Epicurean Question

[hedrick]

When you say single voice what do you mean by that ?
When you say that accomplishing the greater good without evil is logically impossible are we agreed that God (if he is) is not all powerful ?
Thank you for your thoughts on this <3

I think you're taking too abstract of view of what it means to be all powerful. There are things that don't make sense. God can't do them.

I mean that Scripture is a human witness to God's actions and people's experience of them. It's written from different viewpoints, none of which is identical to God's.

 

[Ethan Sutton]

I think you're taking too abstract of view of what it means to be all powerful. There are things that don't make sense. God can't do them.

I mean that Scripture is a human witness to God's actions and people's experience of them. It's written from different viewpoints, none of which is identical to God's.

Oh I see, so you are saying that God cannot perform paradoxes. Example : God cannot make a burrito so Hot that he cannot eat it. I see what you mean.

So scripture isn't to be taken literally then it is just how people perceived Gods actions ?

This is interesting to me. I am also a strange person lol <3

 

[OldWiseGuy]

He actually coerces us into accepting him on pain of eternal punishment. Is that really a choice ?

As an unbeliever why does this bother you?

 

[hedrick]

Oh I see, so you are saying that God cannot perform paradoxes. Example : God cannot make a burrito so Hot that he cannot eat it. I see what you mean.

So scripture isn't to be taken literally then it is just how people perceived Gods actions ?

This is interesting to me. I am also a strange person lol <3

Yes.

Remember that I'm talking about two alternatives, held by people who don't agree with each other.

I would say that the types of inspiration differs in different parts of the Bible. The prophets claim to be speaking God's word. I may not take that entirely literally, but I still think there's a difference between that, the early history, the wisdom literature, and Song of Solomon (which is fairly explicit love poetry).

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You have a garden.
Weeds appear in it.
You have two choices.
Wait for God to pull the weeds,
or,
pull them yourself.

Now I don't claim to be the brightest bulb on the tree, but I am a pretty good gardener.

 

[Ethan Sutton]

You have a garden.
Weeds appear in it.
You have two choices.
Wait for God to pull the weeds,
or,
pull them yourself.

Now I don't claim to be the brightest bulb on the tree, but I am a pretty good gardener.

I like this analogy, I am not saying that the solution is blame God and declare victory. Nor am I saying we shouldn't try to make the world better on our own. I am saying that based on what Christians have told me and what the bible says it's Gods fault things are the way they are.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I like this analogy, I am not saying that the solution is blame God and declare victory. Nor am I saying we shouldn't try to make the world better on our own. I am saying that based on what Christians have told me and what the bible says it's Gods fault things are the way they are.

God is certainly responsible for everything that happens, but it's all going according to his plan and purpose. This used to be understood and accepted by much of mankind, even criminals. Few questioned the 'fairness' of God, as most knew they were sinners deserving of the misfortunes that befell them, as well as giving God praise for their good fortune as well.

 

[Ethan Sutton]

Yes.

Remember that I'm talking about two alternatives, held by people who don't agree with each other.

I would say that the types of inspiration differs in different parts of the Bible. The prophets claim to be speaking God's word. I may not take that entirely literally, but I still think there's a difference between that, the early history, the wisdom literature, and Song of Solomon (which is fairly explicit love poetry).

Thank you for your thoughts. <3

 

[geiroffenberg]

I usually don't work with any holy book unless asked to by my interlocutor. The bibles description of evil has way too much baggage for me. I define evil as being preventable unessasary human suffering. You would agree I think that God allows this on the daily.

Thanks for the response

Ethan

you asked those who believe the bible, so therefore it would be relevant to refere to it.
No, i do not agree that God allows evil at all. As i this notion is based upon a misunderstanding of the gospel and the nature of evil. Meaning unbiblical.

One hint is that the realm we have assigned to evil, god says it has no power at all. The question is, what is evil then, if it has no power according to god. Why does it rule the world of humans.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I can't speak for how others would judge, to me the one who stops suffering is good. Full stop, so if God isn't stopping suffering, (it does not appear that he is in any detectable way) then he must be ok with it. It isn't a no win scenario because if he took away our choice and created a utopia then he could do so without our knowledge and functionally nothing would have changed from our perspective. Other than we wouldn't be suffering and dying by the millions. The nature of having all power is you have all responsibility. You cannot have one without the other.
Thank you for your thoughts Anastasia. <3

I will add just one thing.

