How can God be justified in allowing innocent suffering, even to bring about greater good?

[blase6]

Allowing the innocent to suffer seems to be an injustice, even if greater good could be brought out of it. I see the argument made that God is justified in allowing evil because He can bring about greater good, but that argument is not convincing to me. If God can both be just and allow innocent suffering, then what is justice?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

God’s justice doesn’t really pertain to what happens to us in this life, it’s about the eternal reward / consequence of our choices.

I can chose to do evil, which causes human injustice against others. God’s justice is not served by putting an end to that evil in life, that is human justice. God’s justice is in the eternal suffering I will experience as a result of my rejection of Him. Similarly, for those innocent people whom I harm, if they are truly innocent, then His justice will be in the eternal reward they receive.

The problem with your position is that you are only considering this life, and in this life we are not guaranteed anything. It is not unjust for God to allow someone to die, because God does not owe that person a certain length of life. It is not unjust for God to allow an individual to suffer because God does not owe us a life without suffering. In fact, it may be God’s desire for mercy which allows a person or group to suffer. I know that many people do not turn to Him until they have nowhere else to turn. While it is regrettable that that is what it took, the benefit of turning to God in those times of suffering far outweighs the magnitude of the suffering itself, especially in light of the eternal ramifications of that choice.

Consider in the OT when God allowed the Israelites to suffer. In every case, their suffering was the direct result of a collective rejection of God. it’s true that many people suffered, and that God could have intervened, but through their suffering the people repented and turned back to Him. That is, by far, the greater concern, and the greatest concern of our lives. Eternal salvation is worth the suffering, especially if that’s what it takes to get someone to turn to Him and accept the gift of salvation.

We have, as a species, adopted this faulty notion that somehow we are owed a certain kind of life. When we do not get that kind of life we believe God is being unjust. In reality, everything that we have is a gift. Our very lives are a gift freely given, one that we could not earn, and one that we do not deserve. How much more so the salvation, freely given, and paid for through the blood of the cross? In that, we see the depths to which God is willing to go to impart these gifts. It was the greatest possible injustice that God be killed for the sins of His creation, yet He embraced it freely out of love for us, and through that infinite injustice, He brought salvation into the world.

 

[Debbie_Kono]

I think we can look to St. Padre Pio and find an answer. Traditional teaching is that he never committed mortal sin and he certainly suffered. Physically with the stigmata and health issues, emotionally with priests and even bishops hating and lying about him…but the good he did for souls is known only to God. We need to give our suffering to God for the conversion of others, wether our sufferings are due to our personal sins or not.

Here is a most excellent teaching on the Saint:

 

[Raxus]

Because God can see what we cannot, because we know that God has a plan for us, because we know that plan involves us being with Him forever and is not focused on earthly life, and because we know He loves all of us.

It’s not an easy answer, but it is the answer, and it makes sense. It’s also why suffering in life can have purpose and meaning; that is, to show self and others how to ultimately come home to God.

No other answer really makes sense.

 

[blase6]

God’s justice doesn’t really pertain to what happens to us in this life, it’s about the eternal reward / consequence of our choices.

This is similar to the argument that allowing evil is justified because of bringing about greater good.

I can chose to do evil, which causes human injustice against others. God’s justice is not served by putting an end to that evil in life, that is human justice. God’s justice is in the eternal suffering I will experience as a result of my rejection of Him. Similarly, for those innocent people whom I harm, if they are truly innocent, then His justice will be in the eternal reward they receive.

So this means that God follows a different definition of justice than we do?

We have, as a species, adopted this faulty notion that somehow we are owed a certain kind of life. When we do not get that kind of life we believe God is being unjust. In reality, everything that we have is a gift. Our very lives are a gift freely given, one that we could not earn, and one that we do not deserve. How much more so the salvation, freely given, and paid for through the blood of the cross? In that, we see the depths to which God is willing to go to impart these gifts. It was the greatest possible injustice that God be killed for the sins of His creation, yet He embraced it freely out of love for us, and through that infinite injustice, He brought salvation into the world.

So God owes us absolutely nothing, not even any love or respect. If He wanted to (not saying that God would do this, just for the sake of reasoning) He could condemn all of us to hell without giving us a choice, and that would not be unjust because we don’t deserve anything good anyway.
We owe respect to others because of their dignity of persons. Is God exempt from that respect simply because we are His property?

 

[RedFox0456]

I think there is a misunderstanding in God’s reason for allowing evil. He doesn’t permit evil because he is using it to a greater end. That would imply the ends justify the means, which we are warned against believing. Rather, evil is allowed because of God’s permissive will. If evil was never allowed then there would not actually be any freedom. I think this is more of an emotional issue than a logical one - that is, people think that bad things shouldn’t happen to good people. Setting aside that Jesus was pretty great and he was crucified, let’s look at the rest of humanity.

Let’s use a proof by contradiction here. Let us establish a couple things here. First, let’s assume a few things.
(A) - God has granted us free will.
(B) - God desires for us to choose Him freely out of love.
(C ) - God is good.

