Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Misotheism
View on Wikipedia| Part of a series on |
| Theodicy |
|---|
Misotheism is the "hatred of God" or "hatred of the gods" (from the Greek adjective misotheos (μισόθεος) "hating the gods" or "God-hating" – a compound of, μῖσος, "hatred" and, θεός, "god").
A related concept is dystheism (Ancient Greek: δύσ θεός, "bad god"), the belief that a god is not wholly good, and is evil. Trickster gods found in polytheistic belief systems often have a dystheistic nature. One example is Eshu, a trickster god from Yoruba religion who deliberately fostered violence between groups of people for his own deeds, saying that "causing ire is my greatest happiness." Many polytheistic deities since prehistoric times have been assumed to be neither good nor evil (or to have both qualities). Likewise, the concept of the demiurge in some versions of ancient Gnosticism is often portrayed as a generally evil entity. In conceptions of God as the summum bonum (the highest good), the proposition of God not being wholly good would be an oxymoron. Nevertheless, in monotheism, the sentiment may arise in the context of theodicy (the problem of evil, the Euthyphro dilemma) or as a rejection or criticism of particular depictions or attributions of the monotheistic god in certain belief systems (as expressed by Thomas Paine, a deist). A famous literary expression of misotheistic sentiment is Goethe's Prometheus, composed in the 1770s.
A historical proposition close to dystheism is the deus deceptor, "evil demon" (dieu trompeur) of René Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy, which has been interpreted by Protestant critics as the blasphemous proposition that God exhibits malevolent intent. But Richard Kennington[1][2] states that Descartes never declared his "evil genius" to be omnipotent, but merely no less powerful than he is deceitful, and thus not explicitly an equivalent to God, the singular omnipotent deity.
Thus, Hrafnkell, protagonist of the eponymous Hrafnkels saga set in the 10th century, as his temple to Freyr is burnt and he is enslaved, states that "I think it is folly to have faith in gods", never performing another blót (sacrifice), a position described in the sagas as goðlauss, "godless". Jacob Grimm in his Teutonic Mythology observes that:
It is remarkable that Old Norse legend occasionally mentions certain men who, turning away in utter disgust and doubt from the heathen faith, placed their reliance on their own strength and virtue. Thus in the Sôlar lioð 17 we read of Vêbogi and Râdey á sjálf sig þau trûðu, "in themselves they trusted".[3]
Terminology
[edit]- Misotheism first appears in the Chambers Dictionary in 1907.[4][5] The Greek μισόθεος (misotheos) is found in Aeschylus (Agamemnon 1090). The English word appears as a nonce-coinage, used by Thomas De Quincey in 1846.[6] It is comparable to the original meaning of Greek atheos of "rejecting the gods, rejected by the gods, godforsaken". Strictly speaking, the term connotes an attitude towards the gods (one of hatred) rather than making a statement about their nature. Bernard Schweizer (2002) stated "that the English vocabulary seems to lack a suitable word for outright hatred of God... [even though] history records a number of outspoken misotheists", believing "misotheism" to be his original coinage. Applying the term to the work of Philip Pullman (His Dark Materials), Schweizer clarifies that he does not mean the term to carry the negative connotations of misanthropy: "To me, the word connotes a heroic stance of humanistic affirmation and the courage to defy the powers that rule the universe."[7]
- Dystheism is the belief that God exists but is not wholly good, or that he might even be evil. The opposite concept is eutheism, the belief that God exists and is wholly good. Eutheism and dystheism are straightforward Greek formations from eu- and dys- + theism, paralleling atheism; δύσθεος in the sense of "godless, ungodly" appearing e.g. in Aeschylus (Agamemnon 1590). The terms are nonce coinages, used by University of Texas at Austin philosophy professor Robert C. Koons in a 1998 lecture. According to Koons, "eutheism is the thesis that God exists and is wholly good, [... while] dystheism is the thesis that God exists but is not wholly good." However, many proponents of dystheistic ideas (including Elie Wiesel and David Blumenthal) do not offer those ideas in the spirit of hating God.[8] Their work notes God's apparent evil or at least indifferent disinterest in the welfare of humanity, but does not express hatred towards him because of it. A notable usage of the concept that the gods are either indifferent or actively hostile towards humanity is expressed in H. P. Lovecraft's literary philosophy of Cosmic indifferentism, which pervades the Cthulhu Mythos.[9]
Recent accounts distinguish misotheism, an attitude of hatred or moral opposition toward a deity, from dystheism (a deity not wholly good) and antitheism (opposition to theism). Bernard Schweizer treats misotheism as a strand of “religious dissent” that accepts a deity’s existence while rejecting divine goodness, modern primers likewise present it as a moral protest tradition (e.g., Dostoevsky’s “Rebellion”), not mere disbelief. The Greek root already appears in Aeschylus.[10][11]
- Maltheism is an ad-hoc coining appearing on Usenet in 1985,[12] referring to the belief in God's malevolence inspired by the thesis of Tim Maroney that "even if a God as described in the Bible does exist, he is not fit for worship due to his low moral standards."[13] The same term has also seen use among designers and players of role-playing games to describe a world with a malevolent deity.[14]
- Antitheism is direct opposition to theism. As such, it is generally manifested more as an opposition to belief in a god (to theism per se) than as opposition to gods themselves, making it more associated with antireligion, although Buddhism is generally considered to be a religion despite its status with respect to theism being more nebulous. Antitheism by this definition does not necessarily imply belief in any sort of god at all, it simply stands in opposition to the idea of theistic religion. Under this definition, antitheism is a rejection of theism that does not necessarily imply belief in gods on the part of the antitheist. Some might equate any form of antitheism to an overt opposition to God, since these beliefs run contrary to the idea of making devotion to God the highest priority in life, although those ideas would imply that God exists, and that he wishes to be worshiped, or to be believed in.[15]
- Certain forms of dualism make the assertion that the thing worshiped as God in this world is actually an evil impostor, but that a true benevolent deity worthy of being called "God" exists beyond this world. Thus, the Gnostics (see Sethian, Ophites) believed that God (the deity worshiped by Jews, Greek Pagan philosophers and Christians) was really an evil creator or demiurge that stood between us and some greater, more truly benevolent real deity. Similarly, Marcionites depicted God as represented in the Old Testament as a wrathful, malicious demiurge.[citation needed]
Theodicy
[edit]Dystheistic speculation arises from consideration of the problem of evil — the question of why God, who is supposedly omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, would allow evil to exist in the world. Koons notes that this is a theological problem only for a eutheist, since a dystheist would not find the existence of evil (or God's authorship of it) to be an obstacle to theistic belief. In fact, the dystheistic option would be a consistent non-contradictory response to the problem of evil. Thus Koons concludes that the problem of theodicy (explaining how God can be good despite the apparent contradiction presented in the problem of evil) does not pose a challenge to all possible forms of theism (i.e., that the problem of evil does not present a contradiction to someone who would believe that God exists but that he is not necessarily good).[citation needed]
