The above brought to the conversation via
Belief Net
My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course, I could have given up my idea of justice by saying that it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too--for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist--in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless--I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality--namely my idea of justice--was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.
- C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity pp. 38-39.
Why do bad things happen to good people?
There is no real answer to this question, because it is a flawed question! The question assumes we are good. There really are no “good” people, so how in the world could any of us tell “bad” things from “good” things? The question we actually need to ask is: “Why would a good God let those trying to do His will suffer?” This question has real answers.
First, we need to review where we stand. We are fallen creatures, inclined to do wrong, and wrong thoughts and acts have bad consequences – sometimes for us – sometimes for others. And if God removed the bad consequences, we would never learn anything. Free will without consequences would just be a game, and God does not play games with our eternal souls. God is pretty firm on this – He did not make an exception even to relieve the suffering of His Son! The real wonder is that a world full of fallen creatures, making bad choices, doesn’t have more suffering in it than it does.
Secondly, who says suffering is bad? Not God. When a child is being punished, both he and his parents suffer: is that good or bad? And when he fails in school or in a play or in sports; works harder, then succeeds; we call that character building – but did the child suffer? Of course! A child’s frame of reference is today, ours is limited to this life – but God’s time frame is eternity. His training – His discipline – His focus – is eternal. Thus, we, like the child, are in a very poor position to weight the relative merits of temporal suffering.
And thirdly, what kind of a world would this really be if God’s people never suffered? Not one I would choose to live in. Just think: people would flock to be “God’s people” just to avoid suffering. They would all, of course, be very sincere! And if someone were suffering, it would be their own fault. Who would help? Who would care? All this sufferer has to do is join “God’s people”, and He will fix it! True love – real compassion – all empathy – would cease to exist. It is only as God’s people share in the lot of the world’s suffering that we can share His compassion and His empathy and His love with the world. It is a pity, but no other way will work.
But there is even a better reason we are sometimes tested in uncomfortable ways. God knows the strength of our faith, but we never will until it is used, or tested. This is the same principle as a runner or weight lifter working out before the competition – we will not be strong enough to rely on God when we really need Him if we have never had to trust upon Him along the way.
Finally, it really is through our weakness that God’s strength is revealed. For He will always provide the added measure when our reservoir is empty, and fills us with His grace and strength. Suffering, like death, holds great promise of God’s divine intervention into our lives – but never such that I would seek it. His future for us is far better than the life we have built here on earth. But for those enlisted to endure, there is a great and abiding promise that He will hold, nurture, and comfort us; and through it build us up and prepare us for eternal blessings.
So what are we left with? How do we respond when it is our turn to suffer? First, praise God that He cares and is in charge! That gets our mind and spirit started in the right direction. Then, give Him the problem and find others to support you in prayer. And be prepared to accept whatever He offers. Finally, share your hurts and blessing with others in the same boat. And who knows, you may be building your eternal character in God’s image, strengthening your faith muscles, and bringing a stranger to learn of His love.
Not bad. Not bad at all!
I suppose the Bible isn’t enough of an argument against irrational atheists?
A logical fallacy known a "begging the question".
The phrase "Beg[ging] the question" is, I think, one of the most misused phrases in modern English.
can’t just try to rely on or cling to a part of God’s word but all of it. Simple as that for atheist or for believers who don’t know how to respond.
Evil itself seems to have a malevolence of personality. That in itself seems to BOLSTER the idea of a Christian God, the Adversary of Whom is enraged to levels which do not seem natural or commensurate.
Evil exists because humans are fallen and we sin. Where there is evil, there is sin. If something happens to a good person, there is still sinfulness that occurred at some point in the situation. And by the way “good people” DO sin. When illness happens, sometimes it is thru our own actions, sometimes because of original sin. God allows suffering because he gives us free will. We can do what we want, but suffer the consequences, we must. He allows suffering because it brings us (or should) closer to him. Offering up your suffering is difficult, liberating and redemptive. Suffering empties us of some earthly things, hence making more room for Him.
What is it that God does? God creates; God chooses.
If we are made in the image and likeness of God, then we choose and create (within our own realm.) And if God has free will (without which, God could not be God), then God’s image and likeness must also have it. And that includes the ability to make bad choices.
