If so why ? What should constitute a good enough reason for God to be adjudged evil ?

Which "God" do you have in mind? The jewish one in the OT, or the arabic one in the quran?

@ Jenwetemi >>> The Christian God (especially in the OT) depicted in the KJV version of the Bible.

Oh, that one! Yes, he is the epitome of evil. End of. Why? Because - according to the OT - he does and instigates the following: individual and mass deception, massacres, property destructions, nepotism and favouritism, genocide, infanticide, ethnic cleansing, plunderings, authoritarianism, fascism, tyranny, etc. He seems to utterly enjoy inflicting pain and suffering on a massive scale. He is the most evil character ever written about in any literature.

I beg to differ. I made an assertion to Kay 17 & Mudley with respect to this issue without getting any reply that was germane.

Would God be God (omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent) if man could question the morality of His actions ?

Jenwetemi, please answer this. It is the primary reason I started this thread.

Uyi Iredia:

I beg to differ. 

You are free to differ, of course. It is just my own opinion. Perhaps you can furnish me with the reason why you choose to differ.

Uyi Iredia:

Would God be God (omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent) if man could question the morality of His actions ?

If "he" were to have all those three qualities that you mentioned up there, there wouldn't be any need to question the morality of his actions, because they would be perfect and just before all eyes. but his actions - as chronicled in the OT bible - are far from being just, fair, wise, and above all, moral. These are the actions of a demented tyrant gone berserk. I wonder why we see God as a tyrant that cannot be questioned. If that is your view of what God is, i do not share it with you. A tyrant may be acceptable to you as a God, but not to me. The god of the bible does not even come close to those three qualities you mentioned up there. Therefore, he is fake and his fakeness is only revealed by the lowly morals of his action.

Hope i have answered you satisfactorily. At least now you know my own take on the issue at hand.

Jenwitemi:

If "he"*1 were to have all those three qualities that you mentioned up there, there wouldn't be any need to question the morality of his actions, because they would be perfect and just before all eyes.*2 but his actions - as chronicled in the OT bible - are far from being just, fair, wise, and above all, moral. These are the actions of a demented tyrant gone berserk. I wonder why we see God as a tyrant that cannot be questioned.*3 If that is your view of what God is, i do not share it with you[b]. A tyrant may be acceptable to you as a God, but not to me.[/b]*4 The god of the bible does not even come close to those three qualities you mentioned up there. Therefore, he is fake and his fakeness is only revealed by the lowly morals of his action.

Hope i have answered you satisfactorily. At least now you know my own take on the issue at hand.*4

Allow me clearance for my method of answering you. It is for the sake of clarity & cohesion of my replies.

*1 >>> this is the same stuff Kay 17 did (in his own case he used "he/she/it". What is the rationale behind your apostrophe ("He" ? Could this possibly be a result of feminist demeanor & its influence in society? Is referring to God as He now politically incorrect ? Or is it because of a belief in Spinoza's God ?

*2 >>> this reeks of the absolute-relative dilemma (i.e whether truth is absolute or relative) and more subtly free-will and determinism>>> my comment on this statement is that the presence of choice would necessarily make God's actions 'imperfect' (they would be perfect but choice/perspective would render it "apparently imperfect" . For God's actions to be perfect and just before all eyes then choice would inevitably (and effectively) be rendered impotent.
Do you agree with my aforementioned sentiments?

*3 >>> But you do question Him. Does this "God" force you to believe in Him ? >>> abi u catch bad eye after the alex leo ish. oya confess >>> On a more serious note, because of how subjective truth can be, i disagree. There needs to be balance before you pass judgment on God. What about His benevolent acts ? Why can't these be factored in before you denounce Him as a tyrant. Need I give examples of many 'great' men in history (who committed vile & sordid actions) who are eulogized ? Examples include Richard "Longshanks", Otto von Bismarck, Vladmir Lenin, Mao Zedong, Alexander the Great, Bill Clinton e.t.c

*4 >>> But He is God nonetheless. Would you have denied that Hitler was the German Chancellor just because of how evil he was ?

I think you know the answers to your own questions (although i see your lame attempt in trying to shift the goal post by redefining what evil implies as it suits your imaginary god). Truth is, it's really the people of the old testament, who concocted the idea of this so-called god, that were intolerantly evil. The god of the OT is modeled after bronze-age middle eastern tyrant kings.

