Premise 1: Why Invent A Holy And Just God?
“Christianity is just a psychological crutch!” This is one of a group of common accusations framed against Christianity, which is why it is so important to examine and distinguish if there’s any truth in it. Is Christianity just a crutch for the weak, unintelligent and scared, or is it far more than that?
One of the most popular proponents of this was Sigmund Freud who said this about religious beliefs:
They are illusions, fulfillments of the oldest, strongest, and most urgent wishes of mankind… As we already know; the terrifying impression of helplessness in childhood aroused the need for protection – for protection through love – which was provided by the father…. Thus the benevolent rule of divine providence allays our fear of the dangers of life.
Sigmund Freud, The Future of an Illusion
Sigmund Freud viewed religion not as a divine truth or revelation, but as a psychological construct—a collective neurosis born out of human weakness and emotional need. He believed that religion was essentially an illusion, a set of beliefs rooted in deep psychological desires rather than objective reality.
In his works such as The Future of an Illusion (1927) and Civilization and Its Discontents (1930), Freud argued that religion functioned as a psychological crutch. He saw it as a means of coping with the harsh realities of life—suffering, death, injustice, and helplessness. Religion, in his view, gave people a sense of security and hope by personifying the universe through a father figure (God) who would protect, reward, and punish. This idea, Freud believed, was a projection of childlike dependence on a father figure into adulthood, transferred onto an imagined heavenly Father.
The Uncomfortable Holiness of the Biblical God
If human beings were to invent a god, it would likely be one who is indulgent, tolerant of our flaws, and easily pleased with good intentions. But the God of the Bible stands in stark contrast to that notion. He is holy—utterly pure, morally perfect, and intolerant of sin—not because He is harsh, but because He is just. His holiness exposes human guilt, demands repentance, and refuses to be reshaped to fit human preferences. This is not a comfortable or convenient God; it is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29), and that very discomfort is one of the clearest signs that this God was not made in man’s image.
“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts;
Isaiah 6:1-5
the whole earth is full of his glory!”
And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called,
and the house was filled with smoke. And I said: “Woe is me! For I am lost; for
I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people
of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts!”
In this vivid encounter, the prophet Isaiah finds himself in the throne room of heaven. He sees the Lord seated in absolute majesty, surrounded by fiery seraphim who call out “Holy, holy, holy”—a triple declaration of God’s moral perfection and utter otherness. The repetition emphasizes that God is not merely “good” or “loving,” but transcendent in holiness—set apart in a category all His own.
Isaiah’s reaction is immediate and instinctive: he doesn’t rejoice, dance, or feel comforted. Instead, he crumbles in fear and conviction. “Woe is me!” he cries—not because God condemns him, but because the sheer presence of God’s holiness exposes Isaiah’s sin. He suddenly realizes his unworthiness, not just in actions, but even in the impurity of his lips—a symbol of character and speech.
This encounter is radically different from what we would expect from a god invented by human imagination. A god of our own making would likely affirm us, offer comfort, and turn a blind eye to moral flaws. But the God of the Bible is unapproachable in His purity. His presence doesn’t affirm human greatness; it reveals human guilt.
Isaiah wasn’t an idolater or criminal—he was a prophet, a spiritual leader—and even he trembled under the weight of God’s holiness. That alone shows that this is not a feel-good fantasy created to ease our fears, but a reality that confronts us with uncomfortable truth. God’s holiness is so intense and perfect that even the most righteous among us cannot stand before Him without grace.
This moment anticipates the gospel itself: the awareness of sin must come before forgiveness. Isaiah is later cleansed by a coal from the altar, a symbol of atonement. But the cleansing only comes after conviction—and conviction comes from encountering a God far more holy than we would ever dare imagine or invent.
If Comfort Were the Goal, the Bible’s God Wouldn’t Exist
Throughout history, the gods fashioned by human cultures have typically reflected human nature, desires, and fears—and were often constructed to be controllable, predictable, and emotionally reassuring. These deities, found in mythologies and folk religions around the world, were designed in such a way that human beings could manipulate or bargain with them through ritual, sacrifice, or flattery.
