Epicurean Paradox and my Faith

Eddi said:

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

Click to expand...

I am suspicious of a deity that claims neutrality and equivalency between those who are born into a lifetime of suffering and those who are born into extreme privilege.

Quetzal said:

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:

Click to expand...

Stating the obvious in my terms: I define that 'Evil' is a term that represents what happens when something could be better and is not. I think the story of the Garden of Eden takes the question "Why is there evil" and uses it to get someone to think about what should be changed about themselves. Rather then explaining why evil (the serpent) exists in the garden it focuses on what causes Cain to murder his brother which is in fact his own created self. The garden has a serpent in it, and Cain has murder within himself. That's two evils within creation! This presents a problem if you go into seminary with the expectation that God allows no evil, creates the physical world and allows the evil in it. It shouldn't present a problem if you can think of God differently, as spiritual rather than physical.

You made a good choice to let go of your presuppositions. This chart is wonderful. I'd say rather than destroying faith the chart is able to destroy some beliefs and presuppositions as well as misinformation about faith. This can be painful and even harmful to some people who have a lot invested in beliefs and suppositions, but you were able to survive and accept this change.

Brickjectivity said:

Stating the obvious in my terms: I define that 'Evil' is a term that represents what happens when something could be better and is not. I think the story of the Garden of Eden takes the question "Why is there evil" and uses it to get someone to think about what should be changed about themselves. Rather then explaining why evil (the serpent) exists in the garden it focuses on what causes Cain to murder his brother which is in fact his own created self. The garden has a serpent in it, and Cain has murder within himself. That's two evils within creation! This presents a problem if you go into seminary with the expectation that God allows no evil, creates the physical world and allows the evil in it. It shouldn't present a problem if you can think of God differently, as spiritual rather than physical.

You made a good choice to let go of your presuppositions. This chart is wonderful. I'd say rather than destroying faith the chart is able to destroy some beliefs and presuppositions as well as misinformation about faith. This can be painful and even harmful to some people who have a lot invested in beliefs and suppositions, but you were able to survive and accept this change.

Click to expand...

Mhm and to be a bit more specific, it was a Christian seminary. More recently, I have abstracted my beliefs away from physical and more to the overarching moral network we are all a part of. I call it "The World" for lack of a better term that makes sense to me.

IE: What is the world trying to tell me? What are the intuitions instilled in me from the cosmos pointing me to? Do my ideas make sense when I expand my view beyond the vacuum of my own self? Things like that. I am having success with these ideas.

Brickjectivity said:

I define that 'Evil' is a term that represents what happens when something could be better and is not.

Click to expand...

This is a bit too tepid, I feel.

I believe my kitchen countertops would be "better" if they were all marble surfaces. Does that make Formica "evil?"

Quetzal said:

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:

Click to expand...

I think the Paradox suffers from a lack of understanding of Good and Evil.
Here are some moral dilemmas:
25 Moral Dilemmas
It is easy to create more. In the face of all these moral dilemmas, how do you discern what is "evil" from what is "good" using logic alone? You can't.

Would you be convinced that someone is not good because of his decision in a moral dilemma? I hope your answer no. And that's why the entire argument is nonsense. It's just a glorified moral dilemma.

Let's follow where exactly the argument breaks down:
1. Evil Exists.
Answer: Yes.
2. Can God prevent Evil?
Answer: Yes and No.
Some Evil is preventable.
Moral Dilemmas demonstrate that the answer is not an absolute yes or an absolute no.
Some Evil can be unpreventable. Some Evil can be preventable.

If you want to say that God can prevent Evil that is not preventable because He is God

(in other words, you interpret "all-powerful" to mean He can break logic),

then you have to concede that you can't use logic to trap God and thus the Epicurean argument fails before it begins.

Ponder This said:

I think the Paradox suffers from a lack of understanding of Good and Evil.
Here are some moral dilemmas:
25 Moral Dilemmas
It is easy to create more. In the face of all these moral dilemmas, how do you discern what is "evil" from what is "good" using logic alone? You can't.

Would you be convinced that someone is not good because of his decision in a moral dilemma? I hope your answer no. And that's why the entire argument is nonsense. It's just a glorified moral dilemma.

Let's follow where exactly the argument breaks down:
1. Evil Exists.
Answer: Yes.
2. Can God prevent Evil?
Answer: Yes and No.
Some Evil is preventable.
Moral Dilemmas demonstrate that the answer is not an absolute yes or an absolute no.
Some Evil can be unpreventable. Some Evil can be preventable.

If you want to say that God can prevent Evil that is not preventable because He is God

(in other words, you interpret "all-powerful" to mean He can break logic),

then you have to concede that you can't use logic to trap God and thus the Epicurean argument fails before it begins.

Click to expand...

So God really could swallow himself!
Been wondering about that.

Logic hath no power to assail the nonexistent .

Fool said:

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.

Click to expand...

I don't see how that logic works.

It's like saying that fire can't exist because it would burn everything, yet it must leave something unburnt so we can see the burnt sections as contrasted with the unburnt sections.

A Vestigial Mote said:

This is a bit too tepid, I feel.

I believe my kitchen countertops would be "better" if they were all marble surfaces. Does that make Formica "evil?"

Click to expand...

If it kills people, yes.

Ponder This said:

I think the Paradox suffers from a lack of understanding of Good and Evil.
Here are some moral dilemmas:
25 Moral Dilemmas
It is easy to create more. In the face of all these moral dilemmas, how do you discern what is "evil" from what is "good" using logic alone? You can't.

Would you be convinced that someone is not good because of his decision in a moral dilemma? I hope your answer no. And that's why the entire argument is nonsense. It's just a glorified moral dilemma.

