I'd like to talk about the riddle of Epicurus, I've mentioned it in other posts, but i think it should have its own thread. It's not a perfect argument as there are some gray areas involving good an evil, but I still think it's pretty good.
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?
In plain english...if god is willing to prevent evil, but can't, he is not all powerful, if he can prevent it, but doesn't want to, then he wants there to be evil. If he can stop it, and wants to, then why is there evil around us, and if he can't and he won't prevent evil, then why call him god.
This all basically boils down to, god can't be all loving, all seeing, and all powerful, he can't be all three because they contradict each other. Any thoughts?
Makes perfect sense to me. It's actually the best argument against organized religion.
I always get a sense of atheist pride when I remind myself how long ago that argument was raised.
yeah I think it was created before Christianity, like several hundred years B.C. Then I'd say it sure says something about religion that they all pretty much claim the same thing if he can counter a religious view before it's created.
Can anyone think of any other logical arguments that defeat god, and I don't mean any of those "how come" questions like why hasn't he healed amputees (which is still pretty good), but any other logical arguments out there?