The statements I intend to contradict are:
(I) - God would not allow evil.
(II) - God would not let bad things happen to good people.

Proof Follows
Suppose (I).
Then people are unable to choose any actions which would be evil.
Then free will does not truly exist.
Contradiction with (A).
Therefore, (I) is false. So God must allow evil.

Given (I) is false, let us still suppose (II).
If you perfectly choose God then you will never waver from God’s will.
God’s will is to do good (C ), so you will always do good.
If you are always good then your life will be perfect because no evil will ever befall you.
If you are not always good then you have not chosen God. So evil can befall you because you are not a good person.
Therefore, the only way to never suffer is to never fail to do good.
Therefore, the only way to never suffer is to choose God.
Therefore, there would exist people who feel forced to choose to do good out of the desire to not suffer and not out of love.
So not everyone would be free to choose God out of love, which contradicts (B).
Q.E.D.

The syntax of the proof isn’t perfect, admittedly, but I don’t think the logic fails from it. Summing it up, God’s permissive will requires that both evil exists and that all are capable of experiencing evil, otherwise the universe would not truly be free.

The misconception that God allows evil so that he can use it for a greater good is a distortion of the truth. The truth is that God can bring about good in spite of evil.

 

[blase6]

This doesn’t answer the problem of how it can be just for God to allow the innocent to suffer. If it really is unjust, but is necessitated by giving people free will, then giving people free will is unjust.

Therefore, there would exist people who feel forced to choose to do good out of the desire to not suffer and not out of love.

In all likelihood, don’t people like this exist anyway? And “feeling forced” to choose God is not the same as actually being forced.

 

[RedFox0456]

This doesn’t answer the problem of how it can be just for God to allow the innocent to suffer. If it really is unjust, but is necessitated by giving people free will, then giving people free will is unjust.

This was not meant to address the suffering of innocents. This was only establishing the existence of evil as a byproduct of truly free will. Further, you should specify the criteria for something being unjust so we know we’re speaking the same language. That is, by what standards of morality are you judging something?

In all likelihood, don’t people like this exist anyway? And “feeling forced” to choose God is not the same as actually being forced.

To choose something purely out of love, there must be no benefit to the individual making the choice since love is not selfish. By providing the conditions that doing good is the only path to avoid suffering, God would be creating an incentive to do good. That is, He would be skewing people’s actions and impacting their free will. People would not be choosing Him out of love but out of selfishness or fear. It’s also important to note that “feeling forced” might not be the most precise language, but it is certainly accurate. In this case it means that God would be coercing people to do good by threat of evil befalling them if they don’t. Coercing something (persuasion by threats or by actual force) is evil. Therefore, it would mean that God commits evil. If God commits evil then he is not good. Contradiction with (C ).

Free will can only exist if evil is permitted to exist. Evil must be permitted to happen to good/innocent people if they are to freely choose love, since otherwise they would be doing good out of selfishness.

 

[adamhovey1988]

I get so sick of this argument. “Why does a loving God allow evil”? Would you even know what joy is, if you didn’t suffer?

 

[stpurl]

I recommend you pick up and read C. S. Lewis’ “The Problem of Pain”. It addresses suffering and justice. It’s not a ‘quick read’ but it is very ‘readable’. Hopefully it will help.

 

[midori]

“Dear Lord, if this is how You treat Your friends, it is no wonder You have so few!”

It’s been thought before. It will be thought again.

But, if you look at the example of Jesus-- who was more innocent, and who suffered more than him? --“In light of heaven, the worst suffering on earth, a life full of the most atrocious tortures on earth, will be seen to be no more serious than one night in an inconvenient hotel.”

 

[billsannie]

Whether or not one believes in penal substitution, Jesus did suffer for some very good reasons. Very often people suffer for no good reason, or at least none we can see. Suffering can drive people away from God quite as often as it drives people to seek God. The innocent often do suffer much more than public sinners with more worldly resources. And I’m sorry for being so blunt, but a beautiful eternity we cannot now see is cold comfort to people who are suffering here and now, or who see the very present suffering of others. And we’re still left with a God who either can’t do anything about human suffering or doesn’t care to.

That being said, God understands our suffering (after all, He suffered as Christ). He shares our suffering, will console us and see us through it if we allow Him. There really is no other answer in this world.

 

[Trishie]

I think that we attribute to God, suffering and difficulties that are due to accident, action or inaction of ourselves, and of other people, and of the effects of their/our/myr actions on others.
Suffering also related to economic conditions, wheather and genetics.

Regarding genetics,
Why do innocent nephews and nieces have some serious autoimmune issues, one child, severe arthritis since a toddler? why do some of my siblings…have serious autoimmune illness.
God’s fault, God’s uncaring? God gave the suffering?

No.

