• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should God have created a world without suffering?

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
Beliefs extend way far beyond religion and spirituality.
Of course, but in context of my criticism of trailblazer, Theological beliefs are synonymous with religious or spiritual opinions. Specifically the second definition of "belief": something that is accepted, considered to be true, or held as an opinion : something believed.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
It's a reasonable request by God.
What gets me is why God didn't create A&E with better discipline and resistance to temptation, and then sends the serpent to tempt them, which God knew would dupe them. Sounds like A&E got set up to fail.
If God really wanted its tree left alone you don't send something to dare them to deny God's rule. Something's very fishy.

Satan was Not a Satan at the time God sent him to Earth. Notice how beautifully he is described at Ezekiel 28:13-17.
What is ' fishy ' is that beautiful angelic cherub turned himself into being a Satan and a Devil a megalomaniac.
Satan appointed position (to safeguard A&E) he allowed it to have undo importance.
Satan developed the ambition 'to be worshipped instead of God' out of his own free will - James 1:13-15
In other words, Satan wants us humans to worship him and to deny God's rule, God's Sovereignty.
Satan set up Eve, but Adam deliberately ate the fruit Eve gave him.
Kind of like Adam committed suicide rather than live without Eve.
So, the issue started as to who can govern best____________
Only the passing of time could answer that.
The world today is under satanic influence - 2 Corinthians 4:4 - and time now shows his governing is Not good.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
I have several questions:

1. Should God have created a world without suffering? If so, why? If not, why not?

2. How could God have created humans with physical bodies without engendering suffering?

3. How could God have created a material world without engendering suffering?

4. If God prevented suffering should God prevent all suffering or just some suffering?

5. If God prevented some suffering should God allow some people to suffer more than other people?

Thanks, Trailblazer. :)
On the other hand, why should God have created half a world (specifically, half of the world)? Why should there be no suffering? It's not a case that only some suffer. Everyone suffers, just as everyone experiences joy.

Oh, you're talking about the Disney Princess God?
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
.............As I said, humans have a second purpose, a purpose aside from knowing and loving God. Suffering is required in order to fulfill our second purpose which is to acquire spiritual qualities.
The only way we can know anything about God is from scriptures and there is no indication in the scriptures that God directly causes suffering............................
If God had just left us alone and let us do whatever we thought was best, all people would have different ideas of what is best for them and some people would want what is bad for them. The Messengers off the guidance from God who alone knows what is best because God created humans and God is all-knowing and all-wise.
I agree, but where is the duress? It is not coming from my religion.................)

Suffering to acquire spiritual qualities?, or rather suffering to answer the challenge found at Job 2:4-5 __________
Satan Not only challenged Job with suffering but by way of extension challenges all of us.
Touch our 'flesh....' (loose physical health) and we would Not worship God under adverse conditions.
Both Job and Jesus under adverse suffering proved Satan a liar and so can we.
So, the duress is coming from: Satan the Devil.

Without suffering we can cultivate the spiritual qualities for a spiritual person as listed at Galatians 5:22-23; Galatians 5:16
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
On the other hand, why should God have created half a world (specifically, half of the world)? Why should there be no suffering? It's not a case that only some suffer. Everyone suffers, just as everyone experiences joy.....................
Right, I find it is Not the case that only some suffer.
Satan challenges all of us just as he challenged the righteous man Job - Job 2:4-5.
Touch our 'flesh....' ( loose our physical health ) and we would Not serve God when suffering.
While suffering both Job and Jesus proved Satan wrong and so can we.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Basic human parent advice for those of you who still love and honour human parent life. A baby is 100 per cent innocent.

It trusts its parents. It believes what it is taught. It is protected by its parent from suffering. Live. Lovingly thought of.

Holy spirituality practiced.

Nothing to learn except survival.

Then you have science. The destroyer liar coercer who says why God as a false father would hurt you to teach you.

Already having been lost his owned father's human presence dna irradiated he pondered why natural God sources changed. Told a story he needed to learn God reacting is not a loving status.

