Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Christians, how would you counter this quote by Epicurus?

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 

Guy last I looked

And thank you.




posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowLink
reply to post by Akragon
 

Guy last I looked

And thank you.


Right on bro


You never know on the net...

Guy
In
Real
Life




posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by lightseeker
 

. . . Christian scripture, Theology and Tradition teach that God did not "come into existance' but has always existed and always will exist. To prove otherwise is impossible and begs the question, "Who created God', which muddies the whole debate, . . .

What debate is it you are talking about that would be "muddied" by asking where god came from?
It may be impossible to prove where god came from but it should not be impossible to prove whether or not "Christian scripture, Theology and Tradition teach that God did not 'come into existance' but has always existed and always will exist."
Current "theology" may teach this but I would like to see the evidence for "Christian scripture", and a tradition which predates the Dark Ages that teaches this.
edit on 3-1-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 07:24 AM
link   
The OP was:

“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?” - Epicurus

Is this the subject of this "debate"?
If Epicurus asked me this, I would say, "Being of a philosophy counter to you own and taking up with the stoics, I think you all are a bunch of whiny-babies who think they can wish things into existence that you think you would like.
Also, you are too much into false piety towards the gods and have exaggerated their own claims concerning their nature.
Being of a counter philosophy, I would tell you that the gods are much like ourselves, ad so the affinity we have for each other, and despite the superiority of the one over the other, we both find ourselves in the same circumstance, which is existing in the same universe which we did not create but is just here and we have to figure out ways to deal with it and to work within it and to find out what exactly are the insurmountable obstacles that are useless to try to fight against."
edit on 3-1-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by lightseeker
 


Current "theology" may teach this but I would like to see the evidence for "Christian scripture", and a tradition which predates the Dark Ages that teaches this.
edit on 3-1-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


That is not difficult to provide. Read the writings of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus or Origen who among several other early Church fathers wrote extensively about the nature and pre-existance of God the Father and Jesus Christ, using the very same scripture references that we find in contemporary Bibles,(after being translated from the Greek, of course). All three wrote during the early 2nd century AD. Thier translated writings are available at any public library, most Christian and some secular bookstores.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by lightseeker
 

Read the writings of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus or Origen who among several other early Church fathers wrote extensively about the nature and pre-existance of God the Father

Have you read any of these and do you know where to look in them to find these references?

Edit to add: I'm looking at the introduction to Justin Martyr's First and Second Apologies by Blunt and he says, "It is difficult to decide whether Justin did or did not reject the belief in the eternity of matter."
Blunt goes on to say that it seems Justin felt it unimportant to make a distinction between the two things and the fact that God was a creator is more important than what God make things out of (to paraphrase).
In the thread, Christianity and the Afterlife, I went over Origen and that he has it as God creating a spiritual world.
So, unless someone can come up with an actual quote, I would say this is a fake-out, saying, "Oh, just read these authors", without giving anything specific, even the name of a book.
edit on 3-1-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


What, you expect me do all of your research as well? Do I have to give book titles, page numbers, etc before you will try to find out what you don't want to know? You asked; I pointed you in the best direction I could think of on the spot, and then you complain that I didn't spell it all out for you? I will not do the work you need to do if you are seriously interested in knowing the truth but I will give you links to places you can get the info you need,

Eusebius - The Church History, written about 325AD
Eusebius lays out very clearly what the early church believed about God with scripture chapter and verse, including the pre-existence of God and Christ.

Ireneaus - On Apostolic Preaching
Written in the 2nd Century AD, Ireneaus, Bishop of Lyon, probably the most influential church father of his time explains what all Christians shoulld believe about God, His existence, creation and about Jesus Christ. I don't think you will find much difference, if any, between what Irenaeus wrote and what contemporary evangelical Christians believe today.

On God and Christ - Gregory of Nazianzus
Writen in the 4th Century AD, Nazianzus lays out the substance, character and eternity of God & the Trinity.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by lightseeker
 


Did you look at the other thread I mentioned?
Disraeli was quoting from Systematic Theology, where it did basically the same thing you did, so I am not complaining about you, I am complaining about authors of religious books who are very vague about stuff they will not go into detail about.
I am not the one who is hiding, not wanting to know things.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by IEtherianSoul9


“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?” - Epicurus


thinkexist.com...



