Christian Stuff - A Thread (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

Joe Edit - Changed the title. Had been "Bad Things And Good People - A Faith Question".

Thought it would maybe make sense to open this up other topics.

******


In my experience, the question of "How can a loving and just God allow bad things to happen?" is a terribly difficult question. It's one I see people have a lot.

And something I assume people have wrestled with forever.

Wondering what people think about this:

Bus & Bible on Instagram​

1,928 likes, 95 comments - busandbible on November 8, 2024
www.instagram.com

I have thoughts and will share in a bit but wanted to ask the forum first what they think about the video clip.

 

[Mister CIA]

Christianity offers hope and atheism doesn't. I don't necessarily agree, but that's the gist I got.

 

[Scoresman]

I don’t think he really answers the question. He talks about hope, and I get that. I think that’s a huge benefit to people who are lucky enough to have faith. Even if it’s a false hope, it’s still something that can help people through difficult times, etc.

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

 

[belljr]

Christianity offers hope and atheism doesn't. I don't necessarily agree, but that's the gist I got.

Disagree completely

Budist have no hope? Muslims? They aren't Christian

Hanging hope ONLY on some random religious figure is for weak minded people

Eta: oops wasn't your thought my apologies

 

[rockaction]

I don’t think he really answers the question. He talks about hope, and I get that. I think that’s a huge benefit to people who are lucky enough to have faith. Even if it’s a false hope, it’s still something that can help people through difficult times, etc.

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Sounds very binary. Wonder if Neil likes the binary in other cases. Bet he doesn’t.

I am rushing right ahead here, but I will get to the video. I learned from our own IK here that it’s called theodicy. Augustine grappled with it mightily.

I remember being part of a law school class whereby my professor corrected me when I said something. I summarized a case where a photographer stood by a vent at an amusement park and waited for women’s dresses to blow upward so he could snap a photo of their bloomers (it was the modest 50s). He did so and the local paper ran it. She sued the paper. I summarized the case by saying, “Bad people doing bad things.”

He corrected me by saying “just people doing bad things.” He then talked about the fallibility of man. I remembered that. There is evil in this world, but it is of our own volition. God does not lack power, but he knows that for man to be in his image he must give us free will that is absolute until our reckoning. It is a difficult thing to understand how evil is in the world, but this explanation suffices.

What is harder is needless suffering of innocents, such as childhood cancer. That is where the rub really is. Not why evil can exist, but why needless suffering without prior transgression does.

 

[BlackCrowes]

I don’t think he really answers the question. He talks about hope, and I get that. I think that’s a huge benefit to people who are lucky enough to have faith. Even if it’s a false hope, it’s still something that can help people through difficult times, etc.

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Epicurus said it better

 

[Psychopav]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

 

[Max Power]

I think bad is a relative term. Life will always have challenges and overcoming them is growth.

You can't have the good without the bad.

 

[Scoresman]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

 

[Psychopav]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

I don't think so. In the mythos of the Abrahamic and Christian traditions, all suffering is a result of the fall. That includes suffering due to acts of man and also due to contending with the natural world.

 

[Scoresman]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

I don't think so. In the mythos of the Abrahamic and Christian traditions, all suffering is a result of the fall. That includes suffering due to acts of man and also due to contending with the natural world.

Still don’t see it. Isn’t the natural world created by god? Are the people who die of disease or natural disasters responsible for the fall? Doesn’t this whole ideology conflict with the idea that god is all good?

 

[tommyGunZ]

God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on.

Neil deGrasse Tyson

This seems almost indisputable, right?

W/re to the video Joe posted, I don’t find the idea that “at least there is hope in Christianity” to be persuasive at all as evidence of God’s existence.

Why do we laugh at the idea of Muslim men getting 72 virgins after death, but take far more seriously the notion that Christians can rise from the dead? Is the latter really any more improbable than the former?

 

[Terminalxylem]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

Heaven is eternal bliss, so for believers, dying prematurely should be desirable, no?

 

[Scoresman]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

Heaven is eternal bliss, so for believers, dying prematurely should be desirable, no?