Several key ways in which man-made gods are easier to appease:
1. They Can Be Bribed or Bargained With
In pagan religions, gods often respond to offerings or sacrifices not out of moral necessity, but as a transactional exchange. Crops, rain, protection, or fertility could supposedly be secured by giving the deity something it wanted—food, blood, gold, or praise.
- The Canaanite god Baal, for instance, was believed to grant rain and prosperity in exchange for sacrifices.
- The gods of Greek and Roman mythology were frequently swayed by incense, temples, or animal offerings—regardless of the moral character of the worshiper.
This stands in contrast to the God of the Bible, who says:
“I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.”
— Hosea 6:6 (NIV)
The biblical God cannot be manipulated—He demands righteousness, repentance, and a contrite heart, not bribery.
2. They Do Not Require Moral Transformation
Man-made gods rarely demand personal holiness or inner transformation. Their worshipers could live as they pleased—often indulging in lust, greed, or violence—so long as they followed external rituals.
- In many ancient religions, temple prostitution and drunken feasts were part of worship.
- The gods themselves often reflected these vices—Zeus was deceitful and promiscuous, Loki was a trickster, and many others were morally inconsistent.
The God of Scripture, however, is morally perfect and expects the same from His people:
“Be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy.”
— Leviticus 19:2
He requires internal change—a new heart, not just outward compliance.
3. They Serve Human Desires
Man-made deities often exist to validate the desires of their creators. Whether for conquest, wealth, sexual pleasure, or national pride, these gods support human agendas.
- Tribal gods were invoked to bless war and curse enemies.
- Fertility gods were worshipped to increase livestock and children.
- Prosperity gods were honored for wealth and status.
In contrast, the God of the Bible frequently opposes the very things people most desire when those desires are rooted in pride or selfishness:
“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?”
— Jeremiah 17:9
Rather than catering to our impulses, God confronts and reforms them.
4. They Do Not Demand Exclusive Allegiance
Pagan worship was often polytheistic and pluralistic. You could worship multiple gods without any one of them demanding total loyalty.
The God of the Bible, however, makes an exclusive claim:
“You shall have no other gods before me.”
— Exodus 20:3
He demands full allegiance, not mere inclusion in a pantheon. This exclusivity is not just rare—it’s offensive to the human impulse to remain autonomous and uncommitted.
Pagan Gods vs. the Biblical God
| Pagan God | Pagan Characteristics | Contrast With the Biblical God |
|---|---|---|
| Baal | Fertility and storm god; rain and prosperity obtained through sacrifices | The Biblical God sends rain by sovereign will, not bribery, and condemns sacrifice divorced from righteousness |
| Zeus | Powerful but morally flawed; ruled by impulse, lust, and favoritism | The Biblical God is morally perfect, impartial, and cannot be tempted or corrupted |
| Apollo | Oracle-based guidance; cryptic, unreliable, and manipulable | The Biblical God speaks clearly, truthfully, and consistently, never misleading His people |
| Marduk | Elevated through political power and mythic propaganda | The Biblical God is not elevated by nations; nations rise and fall under Him |
| Ishtar | Embodies sexuality, fertility, and violence; emotionally volatile | The Biblical God is holy, faithful, and unchanging in character |
| Ra | Bound to the natural cycle of the sun; power rises and fades daily | The Biblical God is eternal, uncreated, and not dependent on nature |
| Ares | Glorifies violence and chaos | The Biblical God is just in judgment and restrains evil rather than reveling in it |
| Odin | Seeks knowledge to avoid fate; ultimately subject to death | The Biblical God is omniscient and sovereign over life, death, and history |
Man-made gods are mirrors of human nature: flawed, inconsistent, and easily satisfied with superficial gestures. They give comfort without conviction, reward without repentance, and power without purity.
But the God of the Bible is not so easily pleased. He is holy, just, jealous, and loving in ways we would not invent—precisely because His standards are far above our own. He demands not just reverence, but our hearts, our humility, and our transformation.
Roughly 10,000–20,000 distinct gods have been worshiped, named, or conceptualized by human cultures across history. The sheer volume highlights a pattern: most gods are culturally bounded, localized, negotiable, and disposable—they rise and fall with civilizations. This stands in sharp contrast to the Biblical claim of one eternal, uncreated God who is not discovered by invention but revealed, not tailored to comfort but resistant to it.
This is not a God we would make up to feel better about life. It is a God who calls us to something higher—even at the cost of our comfort.
