In which case either they are unfallen or God is really, really bad at learning from his mistakes. 
Eh? 
unfallen? What is that supposed to mean?
Free of the so called original sin, which according to christian theology is the reason we need to be saved by our faith in God and Jesus, in order for our souls to survive death without unpleasant consequences.
Karajorma is simply saying that if God makes every sentient species "fall from grace" the same way as humanity allegedly did, he either wants it to happen so or alternatively just doesn't ever learn to avoid it...
Some god telling people to do something wouldn't make "something" right, ("God is good" does not mean "good is God") people all have a preconception of good and evil quite separate from god, whether they know it or not.
That is open to much, much debate.
If there is a God, the creator of everything, then He would be way beyond our understanding and even wildest dreams when it comes to power, knowledge, etc..
So to assume to know ANYTHING better than Him would be downright insane. (if His intelligence and knowledge are virtually limitless)
Technicely, God saying that something is right would defacto make something right or good.
The problem in this is obviously that no one can know what God is saying, but many people claim to know so... and they claim God says a lot of contradicting things.
By the way tangenting to the other ongoing debate, do you think God should be allowed to, say, sacrifice people for the greater good because him saying it's for greater good would make it good? Obviously, you are no God, but what if you were? Would you allow yourself the right to do such things? What if you had created an on-going simulation of a world complete with sentient AI's interacting with each other and having odd notions about being your servants in order to save themselves from death, and decided to felgercarbcan the simulation to start it anew...?
Obviously your knowledge of the simulated world would be in, so to speak, higher level than the inhabitants of the simulation. But would it really mean that whatever you do to the simulation - hey, let's try a huge flood and see how these guys deal with it - would be good and right in the inhabitants' point of view because you do it or say it?
What I'm trying to say is this - what exactly is it that makes God's point of view regarding good and bad any more accurate or absolute than your or mine point of view? He's a personality according to religions, but even if he has complete knowledge of how the simulation (or world if you like, the analogy works just fine) runs, it doesn't really mean that his notions of good and evil should coincide with ours - or that even if we had absolute knowledge of his notions of good and evil, we should match ours to his, even if they happen to disagree with our ethic principles.
While Nuke is just being, well, Nuke, I'm not.
This is in fact a particular gnostic viewpoint. God is not good. However, I'm going to take it to its logical extreme.
This is something that studying Christian theology sort of forced upon me; I was a practicing Christian once. But when it comes down to it, God is apparently an out-and-out asshole. The doctrine of original sin and being cast out of the Garden is the story of God blaming the people who were, morally, least cuplable for what happened. God never really got better about that kind of thing. The ultimate proof of this awaits in the lake of fire, where souls burn in torment for eternity, regardless of their crimes or whether God even bothered to check He had gotten His word to them and they even had a chance. I don't care what your crimes were. Even murder and rape, for which I would happily revoke your membership in the human race. Eternal torture is simply not moral. No crime is worthy of being burned alive forever. A week, a month, a year, perhaps even a decade. But not forever.
So put simply God is evil. If He exists, then we have a moral duty to rebel against Him, to free ourselves from His control and to destroy Him that He may never harm another.
I now coinsider it my moral duty to kill you.
Careful with the death threats...
You got everything mixed up. What the hell did they teach you anyway?
Why don't you ask which sect of christianity teaches this and that rather than throw insults against persons and their former denomination?
First, Hell is a foreign concept that we have no idea what it's actually like. It's described like bruning in the lake of fire, but that's just colorfull description. You can't experience Hell while alive, so no human can really describe it.
The concept of hell varies from a literal place of eternal suffering to eternal separation from God to simply death of soul, nonexistence, so I don't think a theological discussion of hell's concept is in the best interests of this discussion to stay even remotely interesting.
The point in fact is not the nature of "hell" in itself at all. The point is that religions have a bunch of criteria that vary from religion and sect to other, but each have one thing in common - the criteria are dictated by the God in each religion. Supposedly, if one follows these criteria, one gains the benefit of eternal pleasant afterlife, while not doing so will result in not getting the benefits, and in some religions there are specific unpleasantness (hell) resulting from not following the rules.
The criteria itself varies from simply accepting JC as one's personal saviour and having faith in him, to following exact rules and rituals during one's life, but the basic idea is similar.
Now the question is, why would any of these criteria be accurate, and if one of them is, why would God place such criteria for his creatures to pass or fail? What would be the motive in that?
Ironically, even though I don't have any faith in existence of any divine creature, I have faith that should one of those exist, they wouldn't have such asinine requirements for their creations...
Secondly, you dont' ahev to be Crhistian to go to heaven. I don't know where you got that from.
Yes well that is very much subject to debate between different religions and branches of christianity even. But I think it might have something to do with Jesus saying that the only way to kingdom of heaven is through him... interpretations of that and other similar quotes have been various to say the least.
