How could a moral God allow suffering?

[GaryTaylor]

“Eventually I was taking more than 107 pills per day plus methadone. Even this level of medication only dulled the pain but did not remove it. I saw all the specialist doctors in the area and all concluded that this condition was incurable.”

uch:

 

[oldcelt]

The problem is that you can’t see the whole picture in order to make the claims that you do regarding the morality of the action or inaction. This is not a rationalization or justification for what God does or does not do – it is a statement of fact–you don’t have all the relevant facts needed–you just assume you do. None of us have that knowledge. We all like to think we are smarter than we are – if God didn’t create the world we think he should have–then he isn’t xyz. I am not presumptuous enough to believe that I have the whole picture and am in a position to judge the act of being that created everything out of nothing. Doesn’t mean I don’t wonder but I do realize I don’t have all the information needed to draw an accurate conclusion.

And of course as you pointed out to Bill: Thank you for your view oldcelt…but it is precisely that.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

Perhaps, but I am placing the blame on two visible sources…mankind and natural deterioration, not trying to redefine suffering.

 

[oldcelt]

"If God knew that the gifts of freedom, power, and universal causal significance would be abused, then why did he give them?

Answer:In knowing of the eventual abuse of his maximal self-gift through sin, God either gives all that can be given and does exactly as he would have done as if he did not know that there would be an abuse of the gift, or he holds back his generosity in order to prevent the abuse from happening by giving something less than the total gift which he would have given originally. Necessarily, God either gives fully, as if evil were not a factor, or he gives something less in anticipation of evil. If God does exactly as he would have done were evil not a consideration at all, then the total gift is given without the least restraint even though he knows it will be abused; he creates exactly those whom he would have created, if evil were never to have been a consideration and gives away power and importance fully and without any degree of compromise in response to the threat of evil. However, if God holds back his generosity in anticipation of the evils that would follow from the abuse of his undiminished self-gift, then self-withholding in anticipation of evil (rather than uncompromising self-donation) becomes the guiding principle in the order of creation. Instead of unconditional love and generosity being the principle of divine action, reluctance to love in response to the threat of evil is elevated to the ultimate principle of being. Rather than the unconditional love of God, the power of evil takes the helm of the universe. It seems plausible at first glance that God’s goodness would be most exemplified by preventing the abuse of his gifts at the outset, but the deeper reality is that the self-withholding of God that would be necessary to prevent evil is the absolute enthronement of evil." New Apologetics

The abuse began almost immediately. Mankind is a predatory species…another thing God would have known if he was really involved with us.

 

[tonyrey]

Suffering has a specific purpose: it is a defence mechanism essential for physical and psychological well-being and development.

Mental suffering is an even more important defence mechanism because it is a warning that something or some one is interfering with our pursuit of happiness, both for others and ourselves. It makes us ask vital questions and search for the answers:

Tragedy is like strong acid - it dissolves away all but the very gold of truth.

D. H. Lawrence

And the most important answer is:

One must learn to love, and go through a good deal of suffering to get to it… and the journey is always towards the other soul.

D. H. Lawrence

 

[oldcelt]

Never knew that D .H. Lawrence held such sway.

 

[tonyrey]

Never knew that D .H. Lawrence held such sway.

You underestimate him. He wrote far more than Lady Chatterley’s Lover…

 

[EWSOCKEY]

The question is why does God permit innocent children to suffer, e.g., Herod’s slaughter of the Holy Innocents.

We need to begin by considering the world we live in. God created the universe in perfect harmony with His will, and therefore there was no human suffering. It is not clear that animals did not suffer, e.g., that robins did not eat worms.

Lucifer rebelled against the established order, causing disharmony and suffering among the angels. Lucifer tempted Adam and Eve to follow his example, they did, and suffering entered the human world. God could have avoided this suffering by not creating Lucifer, but He chose to do so. Still, God did not cause Lucifer to rebel and He did not cause Adam to rebel. On the contrary, God created Lucifer and Adam in perfect happiness according to angelic and human natures.

God destroyed the world by a flood to stop the evil and suffering that had spread throughout the world, but evil began building up again immediately because human nature was damaged by original sin. Then God became Man and submitted to suffer and die at the hands of man and the designs of Lucifer to make up for all the sins that had violated His love and divine justice.

Jesus created a Mystical Body, in which He resides within the baptized organized into the Church (which includes all the baptized in principle) to which He has given the mission of teaching the Gospel, praying for the conversion of sinners (“Whatever you ask for in prayer…”) and suffering (“Take up your cross…”) for the conversion of sinners and the renewal of the world.

