Posted on 07/14/2018 3:34:56 PM PDT by pcottraux
Does Suffering in the World Disprove God’s Existence?
By Philip Cottraux
War. Plagues. Starvation. Natural disasters. Children dying in the streets. Rapes. Massacres. The Bible says For God so loved the world, He gave His only begotten Son (John 3:16), yet why does He allow these things? If He is all-powerful, couldn’t He intervene and stop all of it in an instant? This is perhaps the most common argument against His existence, at least from my experience. If an atheist sniffs out a tweet I’ve made about God’s love, they’ll respond with an image of a child’s body blown to bits by a terrorist, demanding an explanation why a loving God allowed such a thing.
I find exploiting tragedy to win an argument on social media reprehensible, but let’s set aside the ethics of emotional manipulation to take the point head-on. The impression I get from most atheists is that they think this is a ground-breaking argument that completely destroys theism. I’ve written in the past about the common atheist myth that religion is in decline while they are triumphing and growing in numbers, readying the world for a scientific utopia. They seem to view “how could a loving God allow suffering?” as one of the many powerful weapons in their arsenal, as if Christians are chipper, naïve people blissfully unaware of evil in the world (I can’t fathom how anyone would think that in 2,000 years, no one from a group of over a billion people would have figured out that tragedy happens in life). An atheist recently tweeted me that the argument is so powerful, no Christian has ever come up with a good counter argument. I didn’t even know how to reply to such a profoundly stupid claim (how could anyone possibly know something like that?).
But this argument isn’t exactly new. So far as historians can tell, it can be traced all the way back to the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus, who lived from 340-271 BC. According to Epicurus: “Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” In 1710, the philosopher Leibniz first coined the term theodicy to describe the attempt at compromising a good God who permits wickedness.
This is a very complicated issue to unpack in a limited space and I won’t be able to cover every common Christian answer. But these are the arguments that I personally prefer on the alleged contradiction between a loving God who created a miserable planet.
Of course, the classic theist response is to point to free will. If God truly loves His creation, we wouldn’t be automatons forced to serve Him. He wants us to willfully love Him back, so allows us to choose good or evil. Sadly, many choose evil. He will try to woo us to do good with His Spirit but will rarely impose it on us. This is why many atheists, including Sam Harris, adamantly reject the existence of free will (though personally, I can’t compromise how predestination makes any sense without a higher power guiding us along. The inherent contradiction of people like Harris calling themselves “free thinkers” while rejecting the possibility of free thinking is beyond hypocritical). A mature person know that if you love someone unconditionally but they constantly reject you, eventually true love them requires letting them go.
But the free will versus predestination argument brings us down a rabbit hole that has been driving philosophers mad for centuries, so I’m going to sidestep it for now.
My first point is that Epicureanism commits what I find to the classic fatal flaw of atheism, a subtle logical flaw that occurs in almost every skeptical argument; and when I point it out to you, it’ll open your eyes to it emerging universally across the spectrum of atheist philosophies.
It goes as follows: presume atheism is already the truth, then judge all theology as if it’s the truth, without ever establishing why it’s the truth. Never establishing the premise provides a weak foundation. This fatal flaw is so pervasive, Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, considered by many to be the Bible of neo-atheism, is built entirely upon it. From the first page, Dawkins admits he cannot prove God doesn’t exist, then spends the rest of the book knocking down religion as if he’s proven God doesn’t exist.
So let’s apply this principal to the question of human suffering. While most atheists think they’re making a brilliant argument against Christian theology, they actually either show very little understanding of it or are ignoring its basic premise. Anyone with a passing knowledge of the Bible knows that its entire point is to explain why the world’s in this condition, and how it can be redeemed through Christ.
If atheists believe an omnipotent, loving God would only create a paradise free of pain, they should read the first few chapters of Genesis. And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed (Genesis 2:8). Eden was heaven on Earth, there was no sickness or death and man dwelt in God’s glory. But when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, they were cast out because God will not allow sin in His presence. A curse was placed on the human race. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return (verse 19). The devil has been able to wreak havoc on mankind ever since; sin covers this world like a dark cloud and God’s hands are tied, only able to penetrate it through the prayers of the righteous.