Let's follow where exactly the argument breaks down:
1. Evil Exists.
Answer: Yes.
2. Can God prevent Evil?
Answer: Yes and No.
Some Evil is preventable.
Moral Dilemmas demonstrate that the answer is not an absolute yes or an absolute no.
Some Evil can be unpreventable. Some Evil can be preventable.

If you want to say that God can prevent Evil that is not preventable because He is God

(in other words, you interpret "all-powerful" to mean He can break logic),

then you have to concede that you can't use logic to trap God and thus the Epicurean argument fails before it begins.

Click to expand...

So the question is: Is God bound by logic?

Well, if God created everything, then he also created the system of logic that exists in the universe, and thus God existed before that logic. In that case, God can't be bound by that logic, since there was a point at which God existed and that logic didn't. If we claim that God is bound by logic, then there was a time when God was bound by something that did not yet exist. Either that, or God limited himself to logic once he created it, and why would he choose to give up some of his powers?

Quetzal said:

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:

Click to expand...

Interesting post. But let me ask you a question. If evil is a result of freewill, how could freewill exist without evil?

Quetzal said:

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:

Click to expand...

I see two flaws at the top of the diagram.
* first one: (and here I'm not in line with mainstream theologies...), I doubt God's all-time omniscience for the simple fact that there is no Bible verse or a combination of verses that would indicate God's omniscience.
Many Christians need this doctrine, though.
BTW God of course has the power to know all. However, it's questionable if he always used this power to always get every bit of knowledge there potentially is, I think.

This being said I want to align myself to mainstream Christian theology again...
* The third red square box is wrong, I think. It's saying "then God is not good/ all-loving". When man is responsible for inflicting harm on others, which he often is... why say that God MUST be there to even the consequences out in order for him to be good? This is like blame shifting, in my opinion. Also man can be there to help cope with the consequences of their own wrongdoings/ shortcomings.... It's man's responsibility to do so, I think.

Fool said:

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.

Click to expand...

It seems to me you've anthropomorphized evil. It "maintains an illusion" and an "ego /identity," and even the potential for "awareness." Seems invented out of whole cloth to me.

Quetzal said:

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:

Click to expand...

There are lots of good arguments for atheism, but this is actually a pretty bad one. It's easy to get around it logically simply by stating that whatever happens in the universe is what God wants. We might hate it and THINK that it's evil, but if there's an omnipotent god and we define the word "good" based on whatever that god allows to happen, apparently evil doesn't actually exist in this sense.

Audie said:

So God really could swallow himself!
Been wondering about that.

Logic hath no power to assail the nonexistent .

Click to expand...

Sure. Santa Claus can fit down your chimney. If someone says Santa Claus can't fit down your chimney, then he doesn't understand Santa Claus.

But also:
Reality doesn't fit into the picture created by this logic puzzle. Sometimes logic fails to assail reality.

Quetzal said:

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:

Click to expand...

Jumping to the part of "Then why is there Evil," we can make our own choices just like God but He can still know what we will do. Satan is part of God's plan to provide opposition. When God created the Universe, even God made mistakes. For instance, "the fruit tree yielding fruit" meant that the tree should have fruit bark, but instead God got a "tree yielding fruit."

Quetzal said:

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:

Click to expand...

That paradox is so old, one has to wonder why nobody solved it yet or if it even is solvable.
Only that it has been solved. Thomas Aquinas was aware of Epicurus' paradox and others. Therefore he defined omnipotence as "maximal greatness". The Thomists god can't break logic and that is official doctrine of the RCC. But it is not something that is widely proclaimed to the laity.
Most people hate logic because they are bad at it. And a god that can break logic is just better.

Fool said:

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

Click to expand...

You haven't answered any of the questions I presented you.

robocop (actually) said:

When God created the Universe, even God made mistakes.

Click to expand...

Then God isn't omnipotent nor omniscient. If you can do anythin and know everything you, by definition, cannot make any mistake ever.

Evil isn't a choice made by logical reasoning. There is no good reason for evil. If people have a freedom to fall into that then that doesn't negate God being all powerful. The God desire is for people to willfully choose goodness on their own.

And if God makes no attempt to protect, and conform everybody to ways of goodness without any evil then that means God abandoned people because they deserve nothing good and deserve to have evil befall them all or its God not caring one bit either way.

So if mankind shows any real genuine desire for goodness, or if they can able repent then God would do everything in his power to make sure that happens. And if letting go of the world is the only way to accomplish that then God is not all powerful. Or one could suppose that natural cause and effect is meant to bring about true justice and everybody is getting what they deserve toward the best possible result. That would be like karma.

I surmise that true justice does not happen by natural cause and effect. But then the believer's fallback is that there is a spirit operating in the world and everybody has the obvious choice of accepting or rejecting such spirit. But that simply isn't true.

So what becomes of God then this way? God simply doesn't exist, or is secretly working in the world to bring about the ultimate best.

But if God is all powerful God would have the perfect remedy for every evil and every suffering and there would be no need to wait through all of history to accomplish this. It would happen instantly, or in seconds to everybody. A so called instantly perfect truth.

I don't see that everybody is getting what they deserve with absolute perfection in order to bring about the very best results. Nor do I see a spirit of mercy that protects and justifies the sinful. I see a brute, fact universe with a miracle of life that is fleeting and very difficult. We have tragedy here. Very bad things happen to good people. And if people have any good in them then tragedy or doom is not what they deserve.

I would like to see the ultimate standard of infallible goodness and compare that to human goodness. How does human goodness fare to this ultimate standard? And how is God actually working in the worlds?

Quetzal said:

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:

Click to expand...

Why is “God does not exist” not a possibility on this picture? If you include it, the problem is solved.