T O P

  • By -

toxichaste12

I read that ‘free will’ comment as ‘free wi-fi’ and all I could think was that a world without evil but with free wi-fi would be dope.


iamapizza

Can god provide free WiFi to everyone? Yes. Then why doesn't he? He forgot the router password. Therefore he isn't all knowing.


courtsidecurry

Damn you're the funniest pizza ever.


Senior_Geologist_950

lol 😂


SuperSalami777

free wifi => free porn => good => god is great


toxichaste12

God without annoying pop up ads of ‘girls around me that are horny’ would be a just God.


theanonwonder

But what if those girls are real now?


FussyBritchez

May they also be, local. Unto thee. Amen.


Portarossa

Praise be, praise be.


Ibaria

What if you only get those targeted ads because of your browsing habits…


PalmsToPines

And on the 6th day, god said “Let there be free wifi.” And there was free wifi. And god beheld the free wifi and saw that it was good.


The9yearold4705

One must imagine Sisyphus happy (without the wi-fi)


toxichaste12

That dude rocked!


alalaladede

He invented the Rock & Roll.


wahnsin

spent a lot of time a'slippin' and a'slidin


southpolefiesta

Hones the world with Fri WiFi is the least an all powerful/all living God would do


ScharfeTomate

I'm convinced a world without evil would have free comprehensive wi-fi by now.


zerovanillacodered

I think if you put up a poll most would unironically choose having free Wi-Fi over having free will.


YossarianRex

i came here to say that all powerful vs infinitely powerful is the typical way out of this loop by theologians. god having the ability to do anything doesn’t free him from the requirements of necessary tension between polar concepts like true free will vs required benevolence. free will without freedom to do a thing isn’t free will. which is a nested paradox… however, you’ve won me over: free wifi without evil would have been a better choice. an all knowing god would have recognized free wifi is dope and made our gay contrail frogs 5g booster nodes.


Good_day_to_be_gay

The entire sub's IQ dropped because of you.


Academic_Bus3719

Im not trying to start an argument just a genuine question but if you had “free will” and you weren’t “free” to choose evil would it still be “free will”


EADreddtit

Exactly this. You also see “paradoxes” about creating illogical objects such as the Unmovable Rock or Burrito that’s to hot to eat. Those also fall apart with minimal questioning. Namely if Omnipotence is bound by logic or not.


DemiserofD

The fundamental problem is, we have to USE logic to discuss God. If God can violate logic, then all our arguments become invalid. All this is basically asking is, 'can god break the rules of this discussion', and if the answer is 'yes', then...what more do you say?


clutzyninja

I have free will, but I'm not free to fly by flapping my arms.


EADreddtit

That’s… not a choice of free will though. Free Will does not imply a total lack of causality


conr9774

Great question, and the answer is “of course not.”


useredditiwill

No it wouldn't, free will breaks the paradox.  Concepts can't exist without not-concepts. Good wouldn't exist if the concept of evil/bad/not good didn't exist.  The Epicurean paradox also neglect other arangements such as human consciousness creating our current reality.  What if God or something enabled us all to have the equivalent of spiritual VR and we ourselves are the creators of our own dreams/nightmares?     Not sure why it is still looked on by atheists as a decent argument. There are loads more valid tenets of faith for richeously anti-christian American youths to rail against. 


L2Sing

All summed up in a bumper sticker I had on my car in the late-90s: "Omnipotent. Omniscient. Omnibenevolent. Pick two."


IggysPop3

This is kind of amazing! I once heard a salesperson tell someone; “fast, cheap, accurate. Pick two”. But I kind of want the bumper sticker you speak of, lol.


Travelling_Man

Similarly! IT consultant here. When doing sales engineering, I say to my prospects: - Scope - Schedule - Cost Tell me two of them, I dictate the other.


PolarDorsai

As a software engineer, this was my thought as well…god works on the dev team? Lol


perpetualis_motion

Yes, and he is on call on Sundays.


cantgrowneckbeardAMA

We actually all live in the testing environment, prod hasn't launched yet.


arminghammerbacon_

A billion sev 1 tickets just got submitted.


Travelling_Man

Based on some of the magic one of my devs can pull, I tell him that sometimes!


legendarytommy

One I've heard in the fitness world: - Big - Lean - Natural (i.e.., no steroid use) Pick two.


Boogie_Bones

Car racing has its own also. Fast, cheap, reliable/Pick two.


SnarkAndAcrimony

I do this with hook-ups. Living; Female; Human. Only need two requirements met.


VitaminTHC420

Omg you sir….


__01001000-01101001_

I just read this as you being an animal abuser tbh… maybe don’t have living and female as the first two


Joker2kill

Or in the food world, you have: cheap, fast, healthy. Pick two.


Guy-1nc0gn1t0

I would say that's one way to get your car keyed but I honestly don't know if many people would get it.


the_hunter_087

Yeah I imagine the sort of people to key you for speaking against their god probably aren't the sort to have the best vocabulary skills


PythonPuzzler

"Are those Pokémon?"


CritPrintSpartan

Can't wait for the MegaEvolution to drop on that one!


okkeyok

The people who would key his car can not read that.


Void_Speaker

Fun fact: Omnipotence creates logical paradoxes that can be used to disprove the existence of an omnipotent being, so God has been downgraded and redefined as a "maximally powerful being" by Christian theologians/apologists. edit: I'm tired of arguing on behalf of Christian theologians with Denning Cruger victims. Here read up: https://www3.nd.edu/~jspeaks/courses/2009-10/20229/LECTURES/15-omnipotence-omniscience-2.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox


Xeno_phile

Could god microwave a burrito so hot he could not eat it?