Still to this day ignores HIS OWNED life lesson as the false preacher.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Let me explain the difference between pain and suffering.
Pain is like when someone stabs you with a knife. Pain is a "physical" response/stimulus.
Suffering is like when you grab the knife and reinsert it into the same wound again. Sometimes repeatedly.
Suffering is fear, anger, hate, envy etc...
Pain is what occurs when I move across the room. Suffering is the fear of that pain that keeps me immobilized.
Have I let go of my fear of the pain? Yes, I have to do it daily. I have to or stay immobilized. I know the pain will come and I accept that as part of my life. The fear, I don't have to accept.
I like this definition of HOPE:
H old
O n
P ain
E nds
Because we are nearing Jesus' coming Glory Time (Matthew 25:31-33,37) this means the Time for Jesus to act.
We are all invited to pray the invitation of Rev. 22:20 for Jesus to come !
Come and bring ' healing ' to earth's nations as found at Revelation 22:2.
Come because then, No one will say, " I am sick..." as written at Isaiah 33:24.
Come because people will be healthy as described in Isaiah 35th chapter.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Right, I find it is Not the case that only some suffer.
Satan challenges all of us just as he challenged the righteous man Job - Job 2:4-5.
Touch our 'flesh....' ( loose our physical health ) and we would Not serve God when suffering.
While suffering both Job and Jesus proved Satan wrong and so can we.
I'm not prepared for a Biblical debate, but what does it mean that "Satan challenges all of us?" If it refers to suffering, then I agree that we all suffer. If it refers to Job's "challenges," than I would suggest that none of us are exempt from such physical challenges. Job didn't turn on God as Satan predicted, but he did turn on himself, which is worse (until God showed him the light).

I don't know what connection you draw between Job and Jesus.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Basic human parent advice for those of you who still love and honour human parent life. A baby is 100 per cent innocent.
It trusts its parents. It believes what it is taught. It is protected by its parent from suffering. Live. Lovingly thought of.
Holy spirituality practiced. Nothing to learn except survival................
To me Christian meetings (for those of any age) are for learning aka survival classes - Hebrews 10:24-26
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
......I don't know what connection you draw between Job and Jesus.
I find both Job and Jesus (through No fault of their own) suffered under adverse conditions affecting their health.
While suffering both proved Satan a liar that under adverse conditions No one would remain faithful to God.
God blessed the outcome of both repentant Job and faithful Jesus - Job 42:6; Job 42:12-17.
True, Jesus was sinless and Job was Not but both under adverse conditions chose to worship God.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
I find both Job and Jesus (through No fault of their own) suffered under adverse conditions affecting their health.
While suffering both proved Satan a liar that under adverse conditions No one would remain faithful to God.
God blessed the outcome of both repentant Job and faithful Jesus - Job 42:6; Job 42:12-17.
True, Jesus was sinless and Job was Not but both under adverse conditions chose to worship God.
I tend to think that those who have overcome a challenge have proven their integrity and courage rather than someone else's circumstance.

Maybe I'm funny that way.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Suffering to acquire spiritual qualities?, or rather suffering to answer the challenge found at Job 2:4-5 __________
Through suffering, Job acquired spiritual qualities such as patience and perseverance didn't he?

What did Job gain from his ordeal?

Job emerged from his ordeal a better and wiser man who exhibited such patience amidst the upheaval of life. “Honest, good-hearted people who hear God's word, cling to it” (Luke 8:15, NLT). Patience is one of the many attributes of God and He wants to perfect this in His people.Jul 20, 2020

God tested Job's faith and refined his character | Advice ...

Without suffering we can cultivate the spiritual qualities for a spiritual person as listed at Galatians 5:22-23; Galatians 5:16
We can still cultivate spiritual qualities even without suffering, but we acquire more with suffering.

“Men who suffer not, attain no perfection. The plant most pruned by the gardeners is that one which, when the summer comes, will have the most beautiful blossoms and the most abundant fruit.

The labourer cuts up the earth with his plough, and from that earth comes the rich and plentiful harvest. The more a man is chastened, the greater is the harvest of spiritual virtues shown forth by him. A soldier is no good General until he has been in the front of the fiercest battle and has received the deepest wounds.” Paris Talks, p. 51
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
To me Christian meetings (for those of any age) are for learning aka survival classes - Hebrews 10:24-26
Survival. O planet remaining water sealed. Heavens not owning Christ gas spirit sacificed. Trees as wood not being carbon burnt bush alight stone law broken.....not oxygenating water and holy water diminishing.

Warnings known. Occult nuclear dust science said man would return back to dust.

Proven ice as waters cooling is melting.

Ice the newly born newly formed win as end of every year for stable bio animal human birth.

Science prediction 2012 end Gods human sacrifice.

God by United verse universe with sun pulls creation into pressure colder deeper space. The womb birth. God would have stopped removing it's riches.

UFO radiation.

Earth heavens event anti Christ fallout gas burning irradiation would have stopped. By space inherited pressure in sun conditions light constant owner.

Earth only owned cold clear immaculate heavens.

Science prediction no science allowed book shut no false pulpit preacher self idolising. Human warning.

Love honour natural human family group.