This conclusion implicitly takes the first horn of the Euthyphro dilemma, asserting the independence of good and evil morality from God (as God is defined in monotheistic belief). Historically, the notion of "good" as an absolute concept has emerged in parallel with the notion of God being the singular entity identified with good. In this sense, dystheism amounts to the abandonment of a central feature of historical monotheism: the de facto association of God with the summum bonum.[citation needed]
Arthur Schopenhauer wrote: "This world could not have been the work of an all-loving being, but that of a devil, who had brought creatures into existence in order to delight in the sight of their sufferings."[citation needed]
Critics of Calvin's doctrines of predestination frequently argued that Calvin's doctrines did not successfully avoid describing God as "the author of evil".[citation needed]
Much of post-Holocaust theology, especially in Judaic theological circles, is devoted to a rethinking of God's goodness. Examples include the work of David R. Blumenthal, author of Facing the Abusing God (1993) and John K. Roth, whose essay "A Theodicy of Protest" is included in Encountering Evil: Live Options in Theodicy (1982):
Everything hinges on the proposition that God possesses—but fails to use well enough—the power to intervene decisively at any moment to make history's course less wasteful. Thus, in spite and because of his sovereignty, this God is everlastingly guilty and the degrees run from gross negligence to mass murder... To the extent that [people] are born with the potential and power to [do evil things], credit for that fact belongs elsewhere. "Elsewhere" is God's address.[16]
Deus deceptor
[edit]The deus deceptor (dieu trompeur), "deceptive god", is a concept of Cartesianism. Voetius accused Descartes of blasphemy in 1643. Jacques Triglandius and Jacobus Revius, theologians at Leiden University, made similar accusations in 1647, accusing Descartes of "hold[ing] God to be a deceiver", a position that they stated to be "contrary to the glory of God". Descartes was threatened with having his views condemned by a synod, but this was prevented by the intercession of the Prince of Orange (at the request of the French Ambassador Servien).[17] The accusations referenced a passage in the First Meditation where Descartes stated that he supposed not an optimal God but rather an evil demon "summe potens & callidus" ("most highly powerful and cunning"). The accusers identified Descartes' concept of a deus deceptor with his concept of an evil demon, stating that only an omnipotent God is "summe potens" and that describing the evil demon as such thus demonstrated the identity. Descartes' response to the accusations was that in that passage he had been expressly distinguishing between "the supremely good God, the source of truth, on the one hand, and the malicious demon on the other". He did not directly rebut the charge of implying that the evil demon was omnipotent, but asserted that simply describing something with "some attribute that in reality belongs only to God" does not mean that that something is being held to actually be a supreme God.[17]
The evil demon is omnipotent, Christian doctrine notwithstanding, and is seen as a key requirement for Descartes' argument by Cartesian scholars such as Alguié, Beck, Émile Bréhier, Chevalier, Frankfurt, Étienne Gilson, Anthony Kenny, Laporte, Kemp-Smith, and Wilson. The progression through the First Meditation, leading to the introduction of the concept of the evil genius at the end, is to introduce various categories into the set of dubitables, such as mathematics (i.e. Descartes' addition of 2 and 3 and counting the sides of a square). Although the hypothetical evil genius is never stated to be one and the same as the hypothetical "deus deceptor," (God the deceiver) the inference by the reader that they are is a natural one, and the requirement that the deceiver is capable of introducing deception even into mathematics is seen by commentators as a necessary part of Descartes' argument. Scholars contend that in fact Descartes was not introducing a new hypothetical, merely couching the idea of a deceptive God in terms that would not be offensive.[17]
Paul Erdős, the eccentric and extremely prolific Hungarian-born mathematician, referred to the notion of deus deceptor in a humorous context when he called God "the Supreme Fascist", who deliberately hid things from people, ranging from socks and passports to the most elegant of mathematical proofs.[citation needed] A similar sentiment is expressed by Douglas Adams in The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy in reference to the temptation of Adam and Eve by God:[citation needed]
[God] puts an apple tree in the middle of [the Garden of Eden] and says, do what you like guys, oh, but don't eat the apple. Surprise surprise, they eat it and he leaps out from behind a bush shouting "Gotcha." It wouldn't have made any difference if they hadn't eaten it...Because if you're dealing with somebody who has the sort of mentality which likes leaving hats on the pavement with bricks under them you know perfectly well they won't give up. They'll get you in the end.
In Jewish and Christian scriptures
[edit]There are various examples of arguable dystheism in the Bible, sometimes cited as arguments for atheism (e.g. Bertrand Russell 1957), most of them from the Pentateuch. A notable exception is the Book of Job, a classical case study of theodicy, which can be argued to consciously discuss the possibility of dystheism (e.g. Carl Jung, Answer to Job).
Thomas Paine wrote in The Age of Reason that "whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon than the word of God."[18] But Paine's perspective was a deistic one, critical more of common beliefs about God than of God himself.
The New Testament contains references to an "evil god", specifically the "prince of this world" (John 14:30, ὁ τοῦ κόσμου τούτου ἄρχων) or "god of this world" (2 Corinthians 4:4, ὁ θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου) who has "blinded the minds of men". Mainstream Christian theology sees these as references to Satan ("the Devil"), but Gnostics, Marcionites, and Manicheans saw these as references to Yahweh (God) himself.[citation needed]
In art and literature
[edit]Misotheistic and/or dystheistic expression has a long history in the arts and in literature. Bernard Schweizer's book Hating God: The Untold Story of Misotheism is devoted to this topic. He traces the history of ideas behind misotheism from the Book of Job, via Epicureanism and the twilight of Roman paganism, to deism, anarchism, Nietzschean philosophy, feminism, and radical humanism. The main literary figures in his study are Percy Bysshe Shelley, Algernon Swinburne, Zora Neale Hurston, Rebecca West, Elie Wiesel, Peter Shaffer, and Philip Pullman. Schweizer argues that literature is the preferred medium for the expression of God-hatred because the creative possibilities of literature allow writers to simultaneously unburden themselves of their misotheism while ingeniously veiling their blasphemy.[19]
Other examples include:
- Goethe's Prometheus[citation needed]
- the work of the Marquis de Sade[20]
- Emily Dickinson's poem "Apparently With No Surprise" depicts God as approving of suffering in the world, relating the tale of a flower "beheaded" by a late frost as the sun "measure[s] off another day for an approving God".[citation needed]
- Mark Twain (himself a Deist) argued against what he saw as the petty God many followed in a posthumously published book, The Bible According to Mark Twain: Writings on Heaven, Eden, and the Flood. He talks, in part, about the African "sleeping sickness", malaria.[citation needed]
- Ivan Karamazov in Fyodor Dostoevsky's 1879 The Brothers Karamazov articulates what might be termed a dystheistic rejection of God. Koons covered this argument in the lecture immediately following the one referenced above. It was also discussed by Peter S. Fosl in his essay titled "The Moral Imperative to Rebel Against God".
