The Evil God Challenge

[Thief]

I think it's fair to say that most members will be familiar with The Problem of Evil. Variations of it pop up on the forum fairly regularly. What doesn't get as much attention is a related concept: The Evil God Challenge.

To get definitions out of the way, the challenge involves two concepts of God. The first is a good God who is the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent creator of the universe. The second is an evil God who is the omnipotent, omniscient, omnimalevolent creator of the universe.

The challenge itself is fairly straightforward: Why is it more likely that the good God exists rather than the evil one?

Thoughts? Comments?

As a bonus question, to what extent can arguments against the evil God's existence be reversed to apply to the good God?

ying and yang....
nothing new

perhaps the missing line drawn......Who has the power of creation?

if Evil prevails......you really ARE dust

 

[Harel13]

If God is evil, but God created evil - what makes God evil?

 

[PureX]

If God is 'omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent', then what God has created must be a reflection of what God is. And our experience of what God has created is our experience of God.

Are you experiencing Creation as being fundamentally malevolent? Some aspects of it, maybe, but in total? I highly doubt it.

 

[Thief]

in previous efforts.....I have pointed out

Someone had to be First

and saying …..I AM!....
all He would hear in return would be His own Echo

the making of Man was a good thing
we are echoes....but we are each unique in reflection

 

[Link]

Evil and malice is from weakness. A powerful being has no need of such behaviour.

 

[Thief]

let's not confuse evil with destruction

given resources and given the manner of life.....
something must die
that you live

in the scheme of life …..you ARE a god

and we......as if we BE gods.....

take the horse and bridal it's mouth and saddle it's back
we break the spirit
that such an animal will take us wherever we desire to go

dogs hunt at will among their own kind
but we take the dog and collar him......chain him
we take his freedom and forbid that he bite the hand that feeds him
and we expect loyalty

we cage little birds for their love songs
but that creature will never find the mate he sings for
there will be no nest....no eggs....no offspring
and he will die confined
in solitude

we kill bugs …..just because we don't like them

we do unto lesser things as we see fit
as if they were made to serve us

even unto each other

and do we not bear resemblance to the Fallen Angelic

'Man is LESS than we are
he should be made to serve US'

there's is nothing wrong with that logic
is there?

 

[Nakosis]

I think it's fair to say that most members will be familiar with The Problem of Evil. Variations of it pop up on the forum fairly regularly. What doesn't get as much attention is a related concept: The Evil God Challenge.

To get definitions out of the way, the challenge involves two concepts of God. The first is a good God who is the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent creator of the universe. The second is an evil God who is the omnipotent, omniscient, omnimalevolent creator of the universe.

The challenge itself is fairly straightforward: Why is it more likely that the good God exists rather than the evil one?

Thoughts? Comments?

As a bonus question, to what extent can arguments against the evil God's existence be reversed to apply to the good God?

No evil Gods, just bad subconscious programming.

Good Gods, bad Gods, both exist within us. These ideas of good and evil reflect our own internal struggles. The idea I think is to focus on the good, empower it. Eliminate as much as possible the bad influences.

I think often that Gods are models for who we think we ought to be. "No evil Gods" eliminate the bad models.

 

[osgart]

What about God as a hunter/ warrior? Or perhaps a God that isn't very good at creating? Why entertain the notion of an evil god.?

 

[osgart]

let's not confuse evil with destruction

given resources and given the manner of life.....
something must die
that you live

in the scheme of life …..you ARE a god

and we......as if we BE gods.....

take the horse and bridal it's mouth and saddle it's back
we break the spirit
that such an animal will take us wherever we desire to go

dogs hunt at will among their own kind
but we take the dog and collar him......chain him
we take his freedom and forbid that he bite the hand that feeds him
and we expect loyalty

we cage little birds for their love songs
but that creature will never find the mate he sings for
there will be no nest....no eggs....no offspring
and he will die confined
in solitude

we kill bugs …..just because we don't like them

we do unto lesser things as we see fit
as if they were made to serve us

even unto each other

and do we not bear resemblance to the Fallen Angelic

Man is LESS than we are
he should be made to serve US

there's is nothing wrong with that logic
is there?

Then the only sensible thing is to rise up and rebel against any God that makes pets, slaves, or sport of us.

 

[Thief]

Then the only sensible thing is to rise up and rebel against any God that makes pets, slaves, or sport of us.

but it was not God that did so...
having made Man.... God said this is good

the story I got....I cannot find in scripture
perhaps you know where to look

and God said to the angelic
I have made Man less than you
He is fragile
therefore, seek after him that he dash not his toe....nor dash his head

and one third of heaven said.....NAY!
that Man is less than we are
he should be made to serve us

a fight broke out.....swords drawn
brother angel against brother angel

and one third of heaven fell
for an argument over something that looks like ......us
they want us …..dead

two thirds of heaven lost their brothers for an argument over
something that looks like .....us
they might not care any longer

and to whom do we bear resemblance?
that we do unto lesser things as we see fit

even unto each other

 

[Erebus]

If God is evil, but God created evil - what makes God evil?

