Hume touches The Riddle of Epicurus during Part X, and while I find it to be a very interesting cycle of thought, it brought about questions to my mind.
The Riddle goes as follows:
"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?"
Hume mentions this riddle but also states "Is it [misery] from the intention of the Deity? But he is perfectly benevolent. Is it contrary to his intention? but he is almighty. Nothing can shake the solidarity of this reasoning, so short, so clear..."(p.66).
First, I am assuming that Hume is more or less summarizing the Riddle of Epicurus, or else we run into Hume using presuppositions in His argument that God couldn't possibly exist when misery is present. There is no reason, but only assumption to say that God cannot exist when there is much misery in the world. However, I will not suppose that Hume is stating his argument separately from Epicurus, and, giving him the benefit of the doubt, will analyze it as a summary of the Riddle. I have the following question concerning the Riddle.
1. Is it Evil to allow Evil to continue? If so, are Mercy and Grace Malevolent? Seeing as Mercy and Grace both result in the possibility of Evil continuing as it is not extinguished, I would question if they each are Malevolent by the question set forth. Why would a parent allow a child multiple occasions to behave correctly, even when many of which are not even taken and result in more disobedience? It is because the parent is showing Grace, Mercy, and especially Patience.
Simply because we cannot give a definite and observable answer does not mean that God cannot exist. This Riddle appeals to a higher authority than ourselves, and we must acknowledge that each of our arguments become circular arguments unless both parties appeal to the same highest authority. In this case, Christians see scripture as final authority and as a result are called to spread the Gospel to everyone, no matter how frustrating their philosophy and arguments can become.
I respect much of Hume's work for the effort put into it, but unfortunately I belief that in the aspects that stray from Scripture, it is foolishness as Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 1:18-31. Man can only go so far in his reason, and God chose to redeem man through a message that appears totally foolish to the wise men of the world. It appears foolish to the Greeks that God would bother going through all the trouble for us. It appears foolish to the Jews because they were expecting a Messiah who was an earthly savior and would set up an earthly kingdom. Without Scripture, it is clear through creation that God exists, and man has chosen to reject the truth of God for a lie, and to worship creation rather than Creator.
I commented on the posts of Zane and Eliza.
The Riddle goes as follows:
"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?"
Hume mentions this riddle but also states "Is it [misery] from the intention of the Deity? But he is perfectly benevolent. Is it contrary to his intention? but he is almighty. Nothing can shake the solidarity of this reasoning, so short, so clear..."(p.66).
First, I am assuming that Hume is more or less summarizing the Riddle of Epicurus, or else we run into Hume using presuppositions in His argument that God couldn't possibly exist when misery is present. There is no reason, but only assumption to say that God cannot exist when there is much misery in the world. However, I will not suppose that Hume is stating his argument separately from Epicurus, and, giving him the benefit of the doubt, will analyze it as a summary of the Riddle. I have the following question concerning the Riddle.
1. Is it Evil to allow Evil to continue? If so, are Mercy and Grace Malevolent? Seeing as Mercy and Grace both result in the possibility of Evil continuing as it is not extinguished, I would question if they each are Malevolent by the question set forth. Why would a parent allow a child multiple occasions to behave correctly, even when many of which are not even taken and result in more disobedience? It is because the parent is showing Grace, Mercy, and especially Patience.
Simply because we cannot give a definite and observable answer does not mean that God cannot exist. This Riddle appeals to a higher authority than ourselves, and we must acknowledge that each of our arguments become circular arguments unless both parties appeal to the same highest authority. In this case, Christians see scripture as final authority and as a result are called to spread the Gospel to everyone, no matter how frustrating their philosophy and arguments can become.
I respect much of Hume's work for the effort put into it, but unfortunately I belief that in the aspects that stray from Scripture, it is foolishness as Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 1:18-31. Man can only go so far in his reason, and God chose to redeem man through a message that appears totally foolish to the wise men of the world. It appears foolish to the Greeks that God would bother going through all the trouble for us. It appears foolish to the Jews because they were expecting a Messiah who was an earthly savior and would set up an earthly kingdom. Without Scripture, it is clear through creation that God exists, and man has chosen to reject the truth of God for a lie, and to worship creation rather than Creator.
I commented on the posts of Zane and Eliza.
Comments