- Konrad, the protagonist of Adam Mickiewicz's Forefathers' Eve, is close to calling the God a tsar, an ultimate evil (since when Mickiewicz wrote his work, Poland was under Russian occupation). He wants to do that, because God didn't respond to his pleas about giving him the power to rule over people's emotion. He loses his strength, and Satan does it for him.[citation needed]
In more recent times, the sentiment is present in a variety of media:
Poetry and drama
[edit]The characters in several of Tennessee Williams' plays express dystheistic attitudes, including the Rev. T. Lawrence Shannon in The Night of the Iguana.[citation needed]
Robert Frost's poem "Design" questions how God could have created death if he were benevolent.[citation needed]
Peter Shaffer's play Amadeus (1979) has the character Salieri rebel against a God he feels neglected and humiliated by.[citation needed]
In Jewish author Elie Wiesel's play The Trial of God (1979), the survivors of a pogrom, in which most of the inhabitants of a 17th-century Jewish village were massacred, put God on trial for his cruelty and indifference to their misery. The play is based on an actual trial Wiesel participated in that was conducted by inmates of the Auschwitz concentration camp during the Nazi holocaust, but it also references a number of other incidents in Jewish history including a similar trial conducted by the Hasidic Rabbi Levi Yosef Yitzhak of Berdichev:
Men and women are being beaten, tortured and killed. True, they are victims of men. But the killers kill in God's name. Not all? True, but let one killer kill for God's glory, and God is guilty. Every person who suffers or causes suffering, every woman who is raped, every child who is tormented implicates Him. What, you need more? A hundred or a thousand? Listen, either he is responsible or he is not. If he is, let's judge him. If he is not, let him stop judging us.[citation needed]
In Alan Parker's Oscar-winning 1980 feature film Fame, one of the main characters (played by Barry Miller) makes an explicit statement against God. Playing an aspiring stand-up comedian who is asked in an acting class to talk about an experience that has affected him deeply in order to sharpen his skills as a performer, he delivers an extended uncut monologue (rare for a mainstream Hollywood film at that time) that heavily criticizes both modern capitalism and religion, concluding with the line "and then we can all go pray to the asshole God who fucked everything up in the first place".[citation needed]
Modern literature
[edit]Several non-Jewish authors share Wiesel's concerns about God's nature, including Salman Rushdie (The Satanic Verses, Shalimar the Clown)[citation needed] and Anne Provoost (In the Shadow of the Ark):
Why would you trust a God that doesn't give us the right book? Throughout history, he's given the Jewish people a book, he's given the Christians a book, and he's given the Muslims books, and there are big similarities between these books, but there are also contradictions. ... He needs to come back and create clarity and not ... let us fight over who's right. He should make it clear. So, my personal answer to your question, "Should we trust [a God who can't get things right]", I wouldn't.[21]
The writing of Sir Kingsley Amis contains some misotheistic themes; e.g. in The Green Man (God's appearance as the young man), and in The Anti-Death League (the anonymous poem received by the chaplain).[citation needed]
Speculative fiction
[edit]A number of speculative fiction works present a dystheistic perspective, at least as far back as the works of H. P. Lovecraft and Olaf Stapledon's influential philosophical short novel Star Maker.
By the 1970s, Harlan Ellison even described dystheism as a bit of a science fiction cliché. Ellison himself has dealt with the theme in his "The Deathbird", the title story of Deathbird Stories, a collection based on the theme of (for the most part) malevolent modern-day gods. Lester del Rey's "Evensong" (the first story in Harlan Ellison's much-acclaimed Dangerous Visions anthology), tells the story of a fugitive God hunted down across the universe by a vengeful humanity which seeks to "put him in his place". "Faith of Our Fathers" by Philip K. Dick, also from the same anthology, features a horrifying vision of a being, possibly God, who is all-devouring and amoral. Philip Pullman's previously mentioned trilogy, His Dark Materials, presented the theme of a negligent or evil God to a wider audience, as depicted in the 2007 film The Golden Compass based on the first book of this trilogy.
The original series of Star Trek featured episodes with dystheistic themes, amongst them "The Squire of Gothos", "Who Mourns for Adonais?", "For the World Is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky", and "The Return of the Archons". In "Encounter at Farpoint", the pilot episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation, Captain Jean-Luc Picard informs Q, a trickster with god-like powers similar to the antagonist in the aforementioned "Squire of Gothos" episode, that 24th-century humans no longer had any need to depend upon or worship god figures. This is an amplification of the tempered anti-theistic sentiment from "Who Mourns for Adonais?", in which Captain James T. Kirk tells Apollo that "Mankind has no need for gods, we find the one quite adequate." A later episode, "Who Watches the Watchers", depicts accidentally reviving theistic belief in a more primitive species as a negative thing which must be stopped. In Star Trek: Deep Space Nine it is revealed that the Klingon creation myth involves the first Klingons killing the gods that created them because, "They were more trouble than they were worth."
In the film Pitch Black, anti-hero protagonist Richard B. Riddick stated his own belief, after an imam accuses him of atheism: "Think someone could spend half their life in a slam with a horse bit in their mouth and not believe? Think he could start out in some liquor store trash bin with an umbilical cord wrapped around his neck and not believe? Got it all wrong, holy man. I absolutely believe in God... and I absolutely hate the fucker."
Robert A. Heinlein's book Job: A Comedy of Justice, which is mostly about religious institutions, ends with an appearance by Yahweh which is far from complimentary.
The Athar, a fictional organization from the D&D's Planescape Campaign Setting denies the divinity of the setting's deities. They do, however, tend to worship "The Great Unknown" in their place. In the Pathfinder universe, the nation of Rahadoum bans the worship of the setting's deities. They do not deny the deities' power or divinity, but instead believe that worshiping a deity is akin to enslaving ones' self and that mortals' problems are best solved without the interference of higher powers.
In the 2013 film Prisoners, Holly Jones and her husband Isaac lost their faith in God after their son died of cancer. Since then, they have been kidnapping and murdering children in order to make other parents lose faith in God and turning them into revenge-driven hollow shells of their former selves, i.e. spreading their misotheism to other people. As Holly Jones states to Keller Dover near the end of the film: "Making children disappear is the war we wage with God. Makes people lose their faith, turns them into demons like you."
In the DC Extended Universe film Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Lex Luthor has a misotheistic view of God, believing that if God was omnipotent, then he logically could not be omnibenevolent and vice versa (the theological problem of evil), thereby solidifying his belief that power cannot be innocent. He has a penchant for constantly implementing allusions to major figures of both pagan and biblical theology, with him notably comparing himself to Prometheus, General Zod to Icarus, and Superman to Zeus, Horus, Apollo, Jehovah and Satan. He even compares himself to the biblical God in one way, claiming to hate "the sin, not the sinner", and plays God by creating the monster Doomsday.
In the season 1 of Luke Cage, Willis Stryker's misotheism seemed to enforce his revenge mission against his half-brother Luke Cage, quoting several Bible verses that directly link to Lukes's supposed betrayal against Stryker. The Judas Bullet was designed to symbolize this act of treachery; stating "one Judas to another" before shooting Luke in the abdomen and vowing to repeat the same words that Cain said to his father after killing Abel when he finally did kill Cage.
Gorr the God Butcher is a prime example of misotheism in Marvel comics. Created by Jason Aaron and Esad Ribić in 2013, this character embodies misotheism through his crusade to exterminate all deities in the universe after discovering their indifference to mortal suffering. Gorr's characterization illustrates how misotheism can arise from the betrayal of religious expectations rather than simple disbelief. The character, portrayed by Christian Bale, was later adapted in the film Thor: Love and Thunder (2022), bringing this depiction of misotheism to a wider audience.[22]
Popular music
[edit]Misotheism is a 2008 album by Belgian black metal band Gorath.