Suffering is caused by sin, original sin and personal sins. God requires all Christians to participate in renewing the world through teaching, prayer and penance – not only for our own sins but for the sins of the world as Our Lady made clear in her message at Fatima. At Fatima Our Lady said that if we want peace on earth and less suffering Catholics need to pray for the conversion of sinners and offer our daily crosses as reparation for their conversion. In the degree that Catholics neglect to fulfill this obligation, suffering will continue and increase in the world.

If all Catholics fulfilled our obligation to pray and offer penance for the conversion of sinners there would be peace on earth and suffering would be greatly reduced. However, because of original sin there would still be suffering caused by evil men and by the disorders of nature, e.g., disease; but one could hope there would be more grace, giving guardian angels more power to prevent or reduce natural suffering.

Those who sin suffer for their sins. Those who live in the state of grace suffer as members of the Mystical Body of Christ for their own sins and especially – united to the Cross – for the sins of others who need reparation in order to receive the grace of conversion (Our Lady taught this at Fatima). Innocent children who have no personal sins suffer because of the sins of others, including the disorders caused by original sin; but they are in the hands of an infinitely loving God who will give them eternal bliss so intense that their suffering on earth will not matter. Since they are innocent of personal sin, we can expect that their suffering is used by God for the salvation of others (remember that Jesus and Mary were themselves perfectly innocent).

This is how God chose to set up His creation. We need to trust Him, especially in view of His loving decision to become one with us and submit to intense suffering and the most painful death devised by man in order to reopen the gates of heaven to people of good will.

This present life on earth is not what everything is about. Since the Incarnation, life on earth is about restoring what was lost by original sin, and the suffering of the innocent has its place in this renewal.

 

[ajecphotos]

The question is why does God permit innocent children to suffer, e.g., Herod’s slaughter of the Holy Innocents.

We need to begin by considering the world we live in. God created the universe in perfect harmony with His will, and therefore there was no human suffering. It is not clear that animals did not suffer, e.g., that robins did not eat worms.

Lucifer rebelled against the established order, causing disharmony and suffering among the angels. Lucifer tempted Adam and Eve to follow his example, they did, and suffering entered the human world. God could have avoided this suffering by not creating Lucifer, but He chose to do so. Still, God did not cause Lucifer to rebel and He did not cause Adam to rebel. On the contrary, God created Lucifer and Adam in perfect happiness according to angelic and human natures.

God destroyed the world by a flood to stop the evil and suffering that had spread throughout the world, but evil began building up again immediately because human nature was damaged by original sin. Then God became Man and submitted to suffer and die at the hands of man and the designs of Lucifer to make up for all the sins that had violated His love and divine justice.

Jesus created a Mystical Body, in which He resides within the baptized organized into the Church (which includes all the baptized in principle) to which He has given the mission of teaching the Gospel, praying for the conversion of sinners (“Whatever you ask for in prayer…”) and suffering (“Take up your cross…”) for the conversion of sinners and the renewal of the world.

Suffering is caused by sin, original sin and personal sins. God requires all Christians to participate in renewing the world through teaching, prayer and penance – not only for our own sins but for the sins of the world as Our Lady made clear in her message at Fatima. At Fatima Our Lady said that if we want peace on earth and less suffering Catholics need to pray for the conversion of sinners and offer our daily crosses as reparation for their conversion. In the degree that Catholics neglect to fulfill this obligation, suffering will continue and increase in the world.

If all Catholics fulfilled our obligation to pray and offer penance for the conversion of sinners there would be peace on earth and suffering would be greatly reduced. However, because of original sin there would still be suffering caused by evil men and by the disorders of nature, e.g., disease; but one could hope there would be more grace, giving guardian angels more power to prevent or reduce natural suffering.

Those who sin suffer for their sins. Those who live in the state of grace suffer as members of the Mystical Body of Christ for their own sins and especially – united to the Cross – for the sins of others who need reparation in order to receive the grace of conversion (Our Lady taught this at Fatima). Innocent children who have no personal sins suffer because of the sins of others, including the disorders caused by original sin; but they are in the hands of an infinitely loving God who will give them eternal bliss so intense that their suffering on earth will not matter. Since they are innocent of personal sin, we can expect that their suffering is used by God for the salvation of others (remember that Jesus and Mary were themselves perfectly innocent).