@ Uyi Iredia

How do you go from the Old Testament God to some entity that is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient (though I consider such an entity as being incoherent)?

How do you wish to define or explain evil for one to have an idea of what you mean?

Uyi Iredia:
Need I give examples of many 'great' men in history (who committed vile & sordid actions) who are eulogized ? Examples include Richard "Longshanks", Otto von Bismarck, Vladmir Lenin, Mao Zedong, Alexander the Great, Bill Clinton e.t.c

Do you now compare your God with human rulers?

The bible ''God'' simply cannot be God the Creator of the universes.

For goodness sake' this Jewish deity orders massacres, sex slavery, and the splitting open of pregnant women!

He commands 'his people' to raze down whole cities and kill all their inhabitants including women and children, for the flimsiest of reasons.

The old testament ''God'' was a really sick, perverted character, and any mention of ''love'' in connection with his name really has to be seen as a cruel joke played on the poor, gullible sods raised to 'worship' him, and his ''son''.

Pastor AIO:

Do you now compare your God with human rulers?

It's a pity, eh?

Pastor AIO:

Do you now compare your God with human rulers?

i never came close to such >>> i was contrasting the way God is being characterized using examples of human rulers >>> there is a difference

thehomer:

@ Uyi Iredia

How do you go from the Old Testament God to some entity that is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient (though I consider such an entity as being incoherent)? *1

How do you wish to define or explain evil for one to have an idea of what you mean?*1

*1 >>> B'cos the OT God is (believed by Christians to be such)

*2 >>> Circular question because the notion 'evil' is ambiguous. What is adjudged evil changes with zeitgeists. Nevertheless, when i refer to evil in this context, I refer to the 'evil' actions committed by God in the OT

Mudley313:

I think you know the answers to your own questions *1 (although i see your lame attempt in trying to shift the goal post by[b] redefining what evil implies[/b]*2 as it suits your imaginary god). Truth is, it's really the people of the old testament, who concocted the idea of this so-called god*3, that were intolerantly evil. *4 The god of the OT is modeled after bronze-age middle eastern tyrant kings.

*1 >>> same goes for you. people invariably find their own answers to suit their own belief systems. >>> How subjective truth can be.

*2 >>> what evil implies is always redefined. I previously stated how ambiguous (the concept of) evil is, stating as proof the fact that evil changes in relation to zeitgeists.

*3 >>> If there is no God. Or the idea of God is a farce. What then ULTIMATELY constitutes reality

*4>>> same goes for you. toba has repeatedly pointed this out explicitly & subtly. Your posts towards theists (Christians, in particular) are laced with venom. Damn !!! from way over the Atlantic i can sense the anger seething beneath your posts !!!

Uyi Iredia:


. . .

*1 >>> B'cos the OT God is (believed by Christians to be such)

Such a belief I think is incoherent.

Uyi Iredia:

*2 >>> Circular question because the notion 'evil' is ambiguous. What is adjudged evil changes with zeitgeists. Nevertheless, when i refer to evil in this context, I refer to the 'evil' actions committed by God in the OT

I know of circular arguments/reasoning but a circular question? Since you feel that our notion of evil changes, I'm asking how you wish to identify what is evil or what you would consider to be an evil act.

Uyi Iredia:

. . .

Uyi Iredia:

*1 >>> same goes for you. people invariably find their own answers to suit their own belief systems. >>> How subjective truth can be.

*2 >>> what evil implies is always redefined. I previously stated how ambiguous (the concept of) evil is, stating as proof the fact that evil changes in relation to zeitgeists.

