Discuss this quote

[Salo]

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

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

Is God both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?

Is God neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

I would really like to know what you think about this quote, which, by the way, comes from Epicurus. Personally, I like it, as it demonstrates quite well some of the problems that I see in the Christian belief, but if you can somehow show me that this quote is wrong,then so be it.

 

[ChristianT]

He is both able and willing. But first we have to consider: what is evil?

 

[ChristianT]

Evil is anything that is morally bad or wrong. It's anything against G-d. Lying, cheating, rape, murder, etc. But do we want Him to get rid of all of it? We think evil stuff sometimes. If we want Him to eliminate evil, we have to be consistent. That means we'd be eliminated.

I'm not saying people can't be nice, but they can also think evil things. And that is what sin starts from. So I'd be happy we are allowed to even live and possibly* be forgiven of our sins.


*meaning if we were told of Christ and accepted Him as Lord and Saviour, and repent of your sins, then you will be forgiven.

 

[Salo]

Evil is anything that is morally bad or wrong. It's anything against G-d. Lying, cheating, rape, murder, etc. But do we want Him to get rid of all of it? We think evil stuff sometimes. If we want Him to eliminate evil, we have to be consistent. That means we'd be eliminated.

Well, he could just eliminate the evil inside us and replace it with good. He could eliminate greed, sadism and hatred and replace them with love, altruism and good intentions. Why doesn't he do this? If he is omnipotent, he could do it with ease.

 

[ChristianT]

Well, he could just eliminate the evil inside us and replace it with good. He could eliminate greed, sadism and hatred and replace them with love, altruism and good intentions. Why doesn't he do this? If he is omnipotent, he could do it with ease.

Yes, this would be great for those who get evil done to them, their oppressors attaining care and feelings toward their fellow human.

But the thing is, when He replaces evil for good in hearts (He actually does do this), it is a free choice from the person who acknowledges G-d's presence. If a person who wants to do evil and live for themselves despite others' needs, when their hedonism is replaced with compassion, it is not a choice of their own. They couldn't possibly want to switch their ways. Because G-d loves us, He allows us to choose good over evil. See, if we just choose good over evil, it is effectively eliminated temporarily by us. If everyone chooses good, well, that'd be a sign the Antichrist is in power but that's another topic. Anyway, would forced goodness and "love" be actually loving? Would you want a dictator changing your desires to something other than what you want all the time? Is such a thing loving or forced? Is love forceful?

I didn't mean to be pressing with all the questions, they are really just to get you thinking about everything involved with such a thing as altering the naturally desires of all humanity unwillingly from man. G-d wants us to choose Him, not for Him to make us want to choose Him (this happens anyway because He is so amazing).

Peace!

 

[aiki]

This is what is known as the Euthyphro Dilemma. Dr. William Lane Craig has an excellent response to it. He asserts that God's laws are a reflection of His essential character and/or nature. See:

Reasonable Faith: Question 66 - Christianity Today Article and God's Personhood

The comments Dr. Craig makes specifically to the Euthyphro Dilemma are nearer the end of the Q&A article.

Selah.

 

[razeontherock]

Well, he could just eliminate the evil inside us and replace it with good. He could eliminate greed, sadism and hatred and replace them with love, altruism and good intentions. Why doesn't he do this? If he is omnipotent, he could do it with ease.

You are overlooking to really important things:

1) He gave us dominion

2) What you are saying should happen, is exactly what the Gospel commands! Now you know why we pursue being "filled with the Holy Spirit;" this is exactly what it is. Have you ever read Galatians 5:22? (You have a great idea here, just don't try to take credit for it, nor think it impracticable)

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I would really like to know what you think about this quote, which, by the way, comes from Epicurus. Personally, I like it, as it demonstrates quite well some of the problems that I see in the Christian belief, but if you can somehow show me that this quote is wrong,then so be it.

Perhaps evil has a purpose?

I'm not so sure that God's goal for us has ever been perfection. As my tag says, "Happiness is not the reward for perfection."

By conquering evil in our individual lives, we grow stronger.

I know its cliche but I think its more about the journey than the destination. If God just makes everything good...what have we learned? What is the point of our life if God makes everything good? Interestingly I find that if evil is removed from the equation, our lives lose meaning.