Genesis 2:16-17 shows that G-d commanded Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, also giving Adam fair warning that there would be consequences if he did so.
Adam subsequently disobeyed G-d’s command and the rest is history.
The above brought to the conversation via
Belief Net
it’s very simple- you can’t have true love without the possibility of being unfaithful- cheating- true love forsakes all others ie forsakes evil- and chooses to truly love the object of their affection. This is the sign of true love- total dedication to the one you love- forsaking all others- Without the possibility of choosing another- cheating- choosing evil- love would be nothing but a rote/mechanical exercise simply because there would be no chance of being unfaithful or remaining faithful- one would be forced to be faithful because evil would not exist with which to test the measure of true love- When one CHOOSES to forsake all others (ie the evil- cheating etc), that is a true testament to true love-
Aquinas responded adequately to Epicurus to my mind.
Being "all-powerful" doesn't mean that God can just automagically slice through any and all contradictions.
Given that, we have to ask if God can really "prevent all suffering" without causing worse evils, e.g., removing our free will and making us just mindless automatons without moral responsibility. I think he does not wish to do that because he regards that as a much greater evil.
Lewis hit on a very profound point. Apart from a transcendent God what makes anything “right”, “wrong” or “evil”? Only a transcendent God can establish an objective morality or ethic. Apart from that all you’ve got is personal preference or social convention and those can and do change frequently.
Hi.
Imho, the universe is structured in binary code.
0,1 on off, in out, up down, hot COLD..
Good and evil.
5.56mm
If there is no God then how do we define evil. Without God the concept of Evil/Suffering is a societal construct. Pain cannot be the source for the definition as some societies have relished pain as a way of improvement. “No Pain No Gain”.
There are presumptions associated with any definition of Evil. One such presumption is that there must be something that is not evil. Evil as a concept must be relative to the opposite,i.e., Not Evil (Good).
Without defining the opposite of evil the term is meaningless. Society cannot define the opposite as that definition would need to be defined by consensus. As such anyone with any amount of freedom could disagree and redefine Evil as something else hoping that the consensus would change. If in fact that is the case then Ted Bundy and and Charles Manson were individuals exercising their freedom to change the definition of Evil. Islam defines murder of non-Muslim innocents as a “Good”. Most of the world disagrees with them but that too is irrelevant. Humankind has no right to impose its values on Islam or so Islam says.
The only way you can concretely define Evil is to have a moral standard outside humankind that can be used to compare an action to so as to define its relative value. God provides that standard. In the Ten Words of Exodus 19 and 20 we learn of God’s character traits. He works and He rests. He respects family just as He respects the persons of the Trinity. He is life and therefore abhors murder. He is faithful in His relationships in the trinity and expects faithfulness in our relationships in the family. He provides everything and abhors theft and covetousness. He is truth and abhors lies. These characteristics are the basis of defining evil.
The atheist will not accept this definition not because it is false but rather because it is true and that would require them view themselves as accountable to God. Contrary to their belief, they are already accountable to God and will see that when they leave this life.
How does the concept of free will square with the fact that much of who we are is determined before we are born by our genetics, and the family and circumstances into which we are born. By the time we become adults, our genetics and the environment in which we grew up shape our lives.
If you have a birth defect, where is the free will in that?
You will be born into a particular race. Where is the free will in that?
Despite modern nonsense about gender fluidity, you will be born male or female. Where is the free will in that?
You will be born rich, middle class or poor, and into a family that practices one of the numerous human religions, or no religion at all. Where is the free will in that?
You will be born with some talents that may or may not ever be developed due to how you are raised. Where is the free will in that?
The family into which you were born will provide you with educational opportunities or none. Where is the free will in that?
Your parents might be loving and nurturing, or be cruel monsters who kill you in your childhood. Where is the free will in that?
I could go on, but hope the point is made.
Atheism, a religious belief system within itself, needs to get a grip because they apparently do not understand the great design.....to know love, one must know the opposite: evil - do they or anyone else not truly believe that the great ‘I AM’ did not know this before laying everything in place?
We have a Religion forum. Why isn’t this there?
Alvin Plantinga already tackled this problem.
Peter Kreeft’s ‘Twenty Arguments for the Existence of God’:
http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm