Is God Evil?

quote:

---

Allow me to first state that I am a pretty agnostic fellow. I don't hold a strong belief that there is or isn't a God. I do however believe that if there is a God, he is one very evil being. I base this belief on the Bible itself. I have no strong belief one way or the other that this book is indeed the word of God, or that it isn't. For the sake of this discussion, I will assume that it is and that the overwhelming majority of Christians believe that it is. With that being pretty much an undisputed fact, let's examine the words and work of what I believe to be (if he exists) the most evil being/entity/god that humanity has ever known.

---

Welcome to EvC.For the sake of discussion we are assuming that God exists, the Bible is the word of God, and the events in the book happened as written, correct?That said, God is a supreme being who can do what he wants when he wants. Good, bad, or ugly. He can easily put aside destructive behaviors and love everybody or at the very least everyone who believes?How evil is he compared to other gods? Eris - Goddess of Discord. Ares - God of War. Monotheism places all characteristics on one god, whereas polytheism spreads them out to many gods.So what is your point? Supreme beings can't do what they want?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

So if I have a child I reserve the right to take that life away?

---

Nope, you're not a supreme being. Remember, we are talking about God, a supreme being, not humans.

quote:

---

What you are saying is that we are your gods possessions and he can do with us as he pleases and we should praise his name as he condemns the tiny children to short brutal lives of pain and misery and it is his right to do so.

---

That's what the book implies. God brought us into this world and he can take us out.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

So, when I have a dog (which is my property), and I've promised I was gonna torture it for seven years straight, and then did it, that would make me a good person in your book?

---

You're not a supreme being.I find it interesting that when assumptions are made that God exists, the Bible is the word of God, and the events actually happened; the opposition goes straight to human behavior.The thread is about God's behavior thousands of years ago, not what we think of humans who would do the same thing today.What was the point of the deaths according to the Bible?What is a supreme being allowed to do? Anything he wants!

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

I think the point is that the Supreme being is being evil rather than good.

---

He can't be both? The Israelites felt God was harsh at times and generous at times. Their God covered both sides. (Reality: this was before the concept that God was all good and no evil.)How much killing took place in the NT by God?

quote:

---

And I would suggest that it would be an evil thing to do to a sentient being.

---

As most Christians would also, but it is a correct answer per the book.Most Christians would look at the stories in the OT and consider the violence to be distasteful and overkill in many cases, but that is not the God that Christians know today. They have good guy Jesus.IMO, it is better served for individuals to understand the purpose of the stories, exaggerations and all.Harry Potter isn't about the magic, it's about the story.
The OT isn't about the violence it's about the story.In reality, how many of these deaths actually occurred in the OT?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

And? The only two points Iano mentioned were that something needed to be your porperty, and that you should've made a promise to do something to it. But what you're saying is that when I was a supreme being, I'd be a good one for doing exactly what i described in my response to Iano?

---

He was talking about God, who is a supreme being, not a general answer concerning anything. (Reality: In those days people (not just Hebrews) probably were allowed to do what they wanted with what they owned, women and children included.)

quote:

---

Ok, then, same question to you, only this time, I'm a supreme being. I torture the dog for seven years, am I now a good supreme being?

---

The OP made assumptions. You being a supreme being is not one of them. You want a real answer to a fictional question with no foundation.

quote:

---

Actually, no he isn't. Not if he claims to be a good being.

---

Where does God claim to be good in the OT?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Do you really think that whatever God does (or has done), it makes no difference, it must always be good?

---

Nope. I'm saying a supreme being can do what they want. What difference does it make whether we perceive it as evil or not?

quote:

---

Is there one moral code for God and a different one for the rest of us?

---

There are different rules for what a government or nation can do as opposed to what individuals can do. God in the OT is the head of his nation.So who sets up the moral code for a supreme being?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Well obviously no one died as a result of the Yawehs' actions in reality but for the sake of argument we have to grant his existance for this discussion to even take place.

---

We have to accept his existence, but not necessarily the outcome of the supposed events. The originator not so clear on whether "word of God" means every single word was dictated by God, only the words attributed to God, or whether the writings are man's perception of God. Christians have covered all the three. Personally, I go with #3. So we really don't have evidence that these deaths happened at God's hand.

quote:

---

The point remains that his actions are evil and it does not matter that he is in charge.

---

At face value, I would agree his actions are violent. I consider his actions to be an exaggerated reflection of how mankind behaved.

quote:

---

I would suggest that his actions serve no one apart from himself and this is selfish.

---

Served. In the Exodus story he got the people out of bondage.Taking the full stories into account, could you show me in which ones he only served himself? If we take the killings as true we have to take the purpose as true.

quote:

---

I would suggest that his actions cause extreme pain and misery for many people and this is cruel.

---

Caused. Those were cruel times. What did he do in the NT or the several hundred years before the NT?

quote:

---

You cannot say he gets a free pass because he holds all the cards. I would hazard that he has an obligation to his creations to treat them in a manner that causes least pain.

