To begin with, all suffering is a consequence of sin–either from our own sins or from the sins of others. The Son of God became flesh so that, by becoming one with us in the flesh, he could experience the consequences of each of our sins…and Love us until the end despite those sins. By loving us despite our sins we are placed in the same situation as the adulteress in Scripture. Jesus tells those who wish to stone her that he who is without sin can cast the first stone. When all the “accusers” leave, Jesus tells her that since she has no accusers, he will not accuse her. By dying for our sins (he experienced the consequences of every sin that every one of us would commit) he took away ALL of our accusers–except ourselves if we don’t avail ourselves of his grace.
I don’t know that man can answer that question explicitly, but consider this food for thought. *if a baby in the womb could rationalize, he would say to himself, for example, why do I have feet? There are no sidewalks here! While the existence of feet in his current domain appears valueless, the next domain beckons their use and feet are of value.
but i was told that suffering is a gift from God, how can this be then
since God cant give us or create sinExactly!
Thank you!
Well, it is only a gift owing to our fallen nature. Think of the cross as a metaphorical stand-in for us–our bodies. In fact, the similarity between the wood of the cross and the stories of Elijah and Elisha and the means by which they (through the HolySpirit) resurrected dead children are very striking. By uniting our suffering with Christ’s suffering on the cross, our suffering becomes redemptive–for ourselves and those we love. Thus, the gift.but i was told that suffering is a gift from God, how can this be then
ooo so the gift is not the suffering itself, but the redemption attached too it
I would say that is an accurate summation, Steve.
Why expect otherwise? Personally, there is no better exploration for the paradox of human suffering than that brilliantly elaborated by the character of Ivan Karamazov in Fyodor Dostoevky’s The Brothers Karamazov. There comes an inevitable realization we are not capable of fully observing the supernatural depths of the Divine Intellect: “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up your loins like a man, I will question you, and you shall declare to me. Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding” (Job 38:2-4)
So he is all-powerful, but not all-loving? A paradox is not an explanation. It is the opposite of an explanation. It is saying “I don’t know”. And a God who is all-loving, and reveals himself to humans, would have let is know, had there been an explanation.
Curious as to where this was stated?
Au contraire, paradox is a wonderful explanation in spirituality! From your reply, it was obviously one you had failed to anticipate? Amazing what a supernatural paradigm shift can accomplish since creatures ought to conform to the Creator, not vice versa.
Yes I know paradox is a wonderful ‘explanation’ in spirituality. It’s in reality that it doesn’t work!
In the case of Jesus, it was apparently the price He was willing to pay for our redemption.