My atheist friend has stumped me

  • Thread starter Thread starter jakegosling55
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jakegosling55

Guest
My atheist posed this question to me the other day: “If God is so loving, fair, and powerful, why does He allow innocent children and babies to suffer from disease?”

I would have been able to answer the question if he asked why evil exists (free will, sin, etc.) but I myself began to have doubts with this one. Babies and children are innocent, and did not do anything to deserve painful and terminal diseases.

How would I give him an answer that he, an atheist, could understand?

Thanks,

Jake
 
It’s one of those very difficult things to answer. In the end we find that if we truly believe that the fall of the world was because of man, then we also believe that disease etc came about because of that fall. Did the child do anything to warrant the suffering? No.

The problem with blaming disease and suffering on God is that we forget that most of those diseases are caused by mankind himself. We know that in America alone obesity and such are caused by our diet. We eat too many processed foods, too much meat, too much dairy, and not enough fruits and vegetables. We pollute our environment, we pour toxins into our water supplies, put poison in our ground, and genetically modify our plants. Who knows what this does to our bodies? To our genetic codes? To our children that are born surrounded by those concentrated toxins?

We also live in a world where we are taking God out of everything. He’s not allowed in our schools, our government buildings, our apartment complex lobbies, etc. Then we turn around and say, why isn’t God doing anything?

We also don’t know what would have happened to that child had they lived. In fact, we know the world is a pretty horrible place for most people anymore. We can rest in comfort knowing that no matter what, God does have a plan and his ways are higher than ours.
 
We were all “innocent” children born into a world of sin. It’s the tragic consequence of sin.

“WHOEVER CAUSES ONE OF THESE LITTLE ONES TO SIN, IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR HIM IF A GREAT MILLSTONE WERE PUT AROUND HIS NECK AND HE WERE THROWN INTO THE SEA.”

Causing a little one to sin or suffer from anything is an evil. But God allows it for a greater good. He allowed Adam and Eve to sin and for all of mankind to be cursed for a greater good. “O happy fault, O necessary sin of Adam, which gained for us so great a Redeemer”

There are several books out there about the mystery of suffering, and even the joy in suffering. I would suggest you read those before going to your friend. I’ve never read this one in particular, but I know C.S. Lewis has one called “The Problem of Pain”

This is such a dense topic, it can’t be covered in a simple reply.
 
Why do parents allow their children to suffer in certain things? The atheist believes that this is their eternity, so everyone should live perfect lives with no suffering. The Christian believes that this life is a truck stop, so to speak, on the way to perfection.

In the scheme of eternity, the amount of suffering that happens during our lifetime is infinitely miniscule compared to what is promised to us.

So why does God allow us to suffer? Have you ever suffered and learned absolutely nothing from your suffering? If there was no suffering, would there still be feeling well? If there was no bad, would there still be good? We wouldn’t appreciate a loved one dying if they lived with us forever.

In the end, we don’t know why God allows people to suffer. But if it is acknowledged that God exists, then God must be omnipotent and omniscient. If He is, then He knows things that we don’t. He has a reason for everything that happens, even if we can’t see it.
 
jakegosling55 said:
My atheist posed this question to me the other day: “If God is so loving, fair, and powerful, why does He allow innocent children and babies to suffer from disease?”

I would have been able to answer the question if he asked why evil exists (free will, sin, etc.) but I myself began to have doubts with this one. Babies and children are innocent, and did not do anything to deserve painful and terminal diseases.

How would I give him an answer that he, an atheist, could understand?

Thanks,

Jake
Click to expand...
The fall. Even if one views Genesis as metaphor, there was some event that took place in which God was opposed and his instructions were not followed. That opened the door to death, disease, destruction, evil things happening to good people and anything else you can think of. It became a consequence of the original sin – defying God. Baptism removes the original sin from the individual, but the overall consequences remain of that original disobediance.

I think someting similar appears in most, if not all religions in some way. Pandora’s Box is the Greek version of the fall. In fact, the story is very similar to Adam and Eve. Prometheus defies Zeus by stealing and giving fire to man so he was punished when God gives Pandora (perfect and beautiful) to Prometheus’ brother and gives her a box or jar which she should not open. Of course she does, and releases all the evils upon the world. The only thing that remains in the box is hope.