Dystheistic sentiment has also made its way into popular music, evincing itself in controversial songs like "Dear God"[23] by the band XTC (later covered by Sarah McLachlan) and "Blasphemous Rumours"[24] by Depeche Mode, which tells the story of a teenage girl who attempted suicide, survived, and turned her life over to God, only to be hit by a car, wind up on life support, and eventually die. A good deal of Gary Numan's work, specifically the album Exile, is laden with misotheistic themes.
The output of Oscar-winning songwriter/composer Randy Newman also includes several songs expressing dystheistic sentiment, including the ironic "He Gives Us All His Love" and the more overtly maltheistic "God's Song (That's Why I Love Mankind)",[25] both from his acclaimed 1972 album Sail Away. In the latter song, Newman bemoans the futility of dealing with God whose attitude towards humanity he sees as one of contempt and cruelty.
The song "God Made" by Andrew Jackson Jihad proposes dystheism and has an implied hatred for God. More specifically, their song "Be Afraid of Jesus" is about a vengeful Christ although this could be a critique of fundamentalist hate speech.
"God Am" by Alice in Chains from their self-titled album has many misotheistic themes about the perceived apathy of God towards the evil in this world.
"Godwhacker" by Steely Dan from their Everything Must Go album developed from a lyric frontman Donald Fagen wrote a few days after his mother died of Alzheimer's. "It's about an elite squad of assassins whose sole assignment is to find a way into heaven and take out God", he later explained. "If the Deity actually existed, what sane person wouldn't consider this to be justifiable homicide?"[citation needed]
In the song "Terrible Lie" by Nine Inch Nails, Trent Reznor expresses anger, confusion, and sadness towards God and the world he created.
"Judith" by A Perfect Circle is a satirical song that places blame on God for the illness of the lead singer's mother, Judith. Despite her deteriorating condition, Judith never questions why she has been placed in her predicament but instead continues to praise and worship God. Her son angrily mocks god and presents arguments as to why she shouldn't have to suffer.
Marilyn Manson's "Fight Song," "Say 10," and others have direct and indirect misotheistic themes.
American death metal bands Deicide and Morbid Angel base much of their lyrics around misotheism in name and in concept. Many bands in the black metal genre, such as Mayhem, Emperor, Gorgoroth and Darkthrone express extreme misotheism in their lyrics.
Modern art
[edit]In 2006, Australian artist Archie Moore created a paper sculpture called "Maltheism", which was considered for a Telstra Art Award in 2006. The piece was intended as a representation of a church made from pages of the Book of Deuteronomy:
...and within its text is the endorsement from God to Moses for invasion of other nations. It says that you have the right to invade, take all their resources, kill all the men (non-believers) and make no treaty with them.[26]
See also
[edit]- Criticism of religion
- Deontological ethics
- Divine command theory
- Ethics in the Bible
- Evil God challenge
- Free will
- God is dead
- History of atheism
- Lawsuits against God
- Love of God
- Meta-ethics
- Moral absolutism
- Nihilism
- Omnibenevolence
- Problem of Hell
- Religious extremism
- Religious fundamentalism
- Theistic Satanism
- Utilitarianism
- Virtue ethics
- Richard Dawkins
Citations
[edit]- ^ Richard Kennington (1991). "The 'Teaching of Nature' in Descartes' Soul Doctrine". In Georges Joseph Daniel Moyal (ed.). René Descartes: Critical Assessments. Routledge. p. 139. ISBN 0-415-02358-0.
- ^ Richard M. Kennington (2004). "The Finitude of Descartes' Evil Genius". On Modern Origins: Essays in Early Modern Philosophy. Lexington Books. p. 146. ISBN 0-7391-0815-8.
- ^ Jacob Grimm: Teutonic Mythology Archived 2009-06-04 at the Wayback Machine Chapter 1. page 2. (Grimm's Teutonic Mythology Translation Project.)
- ^ Chamber's Twentieth Century Dictionary of the English Language: Pronouncing, Explanatory, Etymological, with Compound Phrases, Technical Terms in Use in the Arts and Sciences, Colloquialisms, Full Appendices, and Copiously Illustrated. W. & R. Chambers Limited. 1907.
- ^ New English Dictionary, under miso-; also explicitly in 1913, Noah Webster's Dictionary of the English Language.
- ^ "On Christianity as an Organ of Political Movement" (1846).
- ^ Bernard Schweizer, 'Religious Subversion in His Dark Materials in: Millicent Lenz, Carole Scott (eds.) His Dark Materials Illuminated: Critical Essays On Philip Pullman's Trilogy (2005), p. 172, note 3.
- ^ Seidner, Stanley S. (June 10, 2009) "A Trojan Horse: Logotherapeutic Transcendence and its Secular Implications for Theology". Mater Dei Institute. pp. 11-12.
- ^ Johnson, Brian (2016). "Prehistories of Posthumanism: Cosmic Indifferentism, Alien Genesis, and Ecology from H. P. Lovecraft to Ridley Scott". In Sederholm, Carl H.; Weinstock, Jeffrey Andrew (eds.). The Age of Lovecraft. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. pp. 97–116. ISBN 978-0-8166-9925-4. JSTOR 10.5749/j.ctt1b9x1f3.9.
- ^ https://thehumanist.com/magazine/january-february-2019/arts_entertainment/seven-types-of-atheism/
- ^ https://www.spanishtranslation.us/what-is-misotheism/
- ^ Apparently coined by Paul Zimmerman in August 1985, on net.origins referring to the misotheistic belief that God was in fact not a "Creator-God" but a "Damager-God".
- ^ Original Usenet posting of Maroney's "Even If I Did Believe" essay, 31 December 1983
- ^ Naylor et al. (1994)
- ^ See the example of Viktor Frankl in Seidner, Stanley S. (June 10, 2009) "A Trojan Horse: Logotherapeutic Transcendence and its Secular Implications for Theology". Mater Dei Institute. p 11.
- ^ Roth et al. (1982) - Extracted from a review of Roth's essay, in which the author comments that "Roth is painting a picture of God as the ultimate example of a bad and abusive parent!"
- ^ a b c Janowski, Zbigniew (2000). Cartesian Theodicy: Descartes' quest for certitude. Archives Internationales D'Histoire des Idees/International Archives of the History of Ideas. Springer. pp. 62–68. ISBN 978-0-7923-6127-5. LCCN 99059328.
- ^ Thomas Paine (1819). The Political and Miscellaneous Works of Thomas Paine ... R. Carlile. pp. 4–.
- ^ Bernard Schweizer, Hating God: The Untold Story of Misotheism (2010).
- ^ Iwan Bloch, Marquis De Sade: His Life and Works (2002), p. 216.
- ^ Transcript of interview with Anne Provoost by Bill Moyers for his "Faith and Reason" PBS TV series
- ^ Erdmann, Kevin (2020). "Gorr The God Butcher Is The Reason Thor Became Unworthy". Screen Rant.
Armed with the lethal All-Black the Necrosword, Gorr subscribed to a philosophy of misotheism, meaning he had an intense hatred of any and all gods, after enduring an incredibly tragic personal loss that came after his prayers went unanswered.