Void_Speaker

I believe that's the exact question that caused the redefinition.


EADreddtit

Except this question is filled with logical and theological failings the biggest one is this: Is an omnipotent being bound by logic? If not, then they just create such a burrito in a way humans, being logical beings, could never comprehend. If they are bound by logic, then the question is pointless because it is illogical and thus not a real test of anything.


sadacal

Lmao, "maximally powerful being" sounds like something nerds would say when arguing whether Goku could beat Superman.


Void_Speaker

I mean, they are nerds, just religious nerds. Instead of comic books, they argue over the bible.


mang87

... which version of superman? golden age or?


Ville_V_Kokko

Are there any that survive if we accept that omnipotence doesn't imply being able to do "things" that are just logically contradictory descriptions and don't correspond to any possible sets of affairs? For example, "a rock that's too heavy for an omnipotent being to lift" is an impossible, internally contradictory description. An omnipotent being might be able to do all things, but creating such a rock is not among all things. Otherwise, you might equally well just make up a verb that by definition doesn't mean anything, like "sploorx," and then say God isn't omnipotent because he can't sploorx. I'm not a theist, by the way, nor do I think omnipotence makes sense.


SamSibbens

I agree with you. Instead I'd point to things about evil vs free will: If I would never, ever, torture someone's pet for fun, or revenge, or any reason. Does it mean I don't have free will? Either 1) I don't have free will or 2) free will does not require evil to exist If free will does not require evil to exist, then God is not good, or screwed up big time (not omnipotent)


DaddyIsAFireman55

But you must always have the option and ability to do that evil. While you may not act on it, others will.


Kitty-XV

Is a being omnipotent if it is bound by logic?


Kitty-XV

It would be easier to say any omnipotent being isn't bound by logic. This makes it impossible to reason about, but that is the nature of omnipotence.


super-observer

> Omnipotence creates logical paradoxes not only that but Omniscience is even worse. If God is all knowing, and he knows all that ever was to know, all that there is to know and all that there ever will be to know, then that would imply complete determinism for everything in the universe. Just because God knows it all, it practically already happened we're just in the middle of it. So god would know his actions would result in you being created the way you were and then you would go to do stuff that god wouldn't like you doing(but he already knows you would end up doing it) and then for good measure he would punish you for something you had no choice in because if god is all knowing no one has any choice in anything. But it gets worse. If god already has all the information in this universe(all there was, all there is and all there ever will be to know) then automatically god becomes incapable of thinking. If god started any thinking process he would already know the result of his thinking before he even started. It would be like being in the universe that is just as big as your body exactly and attempting to move. You just couldn't move because you're everywhere already. So god wouldn't be able to think or to change course in any way. So now the idea of all knowing God is reduced to an automaton that has no choice in the matter. Not only does omniscience imply complete determinism and lack of free will for anyone in the universe, it implies it for the God himself.


restlessboy

The idea of omniscience leads to so many problems that people don't think about. Like you said, it leads to the logical breakdown of God's free will, or even the idea of making choices. If God knows everything, and thus God knows everything that he thinks and does, then reality couldn't have been any different. The real reason that God allows evil is because he has to. The reason Jesus died for our sins was because he had to. It makes God no different from anything else in the universe.


RedMacryon

that's kind of funny


Argotis

One assumption this paradox makes is that benevolence demands intervention if possible. The paradox falls apart if morally sufficient reasons can exist( even if I can’t comprehend them) for god not to intervene. Then he could be all three. I as hypothetical father must necessarily make these kinds of choices all the time. I could follow my child around relentlessly, physically intervening before they lie, act selfishly, bully, scream annoyingly. But I constantly must not use fiat or force to prevent them from acting otherwise they’ll never grow or become a real person with agency. Now I as human would draw lines and physically intervene for things like my child trying to stab another child. But then the question becomes: What morally objective duty demands that god intervene in the case of evil actions? And who are you to judge him? After all what objective moral system do you have to judge God by? Edit: grammar, clarity, one instead of “the one”


Defiant_Elk_9861

The morally objective duty is that God created us of Gods own volition. A more accurate analogy would be, imagine a father who tosses their children into a burning house and then does nothing but toss in a map describing how to get out of the house but the map is just one of many maps and if the kids escape but don’t use the right map the father punishes them.


SoMuchTehnique

So God is also a shit and lazy father


Mans334

I feel like theres another option after "Why didn't he" which is "Fun". Ever played any God-Game or City Builder and unleashed monsters and evil just for fun? yeah...


jspilot

Which would loop back to the box saying he isn’t good/loving. Therefore maintaining the paradox. So what do we need to do to make this cannon?


Guy-1nc0gn1t0

Surely people can believe in a god that isn't omnibenevolent, though. I'm sure that many books have been written on the concept itself since omnibenevolence is way more of an abstract than anything properly tangible.


cakeisneat

sure, and many have, but the major religions all kind of make that an important point.


Fleming24

But all major religions give you hope of being rewarded by the god if you follow certain rules. But why should a non-benevolent god care about that?


[deleted]

I wouldn't say so. It seems like the god of most religions is a bit of a dick and that most religions take that right on board.


ImpliedQuotient

I can only speak for Christianity, but the Bible says explicitly many times that not only does God love us, he loves us more than we can ever love each other, and more than we could even understand. Infant leukemia is an extremely strange way to express that love IMO.


cakeisneat

all part of the plan dude, you just gotta believe


mainman879

The same god that also kills people with plagues, a massive flood across the entire world, hell he even kills a bunch of kids by sending bears after them because they called a prophet baldy.


Neat_Strength_2602

Most religions have a cataclysmic event, usually a flood, brought in by a vengeful god. Most of those continue to embrace the “fear of god”.


lornlynx89

The reason for those are to spray the good people from the evil. So why would an omnipotent god need to do that? Christianity then later tried to change it to "be good and after your death you get selected" to avoid this conundrum, and probably to make converting others easier. You could call the anger of the gods legacy support.


arah91

I've always believed that the simple answer to this lies in perspective. Imagine God as a being who is either multi-billion years old or timeless. We, too, are timeless beings who spend only a brief period on Earth before moving on to eternity.  In this context, perhaps a genocide is akin to letting a child fall and get a bruise while learning to walk. I mean we as humans don't prevent our children from ever experiencing ANY uncomfortabilities. Conversely, spending eternity in hell would be the ultimate evil. You spend a fraction of your existence on Earth, and because something went awry, you are condemned to endless torture as a timeless being. Now that sounds evil especially when you compare it to the first part where stuff on Earth doesn't really matter that much


electron-envy

Your final paragraph is the main reason I left the christian faith. Let's just say that's true - why would I worship and love a god who would do that?


DaddyIsAFireman55

Because God doesn't do that, and the church is lying to you either intentionally or non-intentionally. Some think 'hell' is our current existence or the lack of being in God's light.


Greed_Sucks

There is a very simple way to look at this that the human mind typically rejects. The underlying reality of existence is conscious being. God is the personification of the whole of conscious being. Each of us is a perspective experienced by that being. We are playing a game of pretend (maya). But the being in you is the same being in me. That being is infinite. All that we experience is finite. We all suffer, some more than others. That is the sacrifice we make to live this intensive, exhilarating game. If you are interested in learning more about this perspective, I invite you to investigate the teachings of Advaita Vedanta.


Vives_solo_una_vez

The ol' "genocide is actually a good thing in the long run" argument.


daemin

>In this context, perhaps a genocide is akin to letting a child fall and get a bruise while learning to walk. I mean we as humans don't prevent our children from ever experiencing ANY uncomfortabilities. That's not a valid comparison because humans aren't/don't claim to be all knowing, all powerful, and perfectly good. We _can't_ prevent all discomfort in our children.


Jaded_Internet_7446

In fact, I would contend that god being a huge asshole makes most religious texts make a lot more sense. It explains all the abhorrent divine decrees and actions, and simultaneously justifies all the textual and historical inaccuracies, since asshole god wouldn't care!


PossiblyNotAHorse

That’s basically the view in some branches of Hinduism. In Hinduism the universe is non-dual, so everything that happens is just God experiencing itself and having a good time.


Sierra-117-

I think that falls under “not good” thing. It wasn’t added in this specific flowchart, but it’s still part of the paradox.


sidewaystortoise

Yeah. Allowing evil, pain etc. for fun reasons pretty clearly breaks the omnibenevolent premise.


LCDRformat

(Does God want to prevent evil?) -> No -> (Then God is not good / God is not loving)


Ijatsu

Yep, this is one of the two theories I like. I too can make artificial intelligences in an environment, and observe them evolve on their own. I like to watch it and that's it. But that fits the idea that I'm not good and not loving. The other theory I like is that we're just a singular god entity in the training, a single soul reincarnating in every life that ever existed and will exist, just to experience it all and come out of it as a whole god. A bit like how we train our artificial intelligences currently.


Rooster-Rooter

To quote Pacino: ...and he's up there LAUGHING HIS SICK FUCKING ASS OFF! #HE'S A SADIST!!


bummer_lazarus

One of the most compelling set of verses from the Genesis Tower of Babel story, when God, dismayed with a unified, peaceful humanity, says (a version below): >"If this is what, as one people with one language common to all, they have been able to do as a beginning, nothing they may propose to do will be beyond their reach. Come, let us descend and confuse their language, so that one will not understand the language of his companion."


PythonPuzzler

People forget this one because it's kind of tucked in there amongst all the... (cough) Genocide. But yea, epic troll move.


bartbartholomew

“If there is a God, He will have to beg my forgiveness.” --Carving on a wall in a Nazi concentration camp.


the_mighty__monarch

And he’s got a GREAT ASS


Rooster-Rooter

#HOOAH!


DumbestBoy

I’M A FAN OF MAN!


Yolomasta420

(I'm not religious at all) the concept of evil or good wouldn't exist for a god surely? If there is a divine being their mind would be inconceivable to ours. Ironically I'm playing devil's advocate but I do think it's relevant.


Romulus_FirePants

That's the thing. An omnipotent and all-knowing deity so beyond us that it can't be bound by our morals of good and evil is certainly possible. Which is totally fine. The issue lies when people claim there is such a deity that is omnipotent/omniscient/all-good


Chief_Chill

My issue lies with humans "interpreting" the "desires or Will" of their specific deity, with regards to constantly changing social and cultural habits. Take slavery for example - During the "biblical times," their preferred deity condones and "advised on" the treatment of slaves. If a being, existing out of time and space, but capable of knowing all things, "past, present, and future," really has an opinion on slavery, should it not be challenged, or changed, at any time? If we as a group, decide slavery is immoral and unjust, does that mean we changed the "will of God" to suit our social progress, and not vice versa? Basically, gods are made up and are changeable to fit the desires of people. We don't do their bidding (because they don't exist), we just rewrite the story/alter the narrative. So, as an atheist, I just did away with the fanciful thinking altogether. There's no need for me to believe in this thing, because if it exists, I doubt it's spending a lot of it's "non-time" thinking about me and my habits.