But the Word of God doesn’t leave it unresolved: from the beginning, a plan was set in motion to redeem mankind back to Eden. Jesus was the Son of God sent to free us from the curse of sin. His blood opens a door to heaven in the shape of a cross.
Now, you can argue that Adam and Eve are fictional characters and that the Garden of Eden isn’t historical; but that is a different issue. This is basic Christianity that we learn in Sunday school. So pay very careful attention to how the classic atheist flaw applies. When skeptics confront us with how a loving God could allow horrible things to happen in the world, they are presuming that Adam and Eve never existed, then demanding an explanation as if they never existed. But the first premise of the Bible is that they did exist, so this presumption sinks the entire argument. Like in so many other examples, they’re presupposing Christianity is already not the truth, then demanding Christians explain themselves under the premise that it isn’t the truth. See how this works?
But I have one more point to conclude with, and that’s looking at the results of the argument itself. If suffering is sufficient to debunk God’s existence, why hasn’t it done so for the majority of the human race yet? Again, the argument isn’t “new” or “groundbreaking;” Epicurus taught the problem of evil as a reason not to believe in any deity some three centuries before Christianity. In fact, the careful observer will note that his name appears in the New Testament. In Acts 17, Paul arrived at Athens. Since Greece had been one of the hubs of philosophy in the ancient world, its people would gather at town squares to hear strangers espouse new ways of thinking. When traveling to foreign lands, Paul would preach to Jews first, as they had a basic understanding of God and would be familiar with the Messianic prophesies of the Old Testament. Acts 17:17: Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him. Paul would be invited to speak at Mars Hill to explain the teachings of Jesus. But he was already encountering resistance: Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection. Followers of Epicurus were present at Paul’s sermon at Mars Hill, and rejected His message along with the rest of Athens. They were with him until he spoke on Christ’s resurrection from the dead: And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked: and others said, We will hear thee again of this matter. So Paul departed from among them (verses 32-33). Athens would be one of Paul’s greatest failures; while some were converted, no church was planted at that time.
Far from being something new and Earth-shattering, we can see the conflict between Epicureanism and Christianity dating back almost to the time of Christ Himself. Yet Christianity still exploded in the coming centuries and is today the world’s largest religion. Epicureanism did nothing to slow down its growth.
The results speak for themselves; I can’t help but dismiss it as a weak philosophy. So when atheists show me pictures of horror and death and demand why my God would allow it, thinking they’ve blown my mind with something that’s never occurred to me before, my favorite response is: “In over 2,000 years, no one has been able to defeat Christianity with this old, tired argument. What makes you think you’ll be the first?”
God does not protect us from troubles. I know that Parakletos gives us the peace that surpasses all understanding because I personally have experienced that during trouble but you cannot prove with empirical data that God stops trouble, sickness or difficulty. I can prove the contrary. He sent his Son to save us if we believe Him as the Son of God and that is pretty much it. For my proof — and the proof is endless, during the civil war , 500,000 mostly Christian soldiers were killed . 25,000 Christian boys were killed in one day at Gettysburg. In world war II 550,000 American men were killed . 60% were Christians, The Russians , 50% Russian orthodox were killed by a total of 5 MILLION. “6 million “ Jews were “gassed” in Germany. Now . Tell me how God intervenes in out difficulties with data.
I’m so damn tired of this stupid stupid question! (Did Jesus not suffer?)
This question about if there was a God, how could he let the be any suffering, is so old. It is as if the question could be asked enough times, there would be a different answer. The best answer is don’t question Him.
Don’t over think it. Do you have faith or not?
Well, Jesus inspired Paul to write verses such as Romans 8:18.
I think the answer is found in Job 38:
Get ready to answer me like a man;
when I question you, you will inform me.
Where were you when I established the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding.
Who fixed its dimensions? Certainly you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
What supports its foundations?
Or who laid its cornerstone
while the morning stars sang together
and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Who enclosed the sea behind doors
when it burst from the womb,
when I made the clouds its garment
and total darkness its blanket,
when I determined its boundaries
and put its bars and doors in place,
when I declared: “You may come this far, but no farther;
your proud waves stop here”?
