Does the Problem of Evil Prove that God Does Not E

[Cro55Pr34ch3r]

Hey all:

I'm writing a paper for a Christian Apologetics class on the Problem of Evil. The format of the paper is a dialogue between a Christian and a non-Christian. I thought it might work out well to get some good arguments from a non-Christian, even an atheist or agnostic, for my paper.

The topic is the problem of evil. The problem, or what I would like to discuss, is "Since evil exists in the world does it prove or give evidence that God is not omnipotent (all powerful), omniscient (all knowing), or does it prove or give evidence that God doesn't even exist?"

If there is someone who would like to argue/debate/discuss this question, cogently, that would be great. In fact, if there were even two or three I think that would be fine too.

I would appreciate, if you are interested, that your arguments were "professional" in nature. Seeing as this is a Master's level paper I'm writing I would prefer not to have a dialogue of...

Christian: I believe that God and Evil can exist at the same time

Non: Oh yeah, well your mom is ugly...


I would also like the discussion to go smoothly, sort of point - counter point instead of a 15 page post with 300 points at a time...

If you're interested PM me Email me at [e-mail] or just post a reply.

Thanks!

Jamie Page

[necroshine]

THE RIDDLE OF EPICURUS
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?

that sums it up for me.

[Christian]

Hi,
I am a Christian (obviously), so I don't think you are asking for my replies. But, nevertheless, it irks me that this question is considered an argument in and of itself.

Once you posit an omnipowerful being, any other qualities, no matter how contradictory, can be applied to that being.

If an omnipowerful being can break the laws of physics, he can also break the laws of logic. To think otherwise is illogical and irrational.

[Christian]

necroshine said:

THE RIDDLE OF EPICURUS
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?

that sums it up for me.

If you posit an omnipowerful entity who is the creator of everything, you cannot logically accuse that entity of wrong-doing or injustice.

[Cro55Pr34ch3r]

Well, which is it? Is it that he is unable or not willing? Or maybe both?

Premise 1: Is God willing to prevent Evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

If he is God then he would have to be omnipotent, otherwise he could not be God.

Premise 2: Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent?

Not necessarily, I would like to discuss this point more in detail.

Premise 3: Is he both able and willing? Then were does evil come from?

This is apparently the answer to the question then. But first we need to see if and why he would be willing to allow evil

Premise 4: Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call Him God

I agree, tied to p1. But again if he is God he would have to be omnipotent

[necroshine]

Once you posit an omnipowerful being, any other qualities, no matter how contradictory, can be applied to that being.

If an omnipowerful being can break the laws of physics, he can also break the laws of logic. To think otherwise is illogical and irrational.

To think that a being like that can exist is irrational. If something is outside all that is known then why bother with him? He can do anything. So to live in fear of this being is crazy. He can do anything and will. I have no power against him. To me he doesn’t exist I have never seen him. If he wants me to believe I would think that him showing himself to me would not be outside his power. Why should I just believe? There is no good reason for that.

If you posit an omnipowerful entity who is the creator of everything, you cannot logically accuse that entity of wrong-doing or injustice.

Why? If it made the world has the bible says and he acts as the bible says it does then yes I can. And if it should exist I will stand in front of god and argue my point.

Not necessarily, I would like to discuss this point more in detail.

Please do. I would like to hear your view.

[Cro55Pr34ch3r]

Is it possible for God to have the power to remove evil and yet be unwilling to remove it?

I think so, I think that it is perfectly rational to believe that God can be a good God and allow evil even though He has the power to overcome it; therefore breaking down Epicurus' second premise:

Suppose you bruise your knee. Pain is surely an evil thing isn't it? No suppose there is a doctor who has the power and the knowledge to relieve the pain in your bruised knee. Suppose also that this is a good doctor. But really the only way to remove the evil (pain in the bruised knee) is to amputate your leg. While this would remove the pain, it would also do so at the expense of removing something good (the leg).

So it is possible for a wholly good being to have the power, and knowledge to remove evil, yet allow the evil to exist.

[necroshine]

Is it possible for God to have the power to remove evil and yet be unwilling to remove it?

I think so, I think that it is perfectly rational to believe that God can be a good God and allow evil even though He has the power to overcome it; therefore breaking down Epicurus' second premise:

Suppose you bruise your knee. Pain is surely an evil thing isn't it? No suppose there is a doctor who has the power and the knowledge to relieve the pain in your bruised knee. Suppose also that this is a good doctor. But really the only way to remove the evil (pain in the bruised knee) is to amputate your leg. While this would remove the pain, it would also do so at the expense of removing something good (the leg).

So it is possible for a wholly good being to have the power, and knowledge to remove evil, yet allow the evil to exist.

That isn’t even near the same thing. First off pain is not a bad thing. If you did not have it you would die a lot faster. Pain is good. It lets you know something is wrong. Don’t you want to know if something is wrong with your body. Lets say your back is cut wouldn’t you want to know that?
Not if a doctor had a way to take away your pain there is a price to pay. If you take too many muscle relaxers you will have trouble going to the bathroom. But that is better than laying in the bed in pain that you can not stand.
No doctor is going to chop off a leg just to take care of a bruised knee. That doesn’t make sense. A doctor will do all he can do to get the person better. But god doesn’t seem to care as much does he?
You need to come up with a much better argument than this.