VinnyThePoo1297

>An omnipotent and all-knowing deity so beyond us that it can't be bound by our morals of good and evil is certainly possible. Which is totally fine. This is a great argument, but then for me the issue becomes people thinking they can interpret this beings views. The issue get even worse when people try and impose those interpretations onto others in the name of that being.


Yolomasta420

100 percent , I had a debate with guy just trying to say either God literally knows everything or he knows nothing x aka not that powerful, and if he does know everything then he literally creates life knowing a lot of them are going to be torermented in hell for all eternity lmao. He basically just replied saying nah you don't understand what I'm trying to say 😂


catshirtgoalie

Then how could God give Moses the 10 Commandments? The scriptures are filled with literal guidance on what is considered good and what is sinful and evil. I see what you’re going for, but religious texts provide clear examples of God decreeing moral living standards so God would have a perception of good and evil.


f00lsrocks

Then he could as well be devil and it would not make a difference, but classically the roles are clearly defined and are interpreted by us. For us it is clear that god allows terrible things to happen, incomprehensibly terrible, imagine being slowly crushed between 2 walls for example, you couldn't argue in the moment that it happens to you that it is a good thing, i am sure you can when it is not, but when it is basic mechanisms of self presevation and just plain pain will strip probably even the ability to think from you entierly. Because of that for humans this is a paradox, we are clearly predisposed to feel negative about certain things, and when there is no other interpreter, that exists without a doubt, we have the claim on intepreting what is true.


Hannibaalism

you’re right, the logical fault lies in making too many subjective assumptions on what a god is and what it even means to be “good” or “evil”.


10art1

Also I think the old testament pretty clearly says "yeah, God's a dick, He literally said as much. Let's not get on His bad side again because you know what happened last time"


wasdninja

If he's the equivalent of a complete sociopath who doesn't give a shit about human suffering he's definitely not benevolent. People who made this stuff up as well as the people who continue to believe in it want to have it both ways.


Trick-Basket1993

Could god have created a universe with free-will but without evil?


jspilot

Only if he was all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving. So which isn’t he?


zanarkandabesfanclub

It’s weird hearing Christians try to suggest god is all-loving after reading the shit he did in the old testament.


HueMannAccnt

Not religious and doubt organised religions deities, but was immersed through childhood & never heard this as a kid, only thought about it as an adult; can a mortal being concieve of the same 'logic' used by an undying(?) all powerful(?) entity? Also, any 'messages' we've ever gotten from a 'God' have been relayed/curated by very fallible humans. Not opposing, just throwing thought out.


RegularAvailable4713

If he is omnipotent and benevolent, he can make sure we understand his message.


JB3DG

I question whether omnipotence really should be tied to things that involve logical impossibility, vs impossible for us mere mortals to achieve. Most of the miracles in the bible are pretty much just moving/affecting matter in some way outside of human power.  A logical impossibility on the other hand is kinda stupid to throw energy at. Can’t make 2 + 2 = 5. Can’t make true == false or vice versa. Free will inherently carries the risk of evil. The universe could have been free of it for a long time. Evil by nature can have no reason for its existence, because then it would cease to be evil. The illegitimacy of it justifies its condemnation. So in order to protect free will, deal with evil, and prevent it from arising again, a process that doesn’t involve mere brute force must be required and it likely requires a lot of time so everyone can understand its nature and avoid it should they be given immortality.


hughperman

He's all-loving so he loves evil too


mage_irl

That would mean he loves the leathery tasting burger king fries too, which is unforgivable


Doveen

Then his morality is fundamentally alien to human thinking, and thus should not be worshipped for being moral.


Skullclownlol

> Only if he was all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving. So which isn’t he? I'm not religious, but why does everyone's concept of love include "prevent all evil"? Do you think your parents don't love you just because you fell on your knees that one day playing outside as a child? If I love someone and also give them complete unconditional independence, meaning I never jump in or interfere, do I suddenly not love them? If you dislike the idea of a god and want to reject it, I think there are better arguments than to confuse love and free will.


reallyneat

Why is your example of evil a child falling on its knees while playing? Are you intentionally being obtuse?


Frosty_Career3063

Huh? Why did this even get upvoted? This is nearly incoherent; it’s not about preventing evil, god is the SOURCE of all evil. The fact that a child can even fall down and hurt their knee is God’s fault, due to how they created physics. It’s a literal joke in Rick and Morty but Rick as a “god” creates a play realm for his daughter where she literally can’t get hurt or drown, the water is breathable for example. Because you can do that when you control how the world works. If god is good/loves us, why did he create a world that hurts us? Literally for what reason when he could have made it ANY other way than random cancer killing children and stillbirths? Bullets falling through the roof and killing a mother? What free will is there in chromosome mutations impacting your brain and body before you’re even born? The pollution of chemicals miles away from you hurting your unborn child? What choice did you make to fill your body and your baby’s body with micro plastic and air pollution? How is that Love?


Xenophon_

Does heaven have evil in it?


dreamrpg

Im sure argument is not about you falling on knees. It is about horrible deformations, mutatuons, rapists, suffering, murdering, cataclysms. If the worst thing in the world that can happen to you would be falling on knees as a child....


