You keep equivocating.
As I said at the beginning of this useless conversation, if the concept of an omnipotent being is accepted(even for the sake of argument) it is not sensible to apply human limitations to such a thing. You can only define evil in human terms and there is no way to escape making a subjective definition.
I consider myself to be a moral person, within reason, but there are few things I enjoy more than a good steak. Imagine a cow who happened to have enough self awareness to realize, not only had he been castrated at a young age, but it was done so when he was killed and all his muscles flayed from his body, the resulting cuts of meat would be better pleasing in my mouth. That cow would certainly find me quite evil.
Of course, by most human standards, I've done nothing wrong. A few vegans will empathize with the cow, but I'm above all that.
I don't claim the universe is without logic or reason. I point out, logic and reason are human constructs, just as good and evil. We have created these concepts to explain the world we live in and to which we are confined. If we are going to construct models of God, those constraints do not apply, unless we are searching for a foregone conclusion.
If that's the case, simply use your human mind to declare that a bad God cannot exist, and since evil is loose in the world, there is no God. Don't worry about defining bad and evil. Your argument boils down to a simple statement, "Since God didn't do things in a way to please me, there is no God." This is a totally human sentiment.
Again, my OP was aimed squarely at those religions that claim God is good via revelation. God is supposedly, morally good. And these books, especially the Bible list numerous sub-goodness and gives numerous examples of what this supposed God tells us these sub-goodnesses mean. You seem to not take that into account.
I do not really apply the fact the self same revelations paint God as a pretty bad character, rather, I aim at a higher logical level to demonstrate the logical failings of their self describe good god of revelation.
And if God is divorced from logic and can make the Universe any way God wants to by fiat, that just makes the logical disconnect even more serious. You seem to be saying a God theoretically divorced from "human logic", a super-omnipotent God not limited by logic escapes the problem of revelation supposedly spelling out in no uncertain terms what God means when it comes to being good.
Supposedly, these "constructs" are God's constructs, not ours. Every sura of the Quran starts with "Allah, the merciful and compassionate", for example.
As I started in the OP, God creates our nature. He has three logical choices. Its a matter of why a supposedly good God creates us prone to failure. When logically he could avoid that. Its not a matter of free will. Any thing God chooses constrains our free will. You seem to think that saying God is not bound by "human logic" makes the problem go away, it doesn't It merely strips God of any excuse not to act logically in this matter for the sake of moral goodness.
It tuns the supposed revelations into immense lies. And that fails on that account. Do sub-goodness like mercy and compassion all of sudden have no real meaning? This is a bizarre nihilism, extreme sort of divine command theory gone wild.
Logic is merely a human construct? I don't believe that. Try being illogical in a Universe where being so will get you killed. Look both ways before crossing the road.
