Is God evil?

[Blue_Sargasso]

Seems like an odd question, but I've been thinking about this ever since I read a thriller called "The Armageddon Conspiracy" by mike hockney in which a group of people plot to kill God. The book presents the Gnostic view of history and this amounts to a belief that the material world was created by an evil demon (Satan) for the purpose of entrapping souls. Since it says in the Bible that "God" created the earth then "God" must be Satan. The True God, meanwhile, lives in a spiritual paradise that has no connection with the earth. It's the task of a Gnostic to see reality as it really is and acquire the secret knowledge (gnosis) to allow his soul to be freed from its prison in this world and return to heaven.

The curious thing is that the "God" worshipped by Christians, Jews and Muslims is, according to the Gnostics, pure evil. Isn't it totally amazing that billions of people worship a God that some people believe to be the very quintessence of wickedness? Judging by some of the things that Christians, Jews and Muslims inflict on their fellow human beings (mass murder, torture, inquisition, suicide bombings, massacres, death camps etc), don't the Gnostics have a very good case?

One of the reaons that religion is so absurd is that it frequently allows the precise opposite views to be arrived at from precisely the same theological "facts". The Gnostics and the Christians both accept that "God" created the earth, but the former conclude that this was an act of supreme evil while the latter celebrate it as a great and glorious thing. Same "facts" - entirely different conclusions. Religion is plainly just a matter of interpretation, opinion and taste. There are no objective standards whatever. Some religions can actually contain diametrically opposed views...how is it possible for an extreme capitalist and an extreme left winger to both claim that they are good Christians obeying God's will? At least one must be wholly wrong.

In democratic terms, no religion on earth commands the allegiance of more than about 16% of the world's population (Catholic Christianity and non-Catholic Christianity must, of course, be considered as separate religions since they have precious little in common). So, whatever set of beliefs you choose to adopt, at least 84% of the world's population say you're wrong. Isn't it bizarre that people who trumpet the wonders of democracy, reject utterly the precepts of democracy in terms of religion? The democratic verdict regarding every religion is that it's wrong. In political terms, people are willing to accept the majority view. In religion, they reject it utterly. How weird!! Shouldn't the fact that no matter what religion they belong to, religious believers are in a tiny minority, cause them pause for thought and make them question their beliefs?

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Shouldn't the fact that no matter what religion they belong to, religious believers are in a tiny minority, cause them pause for thought and make them question their beliefs?

No. People like to feel special. Religions tend to have words for the faithful like elect or enlightened to give the sense that the believer is a rare breed of cat above the common rabble. A few religions spell it out even more explicitly. Being in the minority is part of the appeal.

 

[Complexity]

No god, hence not evil.

It it did exist, it would be evil and should be destroyed.

You need a new hobby.

 

[Rob Lister]

interesting question.

is something that does not exist something that does not exist?

very existential!

 

[slingblade]

I'd not call them a tiny minority, either. I'm not even sure they're a minority, if you're counting all religions and all religious.

 

[theprestige]

[If] it did exist, it would be evil and should be destroyed.

How do you figure?

 

[Darth Rotor]

I'd not call them a tiny minority, either. I'm not even sure they're a minority, if you're counting all religions and all religious.

Does that big tent inclusion not evade the OP's question about a minority religion? The OP references God, and the Gnostics, which makes clear what religion and belief is under discussion.

In democratic terms, no religion on earth commands the allegiance of more than about 16% of the world's population

Quoted in support of opening remark.

(Catholic Christianity and non-Catholic Christianity must, of course, be considered as separate religions since they have precious little in common).

No, "must" is not correct. "Can be" works well enough. Your "precious little in common" is not only vague, it is unsupported as an arbitrary throw away.

DR

 

[Rufo]

Hrm. You are simplifying Gnosticism a bit here. Since Gnostics seem to take delight in overcomplicating things, I guess I can't blame you, but it does cripple the debate of that specific viewpoint a bit.

I don't think it's fair to say that mainstream Abrahamic religions and Gnosticism base their beliefs on the same hypothetical "facts". You are right in that it is largely a matter of interpretation, but that interpretation also extends to some speculations which adds additional "facts" to the corresponding belief systems - for instance, mainstream Abrahamic religions do share the Gnostic belief that JHVH created the physical world, but they also believe that JHVH created all that is and that there are no superior beings or entities. In Gnosticism, such beings and entities are vital to the interpretations - including moral ones - and we end up with two different religions with two different hypothetical realities.

But to quote Ghandi, "in reality there are as many religions as there are individuals." Religious interpretations are not limited to seeing the "facts" differently, they are a lot about seeing different "facts". Which is true for many other matters, but rarely so obvious.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Consider the following:

God murders every single human being on Earth in a massive flood, including young boys and girls who have not even had the chance to decide if they will obey or rebel.

He then lays down the most horrific laws you can possibly conceive. A child must be killed for slagging off his parents and a women can be stoned to death on her fathers doorstep if not a virgin on her wedding night. Even if we impose the "Different times, different laws" excuse, we have to ask what possible benefit these rules -that make the Taliban look like Rupert the Bear- can bring to society other than misery.

