Lucretius: On the Nature of Things/De Rerum Natura

"The epic On the Nature of Things, by Lucretius (ca. 99-55 B.C.E.), is the only surviving work of an Epicurean Roman poet. Epicurus was a Greek philosopher who lived in the fourth an third centuries B.C.E., and whose philosophy emphasizes tranquility or peace of mind as the primary goal of human life. Epicureans believed that false beliefs--about the origins and nature of the universe and about death--and false fears about the gods are the primary sources of human anxiety." In fact, the modern adaptation of the word epicurean refers to someone who loves luxury. 

Epicureans "were not atheists" as the text reports, but imagined the gods as separate from humanity, living at the perimeter of the universe in a state of perpetual harmony and contentment. Unlike the gods of the creation epics we've studied so far, and those of many religious traditions, the gods of the Epicurean mind had nothing to do with the creation of the universe or human dealings. 

                                               en.ela.mobi

Lucretius, or Titus Lucretius Carus, about whom little is known, is thought to have had an upbringing of wealth and prosperity, having received an education in Philosophy as well as in Greek and Latin. His poem, On the Nature of Things, though lost for many centuries, seems to have had great influence on the poet Virgil and on the Atomists--philosophers who theorized that the universe was composed of two principles: Atom and Void. Atoms, which float independently or in 'clusters' are the building blocks of solid matter in the atmosphere (1). Our text points out that Lucretius stages an 'interplay' between the pragmatic and the fanciful--between 'science and mythology': while he rejects the notion of gods ruling the universe, his first lines intone the power of the goddess, Venus (Aphrodite), to "control every aspect of life on earth". Could this predilection to combine the scientific and the beatific be complimentary or contradictory? Further, what can be said about his remark that "Too often Religion Herself gives brith to evil and blasphemous deeds"?