Science using bible falsified space year as number 2012 in a thesis claimed God earth would naturally inherit cessation for a machine control prediction.

Shut off turn on process.

It was a natural earth outcome not a science formula prediction.

Obviously the false preaching never allowed you to think for yourself.

Once the church status brain mind conscious entrained healing. Body was rubbed in oils of healing. White medical robes donned.

Sat in Phi resounding structure building involved in sound therapies meditating. Science ownership changed as a healing of mind body ritual three times daily.

Reason for the church.
 

AppieB

Active Member
No, God is not responsible for what He does. Only humans are responsible for what they do.
God can do anything that He wants to do, He is not accountable to humans. Whatever we get from God is solely by His grace and mercy. God is sully self-sufficient and self-sustaining so God does not need humans for anything, humans need God.
Do you praise God? If so, why are you praising someone for something he is not responslible for?

As a civil engineer I'm responsible for a good and save design of a road. This responsiblity makes me feel the importance of doing my job well, because safety matters. It matters what I do.
Given your statement it seems to me that it doesn't matter to God what he does. Whether it's creating a world where 230.000 people were killed in the tsunami of 2004 (let's say for arguments sake this is the exact amount of people who were killed) instead of creating a world where 200.000 people were killed by the tsunami. The amount of suffering doesn't matter to God. Which goes against your earlier statements that God is good and that God acts with empathy.

No, the world exactly as it should be because God is infallible so God does not make any mistakes. God is also all-knowing and we are not so we cannot know more than God about how the world should have been created. That is simple logic.
You could be all-knowing and still be immoral. The former doesn't exclude the latter. That is simple logic.

What is the logic behind you asking the question: "Should God have created a world without suffering?", when you are simultaneously saying we cannot say that God should have created the world without suffering?
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
No, that is not what the word religare means:

The Latin verb religare means to 're-bind'. The Latin noun religio referring to obligation, bond, or reverence is probably based on religare, so religio and its English derivation religion connote a 're-binding'.

Peter Hulen - Religion
http://persweb.wabash.edu › facstaff › hulenp › religion


It implies binding together in unity, which is the primary teaching of the Baha'i Faith. Obviously religion has gotten away from its original purpose, which is to unite humanity.

What is the meaning of the Latin 'religare'? - Quora

I think there are different ways of looking at the word and its etymology. But setting that aside, in practice, religion is mainly about imposing a set of rules on people. My point was that, when people reject religion, they're not necessarily rejecting God, but they're rejecting the rules that humans would impose upon them. That was a relatively common view among people when I was growing up. People would say they still believed in God, but they didn't believe in religion - mainly because of the rules, restrictions, and other unreasonable qualities associated with it.

“The Great Being saith: O ye children of men! The fundamental purpose animating the Faith of God and His Religion is to safeguard the interests and promote the unity of the human race, and to foster the spirit of love and fellowship amongst men. Suffer it not to become a source of dissension and discord, of hate and enmity. This is the straight Path, the fixed and immovable foundation. Whatsoever is raised on this foundation, the changes and chances of the world can never impair its strength, nor will the revolution of countless centuries undermine its structure.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 215

I think the same goal could be accomplished by the principle of "Workers of the world - unite!"

You are correct that the older religions such as Christianity and Islam have been and still are used as a political tool intended to induce conformity and compliance, but the Baha'i Faith is not like the older religions. We do not need conformity and compliance anymore. This is a new age and a new religion was needed to suit the needs of humans in this age.

Yes, and it seems that there have been quite a few new religions and sects which have cropped up in the past couple of centuries. But all in all, religion has been one of the major impediments to revolution and social change. I realize the Baha'i faith is new and different from the older religions, but one can see a familiar pattern, especially as a religion gets larger, has more adherents, and becomes more powerful and influential. There's a point where the institution becomes more important than the actual beliefs. It seems to be a recurring theme throughout history.

I fully agree with that and this is what religions such as Christianity and Islam do to their flocks, but the Baha'i Faith should not be implicated for something it does not do as it is not fair to lump it together with these older religions.

I see it more as an cautionary acknowledgement of human nature and how belief systems can be twisted and perverted for malignant purposes.

Christianity in particular has held back the progress of humanity by teaching their followers that Jesus is going to return someday "in the clouds" and rescue humanity from all the problems we now face all over the world - environmental, social, and economic. I consider this an travesty, even immoral, but you cannot stop Christians from waiting for Jesus to return because it is a time-honored teaching of the Church. The irony is that nowhere in the New Testament did Jesus ever promise to return to earth, and in fact Jesus said that His work was finished here and He was no longer in the world.