"Suffering" is sometimes not what we think.

I can think back to a time when life was, by all outward appearance, "good" for me. My husband and I both had good jobs, we lived in a house that was paid for, had two vehicles. Had pets that were fantastic. Bought a boat and went out on weekends a lot. Had friends. We had our health, as did our family members. We traveled a bit. We satisfied ourselves in everything we did. But I also remember it hitting me one day how empty I felt in it all. I remember contemplating love, and realizing that my "love" for each person was selfish, based on how they made me feel. I didn't find my way out of that condition. I eventually became more comfortable and learned not to ask deep questions and "eat, drink, and be merry" once again.

It was some years later before faith re-entered the picture.

And some decades later now. Thankfully God knows the time for everything. I was diagnosed with cancer over a year ago. I will say that I'm glad that I didn't know right away everything I'd have to go through in detail. It might have been discouraging, to say the least. And I don't know what I'll go though - exactly - from here out. It's a very immediate, day by day existence (though in truth, life is really like that - we just don't know it until we are faced with it). But you know what? When the surgeries started, and more cancer found, and I was in the greatest continual pain I'd ever experienced up to that point ... I have to look back and say that that was actually one of the most comforted, blessed times of my life. Believe it or not. (I know I probably wouldn't if I hadn't experienced it.) Suffering is sometimes to our benefit. That's only "easy" for me to say because I was the one experiencing it. Watching someone else go though it (I've been there too) tends to tear at the soul.

Maybe I should stop. I'm not sure that I could be helping in any way. But in the end, it is true what Paul said (and he certainly suffered) ... our afflictions in this life in the overall picture won't be what we focus on. God's REAL aim is to restore persons to Him and have them be blessed FOREVER ... and if some brief suffering here accomplishes that, He and we are better off for it. It's like a parent who takes their infant in for immunizations. The baby doesn't understand why it's being stabbed with a needle, and it hurts. The parent even feels their pain. But the parent knows it is better that the infant suffer the momentary stab and live healthy decades, rather than suffer even more and perish in disease. It is exactly like that.

It doesn't make it easy for us to understand. There are billions of persons, millions of perspectives. But God alone sees and weaves it all together in the end.

I hope you find your answers.

 

[miamited]

Hello Ted and thank you for your response.
For me your point seems to be he just hasn't taken care of evil yet. I must ask , do you find that answer satisfying ? If you had all power would you not end childhood cancer today ?

I look forward to your response <3

Ethan

Hi ethan,

I don't think you quite comprehend what it would mean if God were to rid the world of evil...now. You and I would be gone!! You see, you like to consider evil and the resultant suffering in human terms. Oh, I'm a good guy, so if God were to get rid of all the Jeffrey Dahmers of the world, why I'd still be here and life here would be paradise. However, when God rids the world of evil, it will be on His terms as He defines evil. There will be no unbelievers. That means that likely your wife or best friend or mother and father and very likely yourself, would have been destroyed a long time ago.

Remember, friend, God did cleanse the world of evil once and all that were left was eight people. It probably wouldn't be a whole lot different, as far as percentage of those left, if God were to rid the world today of evil. Now, how often do you think that God should rid the world of evil? Is it your position that just as soon as someone did something evil in God's sight that they would just fall over and die? When would you have died? I know, speaking only for myself, I would have never had the opportunity to come to know the truth. I would have likely been destroyed shortly before my teen years and certainly during them. I was most definitely not a godly child.

No, Peter tells us quite clearly that we are now living in the age of God's mercy, patience and grace. Evil is allowed to fester so that life in this realm can go on. If God were to rid the world of evil, say every day or once a week or month or whatever, no one would make it to their day of repentance and knowledge of salvation.

I just caution you to be careful what you wish for. Trust that God has established a perfect plan. That for those who come to love God, we should all be thankful that God doesn't cleanse the world of evil quite so regularly as you might wish.

Just for fun, take 10-15 minutes and sit back in your chair and consider who all you think should be destroyed; on what terms should they be destroyed; and then see where it stops.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[JIMINZ]

I would like to hear some reflections from believers on the Epicurean Question. It goes something like this. This is mostly for people that take the bible literally(I.E every word is true and perfect).

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?

I look forward to all of the responses <3

E.S

.
With this in mind, I would like to know, how does this relate to the Title of your OP?