This is how God chose to set up His creation. We need to trust Him, especially in view of His loving decision to become one with us and submit to intense suffering and the most painful death devised by man in order to reopen the gates of heaven to people of good will.

This present life on earth is not what everything is about. Since the Incarnation, life on earth is about restoring what was lost by original sin, and the suffering of the innocent has its place in this renewal.

Phew! What a marvellous post! Full of explanation and meaning.

Thank you so much for sharing those words of wisdom and gives me something to reflect on.

God bless you

 

[bedan_elite]

The question is why does God permit innocent children to suffer, e.g., Herod’s slaughter of the Holy Innocents.

We need to begin by considering the world we live in. God created the universe in perfect harmony with His will, and therefore there was no human suffering. It is not clear that animals did not suffer, e.g., that robins did not eat worms.

Lucifer rebelled against the established order, causing disharmony and suffering among the angels. Lucifer tempted Adam and Eve to follow his example, they did, and suffering entered the human world. God could have avoided this suffering by not creating Lucifer, but He chose to do so. Still, God did not cause Lucifer to rebel and He did not cause Adam to rebel. On the contrary, God created Lucifer and Adam in perfect happiness according to angelic and human natures.

God destroyed the world by a flood to stop the evil and suffering that had spread throughout the world, but evil began building up again immediately because human nature was damaged by original sin. Then God became Man and submitted to suffer and die at the hands of man and the designs of Lucifer to make up for all the sins that had violated His love and divine justice.

Jesus created a Mystical Body, in which He resides within the baptized organized into the Church (which includes all the baptized in principle) to which He has given the mission of teaching the Gospel, praying for the conversion of sinners (“Whatever you ask for in prayer…”) and suffering (“Take up your cross…”) for the conversion of sinners and the renewal of the world.

Suffering is caused by sin, original sin and personal sins. God requires all Christians to participate in renewing the world through teaching, prayer and penance – not only for our own sins but for the sins of the world as Our Lady made clear in her message at Fatima. At Fatima Our Lady said that if we want peace on earth and less suffering Catholics need to pray for the conversion of sinners and offer our daily crosses as reparation for their conversion. In the degree that Catholics neglect to fulfill this obligation, suffering will continue and increase in the world.

If all Catholics fulfilled our obligation to pray and offer penance for the conversion of sinners there would be peace on earth and suffering would be greatly reduced. However, because of original sin there would still be suffering caused by evil men and by the disorders of nature, e.g., disease; but one could hope there would be more grace, giving guardian angels more power to prevent or reduce natural suffering.

Those who sin suffer for their sins. Those who live in the state of grace suffer as members of the Mystical Body of Christ for their own sins and especially – united to the Cross – for the sins of others who need reparation in order to receive the grace of conversion (Our Lady taught this at Fatima). Innocent children who have no personal sins suffer because of the sins of others, including the disorders caused by original sin; but they are in the hands of an infinitely loving God who will give them eternal bliss so intense that their suffering on earth will not matter. Since they are innocent of personal sin, we can expect that their suffering is used by God for the salvation of others (remember that Jesus and Mary were themselves perfectly innocent).

This is how God chose to set up His creation. We need to trust Him, especially in view of His loving decision to become one with us and submit to intense suffering and the most painful death devised by man in order to reopen the gates of heaven to people of good will.

This present life on earth is not what everything is about. Since the Incarnation, life on earth is about restoring what was lost by original sin, and the suffering of the innocent has its place in this renewal.

 

[MarkInOregon]

Perhaps, but I am placing the blame on two visible sources…mankind and natural deterioration, not trying to redefine suffering.

Neither are the others trying to redefine suffering. They are trying to understand if there is a reason for it and what that reason might be. Just because they don’t understand and can’t necessarily see an answer–does not mean one does not exist. The world is full of examples of things that we once did not understand and had no answer for and for which various theories of explanation were proposed and studied over time–eventually yielding an answer. I fail to see how your position is any better than theirs. Your position seems to be–I can see no reason or purpose for suffering–and therefore I will define and understand God to be xyz. They believe Christ rose from the dead, is God incarnate and that God is who he revealed himself to be–that leads them to seek an answer or to attempt to reconcile how they perceive suffering and their understanding of God–rather than throw up their hands, and dismiss their reasoned belief in the resurrection and in Christ.

This I do know–the fact that something currently does make sense to me–does not mean that it never will.

The Peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[oldcelt]

The question is why does God permit innocent children to suffer, e.g., Herod’s slaughter of the Holy Innocents.