God can do whatever He wants. He doesn't have to explain His actions (or lack of) to any of us. We don't have the mental capacity to understand anyhow.

Isaiah 55:9 For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
 


So God could have made us able to understand Him but chose not to?



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


O.K., now I an very confused. What in the world does the Jewish Prime Minister of England during thr reign of Queen Victoria doing quoting Systematic Theology; and who's Systematic Theology was he quoting and furher, what does that have to do with vagueness in the writings of Ireneaus and Justin Martyr?


I can assure you that if you read the titles I suggested in my last post you will find not the least bit of vagueness.
You will know exactly what the early church was hearing about the theology of the time, including the pre-existance of God and Jesus Christ; the creation and the subject of evil. So, unless you have a wayback machine in your basement to take you back to the 3rd century, it's about the best I have to offer you!



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:45 AM
link   
reply to post by lightseeker
 


Go to this post
www.abovetopsecret.com...
This is where to look and you will see the same sort of thing being quotes as what you posted.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


All I see a person,(you), who makes demands for proofs that can not be provided because they do not exist, in the form that you demand. You asked for citations for early church writings supporting the Christian contention that God is Eternal and Pre-existant and then, when I have given you those citations, you look at one or two pages out of 100's or citations from other works altogether and use that to refute the entire work. I see that you did the very same thing with Disraeli in the thread you provided the link to. I believe that a remark another poster in that thread made about you is true: You have already made your mind up about what you are prepared to believe and what you are not, and no amount of evidence to prove an opposing view will ever make any difference.

That is sad, really; a person of your intelligenece and intellect being unable to entertain new ideas but that's fine, you just go one believing what you like and i will go one believing what I believe and we will call it a day. What do you say?



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by lightseeker
 

That is sad, really; a person of your intelligenece and intellect being unable to entertain new ideas . . .

I am entertaining a new idea and I am trying to articulate it right now and what you are presenting is the old idea which is what I was taught all along without anything to back it up really.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by IEtherianSoul9
 



Christians, how would you counter this quote by Epicurus?


By quoting Epictetus :

First say to yourself what you would be; and then do what you have to do. Book III, ch. 23


Peace
edit on 6-1-2012 by Seed76 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Seed76
 


May I ask, how exactly does that quote counter the original?

They're both rather unrelated.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx
 



May I ask, how exactly does that quote counter the original?

They're both rather unrelated.

Well, the question asked was "Where Evil comes from?"

According to Epictetus:

All external events are determined by fate, and are thus beyond our control, but we can accept whatever happens calmly and dispassionately. Individuals, however, are responsible for their own actions, which they can examine and control through rigorous self-discipline. Suffering arises from trying to control what is uncontrollable, or from neglecting what is within our power. As part of the universal city that is the universe, human beings have a duty to care for all fellow humans. The person who followed these precepts would achieve happiness and peace of mind.

Hence my counter quote from Epictetus:

First say to yourself what you would be; and then do what you have to do. Book III, ch. 23

But since the question asked by the op is purely philosophical nature, then it´s only fair to give a philosophical answer.

Now, may I ask you a question?. According to the genesis account, man became God and learned the difference between good and evil, by disobeying the creator, and as consequence distanced himself from God, the question is this : If man is God then where evil comes from? And if man as God knows the difference between good and evil, then why is suffering, starvation, poverty etc all around us?

To re-formulate Epicurus question:

"Is man 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 blame God?”

Peace

PS:" Sorry for my English, but is not my native language"



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seed76
Now, may I ask you a question?. According to the genesis account, man became God and learned the difference between good and evil, by disobeying the creator, and as consequence distanced himself from God, the question is this : If man is God then where evil comes from? And if man as God knows the difference between good and evil, then why is suffering, starvation, poverty etc all around us?


Two parts. According the Genesis, Man didn't become god. They gained the knowledge of truth and evil. Man obviously isn't God, neither by the ideologies of the bible writers, nor by any common definition of the word God.

Secondly, providing this is true, which it isn't. It would prove nothing. Very few people believe Man doesn't exist. So if you're proving God's existence, by proving Man is God. You're only "proving" that man exists.


Originally posted by Seed76

"Is man 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 blame God?”


Man is not omnipotent. For a few reasons. Including the fact that man isn't god. No one claims Man is omnipotent. Most suffering in this world, isn't caused by man, but is a result of the things that man doesn't have the power to control.