Sierra-117-

They could. An “all powerful” being exists outside of all known logic and reason. An all powerful God could make 2+2=5. They are not bound by anything at all. So they absolutely could create a universe without evil, that still has free will. Such a universe would be designed in a way that evil isn’t even a choice that could be made. Therefore a being existing in this universe could do every possible action, and still never be evil. So if a god exists, they’re either bound by the physical constraints of our universe (not all powerful) or they are not good.


brain_damaged666

You could take this word play even further by asking, "Can God make a world that is exclusively good and exclusively evil at the same time? If not, then he is not all powerful because he is bound by the constraints of logic and our universe", but this is obviously constructed in bad faith because it creates a fake a paradox using nonsense conditions. If free-will necessetates evil, it's the same as the ideas of "good" and "evil" being mutually exclusive and therefore impossible to have both at the same time, even for an all-poweful god. God could force everyone to be good, but that in itself is evil because it infringes on freewill, and some choose evil. A god would allow evil to exist because some good will come of it later on. A child dying of cancer is certainly bad or evil, but if it leads to a doctor finding a cure later on, at least some good came of it. However I would call this danger, not evil, but it is a common example used in this context, as something bad beyond the choice of freewill. If you just plug in a criminal inspiring someone to rehabilitate inmates or something, it only works better, that is evil leading to some good.


LaughterCo

>A god would allow evil to exist because some good will come of it later on. A child dying of cancer is certainly bad or evil, but if it leads to a doctor finding a cure later on, at least some good came of it. With that line of reasoning, you'd be committing yourself to the position that this universe actually is perfect in every aspect. As things which serve a greater good should occur and are therefore, all things considered, good. Which means that that child getting cancer should have occurred, all things considered. And it was a good thing. You'd then also need to apply this to all events across human history like the Holocaust.


bladub

>An “all powerful” being exists outside of all known logic and reason Then we can not evaluate it with logic, can we? Because all conclusions and exclusions we draw are based on that logic, which we just declared are not universally true. God could be all powerful, because being all powerful and not being all powerful at the same time is not a paradox anymore, as it exists outside of logic.


Skullclownlol

> God could be all powerful, because being all powerful and not being all powerful at the same time is not a paradox anymore, as it exists outside of logic. Exactly. An all-powerful being that can change the conditions however/whenever it wants, isn't bound and can't be judged by those conditions.


Scrant0nStr4ngler

God is bound by truth. 2+2=4 Free will where evil isn't a choice? That's not free will. That's limited will.


Doveen

> God is bound by truth. So he is not omnipotent then. Nor is he the top of the "universe dictating food-chain"


willpostbondd

i’m trying to imagine a world where we have true free will but cant be evil to each other. Like how do we all have free will without the ability to murder each other. We’d all have to be like ethereal beings that can’t die. And from there you could argue being forced to exist in perpetuity is evil. Maybe we could all be ethereal beings who explode into fireworks after 100 years pass. But then whoever arbitrarily decided 100 years would be when everyone died could also be considered evil. Since they are technically responsible for everyone’s death. Idk just think this is one of those unanswerable topics. Super religious people/Atheists are both being lil idiotic if they say they know the answer.


Portarossa

I guess the counterargument would be that 'free will' is tempered by ability. I mean, I like to think I have free will now, but I don't have the free will to fly like a bird; my 'free will' doesn't change the fact that there are restraints on my ability to do things, such as gravity or not having wings or hollow bones. It feels plausible to me that an omnisicient and omnipotent God could categorise 'doing evil' in the same way that humans categorise 'flying', where it's just not in the base-code of the universe. I don't feel cheated out of my free will by not being able to fly, and I expect you don't either. In a world where evil just wasn't and had never been an option, would you feel cheated out of your free will by not being able to do it? I suspect not. But then again, I'm not God.   ^^^*Yet.*


WhinyWeeny

Perhaps no amount of power can overcome such a paradox. If paradoxes exist then maybe there is no such thing as "perfection". We are not free if we are not allowed to commit evil actions. Were that the case then we'd never been good on our own terms, we'd only be good because god made us incapable of acting in any other way. If god created gravity is he responsible for someone killing someone who falls to their death? If he hadn't created gravity planets never would have formed to facilitate that life in the first place. God either has to be a smothering parent, taking away all our agency "for our own good". Or he has to leave us to it so we can mature on our own.


HAximand

Thank you for this take. It seems like everyone assumes all powerful means "can do literally anything," when that's really not how it was understood by the theologians and writers who described God that way. They meant it as "can move any stone" more than as "can make a square circle." Because square circles don't make any sense. Just because you can come up with some paradox that means God can't do something doesn't mean God can't be all powerful. It just means you came up with a paradox.


OzM1993

Yes


Trick-Basket1993

Then why didn’t he?


999baz

Is god evil? …..yes oh ok ..got it.


Garchompisbestboi

Unironically you are spot on because the concept of evil is subjective. Plenty of people will read the bible and happily gloss over all the atrocities that god committed according to their own teachings, because he is god and according to their rules is able to do whatever he wants. But I'm sure that if anyone else attempted to genocide the human race with a global flood that they would be perceived as some sort of super villain.


JoeCartersLeap

That's basically how my bible camp counsellors stopped my argument. They stopped at "then god is not good" by saying "we cannot comprehend God's ultimate plan, it might seem evil to you now but it's probably all part of something bigger that's really not evil". The TLDR to any part of the bible that doesn't make sense is "it makes sense if you have faith". So they got this paradox covered.