It also depends how you define evil.

 

[Hakan101]

I would really like to know what you think about this quote, which, by the way, comes from Epicurus. Personally, I like it, as it demonstrates quite well some of the problems that I see in the Christian belief, but if you can somehow show me that this quote is wrong,then so be it.

Epicurus, eh?

It's an old argument. In particular I don't like it because it makes certain assumptions which are inconsistent with Scripture.

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

We know he is omnipotent.

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

We know he is willing, he simply has better plans than instant gratification.

Is God both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?

Evil comes from those who are against God's will.

Is God neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

We know he's both.

 

[drich0150]

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

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

Is God both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?

Is God neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

First some definitions:
Sin anything not in the Expressed will of God.

Evil is a malicious intent to commit sin

Not all sin is evil but all evil is indeed sin.

Free Will is the ability to be outside of the expressed will of God. In other words. Freewill is the ability to sin. Evil essentially is the proof of free will.

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

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

How so? Sin and Evil have been nullified at the cross.

Is God both able and willing?

Again, Sin and Evil have been nullified at the cross for those who seek atonement.

Then whence cometh evil?

Evil is the ripe Fruit of freewill.

Is God neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

Because He has given us the ability to Choose, and provide atonement for the choices we make. So if we Choose to be with Him in eternity our choice still has merit.

I would really like to know what you think about this quote, which, by the way, comes from Epicurus. Personally, I like it, as it demonstrates quite well some of the problems that I see in the Christian belief, but if you can somehow show me that this quote is wrong,then so be it

Epicurus' paradox of God is based in a logical fallacy. In that Epicurus uses his own definitions of God apart from the bible to build his chain of logic, thus he is only able to defeat his own idea of who or what God is.

However if one takes and uses the bible even to the most basic Sunday school level as their guide, then the paradox Epicurus founds in his culture's popular understanding of God, crumbles under just minor scrutiny.

The true question should be is: If Epicurus' Fallacy represents "the problems you see in Christianity" Then how old when you stopped seeking an understanding of Christ?

-And-
Are you willing to place your eternal fate on such a medieval understanding of God?

 

[GrayAngel]

I would really like to know what you think about this quote, which, by the way, comes from Epicurus. Personally, I like it, as it demonstrates quite well some of the problems that I see in the Christian belief, but if you can somehow show me that this quote is wrong,then so be it.

God is able, but not willing, and He created evil for a purpose. All things work together for those who love God, including the evils that they are made to endure.

Romans 8:28 - And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

Genesis 50:20 - You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.

We also know that God is just, and He will not let evil go unpunished, or sufferings in the name of Christ go unrewarded. This is why first century Christians considered it a blessing to be beaten for their faith, to be "counted worthy" of torture.

Acts 5:41 - The apostles left the Sanhedrin, rejoicing because they had been counted worthy of suffering disgrace for the Name.

2 Thessalonians 1:5-7 - All this is evidence that God’s judgment is right, and as a result you will be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering. God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels.

 

[Faulty]

I would really like to know what you think about this quote, which, by the way, comes from Epicurus. Personally, I like it, as it demonstrates quite well some of the problems that I see in the Christian belief, but if you can somehow show me that this quote is wrong,then so be it.

The problem with the quote is that is misunderstands what Christianity is at its core. As such, it's a feeble attempt to explain away something the source didn't understand the basics of, at least not at the time the quote was given.

Well, he could just eliminate the evil inside us and replace it with good. He could eliminate greed, sadism and hatred and replace them with love, altruism and good intentions. Why doesn't he do this? If he is omnipotent, he could do it with ease.

He is omnipotent, and that's exactly what He did.

"For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified."
Romans 8:29-30
​

This is for those who have their faith in Jesus, who is the sacrifice for their sin.

"For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God."
2 Cor 5:21
​

This is where we are. You want the evil inside you replaced? Repent of your sins and be forgiven, then you will be justified, in a right-standing with God. Those justified are then sanctified in this life, and then glorified in the next (Ac 26:18, 1Cor 1:30, 6:20).

