving the money you 'saved' to the Church as 'Fast Offerings'. Personally, I've never seen any kind of assistance being given to even 'strong' members in distress from this fund, never-mind 'outsiders'. Usually fellow members have to dig into their own pockets to help out.

So you see, its all comes down to the money. If you don't honor your 'financial obligations', (and they don't just take your word for it either, they check up on you, just like the IRS, via the annual 'Tithing Settlement'.) then you don't get a 'Temple Recommend'. No 'Temple Recommend', no visit to the Temple. No visit to the Temple, sorry for you but, at best, you only get to go to some kind of second class Heaven. At worst, bend down real low, put your head between your legs, and kiss your ass goodbye!

Money, Money Money!

Sorry Dude, This was supposed to be just a short post, but its turned into a bit of a rant, didn't mean for that to happen. :oops:

Usale kahle,
Noodle.[/spoil:7d48x3vs]

Yep, you just about summed it up, Noodle. I'm assuming some missionaries got to you at some point? Anyway, glad you're out of that now. Scars is the right word, to be sure.

To be honest, I think it's better to not argue, sometimes -- rather, just converse.

Some of the best conversations I've had about religion were with a couple of young Mormon door-beaters who stumbled upon me, sitting on my porch having a beer and a go at my guitar, when my neighbor whom they'd come to visit wasn't home.  These two young guys were cool, not pushy or preachy, and willing to have a conversation even after I told them I'd been an atheist longer than they'd been alive.  On that basis, we had several hours of conversations which did not focus on their faith at all, but which did not shy away from our divergent views, either.

I hope that some of the seeds I planted about "thinking for yourself" and the problem of evil and other tenets of my outlook  fell on fertile soil.  

If you come across someone who chalks everything up to the Christian god, ask them about cancer.  They will answer blaming Satan, usually ... but who created him?  Who knew everything before Creation ever happened?

These aren't hard questions to ask; they're only hard to answer, and that only for the believer.

Conversation was all I intended to have, but its hard to have a conversation when someone is so insistent on their correctness. I tried to show that people could esteem themselves even within the church, but she was so insistent that we were nothing without god that anything I said made my ideas sound inferior and prideful. However, first of all, that's not even really doctrine for the mormons, it's just something that she personally believes. I'm sure it could be derived from teachings and scripture, but the complete lack of self esteem can be very dangerous. To be honest, she seems to me like one of those people who uses Jesus as a crutch in order to help herself feel better. Very unstable. I don't know her all that well, but I know some of the symptoms of that instability, as I've been in that position myself at times.

[mykcob4]

Anytime a believer tells me something came from god, I demand that they prove it. I don't mean that they prayed and got what they wanted. I mean actually prove that something came directly from a god. They can't do it. They have never been able to do it. All they do is start screaming passages from the bible, talk about hearsay evidence of supposed miracles that they may have or may not have experienced, but there is never ANY evidence of a god whatsoever.
Then they get frustrated and start with the FAITH nonsense, which is an excuse for having NO proof!
Heres what I mean. I have a close Jewish friend who just wacthed his father die. My friend says that there is a god because with his father's last breath he said "Im' ready, just don't pull me." My friend claimed he was talking to someone that they couldn't see. Out of sympathy I didn't rebutt this story in anyway, but what does it actually prove? Nothing, not a thing, it proves nothing.
My friend is convinced that it proves a god and an after life.
I think he is overwhelmed emotionally and is just buying in to the rhetoric that is used at such a time.
And that is pisses me off by religions. They uses stressful situations to apply their nonsense and then claim that their religion is fact. There is NOTHING factual about it.
I could go shoot someone, claim it was written, and when I am prosecuted produce my version of a religious book(That I wrote) and show where I wrote that I was commanded to shoot that individual.
There has never been any predictions made in ANY book or by any person. NO one has produced a god, and there has never been any miracles! That is just fact!