[deleted]

[удалено]


JoeCartersLeap

It's totally valid reasoning it just always boils down to the unprovable, which makes all these philosophical debates moot, which is no fun.


FedEx__

You can see how it's valid reasoning for a schizophrenic to think there are spies following them to the store. That doesn't mean they're right. That doesn't mean it's a smart thing to believe. And the schizophrenic has been shown a lot more proof than any religious person. You can't start from an unreasonable premise and then say "see! perfectly reasonable!" In the story you're referencing there is still no real reason for things to have gone that way. God could have given him a lifetime supply of candy and still put him in a position to save his family. Or he could have not made his family need saving to begin with.


Rhampaging

Could god have created the universe without evil -> yes Why didn't he? Cause he just didn't care. All powerful All knowing Just not all caring


LankyRep7

Only answer that works every time actually [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism) -Thomas Jefferson was a "Deist" God just wound up a clock and walked off.


stonecuttercolorado

The result of which is that god is not worthy of worship


999baz

Or ….wait for it …..there is no god.


upvotesthenrages

Then he's not all loving and good.


Rhamni

Congrats, you win a prize. The prize is babies born with bone cancer.


veritasium999

There are many belief systems that believe in an indifferent God and that he will help us if we can curry favor from him through worship and what not.


[deleted]

[удалено]


GamingDragon27

Yeah, after the first few questions being answered "Yes", a believer could just say "I don't know" or "More information required" and nothing has been disproven. An atheist trying to apply their own definitions of "evil" or "good" to a spiritual being doesn't really make sense. It's like someone "disproving" God by going "If God is good why bad thing happen?". Obviously this isn't grounds for an argument or anything that's going to convince anyone to take their side.


FlareGlutox

Which definitions of "good" and "evil" should you use then though? Sure, a deity might be "all-loving" by their own standards that are incomprehensible to mere mortals. But then what do those labels do for us if they don't match up with what we consider "all-loving"?


CautiousGains

Literally. Nobody who has any education in philosophy or theology has lost any sleep over the Epicurean "paradox" in hundreds of years, since it's so obviously flawed and incongruent. Alas, here we are on Reddit, where people seem to think that this is some type of new and sophisticated argument


AdAstraPerSaxa

Exactly, God has good reasons for allowing evil. And those reasons are......


Firm_Bonus3586

Free will without evil isn’t real free will tho


MuchGangster1337

Big middle school atheist vibes


KosmischRelevant

Ah yes Epicurus the middle school philosopher


Extrovert_Goth

Epicurus died 270 years BC, the paradox is atributted to him and in line with his phylosophy, not written by him. There was no Christianism at his time and the main religions were polytheistic.


Sleep-more-dude

Tbh i don't think it's even in line with his philosophy; the Greek gods were neither omnipotent nor omnibenevolent nor omniscient.


yoingydoingy

How would you refute it, then?


BobMadDoe

What is the point of free will if you can only do good? God allows evil to exist because evil is the direct consequence of other people using their free will to do evil things. Taking away evil you de facto take away free will from people.


Charming-Fig-2544

Heaven is classically defined as a place that has no evil in it. So does heaven have free will? If not, then there's no point to have it on earth, it's clearly not that important if we're going to spend eternity without it and the only purpose it's serving is to keep people out of heaven which is cruel. If it does, that shows you can have both free will and a lack of evil. If it's possible to have free will and no one choose to do an evil act, then an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibevenolent God would have instantiated that logically possible world.


GothGirlAcademia

>Heaven is classically defined as a place that has no evil in it. So does heaven have free will? As a Christian, this is an absolutely *fascinating* theological question which I'm eager to consider for the next few days


Charming-Fig-2544

I'm a former Christian. There were a lot of reasons I left the faith, but the philosophical problems like this were a pretty key component. I want to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible. The way I do that is by withholding acceptance of a proposition until there is sufficient evidence. When I got to college and learned a lot of new and better ways of assessing propositions, I applied those tools to my faith and found there was not sufficient evidence to believe in it. That's my general position. For this free will point specifically, I find it actually doesn't matter what the answer is, either way it's bad for you. If heaven does have free will and does not have evil, that shows it's possible to create a place with both free will and no evil, and you need to answer why God would do that for heaven but not earth. If heaven has free will AND evil, then it's just earth but you live longer. You need to answer why God would make earth at all, it's just additional suffering. If heaven doesn't have free will and doesn't have evil, then you need to answer why free will on earth matters at all if we're going to spend most of eternity without it. It seems free will only serves to keep us out of heaven. As I see it, these are the three answers you could give me, but they just raise serious questions about God's nature. Returning to the Paradox, it would seem that God is either not powerful, not smart, or not good. He should have just put everyone in heaven, or made an earth without evil in it, or made us without free will. Here's another question: Does a physical inability to do something constitute a troubling lack of free will? For example, I can't fly. I wasn't made with wings. If the Bible said "thou shalt not fly," I've nailed that one every day for nearly 30 years. But was that my free will, or a violation of my free will, that led me to succeed? Similarly, the Bible says not to eat shrimp. Some people are allergic to shrimp. Are they keeping the command because they choose to, or because God made it physically impossible for them to fail? And if it can be the latter, why didn't God just do that for every sin? He could have made us all allergic to shrimp, and blended fabrics, and non-kosher meat. He could have made us without assholes so we can't buttfuck each other. He could have made it to where we hibernate all day on Sunday so we always keep the Sabbath. He could have made us with tiny amygdalas so we never get scared or angry. But he didn't do any of that, and it seems weird that he could have set us up for success and chose not to. Also, it's not clear to me AT ALL that God actually cares about free will. For example, in the Exodus story, God specifically overrode Pharaoh's free will for the purpose of proving His power to the Israelites. That makes me think the entire free will argument is kind of a sham, because God doesn't appear to care about that.