[Cro55Pr34ch3r]

So you are saying that sometimes evil can be good?

Of course it can, and that is why Epicurus' second premise is wrong.

God can be able to remove evil, yet allow it to exist and still be wholly good.


So on to premise number three:
If God is able and willing where does evil come from?

[necroshine]

So you are saying that sometimes evil can be good?

No not at all. Pain is not the same thing as evil. Please point out where I said that evil is good.

Of course it can, and that is why Epicurus' second premise is wrong.

Talk about glassing over a post. I just said everything you said made no sense but yet you just go on to the next thing. I know you said you didn’t want too much back and forth but I thought you would have better arguments.

[Cro55Pr34ch3r]

Alright, than let's back up and review your first response:

You are pain is not evil. Well if it isn't what is it? Or maybe we need to define evil?

You said that pain is not a bad thing if it needs to something good. The example you gave was saving life, and of course, you are correct. If you did not feel pain (in my opinion, which is evil) than you would bleed to death.

So consider this: You are walking down the street... Bang! A thief shots you in the back and steals your wallet.

Is this good or evil?

The pain in your back tells you that you have been wounded and need medical attention.

In this case evil can be seen, as in every illustration that we've looked at so far, to not necessarilly be a bad thing.

It doesn't matter how ridiculous the example is, logically, if we can think of an example were evil existing in not necessarilly a bad thing we can conclude that:

God can be able to remove evil, yet allow evil to exist and still be wholly good -- which disproves Epicurus' first point.

[necroshine]

You are pain is not evil. Well if it isn't what is it? Or maybe we need to define evil?

Pain is not evil.
Pain – 1 the acutely unpleasant physical discomfort experienced by somebody who is violently struck, injured, or ill in certain ways
Evil - profoundly immoral or wrong, 2- deliberately causing great harm, pain, or upset

You can not compare the two and say they are the same thing.

You said that pain is not a bad thing if it needs to something good. The example you gave was saving life, and of course, you are correct. If you did not feel pain (in my opinion, which is evil) than you would bleed to death.

So if you get cut and you felt no pain that would be a good thing to you? An if you bleed to death than that is a good thing?
Again you can not say pain is evil. Why do you say this? just because you don’t like pain you can not say pain is evil. It saves lives every day. What is evil about that?

So consider this: You are walking down the street... Bang! A thief shots you in the back and steals your wallet.

Is this good or evil?

The pain in your back tells you that you have been wounded and need medical attention.

In this case evil can be seen, as in every illustration that we've looked at so far, to not necessarilly be a bad thing.

I don’t even understand this. what are you getting at? Are you ignoring the fact that the person that shot you is the evil part of the story and you are only looking at the pain part? What are you saying?

It doesn't matter how ridiculous the example is,

Oh really? So I can say that you need to take away all knives and cars and guns and everything that can cause pain because pain is evil.
That is stupid. And it does matter how ridiculous the example is.
Let stop operating on people because some people die on the table. So all of that needs to stop. that is dumb.

logically, if we can think of an example were evil existing in not necessarilly a bad thing we can conclude that:

God can be able to remove evil, yet allow evil to exist and still be wholly good -- which disproves Epicurus' first point.

First off its talking about the devil which is what all evil is blamed on.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
If god is able to stop the devil and all the evil people on the earth but don’t want to then he is malevolent.
The point still stands.

[SSS]

So a woman giving birth is evil?

[Christian]

necroshine said:

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
If god is able to stop the devil and all the evil people on the earth but don’t want to then he is malevolent.
The point still stands.

No, the point no longer stands. Due to the nature of omnipotence, the presence of evil does not require God to be malevolent.

Please explain how you can believe that an omnipotent supreme power is limited in any way.

[Christian]

Cro55Pr34ch3r said:

Alright, than let's back up and review your first response:

You are pain is not evil. Well if it isn't what is it? Or maybe we need to define evil?

You said that pain is not a bad thing if it needs to something good. The example you gave was saving life, and of course, you are correct. If you did not feel pain (in my opinion, which is evil) than you would bleed to death.

So consider this: You are walking down the street... Bang! A thief shots you in the back and steals your wallet.

Is this good or evil?

The pain in your back tells you that you have been wounded and need medical attention.

In this case evil can be seen, as in every illustration that we've looked at so far, to not necessarilly be a bad thing.

It doesn't matter how ridiculous the example is, logically, if we can think of an example were evil existing in not necessarilly a bad thing we can conclude that:

God can be able to remove evil, yet allow evil to exist and still be wholly good -- which disproves Epicurus' first point.

I'm not sure this example demonstrates the point as well as it could; let's not get diverted by a discussion about whether pain is evil or not. The fact remains that Epicurus' riddle is solved when one understands the full implications of the quality "omnipotence."