Not really. The quality of an argument is in its ability to change the mind/behavior of the person you’re debating with, and the Epicurian paradox is one of the best tools we have to spur some critical thought from the religious crowd. It takes Christian lore at face value, and pitches it against itself. Using their own material as an argument against that same material will function as a better argument than things like scientific facts cuz they just ignore facts.
…then again, they ignore their own lore too, but shining the spotlight on that has its own value.
Anywho, it’s worded awkwardly in the OP to sound old (I’m assuming it isn’t a direct translation, judging by the other comments here), but it goes down a bit easier when you start with how Christians present their god: he is 1) Absolute good / complete absence of evil, 2) All powerful / reality is as he wills, and 3) All knowing / aware of everything happening in his universe.
The snag is that evil also plays a large role in their lore; and in current current events (turn the news on for 10 minutes and you’ll see no shortage of evil) - but how can evil exist under a god described above?
If he has the capability to stop it, he’s chosen not to and is therefore himself some degree of evil.
If he wants to stop it but can’t, he isn’t all powerful.
If he can and wants to stop it, but isn’t aware it’s happening, then he’s a fucking idiot not all knowing.
Therefore, Christianity is not honest about the nature of their own god. And that revelation is a powerful argument.
Not really. The quality of an argument is in its ability to change the mind/behavior of the person you’re debating with, and the Epicurian paradox is one of the best tools we have to spur some critical thought from the religious crowd. It takes Christian lore at face value, and pitches it against itself. Using their own material as an argument against that same material will function as a better argument than things like scientific facts cuz they just ignore facts.
…then again, they ignore their own lore too, but shining the spotlight on that has its own value.
Anywho, it’s worded awkwardly in the OP to sound old (I’m assuming it isn’t a direct translation, judging by the other comments here), but it goes down a bit easier when you start with how Christians present their god: he is 1) Absolute good / complete absence of evil, 2) All powerful / reality is as he wills, and 3) All knowing / aware of everything happening in his universe.
The snag is that evil also plays a large role in their lore; and in current current events (turn the news on for 10 minutes and you’ll see no shortage of evil) - but how can evil exist under a god described above?
If he has the capability to stop it, he’s chosen not to and is therefore himself some degree of evil.
If he wants to stop it but can’t, he isn’t all powerful.
If he can and wants to stop it, but isn’t aware it’s happening, then he’s
a fucking idiotnot all knowing.Therefore, Christianity is not honest about the nature of their own god. And that revelation is a powerful argument.