The Instigator
Tavadon
Pro (for)
Winning
31 Points
The Contender
CiRrO
Con (against)
Losing
18 Points

Riddle of Epicuris

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/6/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,429 times Debate No: 4596
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (1)
Votes (15)

 

Tavadon

Pro

I want to see a christian refute the Riddle of Epicuris, i have made this debate only 1 round...ok here is the riddle

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?
CiRrO

Con

Ok, I'll go through each question then make my own mini-case.

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent."

My Response: First off, my opponent is trying to understand the mind of God, which is impossible. Thats a simple observation. However, looking at this specific line, of course God can eradicate evil. What better way to eradicate evil then by his own creations. We are they way he eradicates evil. Take 9/11 for instance. The firefighters that went into the buildings were the "good" trying to eradicate the evil made. They saved lives, while risking their own. Thats the greatest goodness that can be done. So essentially, God eradicates evil by the goodness done by his creations. There will always be a balance, evil will be done, but the good ppl on earth will be there is eradicate it.

"Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent."

My Response: Eradicating evil totally is just as malevolent. Good without evil is no goodness at all. Therefore, goodness becomes evilness to itself. A world without evil, needs no good. It's a paradox. Simple, eradicating evil totally is malevolent.

"Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?"

My Response: Evil is not a substance as my opponent makes it seem. Evil is just the absence of good. Just like darkness is the absence of light. Evil automatically comes with good. As i have said before, its a balance, necessary for the very soul of goodness.

"Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

My Response: This is assuming that the first 3 could not be answered. however, I'll respond to it anyway. This statement is trying to understand the very nature of God's will. Like St. Augustine portrayed: It's like trying to take all the water from the sea. It's impossible to do.
Debate Round No. 1
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
ATTENTION EVERYONE INTERESTED IN ONLINE DEBATE TOURNAMENTS:

There is a group on facebook (Online Debate Tournaments) that is holding debate tournaments and a new one is about to start with 2 different types of debate! (Policy and LD)... Anyone interested, please join the facebook group and sign up by July 24th, 2008 (10:00 P.M. Central) on the discussion board "Tournament 2 Sign Up" (more details are in the discussion board)... The site that we are debating on is www.debate.org so be sure to have an account. It's absolutely FREE to enter so sign up today!

Sincerely, Luke Cumbee
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Tavadon 8 years ago
Tavadon
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Paradox 8 years ago
Paradox
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Badrag 8 years ago
Badrag
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by slayer54321 8 years ago
slayer54321
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Biowza 8 years ago
Biowza
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by righteous-reply 8 years ago
righteous-reply
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Derek.Gunn 8 years ago
Derek.Gunn
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Jamcke 8 years ago
Jamcke
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Ozymandias 8 years ago
Ozymandias
TavadonCiRrOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30