Then why are we here at all? The eternal question I guess?

Christians believe that suicides go to hell right? So that means we are forced to live this existence before going to heaven. And we can only get into heaven if we are believers. But we were given free will to choose to believe or not. Again, some rather perplexing actions of an all good god to me.

 

[Psychopav]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

I don't think so. In the mythos of the Abrahamic and Christian traditions, all suffering is a result of the fall. That includes suffering due to acts of man and also due to contending with the natural world.

Still don’t see it. Isn’t the natural world created by god? Are the people who die of disease or natural disasters responsible for the fall? Doesn’t this whole ideology conflict with the idea that god is all good?

While we are not all directly responsible for it, we are all born with original sin and live in a fallen world. Even the most surface level reading of Genesis indicates that suffering, even natural suffering, is a consequence of the fall. The fall is the consequence of the pride of man, so it follows that God is all good, God is all powerful, and humankind ourselves are to blame for the suffering we bear.

 

[belljr]

Feel like this should just be merged with the other thread at this point

 

[Scoresman]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

I don't think so. In the mythos of the Abrahamic and Christian traditions, all suffering is a result of the fall. That includes suffering due to acts of man and also due to contending with the natural world.

Still don’t see it. Isn’t the natural world created by god? Are the people who die of disease or natural disasters responsible for the fall? Doesn’t this whole ideology conflict with the idea that god is all good?

While we are not all directly responsible for it, we are all born with original sin and live in a fallen world. Even the most surface level reading of Genesis indicates that suffering, even natural suffering, is a consequence of the fall. The fall is the consequence of the pride of man, so it follows that God is all good, God is all powerful, and humankind ourselves are to blame for the suffering we bear.

Yeah we’re not really getting anywhere. We’re only born with original sin and live in a fallen world because this supposedly good god willed it, and if he didn’t will it then if he is all powerful he should be able to stop it.

 

[Psychopav]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

Heaven is eternal bliss, so for believers, dying prematurely should be desirable, no?

Then why are we here at all? The eternal question I guess?

Christians believe that suicides go to hell right? So that means we are forced to live this existence before going to heaven. And we can only get into heaven if we are believers. But we were given free will to choose to believe or not. Again, some rather perplexing actions of an all good god to me.

Catholics used to talk about suicides going to hell but with a modern understanding of mental health, the church doesn't believe that. It's worth mentioning that the Catholic church at least has never and will never state that anyone has been condemned to Hell. That depends upon the state of one's soul at the moment of death - something which we are in no position to know, only God.

Again just speaking from the Catholic perspective, I wouldn't say it's correct that we only believers get to Heaven. Believers have the hope of salvation, that is true, but there are a lot of circumstances in which nonbelievers find themselves. Salvation is not out of reach for anyone who earnestly seeks the truth and strives to do God's will.

 

[Corporation]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

Heaven is eternal bliss, so for believers, dying prematurely should be desirable, no?

Then why are we here at all? The eternal question I guess?

Christians believe that suicides go to hell right? So that means we are forced to live this existence before going to heaven. And we can only get into heaven if we are believers. But we were given free will to choose to believe or not. Again, some rather perplexing actions of an all good god to me.

That is a common misperception, that had roots I think in the Catholic Church, but I believe they may have altered their interpretation. Suicide is no different from any other sin and is not a direct ticket to hell.

I didn't watch the clip, but to the question "Why do bad things happen to good people?" We live in a fallen sinful world. The Bible also tells us there is none righteous, no not one, so while many people are "good" from a human perspective, we all fall short of God's perfection. We are called to love and tell others about Christ. God's will is always done, even when we don't understand why.

 

[Psychopav]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

I don't think so. In the mythos of the Abrahamic and Christian traditions, all suffering is a result of the fall. That includes suffering due to acts of man and also due to contending with the natural world.

Still don’t see it. Isn’t the natural world created by god? Are the people who die of disease or natural disasters responsible for the fall? Doesn’t this whole ideology conflict with the idea that god is all good?