- ^ "Dear God" Archived 2008-12-11 at the Wayback Machine, performed by XTC (written by Andy Partridge)
- ^ "Blasphemous Rumours", performed by Depeche Mode (written by Martin L. Gore)
- ^ "God's Song (That's Why I Love Mankind)" Archived 2006-11-13 at the Wayback Machine, performed by Randy Newman (written by Randy Newman)
- ^ From the educational resource pamphlet accompanying the presentation of the 23rd Telstra National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Art Award Archived 2006-09-16 at the Wayback Machine
General and cited references
[edit]- Blumenthal, David R. (1993). Facing the Abusing God: A Theology of Protest. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1993. p. 348. ISBN 0-664-25464-0.
- Ehrman, Bart D. (2008). God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question--Why We Suffer. New York, NY: HarperOne, 2008. pp. 304. ISBN 978-0-06-117397-4.
- Mirabello, Mark, The Crimes of Jehovah (1997), ISBN 1-884365-13-2.
- Naylor, Janet; Julian, Caroline; Pinsonneault, Susan (1994). GURPS Religion. Austin, TX: Steve Jackson Games, 1994. p. 176. ISBN 1-55634-202-0.
- Phillips, D. Z. (2005). The Problem of Evil and The Problem of God. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 2005. p. 280. ISBN 0-8006-3775-5.
- Provoost, Anne (2004). In the Shadow of the Ark. Minneapolis, MN: Arthur A. Levine, 2004. p. 384. ISBN 0-439-44234-6.
- Roth, John K.; et al. (1982). Encountering Evil: Live Options in Theodicy. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1982. pp. 182. ISBN 0-8042-0517-5.
- Russell, Bertrand (1957). Why I Am Not A Christian. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 1957. pp. 266. ASIN B000JX1TIK.
- Sutherland, Robert (2006). Putting God on Trial: The Biblical Book of Job. Victoria, BC: Trafford Publishing, 2006. p. 226. ISBN 1-4120-1847-1. Archived from the original on 2015-11-04. Retrieved 2022-02-07.
- Schweizer, Bernard (2010). Hating God: The Untold Story of Misotheism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. p. 246. ISBN 978-0-19-975138-9.
- Schweizer, Bernard (2002). Rebecca West: Heroism, Rebellion, and the Female Epic. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002. p. 184. ISBN 0-313-32360-7.
- Wiesel, Elie (1979). The Trial of God. New York, NY: Random House, 1979. p. 208. ISBN 0-8052-1053-9.
External links
[edit]- Academic
- Axiology of Theism, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- Lecture by Robert Koons (University of Texas at Austin) developing concepts of dystheism and eutheism (see also)
- Articles and essays from web site of David R. Blumenthal (Professor of Judaic Studies at Emory University and author of Facing the Abusing God: A Theology of Protest)
- The moral imperative to rebel against God by Peter S. Fosl in The Philosophers' Magazine
- Why isn't Christianity considered evil? (from the AskPhilosophers forum at Amherst College)
- Literary
- Account from the life of Rabbi Levi Yitzhak of Berditchev that was part of the inspiration for Wiesel's "The Trial of God"
- Transcript of interview with Elie Wiesel
- Anne Provoost's novel In the Shadow of the Ark (interview)
- Popular culture
- George Carlin on God
- Lyrics to Randy Newman's "God's Song (That's Why I Love Mankind)"
- Lyrics to Depeche Mode's "Blasphemous Rumours"
- Mr. Deity Archived 2021-12-27 at the Wayback Machine, a series of short videos by Brian Keith Dalton depicting a bumbling and callously malicious God
- Online/blogosphere
Misotheism
View on GrokipediaDefinition and Terminology
Etymology and Core Definition
Misotheism derives from the Ancient Greek compound μισόθεος (misotheos), meaning "hating the gods" or "god-hater," formed from μίσος (misos, "hatred") and θεός (theos, "god"). This Greek term appears in Aeschylus's tragedy Agamemnon (circa 458 BCE) at line 1090, where it describes a character resentful toward divine powers.[3][13] The English noun "misotheism" first emerged in 1846, coined by essayist Thomas De Quincey to denote specific anti-theistic sentiment involving hatred of a presumed deity, predating its entry into standard dictionaries such as Chambers's Twentieth Century Dictionary in 1907.[1][9] At its core, misotheism constitutes a stance of profound hostility, resentment, or rebellion against a god or gods whose existence is affirmatively presupposed, distinguishing it from non-theistic positions that reject divine reality altogether. This belief typically arises from perceived discrepancies between attributed divine qualities—such as omnipotence, omniscience, and benevolence—and empirical observations of suffering, moral disorder, or apparent divine caprice in the world.[14] By assuming theism as a foundational premise, misotheism facilitates direct critique of divine agency and character, evaluating them against human standards of justice and causality rather than denying the supernatural outright.[11]Distinctions from Atheism, Dystheism, and Related Concepts
Misotheism fundamentally differs from atheism in that it presupposes the existence of a deity or deities while expressing profound hatred or moral opposition toward them, whereas atheism entails the absence of belief in any gods, making directed animosity toward a non-existent entity philosophically incoherent.[14][2] This distinction underscores misotheism's theistic foundation, where resentment arises from perceived divine injustices or malevolence, rather than ontological denial.[15] In contrast to dystheism, which asserts that a god exists but is not wholly benevolent—potentially evil or flawed in nature—misotheism centers on an attitudinal rejection or hatred of the divine, without necessarily committing to an ontological evaluation of the god's inherent character as evil.[16] Dystheism thus represents a doctrinal belief about divine imperfection, often invoked in responses to the problem of evil, while misotheism manifests as personal or existential animosity, potentially compatible with viewing a god as good yet unworthy of allegiance due to actions or allowances of suffering.[2] Maltheism, a related but distinct concept, involves belief in an evil or malevolent god, sometimes extending to the propriety of worshiping such a being, whereas misotheism rejects worship outright through hatred, focusing on opposition rather than veneration or acceptance of divine malice.[17] This avoids conflating misotheism's emotional hostility with maltheism's potential affirmation of evil as a divine attribute worthy of some form of engagement.[18] Misotheism also separates from antitheism, which actively opposes theism as a belief system or its societal manifestations, advocating against religious practice or propagation; misotheism, by comparison, constitutes individualized resentment toward the deity itself, not a systematic campaign against theistic belief held by others.[19] While antitheists may deny divine existence or utility, misotheists operate within a framework of affirmed theism, directing ire personally at the god rather than at human adherents or institutions.Philosophical Underpinnings
Connection to Theodicy and the Problem of Evil
Misotheism emerges as a direct philosophical response to the inadequacy of theodicies, which seek to vindicate divine justice and goodness amid pervasive evil by invoking mechanisms such as free will or soul-making processes. Proponents argue that these explanations falter against the empirical scale of suffering, including moral evils like the Holocaust, which resulted in the systematic murder of approximately six million Jews by Nazi Germany between 1941 and 1945, and natural evils such as the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami, which caused over 230,000 deaths across multiple countries.[21][22] Rather than permitting such outcomes for a greater good, an omnipotent deity's allowance of gratuitous harm—unmitigated by intervention—implies either inability or intentional malice, privileging observable causal realities over speculative apologetics.[23] The free will defense, positing that moral evil stems from human autonomy necessary for genuine love or virtue, inadequately addresses natural evil, which arises independently of volition, such as seismic events pulverizing innocents or pathogens eradicating populations without moral agency. Critics contend that an omnipotent creator could engineer a world with free agents yet devoid of such disproportionate suffering, rendering the defense insufficient and shifting blame to the divine architect for embedding destructive forces into reality's fabric.[24] This causal tension fosters misotheistic rejection, viewing God not as permissive but as the ultimate source of a flawed, torment-laden order. Epicurus' ancient trilemma—"If God is willing to prevent evil but unable, he is impotent; if able but unwilling, malevolent; if neither, why call him God?"—provides a foundational riddle adapted by misotheists to cultivate active antagonism rather than atheistic dismissal. Philosophers like Arthur Schopenhauer extended this by asserting that an all-powerful, benevolent deity could not originate a world dominated by suffering as a positive existential force, while Emil Cioran portrayed creation itself as evidence of divine culpability in absurdity and pain.[25] Such reasoning, grounded in the persistence of unjustified evils despite proposed justifications, positions misotheism as a stance of principled hatred toward a deity deemed responsible for empirical horrors.[26]The Deus Deceptor Hypothesis and Epistemological Doubts
