How could a moral God allow suffering?

[Achilles6129]

Nicely said

Thank ya

 

[oldcelt]

I haven’t read this entire thread, just wanted to weigh in on the subject as it’s a very important one.

God is obviously ultimately responsible for everything that goes on in the cosmos (and in heaven as well) since he created it and has the ability to stop it if he so chooses. Christ even claims he is responsible for everything that happens:

“18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” Mt. 28:18 (NRSV)

Now, the question “how could God allow suffering” actually has to deal with whether or not the suffering is justified or not. I will assume the suffering is unjustified. I would also have to disagree with the statement that God is “moral” (if “moral” is defined by how natural man understands morality) because I think it is very clear that the God of the Bible would be considered to be evil by human nature (see the following passage). This brings us to one of the most interesting passages in Scripture:

“9 For three and a half days members of the peoples and tribes and languages and nations will gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb; 10 and the inhabitants of the earth will gloat over them and celebrate and exchange presents, because these two prophets had been a torment to the inhabitants of the earth.” Rev. 11:9-10 (NRSV)

Notice that the human race is overjoyed when the two witnesses are dead and even celebrates the occasion. This is very important because the two witnesses are basically corporate representations of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Apostle Paul, Peter, Elijah, Moses, etc. This shows us something very important about human nature: human nature believes that God is evil.

That being said, I wanted to answer how God could allow unjustified suffering: God can allow unjustified suffering because God will rectify all unjustified suffering on the day of judgment. All unjustified suffering will one day be made right by God. So God can allow it for a time (to accomplish his purposes, like saving the elect), because he will right it all later and make it as though it had never been. God can do this, man cannot. And so God can allow unjustified suffering.

That is cold comfort for a family that just watched their child die hideously for no good reason or the thousands of Egyptians mothers who wept after their first borns were slaughtered, or, etc, etc, etc.
Perhaps human nature believes that God is evil because they were taught that. One need only look at the holy books to see the evil. Why the early church fathers chose the books they did I have always boiled down to control. “Listen to us or God will smite you and send you to eternal damnation.” Definitely not all-loving.

 

[Richca]

Then we have no human understanding of terms such as justice. We cannot define it ourselves because it’s not up to us to do so.

Let’s say that we had a scenario where a group of people wanted to leave a country. The powers that be would not let them. If I asked you if it was then justifiable to kill the children of the people who lived there simply because of that, I sincerely hope that you would think the question barbaric. But if you thought that God commanded it, then you’d say it was justified. It wouldn’t matter how atrocious, how barbaric, how horrific you think it was personally, you would have to swallow the bile rising in your throat, take a deep breath and say: It’s OK…

The answer to the question: ‘Is X justifiable?’ has to be, from your statement above: ‘Well, that depends if it’s God’s will’.

The obvious question then becomes: How do you know?

Firstly, we believe that God is infinite goodness and infinite justice itself. We cannot believe that God would or can do anything unjust. An unjust act would be a sin and it is not possible for God to sin against Himself or contradict His own nature.

Secondly, the Israelites in Egypt were the slaves of the Egyptians and they were forced to hard labor. Without trying to gather specific passages of scripture at the moment, I think it is safe to say that the Israelites were treated unjustly by the Egyptians. Since God loves justice and the Israelites were His chosen people, God wanted to rectify this unjust situation.
So, God told Moses to go and tell the Pharoah to let His people leave the country. Now Pharoah could have let the Israelites go at this time and none of the plagues nor the death of the first born would have happened. But of course, Pharaoh being stubborn and probably thinking himself a god, did not. Pharoah was acting unjustly not only towards the Israelites but also toward God. God gave Pharoah nine chances to let the Israelites go. Still the Pharoah refused. What was it going to take? Finally after the death of the first born in Egypt, Pharoah let the Israelites go. However, he recanted and followed after them and the Pharoah’s army perished in the Red Sea. As you can see, Pharoah did not want to heed God’s command even to the death of his own first born son and the death of the other first born in Egypt.