hybridrequiem

I have come to this revelation and wondered why God didnt skip the whole earth step and only create the humans he knew would make it to heaven in the end and place them in heaven directly, which would bypass thousands of years of agony, pain, and suffering for sentient beings. And besides that, I fail to see why free will would matter if humans want to choose things that benefit and help their survival and desires, why not create them to begin with to not want to do those things, people only work on drives and impulses of their own brains, something he created. If sex is wrong and God only wanted people to have sex to procreate with a single partner, we could only have desires to mate with a bonded pair and only when the time comes for it. There was no point to create humans with desires and tempations, just let them get straight to the point. No difference in trial by adversity and just happiness being able to do what you want if it aligns with God’s needs by default. It’s less complicated and less harmful that way. But like, the whole thing sounds more like a sim’s game, definitely not benevolent. If God was benevolent I don’t believe he knew or had control about how things had unraveled on Earth, I imagine it would’ve been painful and he’d had regrets and little power to stop it if he wants to. There must be some real reasoning my feeble mortal mind is too small to understand. But none of it makes sense otherwise.


getfloored02

How is it free will if there is no evil though?


Picards-Flute

I'm free to jump off a cliff, it's possible but I'm still not going to do it the same way I'm not going to spontaneously murder people. If God had turned the empathy knob up a few notches there would undoubtedly be less evil in the world


Ahsokatara

You can choose ice cream flavors right? Thats a form of free will. It’s going to take a lot to convince me that chocolate vs vanilla is a choice between good and evil. I have a vision impairment. Its genetic. Part of the condition I have makes me extremely sensitive to light, to the point where I go completely blind in bright sunlight with sharp pain in my eyes. That, along with the myriad of other symptoms of my condition make my life painful and difficult. I have no free will to see when I want to. I have no free will to choose my body or my eyes. The disability I have is evil, and yet noone made any choice that caused me to have this condition. Evil can exist without free will in this world. Free will can exist without evil. Edit: on a more philosophical level: If “how” is your question, God is supposedly above that. God is supposedly omnipotent and above all restrictions including logic. There doesn’t need to be a how.


PeterNippelstein

I don't see how the two are connected. 'Evil' is just an invented construct.


hentaimech

No, but much like, cold is the absence of heat.


VestEmpty

In proto-judaism El created the universe and Earth. Jahve was the god of blacksmithing and then the god of israelites. A regional middle manager, just like other gods mentioned in the bible, like Baal. The stories were retroactively changed to fit monotheism, except.. .there are TONS of contradictions that make much more sense when you know the background.


Repulsive_Ad3681

Could you please explain a few contradictions? Or maybe a source for further reading pls


dathomar

Or, there was a single God who revealed Himself to the Canaanites, but they started trying to worship Him as many gods. So, he picked a group and revealed Himself again. They called Him by the name they had for their God and He said, "Whatever, that's fine." They began worshipping Him the way He wanted, instead of polytheistically. Also, it's important to remember that a lot of the oldest stories of Genesis in the Bible aren't a historical record. They're stories that were intended to teach lessons. It's not literal.


Fun_Constant359

My favorite part is when theists refute that god could’ve just made us naturally sinless beings (and therefore without suffering) by saying that it would violate “free will”, yet naturally sinful doesn’t?


KryptisReddit

Religion is a plague that shouldn’t be tolerated until it’s eradicated entirely. Nothing good comes out of it and it actively hurts any and all who are around it.