*3 >>> If there is no God. Or the idea of God is a farce. What then ULTIMATELY constitutes reality

quit dancing around the actual subject matter like you're talking to kindergarten children on here. evil is evil. in the context of the english language we all know what evil is. stop trying to redefine evil as it suits your warped religious objectives

hitler was evil for gassing 6 million jews and all the other numerous WWII atrocities he perpetrated; only an ardent racist neo-nazi will disagree. the 9/11 terrorists are evil for flying a plane into skyscrapers and murdering thousands in the process; only an islamic fundamentalist thinks otherwise. your god (as depicted in the OT) is the epitome of evil; only a deluded christian fanatic will see it otherwise as you're trying to do here

when it comes to the devil for you guys evil is no longer subjective even though his perceived evil deeds far dwarfs that of your all loving god, as recorded in your bible book of jewish myths. he's resume in comparison to the all evil devil speaks for itself

[center][/center]

@ Mudley >>> cut to the chase and quit the stultified posts. Answer this

thehomer:

Such a belief I think is incoherent.*1

I know of circular arguments/reasoning but a circular question?*2 Since you feel*3 that our notion of evil changes, I'm asking how you wish to identify what is evil or what you would consider to be an evil act.

*1 >>> okay, teel me why and give me something to cogitate on.

*2 >>> circular questions amount to asking redundant questions. which is what u still do.

*3 >>> pitiable assertion >>> i don't 'feel' on this is a fact one i reckon you are smart enough to know.

*4 >>> given WHAT context.

Uyi Iredia:

. . .
*1 >>> okay, teel me why and give me something to cogitate on.

Ok. Can an entity be omnipotent and omniscient? What does an omnipresent mind mean? Is it present through out the Universe and still considered a mind?

Uyi Iredia:

*2 >>> circular questions amount to asking redundant questions. which is what u still do.

If I'm repeating a question, it's either because you're yet to answer or your answer is not clear. In this case, you're yet to answer.

Uyi Iredia:

*3 >>> pitiable assertion >>> i don't 'feel' on this is a fact one i reckon you are smart enough to know.

Actually, some people do feel that "evil" does not change but that its our moral standards that do change. And it seems clear where you stand on this.

Uyi Iredia:

*4 >>> given WHAT context.

You already gave the context of the Old Testament.

Uyi Iredia:

@  Mudley >>> cut to the chase and quit the stultified posts. Answer this

incase you haven't noticed, i've long since cut to the chase. you asked a simple question: is god evil? and it's either you just wanna be plain stubborn or too blind by your delusions to deduce from my posts that my answer has been an equivocal "YES". It's you who needs to quit beating around the bush and come to terms with the unquestionable evilness of your god

no

@Uyi when you started this topic, I thought it was from an intellectual point of view, but you've just taken side. And since you already know the answer, why do you till post the topic? You said you want to know if God is evil, and Mudley gave you an answer and u begin to attack him. From my assesment of this topic and comments so far, I just discovered that you are a trouble maker. You know the kind of controversy your topic will generate and you still have the temerity to post it. Let the sleeping dog lie. Please. For the sake of peace.

@ the homer

*1 >>> Yes. I believe that an entity can be omnipresent and omniscient. The fact that nature encompasses reality is enough proof for me to believe that an entity which created nature exists. i posit that this entity is God. Still, I'll think more on your question. It isn't easily answered and I would be naive to suppose that my answer puts a full-stop to your question.

*2 >>> expect one now that your question is clear.

*3 >>> semantics (notwithstanding the difference between moral standards and evil). The fact that moral standards change in time means that what is evil changes in effect. Furthermore I wasn't considering it from a moral perspective per se, I was looking at it from how socio-political factors interplay to determine (what is adjudged) 'evil'. I still prefer the term 'zeitgeist' (but used "socio-political" to make myself clear) Examples to demonstrate how evil can be misconstrued:

Richard (aka Longshanks_because of his height) was a man I had hated, as evil, after watching how he was depicted in the film Braveheart; recently I read i a history book that he was good (apparently because of how English dominance accretioned under his reign )

Otto von Bismarck effected the amalgamation of multiple fiefdoms into the relatively less powerful Prussian kingdom. How ? Bismarck himself describes it (i stated it offhand)

"this union can't be achieved through diplomacy but by blood and iron"

widespread killings, serious censorship of books, spying on and maiming of political opponents were methods he effected to curtail the spread of revolutionary ideals which climaxed in what is now present-day Germany, during the years before Bismarck came into power.

I hate the violence, but I doff my cap for Bismarck (another way of saying Bismark was a good man). You might agree if you've read literature about him.

How much more examples need I enunciate ? to demonstrate the fact that 'evil' (or our notions of it) can change.

*4 >>> Question: What would I define as evil or an evil act within the context of the OT ? My answer: Any act in opposition to God (Himself) or His will. In other words, what is evil is something that God would have adjudged to be such.