---

I always love it when people put restrictions on supreme beings or people with magical powers. We are to assume God exists, but the originator didn't say we had to assume God was omnipotent, omniscience, etc. Unfortunately he probably does.Who is a supreme being accountable to? Free pass from what, our judgment? (I'm sure he's quivering.)
Who has jurisdiction over a supreme being?
What are we powerless humans going to do to him? (No money in the offering plate?)

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

So what you are saying is that yes, he is evil, but as we cannot hold him to account we should just lump it?.

---

Nope, but take into account the timeframe.Do his morals reflect the morals of the time?
At that time he was their supreme leader, not ours.Do we say ancient people were evil because their values were different?We may perceive the actions as evil today, but were they considered evil at the time?I agree, those actions by our standards today would be considered morally reprehensible.Some of the assumptions of omnipotence, omniscience and such; cloud your perception.You say that because he knew ahead of time his experiment wouldn't work...evil.
So if he isn't omniscient and therefore didn't know ahead of time; what does that alter in your perception?Does God say he can see everything in the infinite future?He couldn't see that Adam and Eve would eat from the tree and that's parenting 101 stuff.What I'm saying is be a judge and base your verdict on the evidence in the book, not hearsay. Read all the evidence, not just one line.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Does this make it good to do so?

---

In today's society no, but the stories don't take place in today's society. Even in American history men were allowed to do what they wanted with what they owned, women and children included.What purpose does it serve to declare God morally reprehensible by today's standards?

quote:

---

Ok, fine, if god did it, then would you consider him good for doing so?

---

There's no basis for the action and no you can't concoct a basis for the action because you aren't a supreme being. In the stories, there is usually a reason for why God did what he did.

quote:

---

So, you're agreeing god is not good?

---

No, I asked where does God claim to be good in the OT? I claim that in monotheism the god carries both characteristics. He does what can be perceived as good by our standards today and he can do what is perceived as reprehensible by our standards today.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Similarly, what any being (supreme or otherwise) chooses to do because they are powerful enough to do it, is not necessarily the right thing to do.

---

Says who? This is a supreme being that can supposedly control the weather, make fireballs, etc.Right and wrong are relative. If God's the top of the heap, what are right and wrong held relative to?This thread is holding God accountable to our current version of right and wrong.What was considered right and wrong when God supposedly committed the atrocities?What purpose does it serve to judge God's past actions by today's standards?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

I don't know what you mean by talking about God abiding by today's standards or past standards.

---

Laws, morals, standards, etc. change through the ages.

quote:

---

Are they God's standards or human standards?

---

The OP doesn't say whose standards this judgment is based on. I assume human standards.

quote:

---

Surely an eternal being should have eternal standards. Or at least they ought to have been developed beyond those of bronze age humans long before God was smart enough to create the universe.

---

Why?

quote:

---

You ask "What purpose does it serve to judge God's past actions by today's standards". Well, my purpose is to show what a lot of nonsense the Bible is as a moral code and how unlikely it is that anything like the God of the Bible ever existed.

---

It wasn't at the time it was written. It wasn't written for today. There are more practical and reasonable ways to show unlikeliness of the Biblical God. Declaring him evil doesn't really do a lot. One reason is that there isn't any real evidence the killings happened. So the Hebrews make their God look tough.

quote:

---

And I would ask, bearing in mind that "purpose" of life is a major facet to the Christian doctrine, what purpose does it serve for God to demand certain moral behaviour, and wipe out civilisations that fail to abide by that standard, and then change the standard over time? What IS God's purpose? And why should we pay any attention to him?

---

The purpose would depend on the story being used and what the story was trying to convey. I don't know that the stories all had the same purpose.Mankind, civilization, cultures, religion, etc. all change over time. The stories reflect that. The Bible is stuck in time, but mankind continues to change. The Bible tells of man's journey from one religious point of view.Man is good and evil, why wouldn't their gods be?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

You appeared to be arguing that God wasn't evil because he was following the moral standards of the day.

---

I'm saying God wasn't considered evil by his people at that time. He probably was considered evil by their enemies, just as they considered their enemies and their gods to be evil.

quote:

---

It is quite obvious from the Bible and from CONTEMPORARY Christian preaching that God is meant to be the provider of good morals for humans to follow, not the other way around.

---

So what's wrong with Christians turning their God into a good guy?
Are they using the verses provided as evidence of good?

quote:

---

I believe it is equally obvious that this topic was meant to question how God could be held up as an example of a good moral being, when the Bible claims he has instigated so many mass killings, for example.

---

Some Christians hold up the God of the OT and some hold up Jesus as God.If God is good and evil, one can easily hold up the God of the OT as a good moral being. Pick the good parts, just as this topic picked the bad parts. Not hard when one is influenced by other religions. It's that influence that changed God from being good and evil to being good only.

quote:

---

If human beings can develop a moral standard infinitely quicker than God (i.e. compare how far we've come in 2000 years, or even 100 years, compared to how far God had come during eternity), we, my friend, are the supreme beings.

---

Just beings, nothing supreme. So what is wrong with God evolving to what he has become today?

quote:

---

Book of Job.

