• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Epicurean Paradox and my Faith

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
When I was in college, I was very close to attending seminary. But this paradox destroyed my faith and I have yet to recover it. I know this is an oversimplification, but I can't get past it. I wanted to share to get some thoughts from others and how to approach these questions/conclusions. Here is a diagram that is pretty close to how I approach these questions:

8o4v93d735t41.jpg
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
When I was in college, I was very close to attending seminary. But this paradox destroyed my faith and I have yet to recover it. I know this is an oversimplification, but I can't get past it. I wanted to share to get some thoughts from others and how to approach these questions/conclusions. Here is a diagram that is pretty close to how I approach these questions:

8o4v93d735t41.jpg


this paradox fails at a certain level.

evil would have to destroy/overcome the absolute in order to become all powerful. it can't because it would also have to destroy itself as part of the all/absolute and all would become non-existent. Evil is all about maintaining the illusion of self vs other as self. It maintains it's ego/identity as a contrast and delusion to otherness. at some point it will become aware that it has been deluding and transform, or forever be embattled.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
this paradox fails at a certain level.

evil would have to destroy/overcome the absolute in order to become all powerful. it can't because it would also have to destroy itself as part of the all/absolute and all would become non-existent. Evil is all about self vs other as self. It maintains it's ego/identity as a contrast and delusion to otherness. at some point it will become aware that it has been deluding and transform, or forever be embattled.
Why does evil need to exist at all?
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
It remains unsolved for the last 2500 years or so. There is an entire school of thought in theology designed to adress it called theodicy of which you have presented pretty much all the options. That's why people still ponder on it. If there was a satisfying answer there would be no theodicy.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
It remains unsolved for the last 2500 years or so. There is an entire school of thought in theology designed to adress it called theodicy of which you have presented pretty much all the options. That's why people still ponder on it. If there was a satisfying answer there would be no theodicy.
In which case, do you think God punishes those who question Him?
 

Audie

Veteran Member
When I was in college, I was very close to attending seminary. But this paradox destroyed my faith and I have yet to recover it. I know this is an oversimplification, but I can't get past it. I wanted to share to get some thoughts from others and how to approach these questions/conclusions. Here is a diagram that is pretty close to how I approach these questions:

8o4v93d735t41.jpg

Various of us have thought along these lines and heard the divers rationalizations.

I don't see it as a paradox but as trying to
make sense of nonsense.
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
In which case, do you think God punishes those who question Him?

I don't believe there is any sort of deity at all to judge or control your actions, only natural and social forces that, if they can be aware of something, are most often unaware of you personnaly or dimly aware of your existence and their impact upon you.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
When I was in college, I was very close to attending seminary. But this paradox destroyed my faith and I have yet to recover it. I know this is an oversimplification, but I can't get past it. I wanted to share to get some thoughts from others and how to approach these questions/conclusions. Here is a diagram that is pretty close to how I approach these questions:

8o4v93d735t41.jpg
As a rather rational person, the destruction of such a belief system was inevitable.
Bokononism could work for you.
It has several advantages....
1) It's free of contradictions.
2) No malevolence.
3) It's simple...no dogma to learn.
4) As a fictional religion, reactions to it by others are minimal.
 
Last edited:

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
As a rather rational person, the destruction of such belief system was inevitable.
Bokononism could work for you.
It has several advantages....
1) It's free of contradictions.
2) No malevolence.
3) Simple.
4) As a fictional religion, reactions to it by others are manageable.
I have never heard of that. (If this is a joke, I missed it. Apologies in advance.)
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Why does evil need to exist at all?
free will to explore all avenues. service to self is allowed only at the Absolute where there is no contrast possible. all created things eventually return to their uncreated state. like the love/hate relationship in the unenlightened self.

revelation 2:24

know thyself
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
free will to explore all avenues. service to self is allowed only at the Absolute where there is no contrast possible. all created things eventually return to their uncreated state. like the love/hate relationship in the unenlightened self.

revelation 2:24

know thyself

That still doesn't explain anything. I can will things as varied as my imagination allows me to, but I can't do everything I will.

If A desires to kill B, why can he succeed? Would it be a breach of free will to prevent A from succeeding in his quest? If B is killed while he wanted to live, has free will been broken? If free will can be broken so easily by the free will of others, can there be such a thing as free will at all?
 

Eddi

Agnostic
Premium Member
When I was in college, I was very close to attending seminary. But this paradox destroyed my faith and I have yet to recover it. I know this is an oversimplification, but I can't get past it. I wanted to share to get some thoughts from others and how to approach these questions/conclusions. Here is a diagram that is pretty close to how I approach these questions:

8o4v93d735t41.jpg
I believe God to be morally neutral :p
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Can you expand a bit more on this?

I don't believe in god(s) at all.

But if such there be, the description concocted
by those middle eastern tribes has a vanishingly
small chance of being it.

In 7th grade, USA, I wrote a short story, how on death all souls in the
universe go first to a big assembly hall, much like first day of school.

There, kids compare, " who did you get for math?" "Who is your English teacher?"

Then, "ohh, too bad, she is so mean." You know how that goes.

So in this case, its " What God did you get?"

The earthling says, " Yahweh".

"Oh, THAT psycho? You poor guy!"
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
That still doesn't explain anything. I can will things as varied as my imagination allows me to, but I can't do everything I will.
at least you have thought on this and recognize that what is possible and what is real are not necessarily true until questioned. Not everyone meditates on their thoughts; some just react to them.

If A desires to kill B, why can he succeed? Would it bbe a breach of free will to prevent A from succeeding in his quest? If B is killed while he wanted to live, has free will been broken?
the problem oif desire is the seed when planted and nurtured comes to fruition.

if self can understand how the thought proceeds to action then maybe contemplating the thought and its consequences would result in a different action. not all free will acts are productive or without negative consequences. so why then follow through on a consequence that leads to a worse state than present.

the law of free will is not prejudicial until self makes a difference between self and other self, so then a balance must be struck, where self must experience both sides; if it chooses to be polarized. if it loves self as other self there is both sides having the same knowing. if it chooses to self-aggrandize vs other as self-demeaning, then it has to also know the self-condemning part too at some point. the self reaps what it sows.


this is the WAY
 
Last edited:

Eddi

Agnostic
Premium Member
Interesting. So God sees no difference between genocide and acts of moral service?
I believe that one one hand he permits evil and suffering to happen - for various reasons. This I believe makes it not possible to call him "good" - is the God of the OT good? I'm not sure!

But on that the other, things will eventually work out in the end through Karma - and he'd rather not have people suffer, plus he gave us scripture and inspired prophets to show us how to treat each other well and make Earth a better place - this I believe makes it not possible to call him "evil". Is Jesus "evil"? - certainly not!

Therefore, the only option left is "morally neutral" as the other two cancel each other out
 
Top