Some suffering comes from malevolence, or overall selfishness and greed. Though mankind is mostly composed of, at least mostly, good people.

Man is not omnipotent.

Going back to the problem of evil:
If God is Omnipotent
If God is Omniscient
If God is Benevolent

Then Evil cannot exist. Because God wouldn't allow it. Any other kind of God, doesn't cause the problem of evil. If man is god, then the problem of evil doesn't exist, because man isn't Omnipotent or Omniscient, and of varying levels of Benevolence.

Also, it's not about "Blaming" God. It's that any God described as having those three traits, is in direct contradiction to existence of evil.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx
 



Two parts. According the Genesis, Man didn't become god. They gained the knowledge of truth and evil. Man obviously isn't God, neither by the ideologies of the bible writers, nor by any common definition of the word God.

Well, according to Genesis 3, at first the serpent said : "5“For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
By reading further down on Genesis 3 :"And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil."

It proves that man is direct responsible for the evil, since man became like God by knowing the difference. And that is evident through out our human history.

Secondly, providing this is true, which it isn't. It would prove nothing.So if you're proving God's existence, by proving Man is God. You're only "proving" that man exists.

That´s your assertion, and not mine. I am only pointing that since man became as God, then man has the responsibility of evil, since every individual is direct responsible for his/her actions.

Man is not omnipotent. For a few reasons. Including the fact that man isn't god.

I know that, but tell that to the new age persons who claiming "You are God" and "Divine"


Most suffering in this world, isn't caused by man, but is a result of the things that man doesn't have the power to control. Some suffering comes from malevolence, or overall selfishness and greed. Though mankind is mostly composed of, at least mostly, good people.

Yes, i agree. There are things that we cannot control. As an example nature. But man tries to control nature, and thus causing more suffering. Also there are things that we can control ( e.g disease,starvation, etc) In other words :

Suffering arises from trying to control what is uncontrollable,or from neglecting what is within our power.

Which bring us to the question about man "Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?.

Going back to the problem of evil:
If God is Omnipotent
If God is Omniscient
If God is Benevolent

Then Evil cannot exist. Because God wouldn't allow it.

How do you know that God would not allow it ? I do not. But for the sake of argument, even if He is allowing it, that is proof of His Benevolence. However if He didn´t allow it, then He would be an evil God, because if He didn´t allow it then you have an impersonal and distant God that takes joy at the suffering of human beings. The bible does not teach an impersonal force/God. The bible shows that God is dynamic, is personal and He cares for us. After all, He send His son to show us His way. Is it God´s fault that man does not take responsibility of his/her actions even though He showed us the way? Is it God´s fault that there is starvation, sickness etc., knowing that these things we can control?

To repeat the question about man: "Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Any other kind of God, doesn't cause the problem of evil.

Of course. Because any other kind of God is not there.

If man is god, then the problem of evil doesn't exist,

Actually, it does. If man is as God and knows what is good and evil, then man knows what is within it´s power and what is not. Which brings the question : Is he neither able nor willing? Then why blame God?”

because man isn't Omnipotent or Omniscient,

That´s no excuse at all. There are things that we can control see above. And to quote scripture which i think is of relevance :

For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in; naked, and you covered me; sick, and you visited me; I was in prison, and you came to me. (Matthew 25:35-36)

I do not think you have to be Omnipotent or Omniscient in order to perform those tasks, or am i wrong?

and of varying levels of Benevolence.

In my opinion,you either good or bad. To quote Epictetus :

First say to yourself what you would be; and then do what you have to do. Book III, ch. 23


Also, it's not about "Blaming" God.

In my opinion it is. It´s quite evident in "Religion and Faith" forum here in ATS. And by the looks of it, the op is absent from his/her thread. Further i have a feeling that is a troll thread about how the christian God is evil etc, since the op asks specifically Christians. If it wasn´t then the op would at least have stated his/her opinion so people of all faiths or not would discuss the subject.

Peace



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by IEtherianSoul9
 


Epicurus does not understand that "evil" is attachment to matter.

Duping spiritual creatures into believing nothing greater exists other than what is experienced sensually in the material plane can also be considered an act of evil.

Death and destruction are natural phenomena and are perceived as "evil" only in the minds of men.






top topics



 
5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution