Argument against Epicurus's quote about God

[FrugalGuy]

This was in response to the quote posted in the hot deals forum.



<< Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
-- Epicurus >>



The logic statement by Epicurus is valid but wrong because of incorrect preconceptions about God. The reasons are stated below


<< Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. >>

God allows evil to happen for a greater cause. He allows the existence of evil and the devil. Thus he is omnipotent. Why does he allow evil? see next line




<< Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. >>

God's ultimate purpose is to draw people to Him and redeem all of his children from sin. He loves all of us as a parent to his child. However when a child disobeys, punishment is justified. It becomes justified when the greater cause is overall goodness for the child. The child will suffer far greater consequences if he is not corrected in his ways. Thus God is not malevolent, but in fact the complete opposite. He is love and loves each person.



<< Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? >>

Again, evil comes from Satan. God allows satan to tempt man but it is still man's decision to follow into tempation. God does not force man to do evil. Neither does satan. We are still ultimately responsible for our own actions.

This is a quick responce to Epicurus's quote. I will refine this post if I have the time.


UPDATE EDIT ON TITLE Thanx Zenmervolt for you input. I changed the title of this thread.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Hi, I'm Zenmervolt and I'll be playing devil's advocate tonight.

<<God's ultimate purpose is to draw people to Him and redeem all of his children from sin. He loves all of us as a parent to his child. However when a child disobeys, punishment is justified.>>

Granted that punishment is theoretically justifiable in the case that the "child" is actually violating a law of the Almighty and if such laws and the being(s) that create those laws exist. However, would it not make more sense that a benevolent and omnipotent diety would create a world such that evil is not a prerequisite?

ZV

EDIT: From a purely logical standpoint, Epicurius' argument is valid. That is, if his premises are true, then his conclusions are true. Thing is though, that we do not know if his premises are true and also he seems to have an unspoken premise which says something to the effect of "An omnipotent and benevolent diety would create a world in which no evil exists." Given this as a premise, the argument is valid. However there are many valid arguments that are unsound, which is to say there are many valid arguments that are not "true". (Ex. "All men are immortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore Socrates is imortal.". The preceeding argument is 100% valid. However, since a premise ("all men are immortal") is false, the argument is unsound.)

I do not propose that I know the truth or falsity of Epicurius' unspoken premise, or even that I have correctly assumed his unspoken premise. I just wanted to point out that while the soundness of the argument is open to debate, the validity checks out OK.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

NART!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[FrugalGuy]

<< However, would it not make more sense that a benevolent and omnipotent diety would create a world such that evil is not a prerequisite? >>



God did a create a perfect world without any evil. It was in the garden of Eden. It was a utopia and purest in nature. However, evil entered into our world in the form of Lucifer. Lucifer disobeyed God and was cast down from Heaven. God allowed Lucifer to exist because He allows His creations to choose wrongfully. He created all beings with the ability to choose freely. Lucifer chose to disobey God. Man also disobeyed God (Adam disobeying God and eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil) and thus evil is perpetuated. Ever since then, God has been trying to correct our mistakes time and time again. Jesus Christ, was sent to this earth to help us return to God and heaven by being the bridge between our sinful nature and God.

 

[Zenmervolt]

<<God did a create a perfect world without any evil. It was in the garden of Eden. It was a utopia and purest in nature. However, evil was allowed by God because man disobeyed God (Adam disobeying God and eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil).>>

Was that a truly perfect world? Why then is there temptation? Would not a perfect world contain not even the slightest possibility for evil or the root cause of evil (ie. the disregard of the commands of God)?

ZV

 

[Perknose]

Saw the title of this thread, and just assumed it was a PastorDamn trolling for heathens again. :frown:

But, hey, FrugalGuy, looooove your forum name. Just know you're not alone . . . Jesus Saves, too!

 

[Skooch]

Sooooo...what you're saying in a sense based on your ealier statements, is God is punishing the entire family of children (the entire human race), just because the eldest child (Adam), screwed up so long ago. If that's not what someone would consider a vengeful, angry person, I don't know who is. Kind of reminds of some abusive father.

 

[HombrePequeno]

NORT!!

 

[Brutuskend]

OK, well here we go again..

I think the thing that bothers me most about most devoutly religious people is this "I KNOW" attitude.

The ONLY thing religious or NON religious people can KNOW is that they don't KNOW anything.

On this topic there are NO absolutes.

One can THINK, one can BELIEVE, one can ASSUME, and most importantly, one can HOPE. But NO ONE can KNOW.

To state an opinion or belief as fact is the major force that drove me from the church in the first place.

Arrogance and "holier than thou" attitude's will continue to keep me away!

Please be enlightened enough to state opinions as such.

Thanks for your time .... <End of sermon>

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

<< NORT!! >>



Dang I thought it was nart!

 

[m1ke101]

<< The ONLY thing religious or NON religious people can KNOW is that they don't KNOW anything. On this topic there are NO absolutes.

One can THINK, one can BELIEVE, one can ASSUME, and most importantly, one can HOPE. But NO ONE can KNOW. >>



nicely put. that has always bugged me as well. how people are so sure, yet there is no real hard evidence. of course there's the argument you're just supposed to believe and not question, but i mean come on, doesn't that mean every other religion has as much validity as christianity does?

 

[Brutuskend]

Exactly!!

 

[FrugalGuy]

<< is God is punishing the entire family of children (the entire human race), just because the eldest child (Adam), >>



Unfortunately...yes. Adam is the first man. We are all descendents of Adam and thus his sin is carried in all of us (concept of original sin). A pure and sinless God can not be in the presence of a sinful man. Thus Jesus was sent here to purify our presence because He was offered as a sacrifice to atone for our sins. We can be in the presence of God only after we accept Jesus's sacrifice.

 

[Dedpuhl]

<< <<God did a create a perfect world without any evil. It was in the garden of Eden. It was a utopia and purest in nature. However, evil was allowed by God because man disobeyed God (Adam disobeying God and eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil).>>

Was that a truly perfect world? Why then is there temptation? Would not a perfect world contain not even the slightest possibility for evil or the root cause of evil (ie. the disregard of the commands of God)?

ZV >>




good point...

 

[FrugalGuy]

<< I think the thing that bothers me most about most devoutly religious people is this "I KNOW" attitude. >>



I apologize if I sound preachy or present myself with an "I know" attitude. My beliefs are based on the Bible. I can't prove the existence of a God and you can't prove there isn't one. My beliefs are based on faith and thus I believe it's the truth and factual. If you don't have that faith, then you don't believe...simple as that. We agree to disagree.

 

[FrugalGuy]

<< Was that a truly perfect world? Why then is there temptation? Would not a perfect world contain not even the slightest possibility for evil or the root cause of evil (ie. the disregard of the commands of God)? >>



God gave man the ability to freely choose and think. If He did not, then He might as well made mindless puppets. He created us so we can freely think and make decsions. However, this right to choose obviously can lead to wrong choices. It is not His fault that we chose wrongfully.

 

[Dedpuhl]

nm

 

[Brutuskend]

<< I apologize if I sound preachy or present myself with an "I know" attitude. My beliefs are based on the Bible. >>



It's OK.

My father was a preacher while I was growing up, so this has allways been a touchy subject for me.

To me, one can have faith, and tollerance at the same time. And one can respect other peoples beliefs.

In my experiance a LOT of christians (but not all) lack both respect and tollerance for other's beliefs.

That is why thier "I KNOW" attitude bothers me the most I guess.

EDIT: To be fair though, a LOT of non believers lack the same respect and tollerance as well! And that is equally wrong!

 

[Zenmervolt]

Well, the discussion was nice while it lasted. Been nice working with you FrugalGuy, you've shown an admirable amount of restraint and calmness in your replies. I'm out of this thread before it starts to really tank.

ZV

 

[Radiation]

Don't back down, you know that you are right. The Bible is fact, and you can say "I know" before any statement made from the Bible. People who get their kicks by arguing semantics lead sad lives, it is crazy how people search for things to get mad about whenever someone brings up the topic of religion.

Radiation

 

[Dedpuhl]

Sorry for crappin' the thread up earlier. I deleted the post and decided to contribute in a better way.

Omnipotent God?

 

[HombrePequeno]

<< Dang I thought it was nart! >>



Originally it was suggested as NORT even though it meant not another religious thread (topic?). I still prefer NORT.

 

[Brutuskend]

Just one more thing I would like to point out to you.

Just the fact that you use a quote from one book written by a man or men (the Bible) to try to invalidate a quote from another book written by a man, shows a certain amount of arrogance on your part don't you think?

I'm not trying to start a flame war here either, just trying to make you think.

 

[FrugalGuy]

<< In my experiance a LOT of christians (but not all) lack both respect and tollerance for other's beliefs >>



I understand where you're coming from. I thought christians were hypocritical and intolerant of people who were different. I still feel like that a lot of times, but none of us should judge other people, whether they're christians, muslims, blacks, whites, etc., (I think we can all agree to that).

However I started to read the Bible and judged the bible and it's statements for myself. So I made my decision based on the Bible and my personal relationship with Him AND NOT on the behavior of other christians. My point is not to judge God and Jesus based on the behavior of christians but to judge for yourself what God has to say. Thus people should go to the original source of what God is about (the Bible) and then make their decision about God.

I am far from being perfect (NO CHRISTIAN IS PERFECT!). So to judge God based on my behavior or other christians behavior would be a horrible disservice and assessment of what God is about.

 

[PistachioByAzul]

How could a perfect god not create a perfect man. Man erred from his perfection because god gave him free will? To have free will is to be imperfect, if one is perfect one has no free will, the perfect choice has always been made in advance. Same goes for Lucifer, if angels are perfect and especially more 'purer' than humans, how could one go bad?