The deus deceptor hypothesis, originating in René Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy published in 1641, posits a supremely powerful and cunning deceiver—termed an "evil demon" or genius malignus—who systematically falsifies human perceptions and beliefs to undermine certainty in sensory data, mathematical truths, and external reality.[27] Descartes employed this skeptical device not as an assertion of divine malevolence but as a methodological tool for radical doubt, questioning all knowledge claims to establish an indubitable foundation in the cogito. In this scenario, the deceiver operates with motives left ambiguous, potentially to test human reason or derive amusement from error, thereby rendering epistemological foundations unreliable if such an entity possesses god-like omnipotence.[27] This hypothesis intersects with misotheism by portraying a deity (or deity-analogue) as inherently treacherous, eroding trust in any benevolent divine revelation or natural order and prompting hatred toward a creator who engineers perpetual illusion over truth. If the deceiver is identifiable with God, it implies a betrayal of anticipated divine goodness, transforming epistemological skepticism into moral indictment: knowledge of the divine nature becomes unattainable or deliberately obscured, fueling resentment against a being that prioritizes deception over clarity. Descartes ultimately refutes the hypothesis by deducing a non-deceptive God from innate ideas of perfection, arguing that fraud requires defect, which an omnipotent, perfect being lacks; yet the initial postulate highlights causal vulnerabilities in human cognition that misotheists might interpret as evidence of cosmic malice.[27][28] Historically, the hypothesis provoked accusations of blasphemy for implying a malevolent omnipotent God, as seen in the 1643 public dispute at Utrecht University where theologian Gisbertus Voetius charged Descartes with undermining orthodoxy by equating God with a deceiver, prompting Descartes' defense in his Epistola ad Voetium.[29] Empirically, the scenario remains unfalsifiable, akin to solipsistic isolation, offering no testable predictions to distinguish deception from veridical experience, though its psychological resonance persists in amplifying doubts about divine intentions.[27] Critics contend it rests on unverified causal assumptions about perceptual reliability, yet it underscores misotheistic concerns that any god permitting or enacting such doubt forfeits claims to worship.[28]Historical and Scriptural Instances
Expressions in Abrahamic Texts
In the Hebrew Bible, the Book of Job records Job's direct accusations against God for perceived injustice during his afflictions, as in Job 10:1-7, where he declares, "I loathe my life; I will give free utterance to my complaint. I will speak in the bitterness of my soul. I will say to God, Do not condemn me; let me know why you contend against me. Does it seem good to you to oppress, to despise the work of your hands and favor the designs of the wicked?"[30] This passage reflects Job's contention that divine actions appear adversarial, treating the sufferer as an enemy despite human frailty.[30] Similarly, Psalm 88 exemplifies unrelenting lament without resolution, with the psalmist charging God with isolation and wrath: "O LORD, God of my salvation; I cry out day and night before you... You have put me in the depths of the pit, in the regions dark and deep. Your wrath lies heavy upon me, and you overwhelm me with all your waves."[31] The psalm concludes in despair, "You have caused my companions to shun me; you have made me a horror to them... Do you work wonders for the dead? Do the departed rise up to praise you?" illustrating a human response to suffering attributed to divine causation. In the New Testament, Mark 15:34 captures Jesus' cry from the cross: "And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, 'Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?' which means, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'" This utterance, echoing Psalm 22:1, conveys momentary anguish amid crucifixion, interpreted in textual analysis as an expression of abandonment under divine allowance.[33][34] These instances in Abrahamic scriptures depict raw human confrontations with suffering linked to God's sovereignty, predating formalized philosophical critiques.[33]Instances in Non-Abrahamic Traditions
In ancient Greek mythology, the Titan Prometheus exemplifies defiance against the gods, rooted in perceived tyranny and ingratitude. In Aeschylus' tragedy Prometheus Bound (circa 460 BCE), Prometheus, having previously aided Zeus in securing power by revealing the threat of Thetis' offspring, is betrayed and punished eternally for stealing fire to benefit humanity. He explicitly declares his hatred: "I hate all the gods / Who, once well served by me, grossly abuse me," portraying Zeus as a despotic ruler whose authority merits opposition rather than reverence.[35] This stance reflects not mere rebellion but active animosity toward divine betrayal, positioning Prometheus as a proto-misotheistic figure who prioritizes human welfare over godly favor.[36] In Norse literature, the Hrafnkels saga Freysgoða (composed around the 13th century, depicting events circa 10th century CE) depicts chieftain Hrafnkell Goði's renunciation of Thor following a battlefield defeat attributed to the god's failure to intervene. Initially a devout worshiper who built a temple to Thor and swore oaths by him, Hrafnkell demolishes the temple and proclaims to his followers: "I thought it foolish to trust in gods; neither help nor mercy have I received from Thor... Never again shall either I or my kin worship him." This rejection stems from empirical disillusionment with divine unreliability, evolving into a dismissal of godly efficacy akin to contempt, as Hrafnkell shifts reliance to human agency and Freyr without further supernatural appeals. Hindu traditions, predominantly devotional, exhibit rarer instances of attitudes resembling misotheism, often confined to epic antagonists or paradoxical bhakti interpretations rather than systematic hatred. In the Mahabharata (circa 400 BCE–400 CE), figures like Shishupala, king of Chedi, express vehement enmity toward Vishnu's avatar Krishna, hurling 100 ritual insults before his death, driven by personal grudge and perceived divine favoritism. Vaishnava theology frames such opposition as potentially purifying despite its hostility, yet it underscores critiques of divine caprice in bhakti narratives where adversaries contemplate gods as enemies.[37] Asuras, demonic opponents of Devas in Vedic and Puranic texts (e.g., Vritra's rebellion against Indra in the Rigveda, circa 1500–1200 BCE), embody collective hatred of cosmic order, motivated by envy and rejection of godly supremacy, though these are supernatural beings rather than human exemplars. Human bhakti poets occasionally voice frustration with divine indifference, as in select Marathi saint Tukaram's abhangas (17th century CE) lamenting godly neglect amid suffering, but these resolve into renewed devotion rather than sustained animosity.Theological and Philosophical Criticisms
Religious Rebuttals Emphasizing Divine Sovereignty