We need to begin by considering the world we live in. God created the universe in perfect harmony with His will, and therefore there was no human suffering. It is not clear that animals did not suffer, e.g., that robins did not eat worms.

Lucifer rebelled against the established order, causing disharmony and suffering among the angels. Lucifer tempted Adam and Eve to follow his example, they did, and suffering entered the human world. God could have avoided this suffering by not creating Lucifer, but He chose to do so. Still, God did not cause Lucifer to rebel and He did not cause Adam to rebel. On the contrary, God created Lucifer and Adam in perfect happiness according to angelic and human natures.

God destroyed the world by a flood to stop the evil and suffering that had spread throughout the world, but evil began building up again immediately because human nature was damaged by original sin. Then God became Man and submitted to suffer and die at the hands of man and the designs of Lucifer to make up for all the sins that had violated His love and divine justice.

Jesus created a Mystical Body, in which He resides within the baptized organized into the Church (which includes all the baptized in principle) to which He has given the mission of teaching the Gospel, praying for the conversion of sinners (“Whatever you ask for in prayer…”) and suffering (“Take up your cross…”) for the conversion of sinners and the renewal of the world.

Suffering is caused by sin, original sin and personal sins. God requires all Christians to participate in renewing the world through teaching, prayer and penance – not only for our own sins but for the sins of the world as Our Lady made clear in her message at Fatima. At Fatima Our Lady said that if we want peace on earth and less suffering Catholics need to pray for the conversion of sinners and offer our daily crosses as reparation for their conversion. In the degree that Catholics neglect to fulfill this obligation, suffering will continue and increase in the world.

If all Catholics fulfilled our obligation to pray and offer penance for the conversion of sinners there would be peace on earth and suffering would be greatly reduced. However, because of original sin there would still be suffering caused by evil men and by the disorders of nature, e.g., disease; but one could hope there would be more grace, giving guardian angels more power to prevent or reduce natural suffering.

Those who sin suffer for their sins. Those who live in the state of grace suffer as members of the Mystical Body of Christ for their own sins and especially – united to the Cross – for the sins of others who need reparation in order to receive the grace of conversion (Our Lady taught this at Fatima). Innocent children who have no personal sins suffer because of the sins of others, including the disorders caused by original sin; but they are in the hands of an infinitely loving God who will give them eternal bliss so intense that their suffering on earth will not matter. Since they are innocent of personal sin, we can expect that their suffering is used by God for the salvation of others (remember that Jesus and Mary were themselves perfectly innocent).

This is how God chose to set up His creation. We need to trust Him, especially in view of His loving decision to become one with us and submit to intense suffering and the most painful death devised by man in order to reopen the gates of heaven to people of good will.

This present life on earth is not what everything is about. Since the Incarnation, life on earth is about restoring what was lost by original sin, and the suffering of the innocent has its place in this renewal.

Everything you mention,the omniscient Christian God knew in advance and permitted to occur. There is simply no way around it if all the powers attributed to that God are real.

 

[oldcelt]

Neither are the others trying to redefine suffering. They are trying to understand if there is a reason for it and what that reason might be. Just because they don’t understand and can’t necessarily see an answer–does not mean one does not exist. The world is full of examples of things that we once did not understand and had no answer for and for which various theories of explanation were proposed and studied over time–eventually yielding an answer. I fail to see how your position is any better than theirs. Your position seems to be–I can see no reason or purpose for suffering–and therefore I will define and understand God to be xyz. They believe Christ rose from the dead, is God incarnate and that God is who he revealed himself to be–that leads them to seek an answer or to attempt to reconcile how they perceive suffering and their understanding of God–rather than throw up their hands, and dismiss their reasoned belief in the resurrection and in Christ.

This I do know–the fact that something currently does make sense to me–does not mean that it never will.

The Peace of Christ,
Mark

This debate has been going on here for months Mark. My belief in God is based on the observation of reality and the hopeful belief that God is not a sadistic enemy God. Reality shows us that millions upon millions of innocent children have died horrible deaths throughout time. An omniscient God knew they would die that way before they were conceived, yet allowed it to occur despite His omnipotence. I can’t worship,or even respect a God that would do that, no matter the reason.
The answer is that we are in complete control of our little planet, and God does not intervene…ever.