While we are not all directly responsible for it, we are all born with original sin and live in a fallen world. Even the most surface level reading of Genesis indicates that suffering, even natural suffering, is a consequence of the fall. The fall is the consequence of the pride of man, so it follows that God is all good, God is all powerful, and humankind ourselves are to blame for the suffering we bear.

Yeah we’re not really getting anywhere. We’re only born with original sin and live in a fallen world because this supposedly good god willed it, and if he didn’t will it then if he is all powerful he should be able to stop it.

He can't stop what He didn't start. Suffering itself is the direct consequence of humankind's rejection of the truth of God.

The Incarnation IS His plan not to stop it, but to elevate suffering to reconcile us to Himself. Suffering love is the way to eternal life.

 

[Scoresman]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

I don't think so. In the mythos of the Abrahamic and Christian traditions, all suffering is a result of the fall. That includes suffering due to acts of man and also due to contending with the natural world.

Still don’t see it. Isn’t the natural world created by god? Are the people who die of disease or natural disasters responsible for the fall? Doesn’t this whole ideology conflict with the idea that god is all good?

While we are not all directly responsible for it, we are all born with original sin and live in a fallen world. Even the most surface level reading of Genesis indicates that suffering, even natural suffering, is a consequence of the fall. The fall is the consequence of the pride of man, so it follows that God is all good, God is all powerful, and humankind ourselves are to blame for the suffering we bear.

Yeah we’re not really getting anywhere. We’re only born with original sin and live in a fallen world because this supposedly good god willed it, and if he didn’t will it then if he is all powerful he should be able to stop it.

He can't stop what He didn't start. Suffering itself is the direct consequence of humankind's rejection of the truth of God.

The Incarnation IS His plan not to stop it, but to elevate suffering to reconcile us to Himself. Suffering love is the way to eternal life.

“He can’t stop what He didn’t start.”

Ok. So he’s not all powerful then.

I’m not trying to be argumentative. Maybe I’m trying to apply logic to something that is inherently not logical.

 

[Sparky Polastri]

If the very worst isn't an option, neither is the very best. This is why bad things are allowed.

 

[Psychopav]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

I don't think so. In the mythos of the Abrahamic and Christian traditions, all suffering is a result of the fall. That includes suffering due to acts of man and also due to contending with the natural world.

Still don’t see it. Isn’t the natural world created by god? Are the people who die of disease or natural disasters responsible for the fall? Doesn’t this whole ideology conflict with the idea that god is all good?

While we are not all directly responsible for it, we are all born with original sin and live in a fallen world. Even the most surface level reading of Genesis indicates that suffering, even natural suffering, is a consequence of the fall. The fall is the consequence of the pride of man, so it follows that God is all good, God is all powerful, and humankind ourselves are to blame for the suffering we bear.

Yeah we’re not really getting anywhere. We’re only born with original sin and live in a fallen world because this supposedly good god willed it, and if he didn’t will it then if he is all powerful he should be able to stop it.

He can't stop what He didn't start. Suffering itself is the direct consequence of humankind's rejection of the truth of God.

The Incarnation IS His plan not to stop it, but to elevate suffering to reconcile us to Himself. Suffering love is the way to eternal life.

“He can’t stop what He didn’t start.”

Ok. So he’s not all powerful then.

I’m not trying to be argumentative. Maybe I’m trying to apply logic to something that is inherently not logical.

I don't think so. God created logic and although there are things that are beyond us, I don't believe that this is one of them.

I'm sure we have saints who have put it much better than I can, but here's my own understanding of things:

God can be all powerful but also self-limiting in order to allow mankind the freedom to choose to be in communion with him. If He creates free will in man, then man must be capable of desiring something that is not of God. The will of man must be for something which is aligned with God's will (i.e., "good") or something which is not aligned with God's will (i.e., "evil"). If God loves man, then His will must, by definition, be for the good of man. Therefore, what is not of His will must, by definition, be NOT for the good of man. This is the source of suffering.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Christianity offers hope and atheism doesn't. I don't necessarily agree, but that's the gist I got.

*Hope beyond death.

I don’t see any reason why atheists should be hopeless while alive. I’ll also argue an atheist can take solace in the influence they’ve had while living, as that can certainly outlive our mortal bodies.

 

[Mister CIA]

Christianity offers hope and atheism doesn't. I don't necessarily agree, but that's the gist I got.

*Hope beyond death.

I don’t see any reason why atheists should be hopeless while alive. I’ll also argue an atheist can take solace in the influence they’ve had while living, as that can certainly outlive our mortal bodies.

I agree with all that.

 

[Terminalxylem]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

Heaven is eternal bliss, so for believers, dying prematurely should be desirable, no?

Then why are we here at all? The eternal question I guess?

Christians believe that suicides go to hell right? So that means we are forced to live this existence before going to heaven. And we can only get into heaven if we are believers. But we were given free will to choose to believe or not. Again, some rather perplexing actions of an all good god to me.

As a nonbeliever, I have no problem accepting my existence is inconsequential. I’m perfectly OK being the result of entropic happenstance, and serving no greater purpose. Believing otherwise seems a little grandiose, imo.

That doesn’t mean I can’t make the most of my brief time living, both selfishly, and for others. The lack of an afterlife makes life more important for the individual, not less.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on.

Neil deGrasse Tyson

This seems almost indisputable, right?

W/re to the video Joe posted, I don’t find the idea that “at least there is hope in Christianity” to be persuasive at all as evidence of God’s existence.

Why do we laugh at the idea of Muslim men getting 72 virgins after death, but take far more seriously the notion that Christians can rise from the dead? Is the latter really any more improbable than the former?

Greek and Roman gods regularly caused human suffering and intermingled with humans, freely revealing themselves unlike the modern gods. Today those gods are regarded as myth, akin to children's fables, but were worshipped by humans for thousands of years.

 

[Captain Cranks]

Greek and Roman gods regularly caused human suffering and intermingled with humans, freely revealing themselves unlike the modern gods. Today those gods are regarded as myth, akin to children's fables, but were worshipped by humans for thousands of years.

We're slowly getting there with the Classical Era stuff.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

we are all born with original sin

Which means we can't have freewill. Since we can't freely will to be without sin.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The fall is the consequence of the pride of man, so it follows that God is all good, God is all powerful, and humankind ourselves are to blame for the suffering we bear.

This is blaming the victim.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I don't think so. God created logic and although there are things that are beyond us, I don't believe that this is one of them.

I'm sure we have saints who have put it much better than I can, but here's my own understanding of things:

God can be all powerful but also self-limiting in order to allow mankind the freedom to choose to be in communion with him. If He creates free will in man, then man must be capable of desiring something that is not of God. The will of man must be for something which is aligned with God's will (i.e., "good") or something which is not aligned with God's will (i.e., "evil"). If God loves man, then His will must, by definition, be for the good of man. Therefore, what is not of His will must, by definition, be NOT for the good of man. This is the source of suffering.

Other than God himself, is there anything God didn't create?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I have thoughts and will share in a bit but wanted to ask the forum first what they think about the video clip.

By now you know that I think being a Christian out of hope for an afterlife is an un-Christ-like as it gets. It is selfish. It is looking towards oneself, Luther's definition of sin. While humans cannot really do much to prevent the "natural evil" (though we aren't totally off the hook here, but that would lead to political discussions), I think how we respond is what matters. I believe that we are called to take care of each other, God's children, and that is everyone. That we are to create God's kingdom right here, this place right in front of us, right now. Not in a political sense (strike 2?) but in a human sense. We will come up short, but Jesus died to give us the freedom to try. Any god worth our praise or worship will reward the effort. And, if I am wrong and there are no gods or even a god, then oh well we tried to make a better world for those that follow. Of course, I could also be wrong about the nature of a god, but if so, I'm already doomed.

I guess I'm skipping over the power of God to stop evil and even why it must exist in the first place. Like I've said before, God has some explaining to do come Judgment Day.

 

[Jayrod]

I have much to say on the topic but not much time right now.

I've written an outline of a book on this and similar topics called Spiritual Economics which is basically centered on the quote of Jesus', "store up for yourselves treasures in heaven" where I discuss what those treasures could be.

