quote: nkelly
Why don’t we begin life in Heaven with God instead of having to life life on earth first?
Hello, Noel. This is a favorite of mine. I ask it often.
For the realities addressed by this question, are, in the end,
questions posed as to why suffering exists, and what is the meaning of life.
If life were a cakewalk, no such questions would likely arise.
I look at it this way: Those who wrote the Hebrew scriptures
were confronted by a life that was, as the saying goes,
“Nasty, brutish and short.” Zippo on medical care,
famine was always a worry, marauding elements
swooping down on them [the Babylonian captivity
springs to mind, as well as a stay in Egypt, in slavery.]
Man has a drive for meaning*.*
It is asserted that God appeared to Moses, and the rest is history.
One may claim that the Judeo-Christian scriptures
“explain” the meaning of life, but then one has to ask:
“Why would God allow immense suffering, through the ages?”
Had humankind begun in heaven, none of this suffering
and/or deprivation would have existed.
A religious “template” may be applied - which template purports
to
explain the meaning of suffering in human life.
Job’s friends applied that template. “You must have sinned,”
and God basically told them that they were no friends of Job.
In fact, God deflects Job’s questions - asking Job if he was there
when He laid out the heavens, and so on.
In our own time, the existentialists give bold answer -
to the plight of those who share with them the human condition.
The existentialist, Albert Camus, claimed that life was absurd -
you’re born, you suffer, you die. Period.
He said that man could find both meaning and dignity,
in assuming a posture of “revolt” - in the face of no meaning*. *
*
[l’homme révolté]
If I dropped down from another planet -
and viewed the suffering experienced by so many -
I would have a tough time accepting assurances,
from people of faith, that a good and loving Creator
permits such suffering and loss to some purpose
Further, I would then wonder why a Savior was sent, Who was
this Creator as well - for Jesus is said to be the God/man.
Surely, the suffering of human beings may be attenuated
by thoughts of a paradise awaiting, after this life.
Humankind is more willing to accept their lot in life,
if paradise awaits them.
In the East, Siddharta Gautama - the Buddha - had like questions.
A prince, his family had protected him from any sight of suffering.
When Siddharta finally saw another human being in profound suffering,
Siddharta’s one thought was to find a way that would transcend such pain.
He left wife, child, and home, seeking an answer.
Buddhism was the result of his thought and life experience.
[He lived roughly 500 years before the birth of Christ.]
What is critical, in terms of the Judeo-Christian traditions,
is that man was at fault, and this is why the human condition is what it is.
[Paul later gilds all of this, with talk of “Original Sin.”]
Driven from paradise, mankind would now have to work,
with might and main, to return to this paradise, at the end of life.
It’s all man’s fault - nicely side-stepping the fact of the Creator’s omniscience.
God knew it would go this way. And He let it happen.
Tough luck, for humankind. I think that people of faith are reluctant
to aver to this reality [the omniscience of God] -
or to pose the question - that necessarily forms - of why
this whole project was necessary to begin with.
There’s nothing amiss with some intelligent suppression, in life.
Best not think too deeply about all of this.
For then the inconvenience of said questions would arise.
Why did not we all begin in heaven - as human creatures of the Creator?
Some questions in life are probably best not to ask.
For the answers might provoke still other questions.
Life is either absurd - or it has intrinsic meaning - given to it by God.
Each person must look at life squarely, and decide whether, or no, life has meaning.
Maureen Kathleen
[reen12]*
