Written by Ben Russell
Epicureanism is strictly a material only worldview and came through a man named Epicurus. Followers of his thinking state only matter exists, however, if only the material exists it could never be known. The laws of logic are not made of matter and isn’t material and is therefore self refuting.
Epicureanism is also deistic as well. They believe that gods exists, but they have no relationship with people or the creation. There is no sin, fear, prayer, or interaction with the gods in any sense. This sort of logic also fails. They couldn’t confirm laws of logic extend from the character of their gods since their character cannot be known. Allah of the Muslim worldview has this exact problem too (Sura 42:11).
There is also a problem of science and uniformity of nature as well. They could try to state the universe was made uniform due to the gods but they have no reason to believe the future will be like the past without begging the question. They have no idea if the gods or deities will discard uniformity in the future even if they never discarded it in the past.
They state there are no absolutes, and there is no strict purpose regarding life or the cosmos. We are free to live as we want. This is self refuting because confirming there is no purpose assumes that there is purpose in that statement. However, if there is no purpose, how could the statement “There is no purpose” have any meaning? They may claim that atoms arranged themselves in such a way that we received rationality. The problem here is confirming who is reasoning rationally and irrationally. There is no justification for the laws of logic (specifically the law of non contradiction and law of identity) to confirm who is thinking logically in any circumstance since not all atoms are the same.
The main goal in life is to gain as much pleasure as possible and live life to the fullest. The problem here is the concept selfishness. It might make somebody happy to bring death or suffering to somebody else. Who is to say this is wrong if there are no absolute morals? If they proclaim morals are just for the benefit for society then that is arbitrarily reversible for the destruction of society. Also what one person may call a benefit another may call destructive depending on their personal and subjective standard for reasoning and morality.
Also remember to give them the gospel. Expose their need for a savior and repentance by showing them that only God can satisfy the condition of humanity.