But you must note that i the OT there are subtle differences between what God said, what it was interpreted to mean, and how it was effected.

Satisfied ? Or perhaps I still misconstrued your question ?

@ Stankoko >>> You & I apparently have different conceptions of what is intellectual. And, no, i won't let the sleeping dog lie.

Uyi Iredia:

@ the homer

*1 >>> Yes. I believe that an entity can be omnipresent and omniscient. The fact that nature encompasses reality is enough proof for me to believe that an entity which created nature exists. i posit that this entity is God. Still, I'll think more on your question. It isn't easily answered and I would be naive to suppose that my answer puts a full-stop to your question.

You're right about that. One question that immediately springs up like I asked before it how you link up this creator of the Universe and nature with the being described in the Old Testament.
Another question that occurs to me is whether humans can actually make any claims about an entity that is actually omnipresent. Not to speak of making claims that are based on books written by other ancient humans with less knowledge than we currently have.
And many more questions some in a similar vein.

Uyi Iredia:

*2 >>> expect one now that your question is clear.

Ok.

Uyi Iredia:

*3 >>> semantics (notwithstanding the difference between moral standards and evil). The fact that moral standards change in time means that what is evil changes in effect. Furthermore I wasn't considering it from a moral perspective per se, I was looking at it from how socio-political factors interplay to determine (what is adjudged) 'evil'. I still prefer the term 'zeitgeist' (but used "socio-political" to make myself clear) Examples to demonstrate how evil can be misconstrued:

Richard (aka Longshanks_because of his height) was a man I had hated, as evil, after watching how he was depicted in the film Braveheart; recently I read i a history book that he was good (apparently because of how English dominance accretioned under his reign )

Otto von Bismarck effected the amalgamation of multiple fiefdoms into the relatively less powerful Prussian kingdom. How ? Bismarck himself describes it (i stated it offhand)

"this union can't be achieved through diplomacy but by blood and iron"

widespread killings, serious censorship of books, spying on and maiming of political opponents were methods he effected to curtail the spread of revolutionary ideals which climaxed in what is now present-day Germany, during the years before Bismarck came into power.

I hate the violence, but I doff my cap for Bismarck (another way of saying Bismark was a good man). You might agree if you've read literature about him.

How much more examples need I enunciate ? to demonstrate the fact that 'evil' (or our notions of it) can change.

This simply reiterates your position. Which I understand but do not quite agree with.
I think some acts are simply evil when compared to their alternatives. With the understanding that some acts are detrimental to the well being of other people.

Uyi Iredia:

*4 >>> Question: What would I define as evil or an evil act within the context of the OT ? My answer: Any act in opposition to God (Himself) or His will. In other words, what is evil is something that God would have adjudged to be such.

But you must note that i the OT there are subtle differences between what God said, what it was interpreted to mean, and how it was effected.

Satisfied ? Or perhaps I still misconstrued your question ?


@ Stankoko >>> You & I apparently have different conceptions of what is intellectual. And, no, i won't let the sleeping dog lie.

Ok so to paraphrase, God decrees what is evil or good?
So if you saw someone being stoned to death for working on Saturday, you would join in?

Trying to separate what God says from what was put in his mouth by prophets is a futile attempt because how do you know what God did or did not say?

@ all posters

The God i have come to know is not evil, has never been evil, can never be evil and will never be evil.

and of course It is not the God of the OT who is an entity created by the jews to enable them dominate the world. the OT God is a God that is tribal, lacks love and does not forgive and will immediately obliterate you once you stop worshiping him.

The God i have come to know does not favour one race over the other. it loves everyone equally and has no favorites. it really does not care if you are worshiping It or not.

it also does not care about your religion or whether you believe in its existence or not. it is neither male or female. It is definitely not a jealous God and is far above human emotions and conditions.

and Its  nature is love and love alone and Its only goal is to bring us to the full realization of Its nature which is to love all life as It love us.

@uyi when the dog awakens, it might not bark but it may bite. I'm neither a christian nor muslim, so u can have ur fun. But what I just said was that if ur topic is on an intelectual basis, then u shouldn't be sentimental. As for me, I love to philosophize, so most of my arguments are just to bring out emphasis. Lawyers argue to win and I am not a lawyer. I am a philosopher.