​

Yahweh lets Satan persecute Job just to prove a point.

---

The Book of Job is fiction. People felt that if something bad happened to you, then you apparently sinned against God and deserved it.The purpose of the story was to show that bad things can happen to good people due to no fault of their own. Illness and calamity didn't mean the person had sinned and God was displeased with the person.God and Satan are characters.If you want to assume this is a real story, then it defeats the purpose of really wanting to prove God was evil. Not really a path I want to waste time on.Hold God accountable for what he supposedly did do, not what he didn't do.

quote:

---

This I don't get: the point is that he is evil in deed.

---

Was evil. What has been shown is in the past. Sure you can label anyone anything you want, but to say someone is getting a free pass means they are getting out a punishment or retaliation of some sort. That's why I said free pass from what?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

I find this statement interesting.. Do you claim that god is both?

---

There was more to what I said. 1. The verses listed in the OP, but not actually being discussed are all in the OT. So the most we can say is that God was evil or did evil.
2. The Hebrew religion was influenced by other religions. God then became all good and evil went to Satan.I'm arguing, because saying God is evil is incorrect. They could say God was evil.I have agreed that as the stories are written in the OT, the actions that were taken would be considered morally reprehensible today.Later influences from other religions such as Zoroastrianism set God up as representing only good. The role of evil went to Satan.In the NT, God was good and Satan was evil. Since Christianity took off from there with the Greeks, that is what they sell. Jesus was the example of good. Jesus is considered to be God by some.What evil is God responsible for since the OT?So we can say God was capable of morally reprehensible actions.What purpose does that further?

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Aside from how this statement is irrelivent to my question (as I was asking about your personal views on God and not the Isrealite's views.)it could be read to contradict your opening question's implied point (that god could be good and evil.

​

Now, the most likely interpretations, from my perspective, are that the opposing statements create an implied contradiction (of which, no matter the topic would reasonably create confusion.) Or you made an implied point, and then expanded on that point to include information in the name of intellectual honesty.

​

It is also possible that I am reading it entirely wrong. (Thus an issue of unclairity.)

---

I have no idea what you trying to say and my personal views are irrelevant.

quote:

---

1. If we accept that god did evil, then we must accept that god commited acts of immorality, thus making God immoral. Things that are immoral are evil, by definition. This is a round about way of pointing out that by doing evil, god is evil. Much like how if you stole something, you are a theif. You don't stop being a theif once you cease to steal things, neither do you stop being a theif as soon as you donate to a cause. Good and evil, in this context, arent absolute values.

---

Wait a minute. If one steals, they are always a thief even if they stop stealing and do good. So if one does good, are they always good even if they steal?

quote:

---

2. Okay, so the hebrews religion changed with the times. If, over time, the color red starts looking more and more like the color green to me, it doesn't change the fact that the color red is the color red and is not not-the color red, no matter how I view it.

---

I don't understand your point with this one either.

quote:

---

This seems to only confuse me further. First, God was evil, then Satan was evil and God was good despite his evil acts. Did Satan influence God to commiting acts of evil? Are you suggesting that the OT is falacious, but the NT is in truth? If so, how do you know which is true.. If not, then what was the purpose of bringing it up in the first place?

---

It isn't confusing if one sticks with reality or fantasy and not try to mix the two. As I stated, other religions influenced the Hebrews.

quote:

---

At what point did God stop being evil? At what point did God not commit the actions that God commited? Is a theif not a theif the moment after they stole something so long as they never steal again?

---

Mankind is capable of good and evil. When one is doing something good, one is good. When one is doing something bad, one is bad. We aren't just one or the other. There are always exceptions of course.

quote:

---

And they wern't when the books of the bible were written? When was genocide ever considered morally good? (the flood)

---

It's a foundational myth. Show me that ancient writings were all sunshine and roses. The violence is part of the story, just like in many books today.

quote:

---

Okay, I get that societys changed their view of God, this says nothing, however, on if god was evil, only that others viewed him as not being so. My argument to this is perception of reality does not make actual reality.

---

All you have is the human view of God in the Bible. If you're going to look at reality, then look at reality.We can assume all we want, but unless there is evidence that these atrocities actually happened as described and by the hand of a god, as opposed to natural disasters or wars, we really don't have anything to judge other than the people of that time.

quote:

---

If we subscribe to a liniar theory of biblical causality.. all evil.

​

Either we assume God is all knowing, and thusly knew the course of events that would transpire before they were a posibility and started the process anyway, making God responsible.

​

or..

​

We assume God is not all knowing, but then we must allow that evil has occured and has done so out of God's knowledge/ignorance and/or apathy/concern, making God responsible.

---

Damned if he does and damned if he don't. Humans aren't the problem at all right? God isn't all knowing and doesn't "see" ahead any further than humans.I don't play the assumption game well. I thought I could, but people keep adding assumptions. Just another brand of fiction.The idea that one is always a sinner even when one has stopped sinning, is a Christian concept I disagree with. Even the people of the OT present the idea that one is no longer considered bad once they start right behavior and vice versa.Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz