A God of Hard Answers

[RCIAGraduate]

Greetings and Goodwill to All

Hello fellow Catholic Answers bloggers I am relatively new to this forum. I had been thinking about the perfect way to introduce myself,then I resigned to lurking unless I founded my “inspirational first post” but here I am now. I am not quite conflicted now but I want to see the take others.

Around minutes ago my curiosity had struck me and I had searched a tragic picture,the one by a man named Kevin Carter(some of you may have heard it,since it won a prize but do not search it I do not want to responsible for shaking the faith of others). I think and then I saw another blog post that said a statement against God and I had agreed with it . I know what I did(and what now I may be brooding in my mind) was/is wrong. In fact I had rationalized that this is due to God’s gift of free will to mankind. I had read about other tragedies but seeing a photo was quite different for me, especially with the accompanying statement. Earlier I had read a post here about “suffering” and the responses here were from man’s responsibility to one another,God could’ve created a world without no sin no suffering and the gift of free will.

Among my thoughts was a statement from Gustavo Gutierrez who stated that God loved all universally but concurrently had a particular love for the poor due to their state. From another reading I had read that God was no God of “easy answers.” Typing this was quite therapeutic for me but I am quite curious for the responses here. I am sorry for you trouble and may you all have a blessed day.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Evil comes only from man. There is no evil in nature. When a big fish eats a little fish, it is not an act of evil.

If man has free will, then he must be free to choose either good or evil. Free will to do only one thing is not truly free. You cannot have free will without evil.

Suffering can be the result of our own choices (free will), other men (evil), or nature. Let’s talk about nature, because the others are also covered in free will.

Famine is an example of natural suffering. Our bodies require food, and in famine we don’t get enough food, so we suffer. God could have created a world where famines don’t happen. But famines are also a local event, confined to a relatively small area. There has never been a time when God’s earth did not produce enough food for all of its inhabitants. The inability or unwillingness to help those suffering from famine is largely the result of the decisions of men (free will). For example, in every year of the great Irish potato famine, Ireland was a net exporter of food. Its people were starving, but its leaders were selling the food to other nations.

Natural disasters (earthquakes, hurricanes, etc) cause suffering. But they also provide opportunities for grace. And they can come in handy sometimes. If not for a well-timed hurricane, England would have probably won the War of 1812, and we would all be singing “God Save the Queen” instead of “Oh, say, can you see.”

 

[Della]

Greetings and Goodwill to All

Hello fellow Catholic Answers bloggers I am relatively new to this forum. I had been thinking about the perfect way to introduce myself,then I resigned to lurking unless I founded my “inspirational first post” but here I am now. I am not quite conflicted now but I want to see the take others.

Around minutes ago my curiosity had struck me and I had searched a tragic picture,the one by a man named Kevin Carter(some of you may have heard it,since it won a prize but do not search it I do not want to responsible for shaking the faith of others). I think and then I saw another blog post that said a statement against God and I had agreed with it .

The trouble with a snapshot of any event is that it does not tell us the whole story, therefore, making negative statements about God are irresponsible and unfair. It’s the photographic version of “cherry picking” and is hardly proof of anything.

I know what I did(and what now I may be brooding in my mind) was/is wrong. In fact I had rationalized that this is due to God’s gift of free will to mankind. I had read about other tragedies but seeing a photo was quite different for me, especially with the accompanying statement. Earlier I had read a post here about “suffering” and the responses here were from man’s responsibility to one another,God could’ve created a world without no sin no suffering and the gift of free will.

God did create a world of no sin, no suffering (for man), and the gift of free will. It was man who mucked it up, not God. Pain, and the suffering that comes with it, are a part of the natural world. It was the part of the natural world God did not have in mind for humankind until we fell from God’s grace. One day, though, even natural suffering will be eliminated in the new heavens and the new earth. God allows pain and suffering in the natural world to show us what our lives are like without him–a lesson we chose to ignore to our own cost.

Among my thoughts was a statement from Gustavo Gutierrez who stated that God loved all universally but concurrently had a particular love for the poor due to their state. From another reading I had read that God was no God of “easy answers.” Typing this was quite therapeutic for me but I am quite curious for the responses here. I am sorry for you trouble and may you all have a blessed day.

Indeed, there are many Scriptural references to God’s special love for the poor. We who have the ability to alleve their sufferings are supposed to do so. There are many ways of doing this, not the least among them is getting them meaningful employment, not simply handing out money, but I digress.

God’s answers are easy, it’s just hard for our fallen intellects to accept them. We are wounded beings who cannot understand God’s ways–not until and unless we are willing to say to him, “Thy will be done” instead of “my will be done.” It’s why we need God’s grace–we cannot do this on our own.

 

[atheistgirl]

Around minutes ago my curiosity had struck me and I had searched a tragic picture,the one by a man named Kevin Carter(some of you may have heard it,since it won a prize but do not search it I do not want to responsible for shaking the faith of others).

A few points:

That picture was exposed as a set up.

It was taken at a French run feeding station.

The child’s mother had momentarily left the child to get food at the station, which was yards away.

There was a pit there, out of focus, used as a latrine and around which vultures gathered.

That vulture wasn’t targeting the child, it had simply landed and was going to make it’s way to his fellow vultures around the pit at the feeding station.

The picture was shot using a telephoto lens and that vulture is much further away from the child that the image makes it look.

There is a tag on the child’s arm, issued by the feeding station - the child had been logged in and was being cared for.

The final, tragic, irony of that picture is the photographer committed suicide a year later, while that child, who’s name is Kong Nyong, survived the famine and lived until 2008 where he is described as dying from ‘‘fevers’’.

borgenproject.org/the-boy-that-survived-the-vulture/

addisabram.wordpress.com/tag/kong-nyong/

albertorojas.photoshelter.com/image/I0000jJ8bG6k5nsg

Never take anything on face value.

Always dig deeper.

That’s usually where the truth is, and it’s usually much more interesting.

Sarah x