If God did not create the universe, then by what standard do we judge anything? And if He did, then who are WE to judge HIM?
Excellent post.
But I do believe that God invites us to TRY and understand Him. And by trying, we grow closer to Him.
Amen. Truthfully, I can barely wait.
Folks these days have a hard time believing in Satan...yet HE IS THE AUTHOR of most suffering here on earth.
He even has a human organization to do his bidding...its called (today) the DEEP STATE!
Also, its the “Deep State” that will bring us the anti-christ and the biblical tribulation.
Yes, Satan wins for a little while, until Jesus cuts him and the deep state off...with His Glorious Return. Praise His Name!!!
“But I do believe that God invites us to TRY and understand Him. And by trying, we grow closer to Him.”
I agree. But “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,
and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” Unless we first realize that we are incapable of judging God, but that HE can judge humankind, we have no basis for understanding Him. Unless we accept that even our reason is fallen, and our extremely finite minds cannot dissect God, we have no reason to depend on His revelation.
There is no greater folly than to believe Humans get to judge God. Or can. If we cannot see ourselves honestly, how can we see God?
“No one should deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks he is wise in this age, he must become foolish so that he can become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God...”
We need to start at the end of Job:
I had heard rumors about You,
but now my eyes have seen You.
Therefore I take back my words
and repent in dust and ashes.
Every thing in the world says that God created it, and created it wonderfully, and it is lovingly fashioned out of His heart. His glorious stamp is everywhere.
Suffering says that sin has broken this obviously God inspired world, and has contaminated our souls with death. But, God being God, has set about to fix all of creation. By sending Jesus, His only begotten, beloved Son, and giving Him as a sacrifice for man’s sin, He has saved and redeemed not only people, but His beloved world/cosmos.
How could a good God permit suffering?
John 3:16: “For God SO loved the world…”
That God is a GOOD God requires that we think about ideas underlying the word “SO”.
The hardest thing to wrap our mind around is the concept of a perfectly GOOD God. In our world, we have never experienced a perfectly good person. And, in our world, good people prefer not to associate with those who are not-good. A perfectly GOOD God cannot permit any evil to be anywhere near Him. Under this constraint, as soon as Adam and Eve were out of the Garden, justice would require God to condemn them to Hell, a place without God. THAT would be SUFFERING.
Instead, God set in motion a plan to permit Adam, Eve and their descendents to again be permitted back into the Garden. That plan included the sacrifice of God’s own son. God SO loved the world that he bore the suffering of the death of his own son by evil men.
God is GOOD because he created a pathway for us to be redeemed. God did not have to do that.
Purely apart from the work of Satan, one aspect of the problem of suffering is that we live in a universe which follows the laws of chemistry, physics and biology. The human body is quite fragile; some incidents, say, a fall, or car accident, or tornado, etc., etc., etc., all of which obey these laws lead to pain, or sickness, or death. That is, they lead to suffering.
CS Lewis wrote something similar. Initially, he thought the existence of evil in the universe disproved God. Over time, he was led to Christ by the same question; if there was no God, there was no pre-existing standard of good by which evil could be measured. So who was he to call any act "evil" in a godless, uncaring universe? (I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of the argument).
That's why when atheist act like geniuses when they demand the explanation from me, all I hear are morons who know nothing of Christian theology.
When I explain it to them, their answer is usually just to scoff. "Adam and Eve...HA!"
Ah, I love Dennis Prager.
I usually like to put it “God is not a vending machine,” but he is more succinct lol.
Maybe not Biblical, but still a good point. We have something to look forward to.
Of course, if they don’t believe in the Bible then they’re not going to believe any Biblical explanations. But then, their logic is circular anyway. If they don’t believe in God, why ask why God allows suffering? They’re trying to disprove the existence of God by using God as an example.
And yet non-believers continue to argue on that premise. It's the same trap I mentioned: almost all atheist arguments presume God doesn't exist, then demand us defend our beliefs as if He doesn't exist. Dawkins calls God "the most unpleasant character in all of fiction" without ever establishing WHY God is fiction. They think they have every right to judge the Supreme being on human grounds. It's like an ant trying to comprehend how a cell phone works.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.