if the Abrahamic god exists, that being is evil.

Thanks to Pro for his answer. My post will also be a bit rushed, since my I'm ridiculously busy these days..Even so, I will do my best to respond to Pro's claims concerning God's allegedly 'evil' actions in the Bible. The Garden of Eden First of all, and with all due respect, I'm afraid the first part of Pro's argument displays major misunderstandings concerning the Genesis account. The first of these is a misreading of the expression 'knowledge of good and evil', which he comprehends as an inability to conceive of morality. In other words, according to Pro, God created mankind without a conscience. As discussed in my first post, this would mean that, much like animals, mankind's understanding would be devoid of any notion of good and evil. Such an assertion is impossible, because it removes the need for temptation. Think about it: if Adam and Eve didn't know that it was 'good' to follow God's command, would they really need Satan to lure them into disobeying? No, their God-given conscience was precisely the reason why Satan had to entice them with false promises of becoming their own gods. Naturally, this leaves us with the question of what exactly is 'knowledge of good and evil'. The word 'knowledge' can be taken at two levels: the intellectual level and the personal level. As an example, though I (luckily) am not diabetic, I 'know' that it would do me much harm, because I have been taught so at home and at school—I know of diabetes, intellectually. If however, I go against my parents' advice and eat too much sugar, there's a good chance I'll become diabetic—I'll know diabetes personally. In the same way, though God gave Adam and Eve the knowledge of the existence of good and evil, and the means to avoid it, he did not give them the experience of evil. The latter was incurred by the man's choice to eat from the forbidden fruit, which brought separation from God (basically death, in Christian theology). If Pro deems it malevolent to deprive mankind from the personal knowledge of evil, without removing his free will (since man could, and did, choose evil), it is his morality that should be questioned, not God's. To summarize, no, God did not create man with a fatal flaw, unless one considers free will to be a flaw, which I am sure Pro does not. It was man who, out of selfish pride rebelled against God and left the Garden, becoming their own 'gods' (or so he believed..) Noah This one will be shorter. To be honest, this is the first time I hear a comparison of the Flood with eugenics. Let's make this clear: the Great Flood in Genesis has strictly nothing to do with eugenics. God didn't destroy his 'bad' creatures in order to preserve the purity of the 'good' ones. The Flood was sent as a PUNISHMENT of the evil men. As we have seen previously, God is not simply Creator, he is also Legislator, and it follows that his response to severe and unrepentant deviations from his law leads to punishment. In relating the Flood to Hitler's 'Final Solution', Pro speaks of evil as some sort of genetic mutation which must be eliminated at all cost. These men had a choice of whether to follow God or not, and their choice lead to their destruction, as expected. If one applies Pro's argument to secular justice, we would have to conclude that inflicting the death penalty on murderers amounts to eugenics! The issue isn't whether capital punishment is desirable or not. But even an opponent of the practice such as I find it plainly mad to reach such a conclusion! In fact, Noah himself was far from perfect (for those who don't know, he got drunk before his own sons), not to mention his descendents. If God had indeed planned to wipe out the 'evil genes' from planet earth, he certainly has failed! Other 'Atrocities' The Sodom and Gomorrha incident wasn't genocide. The punishment was inflicted on the basis of righteousness, not on race or ethnicity. Great cities like these two probably sheltered people from all over the Ancient Near East. Not everyone was sentenced to death, since Lot and his family were spared. Lot's wife was not 'turned into a pillar of salt' (probably covered by saline fumes from the volcanic eruption) because of curiosity. It was her regret for her former life and disobedience to God, who had warned them of the dangers of such reluctance to trust him. Amalek had attacked Israel in the first place..this was a battle, not a genocide. As for 'toying with them all for genocide', this was another test of faith, which are very frequent in the Bible. Job's trial was an allegorical honor challenge to humanity, which Satan had accused of weakness and unfaithfulness (Job 1). Hardly an 'atrocity'.. God punishes his creatures for their own sins, NOT for those of Adam and Eve. Pro provides no Scripture suggesting the opposite. 'all powerful being still hunts humans" souls one after another as if a collector waiting for the relic to age just enough to be of value.' Emotional and not supported. 'Profoundly Immoral': Since God is the Giver and Source of Life, the 'process of death' is a natural consequence of separation from God. I fail to see the immorality here. 'Malevolence/ malign intent ' : God is malevolent 'every time he takes a life'?? As previously stated, God is Giver of Life, he alone has the right to take it. Righteous punishment is not an expression of malevolence, but of perfect justice. Malevolence/ malign intent : Yet again, Pro misses God's clearly stated intentions. Deuteronomy says it better than me: “After the Lord your God has driven them out before you, do not say to yourself, “The Lord has brought me here to take possession of this land because of my righteousness.” No, it is on account of the wickedness of these nations that the Lord is going to drive them out before you. 5 It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations, the Lord your God will drive them out before you, to accomplish what he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” Deuteronomy 9:4-5 Sinister: Erm...so God was 'sinister' for warning Adam and Eve of the consequences??? If I tell you your house is burning and you better get out, am I being sinister? That's all for today. Your turn, Pro :)