Then his son has the cheek to suggest that we love this genocidal maniac.

 

[leon_heller]

Since the existence of God can neither be proved or disproved, asking if he, she or it is evil is an invalid question.

Leon

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

In democratic terms, no religion on earth commands the allegiance of more than about 16% of the world's population (Catholic Christianity and non-Catholic Christianity must, of course, be considered as separate religions since they have precious little in common).

Here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups

So, whatever set of beliefs you choose to adopt, at least 84% of the world's population say you're wrong.

Not necessarily.

Isn't it bizarre that people who trumpet the wonders of democracy, reject utterly the precepts of democracy in terms of religion? The democratic verdict regarding every religion is that it's wrong. In political terms, people are willing to accept the majority view. In religion, they reject it utterly.

Being religious is the majority view.

How weird!! Shouldn't the fact that no matter what religion they belong to, religious believers are in a tiny minority, cause them pause for thought and make them question their beliefs?

Interesting point. So - as a member of the non-religious minority - do you?

 

[moon1969]

"Religion is the opiate of the people"
-Karl Marx-

"You never see animals going through the absurd and often horrible fooleries of magic and religions. Only man behaves with such gratuitous folly. It is the price he has to pay for being intelligent but not, as yet, intelligent enough."
-Aldous Leonard Huxley-

"It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God - but to create him."
-Arthur C. Clarke-

"The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion."
-Arthur C. Clarke-

 

[RobRoy]

"Religion is the opiate of the people"
-Karl Marx-

"You never see animals going through the absurd and often horrible fooleries of magic and religions. Only man behaves with such gratuitous folly. It is the price he has to pay for being intelligent but not, as yet, intelligent enough."
-Aldous Leonard Huxley-

"It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God - but to create him."
-Arthur C. Clarke-

"The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion."
-Arthur C. Clarke-

No offense, but what's this supposed to prove? I can quote three equally well-known folk who believe heart and soul in God. Providing quotes doesn't really equate to answering the OP, or addressing any of the subsequent responses.

 

[Mashuna]

Religion and football are the opiates of the people
-my Mum-

 

[Nick227]

Seems like an odd question, but I've been thinking about this ever since I read a thriller called "The Armageddon Conspiracy" by mike hockney in which a group of people plot to kill God. The book presents the Gnostic view of history and this amounts to a belief that the material world was created by an evil demon (Satan) for the purpose of entrapping souls. Since it says in the Bible that "God" created the earth then "God" must be Satan. The True God, meanwhile, lives in a spiritual paradise that has no connection with the earth. It's the task of a Gnostic to see reality as it really is and acquire the secret knowledge (gnosis) to allow his soul to be freed from its prison in this world and return to heaven.

Well, very vaguely. The orthodox "God" to the gnostics is the "demiurge" - an alienated, corrupt and controlling deity typified by the Old Testament statement, "The Lord your God is a jealous God."

The curious thing is that the "God" worshipped by Christians, Jews and Muslims is, according to the Gnostics, pure evil.

Not pure evil, just disconnected from reality. Read the Gospel of Truth, if you're interested. This is the source document for a lot of gnostic ideas here.

Nick

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Since the existence of God can neither be proved or disproved, asking if he, she or it is evil is an invalid question.

Leon

If you think God is a fictional character, then it's as valid as asking "Is [character] from [movie] evil?". As long as you bear in mind that you are making a value judgement about a made-up entity then it's still a potentially interesting question.

It's also a significant question because a lot of unenlightened people think God is a non-fictional entity, believe that God is perfectly good, and believe that God did or endorsed all sorts of vile things.

 

[Complexity]

How do you figure?

Just being contrarian and a Curmudgeon-in-Training.

All of the fictional pretenders to godhood that people have invented so far should be slaughtered if they are ever realized.

I'm just extrapolating and embracing my darker self.

 

[fuelair]

It it did exist, it would be evil and should be destroyed.

.

Absolutely!!

 

[fuelair]

How do you figure?

My view, not who you asked, but....
There is evil in the world (won't cover all of it, and what I will cover is quite sufficient for me) : children are killed/mutilated/foully mistreated all over the world every day; people are harmed/ etc./killed every day. IF there was a god and IF that god allows this, THEN that god is pure evil and it is my duty to track down and do my best to destroy it.

My assumption is no god - based on evidence by lack of behavior, BUT if I ever find I am wrong on that then I will function appropriately.

 

[geni]

Consider the following:

God murders every single human being on Earth in a massive flood, including young boys and girls who have not even had the chance to decide if they will obey or rebel.

So collateral damage is evil now?

He then lays down the most horrific laws you can possibly conceive.

You lack imagination

A child must be killed for slagging off his parents and a women can be stoned to death on her fathers doorstep if not a virgin on her wedding night. Even if we impose the "Different times, different laws" excuse, we have to ask what possible benefit these rules -that make the Taliban look like Rupert the Bear- can bring to society other than misery.

It appears almost any codified set of laws is better than nothing. Which is probably why Draco's laws lasted as long as they did.

Then his son has the cheek to suggest that we love this genocidal maniac.

Is it technicaly possible for a non human to comit genocide?