For a small illustration:
my maternal ancestors came from a certain Scottish island, where the family lived for centuries, and my father’s from the nearby mainland…well I think maybe the family might have intermarried on the Isle at least, certainly the two clans show marriages occurred throughout my ancestry. And there were inevitably a lot of cross-connections.
Perhaps this is how some genetic conditions begin…as in the more isolated villages of earlier centuries…who knows, but one does hear of very isolated communities where various deformities occur due to too much intermarriage…there could be any number of reasons why a child is born into illness and pain. The mixing of two parents with varying mostly-unknown backgrounds and differing genetics, is always to a degree a lottery, and while the soul God gives is pure, the mind and body of any child may not be as sound as we desire…simply because of all that exists as consequences of peoples’ choices and situations, even the effects of poverty on genetics, throughout the centuries.

To blame God is easy, and human, but not fair or correct.

 

[TechieGuy]

My understanding is that the orthodox belief is that anything God does is good and just because God is the Source of goodness and justice. Just ask Job.

 

[blase6]

This was not meant to address the suffering of innocents. This was only establishing the existence of evil as a byproduct of truly free will. Further, you should specify the criteria for something being unjust so we know we’re speaking the same language. That is, by what standards of morality are you judging something?

Let’s say that by justice I mean “what ought to be” and injustice “what ought not to be.” That’s simple.

To choose something purely out of love, there must be no benefit to the individual making the choice since love is not selfish.

Why must there be no benefit to the individual? You can experience the fruits of your own love without being selfish.

By providing the conditions that doing good is the only path to avoid suffering, God would be creating an incentive to do good. That is, He would be skewing people’s actions and impacting their free will. People would not be choosing Him out of love but out of selfishness or fear. It’s also important to note that “feeling forced” might not be the most precise language, but it is certainly accurate. In this case it means that God would be coercing people to do good by threat of evil befalling them if they don’t.

Again, how is this not the case in real life? I bet there are more than a few Catholics who obey God out of selfishness or fear! Are you denying the reality of being “scared straight”, obeying out of fear of punishment, etc?

Coercing something (persuasion by threats or by actual force) is evil. Therefore, it would mean that God commits evil. If God commits evil then he is not good. Contradiction with (C ).

So when your Mom threatens to not let you have chocolate cake unless you stop being loud, she is committing evil?

 

[blase6]

I get so sick of this argument. “Why does a loving God allow evil”? Would you even know what joy is, if you didn’t suffer?

This seems to be a common idea, that the experience of evil is necessary to appreciate good. While this may be true to some extent due to fallen human nature, I think that Catholic philosophy denies the absolute truth of this idea.

 

[Sir2v4]

I hope that there is a purpose to suffering, because I have so much of it. Survival is one of the main struggles, if not suffering itself. I suffer much because of the sins I have committed, at least in the sense of painful sorrow for having committed them – sins against God and against my fellow mankind. I can only look to God for my salvation. Both Testaments attribute suffering and pain to sinfulness. To me, it is a proof of my sinfulness. Christ endured the agony of the sinfulness of us all.

with due respect, I have no time to argue God’s will for my life.

 

[StephieNorthCo]

One thing you can do is offer up to Our Lord our suffering as a form of penance for our faults. Those tears can be quite salvific.

Blessings,
Stephie

 

[ProdglArchitect]

This is similar to the argument that allowing evil is justified because of bringing about greater good.

It’s really not. It’s important to have an accurate understanding of the context and proper application of terminology. You are thinking about God’s justice in terms of what happens in this life. That is an improper starting point. If you can’t move beyond it, then you will never be able to find a suitable answer.

If you only ever try to think about God’s attributes in human terms, you will never be able to even begin to grasp them.

So this means that God follows a different definition of justice than we do?

Not so much a different definition, more of a different scope. We look at something as unjust, and from our limited perspective it is. God’s perspective is not limited though, He sees the ramifications of everything through the whole of history. He sees how each action and choice will affect an individual. With that in mind, it is not unreasonable to conclude that what we see as unjust suffering may be a necessary aspect of a person’s journey.

So God owes us absolutely nothing, not even any love or respect. If He wanted to (not saying that God would do this, just for the sake of reasoning) He could condemn all of us to hell without giving us a choice, and that would not be unjust because we don’t deserve anything good anyway.
We owe respect to others because of their dignity of persons. Is God exempt from that respect simply because we are His property?

Correct. God owes us absolutely nothing. He is our creator, and each and every one of us (with exactly two exceptions throughout all of history) spend our lives rejecting Him to greater or lesser degrees. We have constructed a society that extols vice and criticizes virtue. The greatest moral evils are commonplace and celebrated as good. No, God does not owe us anything. We are the authors of our own destruction.

Yet, in spite of this, He chose to suffer and die for us. He gave us this free gift of reconciliation and salvation. That should give you some indication of God’s nature, and help you see that He would not allow a human injustice to happen without good reason.

Also, no, God does not owe us any respect. We don’t deserve any. He does chose to love us though, in spite of that.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

This seems to be a common idea, that the experience of evil is necessary to appreciate good. While this may be true to some extent due to fallen human nature, I think that Catholic philosophy denies the absolute truth of this idea.

The experience of evil is not necessary to appreciate good. However, having experienced evil, we would naturally have an increased capacity for that appreciation by virtue of its contrast with evil.