Would you mind expanding on this please? I'm afraid I don't quite follow you.

 

[Harel13]

Would you mind expanding on this please? I'm afraid I don't quite follow you.

I'll try. How can one claim God is evil, if when we say God we mean an entity that came before all of reality - even the concept of evil - and created all of reality, including the concept of evil? In other words, this entity is above the concept of evil. Likewise, for the concept of good. Can the terms 'evil' and/or 'good' even be attributed to God?

 

[Thief]

I've seen evil defined as......doing harm

and we humans think the churning of this earth is all an act of God

ask any insurance adjustor

 

[Erebus]

I'll try. How can one claim God is evil, if when we say God we mean an entity that came before all of reality - even the concept of evil - and created all of reality, including the concept of evil? In other words, this entity is above the concept of evil. Likewise, for the concept of good. Can the terms 'evil' and/or 'good' even be attributed to God?

Ah, I'm with you now!

It's definitely an interesting argument and I agree to an extent. Something that effectively predates the very concept of good and evil perhaps can't be said to be inherently good or evil. At least, it would have been neither good nor evil prior to the creation of those concepts. However, would it not still be possible for such an entity to then choose to embody one of those concepts after their creation?

 

[Harel13]

Ah, I'm with you now!

It's definitely an interesting argument and I agree to an extent. Something that effectively predates the very concept of good and evil perhaps can't be said to be inherently good or evil. At least, it would have been neither good nor evil prior to the creation of those concepts. However, would it not still be possible for such an entity to then choose to embody one of those concepts after their creation?

Maybe. I don't have enough brainpower (or time) to think about that right now. Maybe some else wants to step in.

 

[Link]

Injustice is only done by weak beings.

 

[Harel13]

Ah, I'm with you now!

It's definitely an interesting argument and I agree to an extent. Something that effectively predates the very concept of good and evil perhaps can't be said to be inherently good or evil. At least, it would have been neither good nor evil prior to the creation of those concepts. However, would it not still be possible for such an entity to then choose to embody one of those concepts after their creation?

Okay, here's a thought before I sign off: if God predates good and evil, even if God does something that we define as evil, that does not make God inherently evil - rather, in our eyes, He may seem evil, but really He is only doing evil acts.

 

[rational experiences]

The teaching always said there is only one God

The first one God is ST ONE....the Creator that released its spirits gases out of a volcano law of the mountain into cold zero spatial 0. Cooled and became Immaculate.

The Immaculate was said to be the baby form of the God body...for space was the womb.

The next ONE God is present as o pi...gases burning owning light, to carbon point of gases burning out/removal (stone) cooled by cold balanced night time gases and water and oxygen.

The D that fell from God is EVIL as defined a veil wavelength extra gases burning was achieved by the Father of science, who by formula conjured the devil....D falls in wavelength L wing.....breaks up in water cooling, then develops O circle on the ground.

Said to be Satan's circle in the past, why the star (water pattern in vibrating droplet) fell.

There was never any evil God, there only was the evil scientist, who tells lies about his known intentions...what evil is. To pretend you are spiritual but cause the opposition to manifest...by human choice.....science/occult.

 

[Erebus]

Also, evil is caused due to some innate weaknesses and deficiencies. God cannot have such weaknesses and deficiencies for it would become impossible to maintain the affairs of heaven and earth in such precise order and harmony. The whole system would be chaotic if God was fallible

Evil and malice is from weakness. A powerful being has no need of such behaviour.

Injustice is only done by weak beings.

I have to admit that I like this take on the challenge! Kudos to both of you.

If to be evil is to demonstrate weakness, then omnimalevolence is incompatible with omnipotence. It definitely seems like a solid argument against the existence of the omnipotent evil God. The flaw I see in it though is that the presence of evil in the world would seem to make it applicable to the good God too.

In response to @Hellbound Serpiente's point about a fallible God resulting in a chaotic system, I'm curious to know how you feel a chaotic system would differ from what we have now?

 

[syo]

I think it's fair to say that most members will be familiar with The Problem of Evil. Variations of it pop up on the forum fairly regularly. What doesn't get as much attention is a related concept: The Evil God Challenge.

To get definitions out of the way, the challenge involves two concepts of God. The first is a good God who is the omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent creator of the universe. The second is an evil God who is the omnipotent, omniscient, omnimalevolent creator of the universe.

The challenge itself is fairly straightforward: Why is it more likely that the good God exists rather than the evil one?

Thoughts? Comments?

As a bonus question, to what extent can arguments against the evil God's existence be reversed to apply to the good God?

An evil God would hate himself. And we wouldn't exist.