Challenge Question: If human beings were naturally inclined to invent gods that are comforting, easy to please, and morally permissive, what does the holiness, justice, and moral demands of the God of the Bible suggest about the Bible’s divine origin?
Premise 2: Why Invent A God Who Suffers And Dies
The disciples and apostles who helped write the New Testament were devout Jews, steeped in the expectations and prophecies of the Hebrew Scriptures. According to the Jewish understanding of the Old Testament, the Messiah was anticipated as a powerful, kingly figure—one who would deliver Israel from foreign oppression, reestablish the throne of David, and usher in an era of national triumph and divine blessing.
At the time of Jesus, this hope burned especially strong. Israel was living under the harsh control of the Roman Empire—a pagan, idolatrous regime that imposed heavy taxes, enforced brutal punishments, and regularly violated Jewish religious sensitivities. The people longed for liberation, and the common view was that when the Messiah came, he would overthrow the Romans, cleanse the land, and restore Israel’s glory as God’s chosen nation. The atmosphere was charged with nationalistic expectation and religious fervor.
But instead of a military liberator, Jesus came as a suffering servant. Rather than leading an uprising, He rode into Jerusalem on a donkey. Rather than ascending to a throne, He was stripped, mocked, beaten, and crucified—executed in the most shameful and public manner the Romans could devise, reserved for the lowest of criminals and traitors.
The last thing any Jew expected—or wanted—was a Messiah who would die a cursed death on a Roman cross. In fact, Deuteronomy 21:23 declared that anyone hung on a tree was under God’s curse. To proclaim that this crucified man was the Messiah—much less the Son of God—was unthinkable, even offensive. As the Apostle Paul later wrote:
So when we preach that Christ was crucified, the Jews are offended and the Gentiles say it’s all nonsense.
1 Corinthians 1:23
If the disciples were inventing the story, they would never have portrayed their long-awaited Messiah humiliated, rejected, and crucified like a criminal. This was not a tale designed to persuade—it was offensive to Jewish expectations and foolish to the Gentile mind. The only reason to proclaim such a scandalous message is because it actually happened, and they were compelled to tell the truth, no matter how shocking or costly it was.
If the early Christians were inventing a religion to comfort themselves or gain converts, they never would have chosen a suffering, crucified Savior. This was not a strategy for credibility, power, or popularity. The only reason they proclaimed it—at the risk of rejection, persecution, and death—was because they were convinced it was true.
A Suffering, Crucified Savior Is Not A Comforting Illusion
Jesus did not conceal His fate from His followers. From early in His ministry, He warned them repeatedly that He would suffer, be rejected, and ultimately be killed—not as a surprise or defeat, but as part of God’s redemptive plan. This message, however, conflicted sharply with the expectations of a triumphant Messiah. Instead of rallying troops or building a political movement, Jesus foretold His own death at the hands of the very enemies His followers hoped He would destroy.
The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priest and the teachers of the law, and that He must be killed and after three days rise again
Mark 8:31
Freud and other secular critics often claimed that religion—especially Christianity—was born out of psychological need: a comforting illusion, a projection of a heavenly father to soothe human fears. Freud called religion a “universal obsessional neurosis” and argued that belief in God was wish fulfillment—a mental crutch for dealing with the harsh realities of life, death, and the unknown.
But the story of Jesus—particularly His crucifixion—runs directly counter to this idea. A suffering, crucified Savior is not a comforting illusion; it is a shocking, offensive, and scandalous claim. No one longing for emotional security or inventing a divine protector would imagine a deity who is publicly humiliated, brutally executed, and seemingly defeated. In the ancient world, both Jews and Gentiles viewed crucifixion as shameful and cursed. To proclaim that God Himself had taken on flesh only to be tortured and killed was the opposite of what anyone—Jewish monotheist or pagan idolater—would want to believe.
Why would the apostles lie?… If they lied, what was their motive? What did they get out of it? What they got out of it was misunderstanding, rejection, persecution, torture, and martyrdom. Hardly a list of perks.
Peter Kreeft—Handbook of Christian Apologetics
Instead of an emotionally satisfying fantasy, Christianity presents a God who enters into human suffering, who does not shield Himself from pain but embraces it to redeem us. Far from being a crutch, the crucifixion confronts us with the brutal reality of sin, injustice, and death—and yet offers real hope not by avoiding suffering, but by triumphing through it.