 

[fred_conty]

This debate has been going on here for months Mark. My belief in God is based on the observation of reality and the hopeful belief that God is not a sadistic enemy God. Reality shows us that millions upon millions of innocent children have died horrible deaths throughout time. An omniscient God knew they would die that way before they were conceived, yet allowed it to occur despite His omnipotence. I can’t worship,or even respect a God that would do that, no matter the reason.
The answer is that we are in complete control of our little planet, and God does not intervene…ever.

The problem with God.

“I can’t accept a God who allows little children to die.”

“I can’t accept a God who remains aloof from me and is always absent.”

“I can’t accept a God who I doesn’t personally talk to me.”

“I can’t accept a God who allows such cruel suffering to happen when he could stop it.”

“God is ^(*%&% from what I see and experience.”

And the conclusion to this is that there couldn’t be a God like that therefore he must be something else. The conclusion is that God is distant from man and remains aloof from all the bad stuff going on which means God isn’t responsible.

How does anyone know from logic that God isn’t all the bad stuff described? And if he is then that dosen’t mean that there is no God like that, but rather from observation that there is a God like that and he will have more reason to put a person in hell. They are assuming that God is good. But how does anyone know that? They have to establish it. They can’t just assume that God is Good. Maybe he is a God-zilla just as they see him…all the more reason to worry. Like the gods of old the Greeks and Romans worshipped. We are just pawns and toys of interest.

By logically denying God to be connected to unpleasant reality, it seems that solves all the problems and explains away the bad stuff. But it dosen’t. Reality of bad stuff still isn’t explained away.

Because either he is aloof, or he is present. Denial of God being present means he dosen’t care. But then that still dosen’t solve the problem, for if he doesn’t care, this brings us back full circle to an image of God that is not wanted. So that the new image of God is just as bad as the image being denied. Which means just as much coldness, indifference, hell, not less.

May God bless and keep you. May God’s face shine on you. May God be kind to you and give you peace.

 

[oldcelt]

The problem with God.

“I can’t accept a God who allows little children to die.”

“I can’t accept a God who remains aloof from me and is always absent.”

“I can’t accept a God who I doesn’t personally talk to me.”

“I can’t accept a God who allows such cruel suffering to happen when he could stop it.”

“God is ^(*%&% from what I see and experience.”

And the conclusion to this is that there couldn’t be a God like that therefore he must be something else. The conclusion is that God is distant from man and remains aloof from all the bad stuff going on which means God isn’t responsible.

How does anyone know from logic that God isn’t all the bad stuff described? And if he is then that dosen’t mean that there is no God like that, but rather from observation that there is a God like that and he will have more reason to put a person in hell. They are assuming that God is good. But how does anyone know that? They have to establish it. They can’t just assume that God is Good. Maybe he is a God-zilla just as they see him…all the more reason to worry. Like the gods of old the Greeks and Romans worshipped. We are just pawns and toys of interest.

By logically denying God to be connected to unpleasant reality, it seems that solves all the problems and explains away the bad stuff. But it dosen’t. Reality of bad stuff still isn’t explained away.

Because either he is aloof, or he is present. Denial of God being present means he dosen’t care. But then that still dosen’t solve the problem, for if he doesn’t care, this brings us back full circle to an image of God that is not wanted. So that the new image of God is just as bad as the image being denied. Which means just as much coldness, indifference, hell, not less.

May God bless and keep you. May God’s face shine on you. May God be kind to you and give you peace.

It can actually go much further…God may not even know that we exist. Then He is not aloof, not evil, He is simply the initiator of creation, not the micromanager of it. Our fate may be driven solely by us in a distant corner of one medium-sized galaxy among millions.

Death, at any age, by any method, is merely a consequence of life…no divine plan…no divine intervention. Through His starting creation, we have a place to call home and raise families if we choose. It is largely a beautiful world, and for that, I give Him thanks.

 

[LaMBS]

The logic seems to be:

Suffering is always bad
To allow what is bad is always wrong
A moral being will never do what is wrong
God is a moral being
God will never do what is wrong
God will never allow what is bad
God will never allow suffering

This argument fails doubly in the first premise because suffering and bad are both relative terms, not absolutes and because suffering is always bad is a subjective statement, not objective.

To disallow suffering would eliminate pleasure, its opposite.

To say that suffering is always bad would imply that no positive consequence of suffering has a greater value than the negative value of the suffering.

Every exchange is some form of suffering offered for a corresponding benefit; giving effort to receive asset, relinquishing one asset to receive another. We understand as Christians that love has greater value than any other gift. Love would be of no value if there were no cost to it and that cost is some form of unrewarded suffering. Every circumstance of unrewarded suffering is an opportunity to transform it into a gift of love.