"For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."
Romans 6:20-23
​

 

[aiki]

God is able, but not willing, and He created evil for a purpose.

If God created evil then He is ultimately responsible for all evil in the world - even the evil of Satan. In fact, if God is the Creator of evil, then He is Himself evil. However, the Bible no where says that God is the author of evil. He creates disasters and causes catastrophes, which older versions of the BIble call "evil," but He is in no way responsible for the moral evil that we do. If He were, we would be perfectly right in laying the blame for our evil at His feet.

Selah.

 

[bling]

Well, he could just eliminate the evil inside us and replace it with good. He could eliminate greed, sadism and hatred and replace them with love, altruism and good intentions. Why doesn't he do this? If he is omnipotent, he could do it with ease.

God is both willing and able to prevent evil, BUT unfortunately evil (sin) has a purpose in the non believer’s life.

Sin (evil) is not the problem.

Not sinning is not man’s earthly objective.

Sin is necessary for humans to help them fulfill their earthly objective.

 

[Salo]

So you say that God doesn’t prevent evil because it serves a purpose? The problem is, a lot of evil doesn’t come from malicious intentions or pure sadism (although that’s still possible), but from a lack of communication or misinformation. For example, in North Korea, political dissidents get arrested, tortured and murdered on a daily basis, not because North Koreans are evil, but because they honestly believe that, in order to protect their “great” country from savagery and chaos, they have to defend it by any means necessary. Why doesn’t God at least prevent this evil? North Korea doesn’t even have access to the bible, so without his divine intervention, they have almost no way of finding Christ. Why doesn’t God help them, if he is both able, and willing to prevent evil?

 

[chilehed]

Epicurus makes the argument of a juvenile delinquent who comes from a good family and has godly parents, and yet blames them for his own wicked behavior.

The argument is fallacious because it would have Man redefined as a being without freewill. He sounds like Ted Kennedy talking about the evils of the abuse of women: he's against it, but only in theory.

Man is by definition a free moral agent, having the ability to choose good or evil. If God eliminated Man's ability to freely choose evil then we would not be Man at all.

If God's goodness is, ultimately, love;
and if one of the things love does is affirm the nature of the other;
and if the other is a human being who is free;
then because of his love God will so respect human freedom that he will allow us to commit evil rather than destroy us or turn us into robots.

A better way to express the problem of evil is given by St. Thomas Aquinas:

"It seems that God does not exist; because if one of two contraries be infinite, the other would be altogether destroyed. But the word "God" means that He is infinite goodness. If, therefore, God existed, there would be no evil discoverable; but there is evil in the world. Therefore God does not exist."​

(SUMMA THEOLOGICA: The existence of God (Prima Pars, Q. 2))

His reply is

"As Augustine says (Enchiridion xi): "Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil." This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good."​

In essence, Epicurus says "God must not exist because he lets me misbehave." It's nonsense.

 

[bling]

So you say that God doesn’t prevent evil because it serves a purpose? The problem is, a lot of evil doesn’t come from malicious intentions or pure sadism (although that’s still possible), but from a lack of communication or misinformation. For example, in North Korea, political dissidents get arrested, tortured and murdered on a daily basis, not because North Koreans are evil, but because they honestly believe that, in order to protect their “great” country from savagery and chaos, they have to defend it by any means necessary. Why doesn’t God at least prevent this evil? North Korea doesn’t even have access to the bible, so without his divine intervention, they have almost no way of finding Christ. Why doesn’t God help them, if he is both able, and willing to prevent evil?

You can come up with a million similar situations, so it still comes down to changing the world from the way it is.

What you are asking is the same thing most (if not all people) ask at some point in their Lives: “How can an all Loving God allow _______ to happen?”

God addresses this quest very early on, with the third Chapter of Genesis (you do not have to believe the story is real to get the message).

What you have (imaginarily, if not actually) are the best all human representatives we could have, placed in the best situation they could have (where God desires humans to be). They are parented by the best (programmed to maturity by God), and have everything they could possible need given to them that can be given to them without their consent. There is no death, no hardship, and no needy people.

Unfortunately this Garden of Eden is a lousy (impossible) place for humans to fulfill their earthly objective, so God has to move man to out to a better place, but does provide us and Adam and Eve with this information of “Why we are not all in a wonderful Garden situation on earth.”