Challenge Question: Why would the Apostles who were orthodox Jews steeped in Jewish tradition and prophetic history invent a hero Messiah that would killed alongside common thieves, that would suffer and die at the hands of their biggest enemy ?
Premise 3: Why Invent A God Who Created Hell?
Many skeptics of Christianity, including Sigmund Freud believe it as the unconcious mind’s need for wish fulfillment. Because people need to feel secure and absolve themselves of their own guilt. If this is true then the Christian doctrine of hell would not seem to fit at all.
hell
/hel/
a nether world in which the dead continue to exist …a realm of the devil
and demons in which condemned people suffer everlasting punishment.
The most well known fairy tales and fictional stories are beloved primarily because they have what we know as a “Happy Ending” Where the people we know and love are always snatched away from danger and rescued. Jesus Himself sadly said that a lot of times this will not be the case:
You can enter God’s Kingdom only through the narrow gate. The highway to hell is broad, and its gate is wide for the many who choose the easy way. But the gateway to life is small, and the road is narrow, and only a few ever find it.
Matthew 7:13-14
While Jesus taught much about the joys and hope of heaven, He warned more intensely and vividly about hell—not to scare people into religion, but because of His deep love and desire to save them from it. He spoke of hell not as metaphor, but as a real and eternal consequence, underscoring the urgency of repentance and the gravity of rejecting God’s grace.
Jesus’ References to Hell:
“Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, fear Him who can destroy both soul and body in hell (Gehenna).” — Matthew 10:28
“If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out… It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.” — Matthew 5:29
“Then He will say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.’” — Matthew 25:41
The imagery and language Jesus uses is not the stuff of bedtime stories. Rather than providing a sense of comfort and security, His words often confront, disturb, and awaken. He speaks of outer darkness, weeping and gnashing of teeth, unquenchable fire, and a great chasm fixed—vivid, unsettling descriptions of judgment and separation from God. These are not the inventions of those seeking emotional ease or psychological escape.
Christianity Doesn’t Coddle—
The vivid and unsettling language Jesus uses—warnings of outer darkness, eternal fire, and divine judgment—stands in stark contrast to the idea that Christianity is merely a psychological crutch. If Christianity were invented to soothe fears or offer emotional comfort, it would paint a far more sentimental picture of God and the afterlife. But instead, Jesus delivers hard truths that expose human sin, demand repentance, and confront our deepest need—not for comfort, but for salvation.
Christianity doesn’t coddle; it convicts. It doesn’t offer shallow reassurance, but a costly grace rooted in a crucified Savior and a call to take up one’s cross. Far from being a man-made illusion, it speaks with piercing realism about the brokenness of the world and the high stakes of eternity.
Most pagan religions did not have a concept of “hell” in the way Christianity defines it—as a place of eternal, conscious punishment for sin in separation from a holy and just God. While many ancient belief systems included some notion of an underworld or afterlife, these realms were often shadowy, morally neutral, or temporary. They tended to emphasize comfort, continuity, or eventual bliss—offering an attainable afterlife through ritual, valor, or spiritual progression.
In stark contrast, Christianity presents a far more sobering view: eternal judgment and the uncomfortableness of hell, alongside the undeserved blessings and bliss of heaven. It does not flatter human pride or promise easy outcomes. Instead, it warns of real consequences and calls for repentance and faith. This sharp distinction forms a kind of meridian line between religions humans might invent—focused on reassurance and comfort—and the kind of faith one would never fabricate if the goal were to craft a pleasant narrative with guaranteed eternal bliss. Christianity doesn’t cater to wishful thinking; it confronts the truth of our condition and points to the costly grace that alone can save.
Challenge Question: If Christianity is a human invention created to help alleviate the fear of our dying and our loved ones dying as Sigmund Freud hypothesizes; how does inventing the prospect of hell make the subject of death easier to grapple with?
ThinkCube Truth Veracity Grid
- Have I considered the facts carefully and with an open mind?
- Is my conclusion the result of a careful examination of the facts, or is it a conclusion made in spite of the facts?
- Is my conclusion the one that makes the most sense of the evidence?