There’s room for miracles and relief from suffering; God does intercede. But the perfect world on earth is now denied to us.
 
jakegosling55 said:
My atheist posed this question to me the other day: “If God is so loving, fair, and powerful, why does He allow innocent children and babies to suffer from disease?”

I would have been able to answer the question if he asked why evil exists (free will, sin, etc.) but I myself began to have doubts with this one. Babies and children are innocent, and did not do anything to deserve painful and terminal diseases.

How would I give him an answer that he, an atheist, could understand?

Thanks,

Jake
Click to expand...
Disease and other sufferings are not a punishment for sin. The Lord says that God, " makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."
The things of this world occur because they are a part of this world and regardless of what they are they can be used to advance the kingdom. The suffering child also serves in the opportunity if gives another to show compassion.

The main problem with these kinds of questions is simply that they are wrong headed…It does not look at eternity. It is an extremely limited world view
The innocent child who suffers and dies goes to God. BUT the one who does nothing to help the one who suffers…where will they go??

Peace
James
 
JRKH said:
The innocent child who suffers and dies goes to God. BUT the one who does nothing to help the one who suffers…where will they go??

Peace
James
Click to expand...
When the disciples asked Jesus why the man was born blind, was it his sin or that of his parents, Jesus said, “Neither. It’s so God can be glorified.” And healed the man.

Stuff happens, and while we don’t like it, it’s not “bad” and it’s not punishment. JRKH asks about those who do nothing to help. The pain of others is an opportunity for grace for us all. If there was no pain here, it wouldn’t be “here,” it would be Heaven.
 
Jesus said, Blessed are you, for I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was hungry and you fed me, naked and you clothed me…

When we take care of the needs of others, Jesus counts that as doing it to himself. We will be eternally grateful for the opportunities that others gave us to show mercy, that in the final day, gained us mercy. That measure you measured to others will be measured to you.

Another angle, who would you chose to be, a child who suffered and died at one year old and had eternity in heaven, or a person who lived till 90, ate, drank, had all he needed, and ended up in hell for eternity. (I’m sure he would have had suffering in his life too, just spread out over a longer time)
 
Disease is indiscriminate. Would God be benevolent, to employ disease toward the ends of contaminating others, not children, but adults? That could be construed as genocide: targeting a specific demographic. Would God be either just, or merciful, to create for parents a world of fantasy, that their sexually transmitted diseases, or, (If we agree … ), addiction to alcohol, etc., were to be given great indulgence, without consequences to children: in the womb, or born?
 
Thinking about this a bit more. Atheists seem to like to blame God for bad things. Why don’t they ever blame the devil, who is a liar and cheater from the beginning? Blame sin in the world? Our fallen humanity? Our polluted world that causes illness? They would be the first to say “global warming” and stop pollution, *we’re killing ourselves and our planet! *but it’s God’s fault if there’s illness? Puh-lease.

Calumny: A false and malicious statement designed to injure the reputation of someone, slander, defamation.

Personally, I wouldn’t care to be guilty of this, slandering God’s good name.
 
PennyinCanada said:
Thinking about this a bit more. Atheists seem to like to blame God for bad things. Why don’t they ever blame the devil, who is a liar and cheater from the beginning? Blame sin in the world? Our fallen humanity? Our polluted world that causes illness? They would be the first to say “global warming” and stop pollution, *we’re killing ourselves and our planet! *but it’s God’s fault if there’s illness? Puh-lease.
Click to expand...
Don’t see the contradiction here. When people do stupid and harmful things, the faithful insist that God gave us free will, and this is a natural consequence. But when a 4-year-old girl turns up with leukemia, the faithful can’t make that argument. They must make up their minds as to whether God either can’t intervene in such a case, or refuses to.

I have no problem absolving God of the blame for innocent children suffering terminal illness, except that I’ve been told my entire life that God is capable of healing the mortally ill.
 
ASimon
**
But when a 4-year-old girl turns up with leukemia, the faithful can’t make that argument. They must make up their minds as to whether God either can’t intervene in such a case, or refuses to.**

Would you as an atheist explain all such evil in the world as the result of blind, indifferent nature? How is that preferable to the death of the child and that child’s kind embrace by the Lord for all eternity?

Death isn’t the great enemy, except to an atheist. Sin and hell are the great enemy. That child, without sin and hell, is likely now in better shape than you and I are with all the sins we must account for to a merciful but just God.
 