Epicurean

Definition
Devoted to sensual pleasures, esp food and drink;hedonistic
Of or relating to the philosophy of Epicurus

Fond of or adapted to luxury or indulgence insensual pleasures; having luxurious tastes orhabits, especially in eating and drinking.

Word Origin and History for epicurean.
n.
late 14c., "follower of the philosophical system of Epicurus;" 1570s, "one devoted to pleasure," from Old French Epicurien, or from epicure + -ian. As an adjective, attested from 1580s in the philosophical sense and 1640s with the meaning "pleasure-loving."

Synonyms:
Gourmet, Luxury, Lavish, Deluxe, Rch.

 

[Moral Orel]

Of or relating to the philosophy of Epicurus

The Epicurean Paradox

Epicurus is generally credited with first expounding the problem of evil, and it is sometimes called the "Epicurean paradox", the "riddle of Epicurus", or the "Epicurean trilemma":

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?

— The Epicurean paradox, ~300 BCE
There is no surviving written text of Epicurus that establishes that he actually formulated the problem of evil in this way, and it is uncertain that he was the author. An attribution to him can be found in a text dated about 600 years later, in the 3rd century Christian theologian Lactantius's Treatise on the Anger of God where Lactantius critiques the argument. Epicurus's argument as presented by Lactantius actually argues that a god that is all-powerful and all-good does not exist and that the gods are distant and uninvolved with man's concerns. The gods are neither our friends nor enemies.

 

[Ethan Sutton]

.
With this in mind, I would like to know, how does this relate to the Title of your OP?

Epicurean

Definition
Devoted to sensual pleasures, esp food and drink;hedonistic
Of or relating to the philosophy of Epicurus

Fond of or adapted to luxury or indulgence insensual pleasures; having luxurious tastes orhabits, especially in eating and drinking.

Word Origin and History for epicurean.
n.
late 14c., "follower of the philosophical system of Epicurus;" 1570s, "one devoted to pleasure," from Old French Epicurien, or from epicure + -ian. As an adjective, attested from 1580s in the philosophical sense and 1640s with the meaning "pleasure-loving."

Synonyms:
Gourmet, Luxury, Lavish, Deluxe, Rch.

It does not relate, The Epicurean Question is just the name of the question. I am not endorsing Epicuris.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Oscar,
I would need some clarification on several thousand thing there but I'll get it down to one because most of this I have addressed already in other replies.
The concept that an all knowing all powerful God exists and you still have choice. So if God knows what Adam will do (he did) and puts him in that position anyway (he did) then who's fault is it when Adam fails. The all powerful all knowing God who engineered the rules and the circumstances of his life ? Or the creation with no discernable powers whatsoever ?

Let me know what you think.

Ethan

I am of the view that because the future doesn't exist yet, it is unknowable. The existence of the future is a philosophical and science fiction/fantasy concept, not a Biblical one. I know that God is all-knowing, but He knows what is knowable, and I believe the future is unknowable because it is generated by our present decisions. It is like me making a musical instrument. I might have the plans and the wood for it, but it doesn't exist yet. I have to make it stage by stage, so it develops as I cut it out, shape it, sand it, stain and varnish it, put on the strings, tune it up and play it. It exists only after I have finished it. The future is the same. The future is being constructed as we make decision after decision.

This is the only reasonable explanation of why God created Adam and then had to see him fail. God gave Adam free choice, and He expected Adam to remain faithful, but Adam disobeyed, so God had to achieve His objectives for mankind in a different way. The Old Testament is full of events where God changed His mind, His plans, and reviewed prophecies.

The idea that God lives in an ever present existence means that He cannot do anything, because to do something means that one event has to follow another. The only ever-present item that I know about is a photograph. It freezes a situation, person or group in an "ever-present" state. There is no forward movement. That would be what God would be like if He lived in the ever present. So an ever present existence is philosophical fantasy quite unrelated to reality.

Our concept of time is determined by the rotation of the earth and its rotation around the sun. The only difference between time and eternity is that in time, the length is measured in days, months and years; while in eternity there is no rule of measurement. This is why we can say that one day to God is like a thousand years to us. He doesn't have to measure time because there is no limit to time where He is, so He can take as long as He likes to do something. We feel our limitation of time because we have a limited life span. So, if God wants to take another couple of thousand years before the return of Christ, then He can without having to justify Himself to anyone. Actually, no one is actually going anywhere, are they?