[BlackL1ght]

The statement that humans are horrible beasts without god is a strange one. Why would an omnipotent, omnibenevolent god make creatures that are so horrible? You'd think he'd make good people, right?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Conversation was all I intended to have, but its hard to have a conversation when someone is so insistent on their correctness. I tried to show that people could esteem themselves even within the church, but she was so insistent that we were nothing without god that anything I said made my ideas sound inferior and prideful. However, first of all, that's not even really doctrine for the mormons, it's just something that she personally believes. I'm sure it could be derived from teachings and scripture, but the complete lack of self esteem can be very dangerous. To be honest, she seems to me like one of those people who uses Jesus as a crutch in order to help herself feel better. Very unstable. I don't know her all that well, but I know some of the symptoms of that instability, as I've been in that position myself at times.

I hear you.  I didn't mean to make it sound like you blew some chance or something.  When someone's walls are up, nothing can be said.  I've found too that how tightly a believer clings to his beliefs has much to do with the circumstances the believer is going through at the time.  There are times when they can be reached, and times when they cannot be reached.  You apparently caught one of the latter times.

[BlackL1ght]

Conversation was all I intended to have, but its hard to have a conversation when someone is so insistent on their correctness. I tried to show that people could esteem themselves even within the church, but she was so insistent that we were nothing without god that anything I said made my ideas sound inferior and prideful. However, first of all, that's not even really doctrine for the mormons, it's just something that she personally believes. I'm sure it could be derived from teachings and scripture, but the complete lack of self esteem can be very dangerous. To be honest, she seems to me like one of those people who uses Jesus as a crutch in order to help herself feel better. Very unstable. I don't know her all that well, but I know some of the symptoms of that instability, as I've been in that position myself at times.

I hear you.  I didn't mean to make it sound like you blew some chance or something.  When someone's walls are up, nothing can be said.  I've found too that how tightly a believer clings to his beliefs has much to do with the circumstances the believer is going through at the time.  There are times when they can be reached, and times when they cannot be reached.  You apparently caught one of the latter times.

Yeah, that sounds about right. Taking offense to something is often the best way to argue against it. It wins you the crowd, at the very least :/

[widdershins]

I always marveled at the "nothing without God" argument.  The church of my youth often told us how everything we were was due to God and we were "nothing without him", yet they would argue venomously against the concept that they needed God because they were weak.  It seemed so stupid since they accepted it wholeheartedly until the concept came from an atheist.

Anyway this very concept is what taught me that a relationship with God was an abusive relationship.  The psychology behind being "nothing without God" is identical to the psychology behind battered spouse syndrome.  Not to mention the whole, "You know I love you, baby...but...if you ever leave me I will FUCKING LIGHT YOUR ASS ON FIRE!" part.  You learn how "WORTHLESS" you are and how "NOBODY ELSE COULD EVERY LOVE YOU" like God does, not to mention you learn how you get "PUNISHED BECAUSE YOU FUCKING DESERVE IT".  It's really pretty damned eery how closely a relationship with God resembles an actual abusive, controlling relationship, right down to the threats that if you ever leave you'll be killed because you'd deserve to be.

[BlackL1ght]

I always marveled at the "nothing without God" argument.  The church of my youth often told us how everything we were was due to God and we were "nothing without him", yet they would argue venomously against the concept that they needed God because they were weak.  It seemed so stupid since they accepted it wholeheartedly until the concept came from an atheist.

Anyway this very concept is what taught me that a relationship with God was an abusive relationship.  The psychology behind being "nothing without God" is identical to the psychology behind battered spouse syndrome.  Not to mention the whole, "You know I love you, baby...but...if you ever leave me I will FUCKING LIGHT YOUR ASS ON FIRE!" part.  You learn how "WORTHLESS" you are and how "NOBODY ELSE COULD EVERY LOVE YOU" like God does, not to mention you learn how you get "PUNISHED BECAUSE YOU FUCKING DESERVE IT".  It's really pretty damned eery how closely a relationship with God resembles an actual abusive, controlling relationship, right down to the threats that if you ever leave you'll be killed because you'd deserve to be.

Wow, that's creepy. I'd never thought of it that way, but you're absolutely right. Every one of those things is valid. It all comes down to submission, doesn't it? Islam actually literally means submission. So the leaders of said religions are actually either abused or abusers, depending on how they see things.