My central theme is that most all of us really don't understand what is most important to God and it causes us a lot of problems, not the least of which is getting mad at God for not doing what we think He should...which is the crux of this discussion, IMO.

I believe asking "If God is X why doesn't he do Y?" usually is based on misunderstanding what X is or means.

 

[IC FBGCav]

In my experience, the question of "How can a loving and just God allow bad things to happen?" is a terribly difficult question. It's one I see people have a lot.

And something I assume people have wrestled with forever.

Wondering what people think about this:

View attachment 4780

Bus & Bible on Instagram​

1,928 likes, 95 comments - busandbible on November 8, 2024
View attachment 4781 www.instagram.com

I have thoughts and will share in a bit but wanted to ask the forum first what they think about the video clip.

The answer is either God doesn't care about individual people or God isn't what you think God is. I had a similar discussion with a professor at Penn State Shenago Valley campus. After 30 years, it's all I got and I am not saying I am correct but I have nothing else to add but the above.

 

[IC FBGCav]

The better question is does God care about religion or is it a human thing. It sort of goes hand and hand with this.

 

[rockaction]

I just watched the video. It sounds like he’s attacking the problem of theodicy by explaining why believers should believe in God’s existence even given needless suffering that we see. He does not offer a philosophical defense of the premises and conclusion surrounding the issue. He speaks to people who do not believe or stopped believing in God because of needless suffering when he says that Christianity gives us hope because God has suffered and been risen from the dead, therefore we may have hope that we do not end life with death. We need Christianity to have any hope—he claims atheists like Richard Dawkins unintentionally remove moral agency from our lives (he says this at one point unless there were unspoken nuanced premises he was getting at).

But let’s not get hung up on that. What I want to know is how does hope resolve the premises that God is all powerful and omnibenevolent and yet still there is evil, both moral evil and suffering?

I didn’t get the answer I really wanted from him. His answer was because it has utility to the believer. That was unsatisfying, so I looked up Augustinian theodicy in Wiki and got a nice summarization of the problem.

I think anybody who reads this will come away more edified than the video (when viewed alone) would leave us. The Christian in the video sounds like he’s engaging in apologetics rather than philosophy, which is an exercise that is very much in the intellectual Christian evangelical tradition—and is fine and good. But that sort of apologia has its limitations. Here is Augustine’s response to the dilemma evil poses for us when considering God, summarized by Wiki:

Augustinian theodicy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[IC FBGCav]

One last thing before I probably don't post again for months, is you can't put logic to things that have none. God gave Moses the 10 Commandments in stone to spread his word. One man with heavy items to transport to inform the world. Why not just post it in the sky for all too see? Etc....

 

[Scoresman]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

Not sure to be honest, and I agree what you’re saying is a possibility but doesn’t this only address the human aspect and not things like natural disasters/diseases etc that are out of human control but not out of control of an all powerful god?

One example he gives was an earthquake and tsunami that hit Portugal a few centuries ago. It hit on a holy day, and many more people died than would have because so many people were gathered in the large churches that collapsed. Not sure how someone with a view that god is all powerful and all good can reconcile this.

I don't think so. In the mythos of the Abrahamic and Christian traditions, all suffering is a result of the fall. That includes suffering due to acts of man and also due to contending with the natural world.

Still don’t see it. Isn’t the natural world created by god? Are the people who die of disease or natural disasters responsible for the fall? Doesn’t this whole ideology conflict with the idea that god is all good?

While we are not all directly responsible for it, we are all born with original sin and live in a fallen world. Even the most surface level reading of Genesis indicates that suffering, even natural suffering, is a consequence of the fall. The fall is the consequence of the pride of man, so it follows that God is all good, God is all powerful, and humankind ourselves are to blame for the suffering we bear.

Yeah we’re not really getting anywhere. We’re only born with original sin and live in a fallen world because this supposedly good god willed it, and if he didn’t will it then if he is all powerful he should be able to stop it.

He can't stop what He didn't start. Suffering itself is the direct consequence of humankind's rejection of the truth of God.

