God Idea advocates Extreme Asceticism

The Catholic Church has canonised many saints who were ascetics. They made themselves suffer for God. They didn't find life painful enough so they set out to create new horrors for themselves. The Catholic idea that we must love God more than ourselves implies that we should welcome suffering. The teaching of Jesus Christ that we must value only God suggests it far more strongly. Deranged Saint, Therese of Lisieux, taught about celebrating suffering as a gift.
 
EXTREME SACRIFICE PLEASE!
  
Every moment of your life is absolutely valuable in itself and to you because it is a moment of life and life is so precious. To suffer a moment for a human being is okay because you will see the benefits and you see and touch who you are doing it for. It is not a waste. But God wants you to suffer as part of his plan for his sake! This is an outrage and a disgrace for he is not like a human person in the sense that we can only believe in him or have the opinion that he exists. You can’t be totally sure he exists. You cannot be as sure he exists as you are that your neighbour exists. Because life is so valuable to pain yourself to help others is always extreme but if you do it for God or if you help them for God then this is excessively extreme. It implies that God wants you to suffer unreasonably and excessively. He could hardly want you to sacrifice for him at all without wanting you to sacrifice yourself as cruelly as possible. Intelligent people realise these things so God religion is dangerous and causes a lot of harm.

To love another is to freely make sacrifices for them because if you do something for them to benefit yourself or so that you can feel good you are really just loving yourself. So to help others you have to reject what is good for yourself in doing so. There would be no point in us being allowed by God to undergo suffering at all unless he wanted us to make sacrifices. And when he makes extreme suffering possible though when I am most sure I exist and what I am most sure of comes first he wants me to be prepared to face it for self-negating love. This teaching has been explicated in The Life of All Living by Bishop Fulton J Sheen (page 95) which speaks of love as something that hurts and wounds.
 
You only help yourself when it enables you to do more for others. It is them it is really all for. So it follows that if you are selfless, then you can always be selfless.
 
You have to be selfless all the time. Selflessness means putting another or a number of people before one person, yourself. Morality is doing the most good for others. To make yourself happy would be a sin when you can use the energy to make others happy instead.
 
If God exists, failures in the way of sacrificing to do good are more serious than they would be if he did not. To do wrong on A would mean doing wrong on God too for he is good. But if there is no God you would just be mistreating A. So God necessarily demands sacrifice. He asks you to adopt a belief that makes you as a flawed person, a person who goes out of their way to see less good in themselves all for the sake of a belief!
 
Devotion to God is not gained by strolling along paths of flowers but by hurling yourself along paths of thorns. By this principle alone, the priests and the clergy of Christendom, the leaders of the Muslims and the rabbis of the Jews who have a personal God who they believe is the only thing that matters are condemned as mistaken at best and hypocrites at worst for they do not do much suffering for God.
 
Would God be pleased with little sacrifices when you could make better and bigger ones?
 
Jesus told us to love God with all, not some of, our power. A small sacrifice is a sin when you can make a bigger one because the more terrible the sacrifice is the greater the act of love it is.
 
And if God is to be all, that makes self-esteem a sin for we should have God-esteem or we should like God working in us but not like ourselves. We should praise him for our good works and not ourselves. That is quite harmful. And God should not be all or even first when I can prove I exist but can’t prove him. GOD IS PERFECT AND WOULD COMMIT AN EXTREME SACRIFICE FOR ME SO IF I AM TO BE ALL FOR HIM, I HAVE TO BE LIKE HIM IN THIS. I HAVE TO REWARD HIS LOVE BY EXTREME PALLID SACRIFICE. Christianity says that God went to the extreme of dying on the cross for sinners and would have rotted in Hell forever for us if he had to and if he could. God might say we are not degrading ourselves by extreme sacrifice because he is there to make sure we will be okay. Being okay in his world means being virtuous not necessarily happy.
 
If God is pleased when we please ourselves then we would not suffer. When you make yourself happy you are not even aware of suffering or sacrifice so it is possible for God to make you happy all the time. He does not so it is his will that you suffer. So, the true believer has to suffer all the time, all the way.
 
If pleasure is good then the wrongness or malice (against God) of sexual sin is lessened the more pleasure you take in it. The pleasure however great does not necessarily have to make you sin again. And besides even good pleasure can make you weaker in relation to the pleasure of sin so the forbidden pleasure is not banned for that reason. The Church says that sexual sin is worse the more you enjoy it meaning that pleasure is considered to be a sin.
 
We all know it is easier to be bad when our life is going well. Religion denies that sexual or any sin is lessened in badness by the enjoyment you take in it. So how could pleasure be good when it fails to reduce the iniquitous intent? It has to be bad then when it cannot do that. Anything that seems good but fails to do good or reduce the wickedness or malice of sin is bad. Some wrongly say that it may not be bad but it is not good either. It’s both. But even then how could you create a morality with an idea like that? The view that it is bad destroys morality altogether.
 
Religion says that God does not want us to suffer but when we have to suffer he has to tell us to do it. It is a necessary evil. But it is only a necessary evil if God was compelled to make us which religion denies. Belief in God is dangerous. You can see this from the fact that nobody should try for a baby when that baby will inherit a dreadful disability from her. You cannot excuse it on the basis that it will love and she will love it and suffering will deepen that love. Belief in God logically commands cruelty for he says we will inevitably tend towards godlessness. The more evil we do the more evil we make necessary.
 
Self-denial is, according to Christianity, not demanded for its own sake but for a greater good, for practicing love. But the problem is that this love is altruism, altruism just cares about rules and not happiness, and so it is not good. So self-denial is demanded for its own sake or the sake of evil. Love is self-denial in the Christian view. So it follows that it does indeed urge self-denial for its own sake. It obscures that for it does not really believe its doctrine.