The most common comforting belief people repeat when someone dies is "they went to God". But if this is true, is it actually a good thing? Let's think about it.

When someone close to you passes away, you still want the best for their soul, so you fall back on the comforting belief that they "went to God". It is a way of coping with grief and I totally understand it, as a matter of fact i've done this myself when i was younger.

But here is the real question: should we keep clinging to comforting beliefs, or should we be searching for objective truth, no matter how difficult it is? Is blind faith in an idea, just because it feels good, really the way forward? Blind faith was the way to go thousands of years ago. Generations and generations before us have relied on blind faith. Should it continue to be that way forever? No. It is time to look for the truth, and even if we can't find the absolute, unchangeable truth, then we should at least question the general consensus/"truth".

Let's think about it logically. Is it actually a good thing if they go to "God"? Think about what that means. This God is evil enough to create a world where survival is based on killing and consuming other life. This is the case for all living beings on this planet. We're placed in an environment where we have to kill either directly or indirectly by paying someone else to do it for us. Every ecosystem is designed to run on violence and consumption. Predation, parasitism, disease, famine, mass death and trauma are baked into every food chain, every ecosystem, every human institution. If the creator is all-loving, why build a system where billions suffer needlessly and endlessly? That contradiction is the smoking gun.

A world where animals tear each other apart and experience excruciating pain, humans killing animals and each other, even plants compete for survival. So, is that really where you want your loved ones to go? If you ask me, that is the last being i would want my loved one to meet when they die.

Religions tell us this creator is pure love, pure goodness, pure light. But the design of this reality proves the opposite. Pain, death, predation, exploitation. Remember, actions speak louder than words. If anything, what religions tell us about God looks more like a complete inversion of the truth.

And what would the encounter with God may look like? "You have sinned too much" -> "go back". "You have accumulated too much karma" -> "go back" (even though the concepts of "sin" and "karma" 100% do not actually exist in the way we've been taught and they are being used as perceptual traps).

Compare the worst human monsters to the scale of natural suffering. Even the worst humans in history did not create whole species just to suffer and fight for their life 24/7, or design ecosystems that produce endless pain by default. The scale of suffering here is orders of magnitude beyond any human atrocity. That points at intentional design, not random cruelty or a good God.

Some people say "God gave everyone free will, that is why suffering exists". But is that so? A baby gazelle being eaten alive by lions did not "choose" that. Free will does not explain natural disasters, diseases, or children dying of cancer. That proves suffering is baked into the design, not just a byproduct of choice. If God was love, he would have made a world where cooperation sustains life, not one where endless slaughter is required just to survive.

People pray to God to heal them or help them in some way, but this is the same God that allowed their problem in the first place. When some people see improvement, they say it is because of God, while those who do not improve are left in silence. In reality, it is simply chance. If God was truly loving and just, would he/she not help all people equally, rather than only a select few? God is supposed to be pure and unconditional love. Unconditional means exactly that: without condition. If help is given to some but withheld from others, especially innocent children who suffer, then what is being described is not unconditional love at all. It is favoritism and neglect, dressed up in religious language. This fact alone is proof that God is not unconditional love like we've been taught.

Imagine 100 million people around the world who are chronically ill. In reality the number is much bigger but i'll use this number for the sake of the argument. And all of these people pray to God for healing. Inevitably, some of them will recover for natural reasons like a stronger immune system or better medical access, maybe their condition was less severe than others. These people then thank God for saving them. But what about the ones who prayed just as hard, maybe even harder, and did not recover? What about children who suffer or die young, despite their innocence? What about children who die of cancer, why does this good God not save them? Is God ok with children suffering (as well as their parents and loved ones)?

The sad truth:

Attributing recovery to God is a fallacy because it ignores the millions and millions who were not helped. Not only were they left to suffer and die in terrible ways, but this includes countless people who lived peaceful lives, caused no harm, and still received no mercy. This shows that this is is not divine love, it is proof of randomness being mistaken for intervention by people who are programmed with religious ideas. The truth is that people remember the exceptions and build faith on selective outcomes, while overlooking the countless prayers that went unanswered. The religious programming runs so deep that even when the logic completely collapses, they twist themselves into mental gymnastics to protect the belief. If God heals 1 in 100, they call it a miracle. If God ignores the other 99, they call it "mysterious ways" which is not an explanation, it is a cop-out. Imagine a human ruler who tortured and killed billions, and when asked "why", his followers said "his love for us works in mysterious ways". Nobody would accept that. Yet with God, people defend the indefensible. This is how powerful religious programming can be.

As a result, when people say "my loved one went to God" they are not realizing they are actually saying "my loved one went to the Demiurge", the same being that designed this place the way it is. The same "God" who thrives on suffering and feeds on energy. That is not a blessing, that is just returning to the farmer who bred you into the slaughterhouse in the first place. The "God" of religions is not who they think they are. It is the warden dressed up as the savior.

Cows on a farm might look at the farmer and think he's God. The human farmer feeds them, shelters them and keeps them alive. From the cow's perspective the human farmer seems benevolent. But is the farmer actually God? And is it a good, all loving, God? No and no. All the farmer wants is to exploit these animals for his own benefit. The farmer does not to care about the animals' feelings, all he cares about is himself. If he truly cared, he would free them and let them live in peace. But instead, he keeps them trapped and exploits them 24/7. From inside the farm, it looks like protection and care. Maybe even love. From the outside however, it's actually just cruel farming.

It is the same thing with us. The being people call God plays the role of the provider while running a system that harvests us. If you think the guy who feeds the cows is their friend, fine. Just don't be surprised when the farmer decides to sell them to the slaughterhouse. That reveals the farmer's true intent with these beings. The farmer is not all loving like the cows may think.

The way reality functions is already proof that God is the opposite of loving and that we should do everything in power to escape the reincarnation cycle when our time comes and never come back here again. I salute anyone who can accept the harsh truth, even though it's hard to swallow.