The concept that God knows every detail of the future in advance is a very strong teaching among religious people, and it can cause a notion of fatalism in people. Why bother to pray to try and change God's mind about something when He knows what is going to happen anyway? We know that God has a plan and that prophecies have been fulfilled. The fulfillment of predictive prophecies have happened because God planned it and then did things to make it happen, not because He fore-new it in advance. I can say that in 24 hours I will have a new banjo that I have made. It is not because I can see into the future, but that I have planned it that way, and I am going to spend the next 24 hours making it. So the prophecies about the coming of Jesus and what He did, came to pass because God sorted out circumstances and caused people to make decisions in order to make it happen.

Some religious people forget that we are made in the image of God. This means that we have much the same attributes that God has, except that His are much better and higher. If God was some airy fairy being who lived in a fantasy world of the ever present where there was no past or future, then seeing that we are made in His image, we would be the same. But we are not the same. We are intelligent beings who have emotions and we can think logically. These are God's attributes as well. This is why we can fellowship with Him.

 

[JIMINZ]

Epicurus's argument as presented by Lactantius actually argues that a god that is all-powerful and all-good does not exist and that the gods are distant and uninvolved with man's concerns. The gods are neither our friends nor enemies.

.
Note: the use of (gods) this was a Greek actually asking questions about false Gods, it was not about THE GOD of the Israelite's.

It is doubtful, he understood anything about The one True God, The Creator of of Heaven and the Earth.

No, he believed in all the false Gods of Greece, and was attempting to question how they operated.

You can't take a question about the False Gods of the Greeks, and haphazardly apply it to the God of the Bible.

Epicurus (341—271 B.C.) Epicurus is one of the major philosophers in the Hellenistic period, the three centuries following the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C. (and of Aristotle in 322 B.C.). Epicurus developed an unsparingly materialistic metaphysics, empiricist epistemology, and hedonistic ethics.

 

[Moral Orel]

You can't take a question about the False Gods of the Greeks, and haphazardly apply it to the God of the Bible.

It's one of many variations on "The Problem of Evil" which seems a perfectly valid question to me. If it doesn't apply, then explain why it doesn't. Historical origins of an argument have no bearing on whether they are sound or not, nor do facts about other beliefs that the originator of the argument had.

 

[LostMarbels]

I would like to hear some reflections from believers on the Epicurean Question. It goes something like this. This is mostly for people that take the bible literally(I.E every word is true and perfect).

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?

I look forward to all of the responses <3

E.S

God is sovereign. As a sovereign entity, he has the power to save and condemn. Which he does on purposeful intent to fulfill his will. God is not subject to opinion, or popular belief, and he will not be swayed because we do not think it should be so.

Now... Here's a choke point for a lot of people. God can do anything, but there are things he will refuse to do. God will never at any point for any reason give homage to any other god, lie, partake of sin, entertain evil, tempt mankind to evil or sin, nor break an oath or his word. These things He has sworn to by his own mouth. God has bound himself by his word, in accordance with his will. It has nothing to do with God can't, won't or is unwilling. He already outlined exactly how he was going to act in scripture, and in Jesus.

 

[JIMINZ]

It's one of many variations on "The Problem of Evil" which seems a perfectly valid question to me. If it doesn't apply, then explain why it doesn't. Historical origins of an argument have no bearing on whether they are sound or not, nor do facts about other beliefs that the originator of the argument had.

.
Sure they do.
If the originator of the question had no knowledge of the God we are now speaking, how could he propose a question about him?

He was asking questions about the gods he did know of, false gods, weak gods.

Have you ever heard of Dominion as it applies to the human race (Mankind)?

Are you able to define it in that context?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

This is the only reasonable explanation of why God created Adam and then had to see him fail. God gave Adam free choice, and He expected Adam to remain faithful, but Adam disobeyed, so God had to achieve His objectives for mankind in a different way. The Old Testament is full of events where God changed His mind, His plans, and reviewed prophecies.

Couple of things.

He didn't expect Adam to remain faithful. The "fall" was a reenactment of the rebellion of Lucifer. It came off as scripted by God.

He hasn't changed his "plan", although he has made some adjustments along the way.

His "objective" for man is to place him in his restored kingdom as new spiritual creations. His kingdom, glory, and name are foremost. We are building blocks for that purpose, not 'the' purpose.