Is G-d A Narcissist?!?

Written on Shevat 4, 5781, various edits added later

me when the debubk

A classic Torah criticism that fools regurgitate constantly is that G-d is, chas veshalom, a narcissist, and that he unjustly punishes people in the Torah. These are usually easy to debunk, but many people who are not very knowledgeable about the Torah may not be able to debunk the Torah-critic idiots. So thus I will address the stupid claims that "Yahweh" is immoral. Disregarding the nearly insufferable constant incorrect pronounciation of the name (I am refering particularly to the otherwise good Youtube channel called "TheraminTrees"), I will attempt to discredit their ridiculous claims in this article. Mostly, the reason that these fools can be so easily debunked is because they DON'T *swer* KNOW WHAT THEY ARE *swer* TALKING ABOUT. Okay, so they don't know anything from the tradition (Talmud) or, really, ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT THE TORAH. Ok, so now I will actually debunk them instead of displaying their incompetence and ignorance. I will today be debunking TheraminTree's insufferable video, "worshipping narcissists | qualiasoup & theramintrees", who makes wonderful videos about mental health and narcissism, but then constantly interjects rants about "Yahweh" being immoral. He indirectly asserts that G-d wants us to serve him, for his sake, not for our own pleasure. The reason G-d created us is not so he can have some humans to rule over, but so we can have infinite pleasure (this misunderstanding reminds me of how some Jews thought that G-d brought them out of Egypt to kill them). Of course, he is not expected to know this because he is incompetent at Torah subjects, so thus should have not made this *swer* video. Anyway, that should refute the whole video, but because this video is so stupid, I will tear it apart further! Yay! At least some of these debunks were done by a rabbi I asked, and not by me. Sadly, I must watch this video again to debunk it, and this video is painful to watch, partially because such unholiness is painful.

It begins with a quote stating the supposed absurdity of a diety caring about humans, but also with several incorrect assumptions, such as G-d wanting worship (this is to pleasure us, not him). He then speaks about an indeed horrible kind of "love", that involves jealousness (as in G-d being a "jealous G-d"; this is a bad translation [yay, another one o' those], and G-d is "jealous" because serving idols is not pleasurable to us, it has little to do with him), vengeace (if G-d did not punish evil, G-d would be evil, by agreeing with evil deeds), and setting "traps" to test those he loves (every test G-d gives us we can overcome, so they're not "traps"; he also refers to them as impossible, when they're not). I don't know what he means by saying that G-d creates "damned if you do and damned if you don't" situations. He says that this love "would evaporate instantly in response to any exercise of independence". If we attempt to be independent of G-d (we are not, it is only by his will that we exist), we would be less pleasured, and thus going against G-d. He says that G-d is seen as blameless when he causes destruction, death, etc., though he does this for our eventual pleasure and everything he does is for the good. It is somewhat hard to debunk all these words because he is using what I believe is a form of loaded langauge (or some other fallacious tactic) by using words that appeal to his side of the argument, such as "cruel". I don't know what an example of what he mentions being G-d not knowing his mind better than he did. There is no example, and this point is all bull*swer*. He also never gives examples of other negatives, such as accusing him of doing a transgression he never committed, and also, of course, these are also bull*swer*.

He then shows a list of narcissistic traits, the negative ones of which do not apply to G-d. I will debunk them all individually. Idealised fantasies: everything G-d tests us with we can handle, and all his mitzvos we can observe. Omnipotent fantasies: it's not a fantasy that G-d is omnipotent. Entitlement fantasies: G-d is certainly entitled to obligating us to have pleasure! Irresponsible: nothing G-d does is bad, so he is not guilty of anything wrong. Superior: we, being humans, often make mistakes; G-d never makes mistakes; this is one of infinite ways G-d is indeed superior; that's not a negative trait. Easily insulted: G-d is never "insulted" and has no emotions; when he is depicted as angry (so we can better understand G-d, not that he's actually angry), it is to rebuke us so we can have more pleasure. Easily enraged: same as the last thing I wrote. Craves adoration: G-d wants adoration because when we adore him, we are significantly happier. Controlling: all his mitzvos are for our pleasure. Jealous: I wrote much earlier a refutation of that. Callous: creating us solely for our pleasure is quite the opposite of that word. Manipulative: when he "manipulates" us (I don't know what this means, but I can guess) with his mitzvos(?), we are significantly more happy. G-d does not change since he is beyond time; everything he does is for the best.