In Christian theology, misotheism is rebutted as an expression of human sinfulness arising from rebellion against God's absolute sovereignty, rather than evidence of divine malevolence. The Apostle Paul articulates this in Romans 9:20, challenging mortals to question the Creator: "But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, 'Why have you made me like this?'" This passage frames hatred toward God as presumptuous defiance, rooted in a refusal to acknowledge divine prerogative over creation and judgment.[38] Theological interpreters emphasize that such attitudes stem from unrepentant sin, which distorts perception of God's justice into perceived cruelty, as sin itself provokes the illusion of divine hatred.[39] Patristic and medieval doctrines further contend that misotheism ignores the redemptive utility of suffering, as outlined in Irenaeus' theodicy, where earthly evils facilitate moral and spiritual maturation akin to "soul-making." This perspective, elaborated by John Hick, posits that challenges in the "vale of soul-making" cultivate virtues impossible in paradise, rendering hatred of God a failure to discern providential purposes behind apparent flaws.[40] Hatred thus reflects ingratitude toward a sovereign order designed for ultimate good, exacerbating personal torment through persistent defiance rather than submission.[41] Parallel rebuttals appear in Islamic theology, where misotheistic defiance contrasts sharply with the core imperative of islam—total submission to Allah's will as the path to harmony and salvation. Defiance (kufr) is depicted as self-inflicted spiritual bondage, arising from ego-driven rejection of divine decree, whereas surrender yields freedom from the chaos of autonomous rebellion.[42] Quranic exhortations underscore that resisting sovereignty invites greater suffering, positioning hatred as a culpable inversion of gratitude owed to the Merciful.[43] Theological observers note that misotheistic positions frequently display moral inconsistencies, such as invoking objective ethics to indict God while undermining the transcendent ground such standards require, thereby borrowing from theistic frameworks they despise. This selective retention exposes the critique's internal fragility, as unanchored morality devolves into subjective preference without sovereign authority to enforce it.[44]Rational and Empirical Critiques of Misotheistic Reasoning
Misotheistic arguments often presuppose direct insight into a deity's malevolent intentions, yet such claims rest on unverifiable inferences from personal or observed suffering, lacking empirical falsifiability or independent corroboration.[45] This epistemic overreach contrasts with atheistic frameworks, which apply parsimony by rejecting supernatural agency altogether, thereby avoiding the additional explanatory burden of attributing intent to unobservable entities without proportional evidence.[46] Empirical psychological research reveals that professed anger or hatred toward a deity correlates strongly with individual trauma, such as bereavement, chronic illness, or violent loss, rather than constituting objective disproof of benevolence.[47] For example, studies of bereaved individuals and cancer patients demonstrate that unresolved divine anger predicts diminished psychological adjustment over time, framing it as a maladaptive coping mechanism tied to attributional biases during distress, not a rational deduction from global evil.[48] These patterns hold across believers and nonbelievers, with even atheists reporting retrospective divine resentment in response to adversity, underscoring its roots in emotional reactivity over evidential analysis.[49] Causally, patterns of human suffering align more parsimoniously with impersonal natural laws and agentic human behaviors than with orchestrated divine malice, as the former require no teleological assumptions.[50] Diseases and aging, responsible for the majority of global mortality (e.g., over 70% of deaths from non-communicable conditions like cardiovascular issues per WHO data), emerge from biological and environmental processes governed by physics and evolution, not targeted ill will. Interpersonal harms, such as violence accounting for about 1.3 million annual deaths, trace to discernible human factors like resource scarcity and decision-making errors, rendering anthropomorphic projections of supernatural culpability superfluous and empirically untestable. This distribution favors explanations rooted in observable mechanisms over those imputing unverified cosmic hostility, aligning with causal chains observable in scientific inquiry.Cultural Representations
In Classical and Romantic Literature
In Aeschylus' tragedy Prometheus Bound, composed around 460 BCE, the Titan Prometheus embodies defiance against Zeus, depicted as a despotic ruler who imposes unmerited suffering on humanity's benefactor by chaining him to a rock for eternity while an eagle devours his liver daily.[51] Prometheus' rebellion stems from Zeus's tyrannical withholding of fire and knowledge from mortals, framing the supreme god as envious and punitive toward progress, a motif that underscores resentment toward divine caprice over benevolence.[52] During the Romantic era, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's poem "Prometheus" (1774) articulates explicit misotheistic sentiment through the Titan's voice, rejecting subservience to gods as human projections: the speaker molds humanity in his image and dismisses deities as figments of fear, proclaiming self-reliance over celestial authority.[6] In Goethe's Faust (Part I, 1808; Part II, 1832), the protagonist's pact with Mephistopheles reflects profound discontent with divine order, as Faust curses the limitations of God's creation and seeks transcendence through forbidden knowledge, evoking hatred for a cosmos that stifles human ambition.[53] Lord Byron's dramatic poem Cain (1821) portrays the biblical figure's encounter with Lucifer as a catalyst for questioning God's benevolence, with Cain decrying the Creator's imposition of mortality, suffering, and hierarchy on a flawed world, culminating in fratricide as rebellion against an ostensibly malevolent divine scheme.[54] Byron attributes to Cain a philosophical anguish over evil's persistence in a supposedly perfect creation, positioning God as architect of injustice rather than redemption.[55] In Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov (1880), Ivan Karamazov's "Rebellion" chapter enumerates child suffering—such as Turkish atrocities and parental cruelty—as irrefutable evidence against divine harmony, leading him to "respectfully return the entrance ticket" to God's world, not denying His existence but rejecting participation in a moral order permitting such horrors.[6] Dostoevsky presents Ivan's stance as intellectual revulsion toward theodicy, prioritizing empirical cruelty over abstract harmony, though the narrative critiques this as incomplete without faith's redemptive lens.[56]In Modern and Speculative Fiction
In Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy (1995–2000), the Authority is depicted as a despotic false god whose authoritarian regime suppresses human potential and consciousness, positioning divine power as an existential threat that protagonists must dismantle through rebellion and the weaponization of subtle matter known as Dust.[57] This speculative framework extrapolates biblical motifs into a multiverse where theocratic control enforces ignorance and fear, fueling characters' visceral opposition to the divine order as inherently malevolent.[58] Pullman's narrative privileges empirical subversion of religious dogma, portraying God's agents—like the angel Metatron—as enforcers of a repressive cosmology that stifles free inquiry.[59] Neil Gaiman's American Gods (2001) extends misotheistic undertones into a speculative tapestry of immigrant deities warring for survival in a belief-starved America, where gods manifest as capricious, addictive, and manipulative beings who exploit human devotion for petty gains.[60] Figures like Odin (as Mr. Wednesday) embody divine flaws—greed, deception, and obsolescence—hypothesizing a reality where supernatural entities derive power from cultural faith yet repay it with betrayal and existential neglect, evoking disdain for their parasitic nature.[61] The absence of a benevolent monotheistic presence underscores a polytheistic cosmos indifferent to morality, amplifying themes of divine unworthiness through ritualistic violence and faded mythologies.[62] Lovecraftian speculative fiction, influencing 20th-century horror, twists cosmic indifference into implicit misotheism by populating the universe with elder entities like Cthulhu—amoral, incomprehensible forces whose incidental malevolence toward humanity inspires not worship but revulsion and futile resistance.[63] Works such as "The Call of Cthulhu" (1928) hypothesize a godless expanse where "gods" are cataclysmic anomalies, prompting human hatred born of perceived cosmic cruelty, as interpreters anthropomorphize their uncaring vastness into deliberate antagonism.[64] This framework rejects anthropocentric divinity, positing speculative horrors that validate misotheistic fury through empirical encounters with entities beyond ethical reckoning.[65]In Music, Drama, and Visual Arts