 

[MarkInOregon]

This debate has been going on here for months Mark. My belief in God is based on the observation of reality and the hopeful belief that God is not a sadistic enemy God. Reality shows us that millions upon millions of innocent children have died horrible deaths throughout time. An omniscient God knew they would die that way before they were conceived, yet allowed it to occur despite His omnipotence. I can’t worship,or even respect a God that would do that, no matter the reason.
The answer is that we are in complete control of our little planet, and God does not intervene…ever.

Yes–I can see that and I did not enter the discussion to debate with you, it seems obvious from your posts that–well lets just leave it at your position is unchangeable at this time and nothing that anyone says here is going to change your mind. The point of the post to which the above is a response–was simply to point out that others are not trying to redefine suffering (which is something you accused them of) and to say that I didn’t see how your position–i.e. there is no possible reason that would explain the suffering is any better than the attempt of others to reconcile their understanding of suffering with their understanding of God. Obviously you think the one is a fools errand while I think you…well without knowing you or your story I am in no position to think anything other than what your stated belief is.

And the point of my first post was not really to debate with you either, but was really to point out that what you have been saying is simply your view–and I did so only because you felt the need to point that out to another poster–as if we are all misguided dolts who don’t realize we are offering our views and understanding or lack thereof–and as if your statements regarding God are fact and not simply your view. Had you not felt the need to point that out–I never would have entered the discussion.

I do wish you the best.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[Nate123]

It can actually go much further…God may not even know that we exist. Then He is not aloof, not evil, He is simply the initiator of creation, not the micromanager of it. Our fate may be driven solely by us in a distant corner of one medium-sized galaxy among millions.

Death, at any age, by any method, is merely a consequence of life…no divine plan…no divine intervention. Through His starting creation, we have a place to call home and raise families if we choose. It is largely a beautiful world, and for that, I give Him thanks.

You shouldn’t give thanks to a God that approves of evil. You have done a good job of opposing all false idols. Now there is a true God who does oppose evil with the fullness of his Omnipotence and all of his goodness.

 

[Nate123]

The logic seems to be:

Suffering is always bad
To allow what is bad is always wrong
A moral being will never do what is wrong
God is a moral being
God will never do what is wrong
God will never allow what is bad
God will never allow suffering

This argument fails doubly in the first premise because suffering and bad are both relative terms, not absolutes and because suffering is always bad is a subjective statement, not objective.

To disallow suffering would eliminate pleasure, its opposite.

To say that suffering is always bad would imply that no positive consequence of suffering has a greater value than the negative value of the suffering.

Every exchange is some form of suffering offered for a corresponding benefit; giving effort to receive asset, relinquishing one asset to receive another. We understand as Christians that love has greater value than any other gift. Love would be of no value if there were no cost to it and that cost is some form of unrewarded suffering. Every circumstance of unrewarded suffering is an opportunity to transform it into a gift of love.

No need to settle for a "god’ that is not opposed to evil. The "god’ you describe screams “get away from me.” It a big reason atheists are atheists. They won’t settle for evil.

You said: “Love would be of no value if there were no cost to it.”

I reply: How can love be of no value? Love is self-gift. It has no concern of what it can get out of it or what may happen. Its just an total offering of oneself to another. The Father and the Son love each other with no suffering involved. Its only in the fallen world does love entail pain. There will be no pain in heaven you know.

 

[oldcelt]

No need to settle for a "god’ that is not opposed to evil. The "god’ you describe screams “get away from me.” It a big reason atheists are atheists. They won’t settle for evil.

You said: “Love would be of no value if there were no cost to it.”

I reply: How can love be of no value? Love is self-gift. It has no concern of what it can get out of it or what may happen. Its just an total offering of oneself to another. The Father and the Son love each other with no suffering involved. Its only in the fallen world does love entail pain. There will be no pain in heaven you know.

You make some excellent points Nate. I can also tell you that the main reason people become Deists is that they spend years in various churches being taught about an all-loving god, yet never see any evidence of it. They see suffering on all levels in the world, encounter religious educators who are obsessed with pain and suffering and all the while their prayers for help go unanswered.

 

[oldcelt]

You shouldn’t give thanks to a God that approves of evil. You have done a good job of opposing all false idols. Now there is a true God who does oppose evil with the fullness of his Omnipotence and all of his goodness.

I see no evidence of that God.