The Incarnation IS His plan not to stop it, but to elevate suffering to reconcile us to Himself. Suffering love is the way to eternal life.

“He can’t stop what He didn’t start.”

Ok. So he’s not all powerful then.

I’m not trying to be argumentative. Maybe I’m trying to apply logic to something that is inherently not logical.

I don't think so. God created logic and although there are things that are beyond us, I don't believe that this is one of them.

I'm sure we have saints who have put it much better than I can, but here's my own understanding of things:

God can be all powerful but also self-limiting in order to allow mankind the freedom to choose to be in communion with him. If He creates free will in man, then man must be capable of desiring something that is not of God. The will of man must be for something which is aligned with God's will (i.e., "good") or something which is not aligned with God's will (i.e., "evil"). If God loves man, then His will must, by definition, be for the good of man. Therefore, what is not of His will must, by definition, be NOT for the good of man. This is the source of suffering.

This seems very complicated to me to be believable, not in the sense that I don’t understand what you’re saying, but more because why on earth would an all powerful and good god make things this way?

Bottom line for me, is if a god really is BOTH powerful and good, there would be no need for any of this suffering, no fall of man, etc. We would be created, be given free will, and those of us who mostly do good with it get to spend eternity in heaven. Maybe make a world with less suffering in it for the people you supposedly love so much.

So either there is no god and this is as good of a way as any to explain the universe, or there is a god and he is either a bit of a jerk, or isn’t as powerful as we think.

This is probably the biggest reason I don’t have faith in a higher power.

 

[Scoresman]

One last thing before I probably don't post again for months, is you can't put logic to things that have none. God gave Moses the 10 Commandments in stone to spread his word. One man with heavy items to transport to inform the world. Why not just post it in the sky for all too see? Etc....

This reminds of a movie where Moses comes down with the tablets and says to the people “I give you these 15” (drops one of the tablets) “err 10 commandments!”

Was that History of the world part 1?

 

[rockaction]

Was that History of the world part 1?

Yes. Mel Brooks.

 

[Captain Cranks]

I believe asking "If God is X why doesn't he do Y?" usually is based on misunderstanding what X is or means.

The math is pretty simple for me. God is loving does not reconcile with the unnecessary suffering of innocents. I'm not doing a bunch of gymnastics to get around that.

 

[Navin Johnson]

But it doesn’t answer the fundamental question. I tend to agree with Neil Degrasse Tyson’s take on this. He’s talked about this question a lot. He says that gods are usually considered all powerful and all good by the major religions, and the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both.

Does NDT ever address the idea of free will? The Christian God IS all powerful, but is also self-limiting in order to allow humanity to freely choose His way. Once free will is on the table, then all powerful, all good, and the existence of suffering are no longer mutually exclusive.

The slippery slope argument doesn't hold here.

 

[-OZ-]

the only logical way to answer why so much suffering exists in the world he has created is that he is in fact either not all powerful or not all good or both

Or God decided that free will and the opportunity for us to do better each day is more important than a lack of bad things happening.

God does not lack power, but he knows that for man to be in his image he must give us free will that is absolute until our reckoning. It is a difficult thing to understand how evil is in the world, but this explanation suffices

true goodness is persevering in the face of evil.

It’s entirely possible that God doesn’t view the goodness and badness of events, diseases, crime, etc the same way we do.
Personally I don’t believe our praying does anything other than gives us mental and emotional space to figure things out. Sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn’t.

 

[-OZ-]

I believe asking "If God is X why doesn't he do Y?" usually is based on misunderstanding what X is or means.

The math is pretty simple for me. God is loving does not reconcile with the unnecessary suffering of innocents. I'm not doing a bunch of gymnastics to get around that.

It isn’t gymnastics to think that maybe he views the pain and suffering as minor, no more than getting a bad grade on a test or getting a boo-boo when we trip. Of course many things are major to us, but we’re basically toddlers comparatively. I don’t stop my kids from failing a test, nor did I stop my 1 year old from falling when learning to walk.
If the most important thing is ultimate salvation, everything else is minor.
I say that after watching my daughter suffer for months at St Jude and meeting many parents who lost their kids, it’s obviously huge to us.

