Epicurus riddle.

[Archbow]

“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?”

Opinions on this riddle?

[Paul the Human]

My opinion is that Epicurus has clearly shown that the Biblical God cannot be all of the things that the Bible claims he is. The natural conclusion is that, therefore, God does not exist. Epicurus' Riddle does not actually make that claim, however.

Christians have told me that the riddle shows that God cannot be comprehended by us mere mortals. Either way, I have always been a fan of Epicurus' Riddle.

[chatpilot]

I don't consider it a riddle but rather a statement of relevant facts regarding the xtian God. Most of those statements reveal the many contradictions regarding the biblical God and his attributes or his role in the lives of us mortals. I don't think it serves as an argument for the non-existence of the biblical god at all.

[Welsh cake]

It's more of a paradox than a riddle actually, since theists propose the existence of an omni-benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient deity when we live in a reality where shit happens.

At this point the Christian will become frantic and defend their god concept's behaviour by falling upon the excuse of "free will", which is pathetic to behold because it still doesn't come close to resolving the paradox, but then when have they ever cared for logical arguments anyhow?

Why can't Christians admit they believe in a tyrant deity? Why all the layers of depiction stacked up like a jengo tower ready to fall over? The scriptures say God's an ass since you've got the character Moses who literally describes him as an ass, God admits to being an ass, anyone who's not an apologist recognises his character's an ass.

The Epicurus paradox is resolved once you get rid of this "omni-benevolence" thingy, but noooo, Christians can't publicly confess they're part of an evil cult that desires all non-believers outside their circles to burn in Hell, that would be too easy.

[Disinter]

It's more of a paradox than a riddle actually, since theists propose the existence of an omni-benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient deity when we live in a reality where shit happens.

At this point the Christian will become frantic and defend their god concept's behaviour by falling upon the excuse of "free will", which is pathetic to behold because it still doesn't come close to resolving the paradox, but then when have they ever cared for logical arguments anyhow?

Why can't Christians admit they believe in a tyrant deity? Why all the layers of depiction stacked up like a jengo tower ready to fall over? The scriptures say God's an ass since you've got the character Moses who literally describes him as an ass, God admits to being an ass, anyone who's not an apologist recognises his character's an ass.

The Epicurus paradox is resolved once you get rid of this "omni-benevolence" thingy, but noooo, Christians can't publicly confess they're part of an evil cult that desires all non-believers outside their circles to burn in Hell, that would be too easy.

I thought that you couldn't be omnipotent and omniscient at the same time, so isn't it just one big paradox no matter how you slice it? I agree with what you're saying of course, but I think even without the omni-benevolent thing it'd still be a paradox. Simply because you know what you are going to do so therefore you can't do anything because you are tied to what you know you are going to do. Either way, there is no freedom and therefore no omnipotence.

[The Piper]

“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?”

Opinions on this riddle?

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
God is willing and able.
Is he able, but not willing?
Yes, no.
Is he both able and willing?
Yes.
Then whence cometh evil?
Free will
Is he neither able nor willing?
No.
Then why call him God?”
Redundant question.

Opinions on this riddle?
God enables us to have free will, meaning that some will do evil and some won't. It's our choice, God is allowing us to determine our fate and he is very patient. Evil will be dealt with in his time.

[chatpilot]

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
No because he does not exist
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
No because he does not exist
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
No because he does not exist
Then whence cometh evil?
From the natural condition of man all gods or demons excluded.
Is he neither able nor willing?
No because he does not exist
Then why call him God?”
Because some people can't think for themselves.

Opinions on this riddle?

[Eilonnwy]

Then whence cometh evil?
Free will

First, evil in this doesn't refer to just people. It also includes natural disasters, disease, etc... Free will doesn't apply.

Second, do you think God has a plan for you? Do you think good things in your life are because of God? When someone dies unexpectedly do you say, "It was his time, God called him." "God has a plan."

If you answer yes to any of those, your concept of free will is a pathetic excuse.

[chatpilot]

The belief in a god is a pathetic excuse.

[The Piper]

Then whence cometh evil?
Free will

First, evil in this doesn't refer to just people. It also includes natural disasters, disease, etc... Free will doesn't apply.

Second, do you think God has a plan for you? Do you think good things in your life are because of God? When someone dies unexpectedly do you say, "It was his time, God called him." "God has a plan."

If you answer yes to any of those, your concept of free will is a pathetic excuse.

Natural disasters are not evil in themselves.

Death occurs due to our sin, it's a punishment because we all sin.

God has a hope that I will do the right thing, if you want to call that a plan.

God allows it to rain on the righteous and the unrighteous conversely he also allows the sun to shine on the righteous and unrighteous.