It was Pharoah who killed the first born in Egypt because of his stubborness to listen to the true God. How can it be said that God acted unjustly here? He gave the Pharoah ten chances to heed Him before the killing of the first born which was the punishment for Pharoah’s sin and who knows how many other Egyptians sins.

 

[tonyrey]

Your respect is misguided because you would condemn a human father who ignores his children and has no love for them from the moment they are born until the moment they die. That is the apotheosis of cruelty…

You need to specify whether God knew what He was doing when He created the universe and whether He knows its subsequent history. Otherwise your hypothesis is too vague to be worth considering. Its suggestion that human fathers are far superior to their Creator undermines its credibility. Divine power divorced from goodness is akin to wanton cruelty.

 

[Bradski]

Still the Pharoah refused. What was it going to take?

Well I’m sure you’d agree that God had an infinite number of choices here. As you said, He killed the Pharaoh and his army without too much difficulty a little later on and that seemed to have solved the problem.

Do you think that He knew the Egyptians would recant on their promise after he killed all the children? I can’t for one minute believe that you could suggest He was surprised by it. So He killed them all knowing it was going to be a waste of time.

Why not kill the Pharaoh and the army in the first place and let the children live?

 

[thinkandmull]

I asked this somewhere, but can’t find it:

If good comes from pain, then why prevent the pain? If not, then why is there pain?

 

[oldcelt]

You need to specify whether God knew what He was doing when He created the universe and whether He knows its subsequent history. Otherwise your hypothesis is too vague to be worth considering. Its suggestion that human fathers are far superior to their Creator undermines its credibility. Divine power divorced from goodness is akin to wanton cruelty.

Their Creator is God, not some divine nursemaid. He didn’t create us, why would he give such an inordinate amount of attention to a tiny planet on one of the far wings of one medium sized galaxy among billions?

Wanton cruelty…like in the OT or the Slaughter of the Innocents in the NT?

 

[Amandil]

I don’t recall ever saying that it wasn’t.

So you’re affirming that you’re a materialist?

 

[oldcelt]

So you’re affirming that you’re a materialist?

I suppose that depends on the definition. I probably come closest to a scientific materialist.

 

[Amandil]

I suppose that depends on the definition. I probably come closest to a scientific materialist.

And where does any spiritual entity, even a deistic “god”, fit into the philosophy of a “scientific materialist”?

And how precisely is there any room for rational discussion in materialism’s closed system of physical causes and effects?

 

[oldcelt]

And where does any spiritual entity, even a deistic “god”, fit into the philosophy of a “scientific materialist”?

And how precisely is there any room for rational discussion in materialism’s closed system of physical causes and effects?

Plenty of room. How did materials combine in the early universe, when did life first appear on earth, what is the nature of God is the biggie. Since we have no dogma, the best argument tends to gain the greatest following.

 

[Amandil]

Duly noted that you avoided my first question.

Plenty of room. How did materials combine in the early universe, when did life first appear on earth, what is the nature of God is the biggie. Since we have no dogma, the best argument tends to gain the greatest following.

Materialism, generally understood, explicitly denies the existence of everything not material. According to materialism the universe is the product of chance, not a “first necessary cause” such as “god”.

That is the dogma of materialism.

You can’t have it both ways.

 

[ajecphotos]

Like i said before, oldcelt is picking things that suit his needs etc. He is trying to ‘mould’ his own God.

 

[tonyrey]

You need to specify whether God knew what He was doing when He created the universe and whether He knows its subsequent history. Otherwise your hypothesis is too vague to be worth considering. Its suggestion that human fathers are far superior to their Creator undermines its credibility. Divine power divorced from goodness is akin to wanton cruelty.

Who does “Their” refer to?

He didn’t create us, why would he give such an inordinate amount of attention to a tiny planet on one of the far wings of one medium sized galaxy among billions?

Size has nothing to do with value or significance. Otherwise you should treat everyone like dirt - including yourself! The fact that you don’t contradicts your conclusion.

Wanton cruelty…like in the OT or the Slaughter of the Innocents in the NT?