 

[Jayrod]

I believe asking "If God is X why doesn't he do Y?" usually is based on misunderstanding what X is or means.

The math is pretty simple for me. God is loving does not reconcile with the unnecessary suffering of innocents. I'm not doing a bunch of gymnastics to get around that.

See my first post as a simple reply. Your understanding of God being loving is likely incomplete.

Sure human suffering can seem atrocious and appalling, especially when it happens to children. I'm not minimizing it and neither does the Bible.

It doesn’t take mental gymnastics to realize our understanding of how the universe functions, eternity, and what happens after we die is incomplete. The entire book of Job is about this very topic. God's answer to us is the same as it was to Job: if we don't even fully understand the way the physical world works, how can we understand the spiritual world that we can't see or touch?

 

[Scoresman]

I believe asking "If God is X why doesn't he do Y?" usually is based on misunderstanding what X is or means.

The math is pretty simple for me. God is loving does not reconcile with the unnecessary suffering of innocents. I'm not doing a bunch of gymnastics to get around that.

It isn’t gymnastics to think that maybe he views the pain and suffering as minor, no more than getting a bad grade on a test or getting a boo-boo when we trip. Of course many things are major to us, but we’re basically toddlers comparatively. I don’t stop my kids from failing a test, nor did I stop my 1 year old from falling when learning to walk.
If the most important thing is ultimate salvation, everything else is minor.
I say that after watching my daughter suffer for months at St Jude and meeting many parents who lost their kids, it’s obviously huge to us.

This does not compute for me. A god that is good does not cause earthquakes to happen when the majority of people are in large churches that end up collapsing like in the example I gave in Portugal. If that’s his idea of still being good, he is not good.

 

[-OZ-]

I believe asking "If God is X why doesn't he do Y?" usually is based on misunderstanding what X is or means.

The math is pretty simple for me. God is loving does not reconcile with the unnecessary suffering of innocents. I'm not doing a bunch of gymnastics to get around that.

It isn’t gymnastics to think that maybe he views the pain and suffering as minor, no more than getting a bad grade on a test or getting a boo-boo when we trip. Of course many things are major to us, but we’re basically toddlers comparatively. I don’t stop my kids from failing a test, nor did I stop my 1 year old from falling when learning to walk.
If the most important thing is ultimate salvation, everything else is minor.
I say that after watching my daughter suffer for months at St Jude and meeting many parents who lost their kids, it’s obviously huge to us.

This does not compute for me. A god that is good does not cause earthquakes to happen when the majority of people are in large churches that end up collapsing like in the example I gave in Portugal. If that’s his idea of still being good, he is not good.

i don’t believe God causes earth quakes.

 

[belljr]

I believe asking "If God is X why doesn't he do Y?" usually is based on misunderstanding what X is or means.

The math is pretty simple for me. God is loving does not reconcile with the unnecessary suffering of innocents. I'm not doing a bunch of gymnastics to get around that.

It isn’t gymnastics to think that maybe he views the pain and suffering as minor, no more than getting a bad grade on a test or getting a boo-boo when we trip. Of course many things are major to us, but we’re basically toddlers comparatively. I don’t stop my kids from failing a test, nor did I stop my 1 year old from falling when learning to walk.
If the most important thing is ultimate salvation, everything else is minor.
I say that after watching my daughter suffer for months at St Jude and meeting many parents who lost their kids, it’s obviously huge to us.

This does not compute for me. A god that is good does not cause earthquakes to happen when the majority of people are in large churches that end up collapsing like in the example I gave in Portugal. If that’s his idea of still being good, he is not good.

i don’t believe God causes earth quakes.

Right.... that's mother nature obviously

I kid

 

[ghostguy123]

If God exists, then who created God?

 

[ghostguy123]

I believe asking "If God is X why doesn't he do Y?" usually is based on misunderstanding what X is or means.

The math is pretty simple for me. God is loving does not reconcile with the unnecessary suffering of innocents. I'm not doing a bunch of gymnastics to get around that.

At least he MEANS well.