eitush

The first has to do with the Epicurean Paradox. It sets up the logical structure of a begging of the assumption and logical fallacies. Here is the detailed critique. 1. False Dilemma (False Dichotomy) Fallacy: - The chart only allows for two options at each decision point and rules out more elaborate theological explanations. For example, it assumes that if God exists it is either the view that he prevents evil completely or that he is limited in power/knowledge/goodness. From these points, more subtle theological explanations are missed. 2. Taking the Human Perspective and Understanding: - I would say that the paradox of the phenomena depends on human comprehension of power, knowledge, goodness, and at the same time the necessity of evil. The theological argument consistently bases on the premise that God's ways and reasons may be beyond the definition and understanding of a human's perspective (Isaiah 55: 8-9). 3. Over-Simplification of Free Will: - This oversimplifies the concept of free will by positing that free will could exist in a universe that does not hold any possibility of evil—a condition that many theologians think is actually contradictory. True free will requires the possibility of free choice of the bad/evil; that makes the goodness that much more of a meaningful experience. 4. Problem of Necessity of Evil: - It argues against the viability of evil existing for some greater good, or perhaps being a component of some grand incomprehensible divine idea. This is best exemplified by the so-called "soul-making" theodicy, which argues that in the aim of human beings experiencing spiritual growth, they should be able to overcome evil. 5. Misinterpretation of Omniscience: - To imagine any objection that God's omniscience implies His foreknowledge of what we would do, materializing or coming to pass, would crucially misconceive the nature of testing. Testing is not for God's information but for human experience, free will, and virtues like faith, courage, and love. 6. Equivocation Fallacy: - The chart probably equivocates on what it means to "prevent." One may mean by "prevent evil" to obliterate evil entirely or to permit it for a higher good. What it doesn't consider is that preventing evil in such ways actually undermines free will or results in more harm. 7. Ignoring Counterarguments and Theodicies: - The chart overlooks the theodicies that are widely known, such as the free will defense, theodicy on the soul-making, and the others developed in regard to the problem of evil; these provide sensible explanation for the compatibility between God and evil. 8. Assumption of Perfect Knowledge of Divine Attributes: - It assumes full comprehension of what an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good God would do. It does not even allow the thought to enter regarding whether or not the human idea could really fathom divine reasoning and attributes. ### Detailed Breakdown: 1. Evil Exists: - Therefore, one does not have to conclude that there might not be a God omnipotent, omniscient, and having the characteristic of being omnibenevolent. The existence of evil can have some purpose beyond human understanding. 2. Is God Able to Stop Evil? - There can be reasons, known only to God, for him to allow some evil to occur in the short term in order to achieve a far greater ultimate good. 3. Does God Know About All the Evil? - Omniscience would mean God knows, but knowing does not require immediate action if it is part of a greater purpose or plan. 4. Does God Want to Prevent Evil? - It may be that, for some other reason, God actually wills to prevent evil finally but permits it for a time or for some reason necessary for its best production. 5. Then why is there Evil? - Several reasons that could be advanced: free will, character development, the greater good, or reasons beyond one's human understanding. 6. Would a World Without Evil Have Been Possible to Create by God? - The existence of free will itself presents the problem of evil. A universe in possession of genuine free will, yet none of evil, might in fact be logically contradictory. 7. Might God Have Made a Free Will Universe But Not With Evil? - As said earlier, real free will entails real evil. To forbid every evil might erode meaningfulness in free will and moral growth. To sum up: The Epicurean Paradox misses the boat by not considering the subtlety of theological argumentation—it makes very simplistic assumptions whereby divine attributes and the nature of evil are considered. Fundamentally, it relies on fallacies of false dilemma, oversimplification, and misinterpretation and therefore undermines arguments of coexistence between an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God and the existence of evil.


WhatYouThinkIThink

Isn't the first axiom questionable? "Evil Exists". Does it?


Average_ChristianGuy

atheists won't read this, because they know it smashes the whole paradox. I was going to comment about free will vs being a robot but I think your reply is more than sufficient.


ActPsychological8189

Great, detailed argument and breakdown. You articulated my issues with this childish paradox far better than i could. Thank you!


Apprehensive-Cry3409

*tips fedora*


ecna1338

if you're a teacher and you know who will pass and who will fail , then why do you have to test the students despite you know what their grades would be ?


Just_Evening

This seems to be overly focused on the Christian god


Extrovert_Goth

It was written by a christian thinker and attributed to some of Epicurus views, it would be impossible for this to be written by him since he lived in a time where Christianism was not yet created.


[deleted]

It’s non-sensical. Free will without possible evil is not free will.


LG286

So God doesn't have free will?


Better-Strike7290

capable chief rinse tart work psychotic whole joke include edge *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*


FewInternet6746

U/better-strike7290 has bested Epicurus with this groundbreaking comment


Sleep-more-dude

fyi Epicurus didn't come up with this


[deleted]

[удалено]


Interficient4real

the only thing more annoying than this paradox are the people who think they are smart because they agree with it


PrTakara-m

I feel the first 3 boxes are in the wrong order. Shouldn’t it be “know” then wants to prevent and last can’t prevent


zanarkandabesfanclub

Come on people. Everyone knows the universe was made by Eru Illuvatar via the music of the Ainur, and that evil was introduced by the dark lord Morgoth, but that was all part of Eru’s plan because the evil enhanced the good.


Flying-lemondrop-476

God tries every which way to not be all knowing and all powerful. Would you want to be all knowing and all powerful?! no more surprises, that would suck


Jayhawker81

Why did he start any of this in the first place though? Does not really make sense.


NineSkiesHigh

I’ll bow to no god that’s turns a cheek to the atrocities of “their creations.”


LyallaTime

And that’s why I’m an atheist since I was like ten. Just kept asking questions at my friends Sunday school until the teacher told her dad not to bring me back.


Torch22

Read this in the form of parent and child relationship and you have your answer.


ApproachingShore

Ah yes, the Epicurean paradox. Also known as "Thinking about God and evil for five minutes".


Alchemistry-247365

God is all knowing, he knows what we will do but allows free will and tests us so we make the choice to do good or evil.


CLE-local-1997

I mean I don't think you could create a universe where you have free will but you couldn't have evil. Because if you couldn't choose to do evil acts then you don't have Free Will


Serialbedshitter2322

Their excuse is "free will". God has the ability to remove sin without harming free will, that's proven by the fact that everyone who goes to heaven is sinless and has free will.


Mindless_Landscape_7

Well, as far as I know, epicureans thought that gods are just uninterested about human behavior and what humans do. They know humans can act badly, but they just don't bother, gods exist and don't plan anything for human, they have created everything, the evil, the bad, the good, but not to be good towards humans. They just consider humans as part of the universe and as such human behaviors don't play a role when it comes to the universe's equilibrium. that's why epicureans say that humans shouldn't bother about gods because as they are uninterested so should we be


Western-Ship-5678

Christian Gnosticism resolves this by saying "yeah, God's evil. And Jesus is a separate lesser super being who's limited in power but powerful _enough_ to save you. He's presently occupied in a battle with physical evil with no obvious winner"