1. Yahweh is not the Christian God.
2. The slaughter of the Innocents in the NT was the result of the wanton cruelty of King Herodis.
3. It is wanton cruelty to create a universe that is subsequently totally neglected.
4. Otherwise God is totally ignorant and totally impotent.
5. Yet immense knowledge and power are required to create the universe.
6. The fact that scientists copy extremely complex natural mechanisms demonstrates that they are not the product of a blind creator who hasn’t the faintest idea of what he is doing.

 

[rinnie]

I see no evidence of that God.

Really? Do you only know selfish people?

You never saw a person who had very little, but always shared what they had with everyone?

You never saw a Mother and Father who denied themselves much, for the love of their family?

 

[oldcelt]

Really? Do you only know selfish people?

You never saw a person who had very little, but always shared what they had with everyone?

You never saw a Mother and Father who denied themselves much, for the love of their family?

These positive traits are within the nature of most human beings in my view. No god is necessary.

 

[oldcelt]

Who does “Their” refer to?
Size has nothing to do with value or significance. Otherwise you should treat everyone like dirt - including yourself! The fact that you don’t contradicts your conclusion.

1. Yahweh is not the Christian God.
2. The slaughter of the Innocents in the NT was the result of the wanton cruelty of King Herodis.
3. It is wanton cruelty to create a universe that is subsequently totally neglected.
4. Otherwise God is totally ignorant and totally impotent.
5. Yet immense knowledge and power are required to create the universe.
6. The fact that scientists copy extremely complex natural mechanisms demonstrates that they are not the product of a blind creator who hasn’t the faintest idea of what he is doing.

Their refers to Deists. For the rest: 1. Marcionite heresy 2. Christian God knew this would happen 3. Who says that the universe is neglected…it is permitted to function. 4. How do you arrive at that? 5. Definitely, but interference is not 6. We only wish that we could truly copy natural mechanisms. Pale imitations, maybe.

 

[Amandil]

These positive traits are within the nature of most human beings in my view. No god is necessary.

For all intents and purposes oldcelt is a materialistic atheist who is hedging his bets by claiming to be a deist thinking and hoping that simply being sincere about his “deism” will save his skin in case he’s wrong.

 

[Amandil]

Back to my original point:

One obviously had a physical condition that caused his death. Same applies to me. I do all those things and many more because it is in my physical nature to do so. This developed through many millennia and is likely still continuing

Those who have yet to be conceived and born lack the physical characteristics necessary to perform such actions.

Just seconds before their physical condition was the same i.e. they were alive.

What live cow has which is now lacking in dead cow is “life”. How do you explain this?

Now you can make the claim that “life” is solely the result caused by “physical conditions” but you’d be begging the question.

 

[tonyrey]

1. Yahweh is not the Christian God.
2. The slaughter of the Innocents in the NT was the result of the wanton cruelty of King Herodis.
3. It is wanton cruelty to create a universe that is subsequently totally neglected.
4. Otherwise God is totally ignorant and totally impotent.
5. Yet immense knowledge and power are required to create the universe.
6. The fact that scientists copy extremely complex natural mechanisms demonstrates that they are not the product of a blind creator who hasn’t the faintest idea of what he is doing.

1. Marcionite heresy

Nonsense! The loving, merciful Father revealed by Jesus is not identical with the primitive idea of a wrathful Deity in some texts in the Old Testament which is at odds with the more refined concept of the Creator in .

1. Christian God knew this would happen.

You are using your free will to condemn God’s gift of free will! Would you prefer to be a zombie?

1. Who says that the universe is neglected…it is permitted to function.

Then why do you complain about the suffering in the world?

1. How do you arrive at that?

It requires immense knowledge to understand even most aspects of nature let alone create all of them. Why are teams of scientists dedicating their lives to research with sophisticated equipment?

1. Definitely, but interference is not

Not what?

1. We only wish that we could truly copy natural mechanisms. Pale imitations, maybe.

Which proves that immense knowledge and power on the part of the Creator are needed to create them!