Morality is intended to bar actions possible, not impossibilities. The fact that god is omnipotent is more or less a reason to force his actions to be less harmful to all. Zeitgeist evolves, dropping destructive tendencies along the way.

A contradiction I spot in an omnipotent and omniscient god is this, he is omniscient to see the future, so how is it possible to for him to change an action he has in the future.

@jinwetime

your vocalness i boring. quite typical.
sb said atheism is not a religion - but why do you feel so STRONGLY against God.
since you bring up the "atrocities " of God in the OT .
did you read what God -the wicked ,tyranical God went through- to rescue the nation
of Isreal out of egypt?
was it a wicked God that would do that?
biased arguments .
nobody is saying don't be an atheist - it's your free will . use it.
but argue balancedly.
Is a wicked God that would give a 90 year old woman child?
is that wickedness.
we had a dictator in nigeria- abacha.
nigerians lived in fear. but when the children of isreal made it across the red sea the rejoiced.
is rejoicing a feature of a tyrannical rule.
What of the widow who would hav died of starvation - God sent his prophet to her?
and saved her from losing her sons as slaves? is that wicked?
when a human judge sentences a criminal to the electric chair? is such a one shouted down as wicked?
we accept it that the criminal had to b executed.
when a mob lynches a criminal after they've been harrassed by criminals in that locality for a long time- do you campaign for FG to sent troops to sack the area?
in their anger the mob meted out justice?
so how come with man - you understand the brutality of justice but with God you call him a tyrant?
he should have spared injustice right?
in your concept of kind - you mean tolerate and condone what is evil right?
if you have a child you'll spank that child - why? to kill the child? or to make him better?
since you quoted the OT, read proverbs 4 . it says God disciplines those he loves.
the children of isreal however,like many of us, we in love with sin and kept on persistently doing wrong - going after false idols, worshipping idols - sacrificing their children in fire to idols ? children God gave them.
God should fold his hands and clap for them right?
nigeria,is a mess because theives loot the treasury and walk free. law makers cart home so much while other make barely below minimum wage.
so much evil. and it is condoned- what's the end result.
i'm not trying to convince you. but don't baised.
A wicked God won't sew cloths of skin to cover Adam and eve after they sinned,
their original idea was shabby - cloths of leaves.
you're free to be an atheist. fact is - God doesnt take anybody to heaven and God doesnt send anybody to hell.
we choose where we want to end up. The bible says - christ died for the sinner WHILE we were yet in sin and some where else it says everybody has been raised up with Christ - restored in fellowship - because Christ has been raised from the dead.
its up to you and me whether to accept the offer.
like a stadium with free tickets, its up to anyone to pick the ticket and go. its free.
sin is a non-religious issue.
if you believe the OT so much and could see God as a tyrant. have you seen the verse
that says "sin is a reproach" to any nation? (oh , you skip over such)
nigeria - a nation in darkness - ,so much poverty,greed,wickedness - the bible says
the problem is sin . Government says its sth else.
God says sin is in the heart of man- all men are born evil. only the blood of his son
can cleanse it.This is not religion- you and every nigerian is suffering the very manifestation of sin.

God is balanced
some wacko's here cannot even understand that the OP mention God and not OT God, why take him out of context to suit your lust for abnormality.

Jenwitemi:

Which "God" do you have in mind? The jewish one in the OT, or the arabic one in the quran?

Uyi Iredia:

@ Jenwetemi >>> The Christian God (especially in the OT) depicted in the KJV version of the Bible.

Rhino.4dm:

God is balanced
some wacko's here cannot even understand that the OP mention God and not OT God, why take him out of context to suit your lust for abnormality.

Rhino, read the quote above yours. You will quite clearly see that i did not take him out of context. If anybody wants to open a thread about "God" in here, it is imperative that he/she states quite clearly which God the thread is about since there are almost as many Gods as there are religions and even humans. I am sure that you have your own God and he is probably a very "balanced" one. But that balanced element in your God only reflects the balance in YOU which is being projected on the image of your own created concept of how your God should be. We all do that consciously or unconsciously. The God according to the jews, however, is UGLY. And that is a fact because the bible said so. 

Passing through.