The messed up world with all these huge problems is actually the best place for willing individuals to fulfill their earthly objective.

 

[Salo]

Man is by definition a free moral agent, having the ability to choose good or evil.

It’s a well known fact that you not can sometimes prevent others from committing evil by showing them the consequences of their actions, or by telling them something they didn’t know before. For example, God could tell a Muslim suicide attacker that he won’t go to heaven if he blows himself up. This way, he could prevent evil without changing the fact that humans have free will. Or, even better, he could tell the followers of ALL wrong religions that they are delusioned. Why doesn't he do this? This way, he could prevent them from claiming more victims AND from wasting their lives praying to a deity that doesn't exist.

The messed up world with all these huge problems is actually the best place for willing individuals to fulfill their earthly objective.

It’s God who gave us this objective. He could have just, like, not given us this objective and allowed us to live in the Garden of Eden. I don’t think we would be worse off this way, either.

By the way, if God gave us free will so that we could decide between good and evil, then why does he still send us to hell if we make the wrong decision? Of course you could say that it’s because we have to live with the consequences of our actions, but he is the one who punishs us for our sins, which means that he made the consequences, which, in turn, would put him in the same situation as a mother who watches her child throw stones at other kids and then beats the child up for it, without ever having told the kid that this action is wrong. I highly doubt that you really believe God would ever do something that irrational, but your argumentation makes it look that way.

And before you tell me that the conscience God gave us tells us what’s wrong or not, please explain to me, then, why God created people without a conscience, i.e. sociopaths, or, as they are nowadays called, people who are suffering from anti-social personality disorder.

 

[bling]

It’s God who gave us this objective. He could have just, like, not given us this objective and allowed us to live in the Garden of Eden. I don’t think we would be worse off this way, either.

You do not understand the objective.

Yes, God could make nice little animals to run around in a garden, but what’s the objective of that?

Would you like to have a huge wonderful powerful, way out there, objective that is still yet obtainable or would prefer to not have an objective?

By the way, if God gave us free will so that we could decide between good and evil, then why does he still send us to hell if we make the wrong decision? Of course you could say that it’s because we have to live with the consequences of our actions, but he is the one who punishs us for our sins, which means that he made the consequences, which, in turn, would put him in the same situation as a mother who watches her child throw stones at other kids and then beats the child up for it, without ever having told the kid that this action is wrong. I highly doubt that you really believe God would ever do something that irrational, but your argumentation makes it look that way.

Hell is always a favorite topic of agnostics and atheists, so you are no different.

People will be annihilated in hell and are not provided eternal life in hell.

Everyone is judged on what they do know and feel (what is on their hearts) and not their actions.

What you have to remember is God is doing everything God can do to help willing (that is where our free will really comes into play) individuals to fulfill their objective. (God is totally unselfish in this objective).

This “everything” God is doing comes at great pain and sacrifices for God and includes allowing: Christ to go to the cross, some individuals to go to hell, tragedies of all kind, sin and evil.

And before you tell me that the conscience God gave us tells us what’s wrong or not, please explain to me, then, why God created people without a conscience, i.e. sociopaths, or, as they are nowadays called, people who are suffering from anti-social personality disorder.

There are lots of people that never mature to the point of truly having the opportunity to make the moral free will decision to accept or reject God’s help (these include small children and mentally handicapped that die). Unfortunately, these provide wonderful needed opportunities for true Christians to allow God to work through them providing obvious unconditional Love while they live. Their outcome at judgment is not directly addressed in scripture, but from what we know of God’s love they would inter heaven without ever fulfilling their earthly objective (did not have that opportunity) and would thus need to be protected and preserved for eternity by those that had completed the earthly objective. Again these individuals would not be “saved”, but would be in a safe situation to death.

 

[elman]

I would really like to know what you think about this quote, which, by the way, comes from Epicurus. Personally, I like it, as it demonstrates quite well some of the problems that I see in the Christian belief, but if you can somehow show me that this quote is wrong,then so be it.

God is able but unwilling to prevent all evil. That would prevent our ability to love others.