In Percy Bysshe Shelley's lyrical drama Prometheus Unbound (1820), the protagonist's rebellion against the tyrannical Jupiter symbolizes a triumphant defiance of divine authority, portraying the god as a despotic force whose overthrow enables human emancipation.[66] This work reinterprets the Prometheus myth to critique oppressive celestial rule, with Jupiter's downfall representing the eclipse of a biblical-like deity in favor of mortal agency.[66] William Blake's visual mythology features Urizen as a flawed demiurge embodying tyrannical reason and restrictive law, depicted in engravings like The Ancient of Days (1794), where the figure imposes geometric order on chaos, stifling human imagination and vitality.[67] In The Book of Urizen (1794), Blake illustrates this entity as a self-deluded creator whose dominion fosters illusion and evil, critiquing conventional religious and rationalistic gods as sources of spiritual bondage.[67] Urizen's crouching form under massive rocks in later works underscores his role in crushing creative energy, aligning with Blake's broader assault on institutionalized divinity.[68] Extreme metal genres, particularly blackened death metal, have channeled misotheistic sentiments through lyrics and album concepts explicitly targeting divine malevolence, as in Hour of Penance's Misotheism (2019), which sustains a "constant sense of rage and hatred" against godly figures via tracks like "Flames of Merciless Gods" blending blastbeats with anti-theistic fury.[69] Similarly, black metal acts such as the Norwegian band Misotheist (formed circa 2018) explore satanic darkness and opposition to redemption narratives, evident in their debut album's dissonant evocations of infernal rebellion against heavenly order.[70] These expressions prioritize visceral antagonism toward the Abrahamic God over mere disbelief, distinguishing them from broader atheistic rock statements.[63]Contemporary Perspectives and Debates
Misotheism in Modern Philosophy and Pessimism
In Seven Types of Atheism (2018), philosopher John Gray identifies misotheism as the fifth variety of atheistic thought, characterized by an intense hatred of God conceived as humanity's cosmic adversary.[71] Gray highlights the Marquis de Sade (1740–1814) as the foremost modern exponent of this position, portraying Sade's worldview not as mere unbelief but as a vehement opposition to divine authority amid pervasive suffering.[72] This typology situates misotheism within broader atheistic traditions, yet Gray's inclusion draws scrutiny for conflating it with theism, as genuine hatred of God logically requires affirming divine existence, thereby undermining atheism's core denial of deities.[71] Critics of Gray's framework argue that misotheism perpetuates monotheistic anthropocentrism by framing human-divine relations as a zero-sum conflict, where humanity positions itself as protagonist against a tyrannical creator, rather than transcending such dualisms.[73] This retention of theistic structure limits its philosophical autonomy, rendering it vulnerable to the same evidential burdens as traditional religion—such as justifying God's malevolence without empirical warrant—while offering no superior explanatory power over atheistic accounts of suffering.[73] Amid 20th- and 21st-century pessimism, which emphasizes life's inherent futility and predominance of displeasure over pleasure, misotheism gains traction as a theistic variant that attributes cosmic suffering to deliberate malice rather than indifferent natural processes, potentially providing a more causally direct etiology than godless nihilism.[26] However, its intellectual viability remains contested, particularly post-2020, as it clashes with existentialist leanings that favor absurdism or rebellion without presupposing a hated overseer, and contrasts sharply with secular humanism's progressive optimism by insisting on an irredeemable divine culpability.[74] Gray's own skeptical humanism underscores this tension, viewing misotheism as a reactive stance that, while candid about evil's scale, fails to escape the progressivist myths it ostensibly rejects.[75]Psychological Motivations and Societal Implications
Psychological motivations for misotheism often stem from personal experiences of trauma or perceived divine neglect, where individuals attribute suffering to God's allowance or malevolence rather than denying divine existence. Empirical studies on religious or spiritual abuse indicate that such trauma, including indoctrination in authoritarian environments, can foster resentment toward religious authority figures, extending to God as the ultimate source of perceived injustice. A systematic review of 25 empirical studies found that religious/spiritual abuse correlates with symptoms like anxiety, depression, and interpersonal difficulties, sometimes manifesting as hostility toward theistic concepts amid unresolved pain.[76] However, robust longitudinal data specifically linking trauma to sustained misotheism remains limited, with proposed constructs like "religious trauma syndrome" describing features such as diminished self-worth and moral injury from toxic theology, yet lacking comprehensive empirical validation beyond case reports and correlational findings.[77] [78] Moral outrage at worldly inequalities or personal ethical setbacks also drives misotheistic sentiment, frequently serving as a psychological outlet for existential frustration and a means to assert dignity against perceived cosmic unfairness. Research on resentment toward God highlights family breakdowns and social disruptions as precursors to rebellious attitudes among youth, framing divine order as culpable for human inequities. This contrasts with broader patterns in trauma survivors, where anger at God co-occurs with retained belief but may mask individual agency in ethical failures, privileging external blame over self-accountability. Peer-reviewed analyses of religious struggles show correlations between such divine-directed anger and identity distress, suggesting misotheism perpetuates cycles of victimhood by evading causal reconciliation through empirical self-examination.[79] [80] [81] Societally, misotheism contributes to anti-theistic militancy by channeling personal resentments into collective critiques of divine hierarchy, differing from atheistic indifference through its affirmative hostility. This dynamic aligns with observed declines in religiosity, where Pew Research Center data from 2023-2024 indicate U.S. Christian affiliation stabilized at around 62% after prior drops, yet 80% of Americans perceive religion's public influence waning, partly amid dechurched individuals harboring institutional resentment that can spillover to theistic animosity. Such sentiments fuel activism against perceived religious overreach, contrasting with conservative orientations that accept hierarchical structures as normative, potentially exacerbating cultural polarization without fostering adaptive responses to suffering. While articulating legitimate grievances from abuse or loss, misotheism risks societal implications like eroded communal resilience, as empirical patterns in religious disaffiliation reveal that resentment-driven deconversions hinder reconciliation and privilege narrative blame over data-informed agency.[82] [83] [84]References
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/misotheism
- https://www.[researchgate](/page/ResearchGate).net/publication/293354521_Hating_God_The_Untold_Story_of_Misotheism
- https://www.[researchgate](/page/ResearchGate).net/publication/317451518_Facing_the_deepest_darkness_of_despair_and_abandonment_Psalm_88_and_the_life_of_faith