ASimon said:
… I’ve been told my entire life that God is capable of healing the mortally ill.
Click to expand...
Whom has God healed: mortally ill atheists, or mortally ill believers – is it possible, that both mortally ill atheists, and mortally ill believers, have been healed by God? If either / or, or both / and, then why one over another, as opposed to all?

When phenomenon exposed, and exhausted, yields to the unexplainable – will an atheist conclude – God exists!

Of what, or whom, God has to give: would an atheist accept?

It’s easy to deny what you have heard, that people have stated to you – your whole life – God is capable of healing the morally ill; nonetheless, capabalities, and abilities, they are two different matters. The proof is in the pudding; nonetheless, even proof is deniable.

I am unable to read your posts, because I have blocked you!
 
When an atheist has run-out of explanations, then will denial end with the conclusion: God exists!
 
Charlemagne_II said:
Would you as an atheist explain all such evil in the world as the result of blind, indifferent nature? How is that preferable to the death of the child and that child’s kind embrace by the Lord for all eternity?
Click to expand...
It’s preferable because it’s almost certainly true. And even if were intent on lying to children (as well as ourselves), we could easily conceive an afterlife more appealing than an eternally worshipful state.

Though, for the record - “We don’t know” remains a perfectly acceptable answer to any child’s big “Why” questions. And also has the benefit of being true.
Death isn’t the great enemy, except to an atheist. Sin and hell are the great enemy. That child, without sin and hell, is likely now in better shape than you and I are with all the sins we must account for to a merciful but just God.
Click to expand...
Death doesn’t have to be an enemy to anyone. The theist believes that nobody ever really dies, so it’s a moot point. The atheist at least acknowledges the reality, and that knowledge makes life (the only one we know we have) even more precious.

The idea that all tears will be dried, and all wrongs righted, is likewise a horrible one, since it effectively forgives any amount of unexplained suffering in this world.
 
jakegosling55 said:
My atheist posed this question to me the other day: “If God is so loving, fair, and powerful, why does He allow innocent children and babies to suffer from disease?”

I would have been able to answer the question if he asked why evil exists (free will, sin, etc.) but I myself began to have doubts with this one. Babies and children are innocent, and did not do anything to deserve painful and terminal diseases.

How would I give him an answer that he, an atheist, could understand?
Click to expand...
Christians have our answers, which makes sense to us.

Why are athiests asking questions on the premise that God exists? That’s the real stumper (but I don’t think atheists are very good epistemological logicians anyway). And when we respond, they don’t accept the answer (because they don’t understand what Faith is).

Blessings,
Marduk
 
jakegosling55 said:
My atheist posed this question to me the other day: “If God is so loving, fair, and powerful, why does He allow innocent children and babies to suffer from disease?”

I would have been able to answer the question if he asked why evil exists (free will, sin, etc.) but I myself began to have doubts with this one. Babies and children are innocent, and did not do anything to deserve painful and terminal diseases.

How would I give him an answer that he, an atheist, could understand?

Thanks,

Jake
Click to expand...
You must first of all understand that most cases of atheism are the result of pride. So you should gently target their pride in your responses. There are many whose compassion and concern for the suffering is mere ‘lip service’; they have never ever lifted a finger to help anyone in their life but are quite vociferous in their criticisms and attacks on those who are allegedly responsible. It is the humble-hearted who genuinely reach out to contribute their mite in cash and kind for the alleviation of human suffering. They seldom pass judgement or hold anyone responsible for a misery. Atheists are neither qualified nor have any right to judge anyone and how dare they judge God who is the ‘fountain of all holiness’ and ‘love and compassion’.
 
jakegosling55 said:
My atheist posed this question to me the other day: “If God is so loving, fair, and powerful, why does He allow innocent children and babies to suffer from disease?”

I would have been able to answer the question if he asked why evil exists (free will, sin, etc.) but I myself began to have doubts with this one. Babies and children are innocent, and did not do anything to deserve painful and terminal diseases.

How would I give him an answer that he, an atheist, could understand?

Thanks,

Jake
Click to expand...
That’s the oldest atheist question in the book. Go to the nearest bookstore (a used bookstore works just as well) and get C.S. Lewis “The Problem of Pain”, the best response I have ever seen to the question.
 
Harold Kushner’s When Bad Things Happen to Good People.

Excellent reading.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top