We're finally done demolishing his list, so let's move on! He shows another stupid quote saying essentially that G-d is both good and evil. Nope. That's wrong. Moving on. He then lists the third quote from Ludwig Feverbach in the video, essentially stating that bad things happen. Nope, they don't. Moving on. He lists a quote that preassumes that bad things happen again. Nope, they don't. Moving on. He then identifies Gideon [incorrectly] as the "golden child" (notice how he had to pull out some obscure section of the Tanach and misenterpret it just to find a nonexistent "golden child" example in G-d). He says that this is a sin. The mitzvah to not test G-d is regarding not testing a proven prophet, not refering to testing G-d directly (as a prophet yourself) (it also says in that mitzvah, "As you did in Massah". This is a different form of testing than what was done there.). Gideon had to figure out if it was G-d he spoke to. He didn't test G-d needlessly, he had to figure this out and could not without help from G-d.

He says that the Torah says (it says something similar) that children are to be punished for their parents' sins. The verse he mentioned is refering to if he child is repeating the sin.

The story of Iyov being "evil" can be easily refuted by saying that it was likely a parable. Even if not, it still doesn't have to be evil, because Iyov (if the story's real) comitted a sin (one possibility being that he allowed Pharaoh to try to kill the newborn babies, being Pharaoh's servant. Killing his children would be fine because they were evil [especially because it was Egypt, also the above paragraph refutes this as well]). He says that [the christian] heaven and hell are binary punishments. NOPE. Each of them gives reward and punishment specific to one's individual deeds. He reads something from the stupid new testament saying that one who looks lustfully at a woman has committed adultery in the heart. Matthew is wrong. It is a relatively extremely minor sin to look lustfully at a woman (it's still bad though). Gehinomm (hell) is only to purify people so they can receive their infinite reward. Some people don't even merit gehinom. Those who are punished are not punished infinitely, however I am not knowledgeable enough to say exactly why these people must be punished at all. By the way, it would be an argument from ignorance to say that because I do not know, there is no answer, or that G-d is evil.

He shows some more buzzwords: "fear, obligation, guilt, sympathy". I will talk about them individually. Fear: fear of G-d makes us happy. Obligation: mitzvos make us happy. Guilt: guilt allows us to repent from evil, which allows us to be happy. Sympathy: I don't know what this one means, but I imagine it is fully bull*swer*. He mentions how G-d commits "genocide after genocide". To debunk just one (Amalek), Amalek was sent many peace letters and they refused peace; they were warned, and refused. The Jews would only kill the ones who were evil, and those who agreed to be righteous (or pretended to) would be spared. Genocide, definitely.

He mentions some garbage from the new testament, that I will not go into for obvious reasons. He says that G-d bypasses forgiveness from injured parties. What does G-d need to apologize for? Trying to get people to have infinite happiness? G-d, please repent! I don't want to be happy!

Anyway, apostates, if they legitimately cannot find reason to accept the Torah are only guilty for not seeking reason to accept it. They are guilty because they denied themselves the pleasure of serving G-d. There is much evidence that G-d "exists", but we must find challenge in discovering it.

Proverbs 3:5 is refering to not leaning on your knowledge to rationalize the mitzvos, but to do them because G-d told us to do them. This is not refering to discovering the Torah's truth. Simply the fact that the Jews have an unbroken tradition from Sinai is enough proof of the Torah's divinity, but that is worse than garbage compared to what other proof there is. I believe it was in another video of TheraminTrees' that he arrogantly states that we cannot prove G-d's "existence". This is wrong. The proofs relate to Pi, Torah codes, and much, much more. He then much later calls apologetics "enablers" for refuting criticism. How dare they refute TheraminTrees' criticisms! Is he saying that he is so infallible that the apologetics' work is pointless? I don't really know, and also don't care, because he is not my source for all knowledge.

Conclusion: WOW! That was a lot of garbage I had to sit through (two times, the first time with no intention of publicly debunking it) So these Torah critics will forever (until Moshiach, rather) be pooping out these horrible videos that require such time spent in debunking them often. And as Avigdor Miller said in Rejoice O Youth! (I also used this line in my debunk of Professor Dave) (p. 25), "We view these opponents, whether physical or ideological, who rise up against us in every generation, with a calm and seasoned eye; we know that they will go down into oblivion as did all the upstarts who preceded them." May Hashem bless you with knowledge and happiness!