It is not fair to blame God for what humans have done in the name of religion because God had nothing to do with what humans did after the religions were revealed by His Messengers..

I don't see that anyone is blaming God directly, especially those who don't even believe in God. I would see it more as blaming humans who contrive such ideas in the first place, along with those who continue to believe and propagate those ideas.

Even if we accept the notion that God had nothing to do with what humans did in terms of causing suffering, one of the major problems with religion and its dictates is that it prohibits humans from actually doing something meaningful to stop suffering. Humans are told to turn the blind eye and stick their heads in the sand, while they have to patiently wait for God to get around to dispensing justice. They can't fight back. They can't resist. They can't revolt. They can't overthrow the ruling class that oppresses them and causes suffering - because that would be a sin.

Secularist and atheist revolutionaries had a far better understanding of justice than any religion ever did. They knew what was necessary to alleviate human suffering, mainly by attacking and neutralizing those humans which were identified as the primary instigators and source of human suffering.

All religion teaches is for people to get on their knees and pray. But you can't fight injustice on your knees. You can't end suffering by blind obedience to authority, no matter if it's religious or political authority. One has to question authority and sometimes defy it when necessary.

People are moving towards secularization because they are fed up with religions having power over them.
By the way, the downfall of religious leaders was predicted by Baha'u'llah in the latter half of the 19th century. He warned all of them that if they did not heed His call they would fall from power and everything He predicted happened. He also warned the kings and rulers of the earth that they would fall from power and not long after that they all did. This history is all documented in the Writings of the Baha'i Faith, in a book entitled The Promised Day Is Come.

In short, the primary goal of the Baha'i Faith is to build a new world order and put an end to these kinds of suffering and we have complete faith that it will end eventually, although it will take a very long time, especially of the Christians and even the Muslims continue to wait for Christ to return.

Toward a New World Order?

Baha'is believe that all this progress is the result of the coming of Baha'u'llah, because although most people have not recognized Him, His coming which was the return of the Holy Spirit, has effected the entire world.

I believe that humans are powerless to do it without the intervention of God, and I believe God intervened when He sent Baha'u'llah who revealed the blueprint instructions that will be necessary to build the new world order, whcih Christians refer to as the Kingdom of God on earth.

Well, all of this sounds good in theory, but it looks like a plan to sit around and wait for God to actually do something.
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
Moreover, there is no way for humans to know if God could have achieved the same ends without the potential for suffering because we are not all-knowing as God is.
So why are you so arrogant as to declare all of these definitive statements about Gods nature? There is a double standard (as I predicted) in that you're free to make definitive statements about the nature of God but the moment I question any of them, it's dismissed out of hand because "humans can't know God".

Omnipotent means God is all-powerful, it does not mean that God can do anything. God can only do what is within His nature.
What is it that determines Gods nature though? Why can't God choose to change his nature if he wanted to? What is it that prevents God from doing the things you've decided he is incapable of doing? Or to put it another way, what is more powerful than God?

Nobody attributes omnipotence to God, that is revealed by God in scriptures.
Scripture is written by humans. Their declarations about the nature of God in scripture is no different to your declarations about the nature of God here.

I do not see anyone being discouraged from challenging God's omnipotence. In fact, what I see is atheists trying to use it to their advantage, saying 'God is omnipotent so God can do anything' and what they are really saying is 'God is omnipotent so God should be able to do what I expect Him to do' which is completely illogical because an omnipotent God only does what He chooses to do, He does not do what humans expect Him to do.
There is the anthropomorphisation again. Making choices is a human thing and if anyone chooses to do (or not do) things, those choices can be assessed morally.

For any truly omnipotent and omniscient being, the whole concept of "making a choice" would be irrational since that involves consideration of limited information over given period of time. For such a being, what they wanted to be would just be (and have always been). I don't think it is possible for human beings to relate to such a being in any way, positive or negative.

So you think God should have created pre-programmed robots, just so humans would not have to suffer and learn and develop their character?
I'm saying he could have done. You've now declared that we can't answer the question of what he should have done. :cool:

I do not apply morality to God's decisions because God is not subject to being moral since God is benevolent by His nature. Morality applies only to humans who have the potential to be moral or immoral.
How convenient. According to who? If I declare myself a god, benevolent by my nature, can my actions become immune to moral challenge too?

You are correct, and you get the door prize for logic since you are the first atheist who has figured this out. ;)
Oh, I'm really not.

Of course 'should questions' do not apply to an omniscient-omnipotent God, since whatever we see is just as it should be since God knows what is best for humans and has the power to bring it to fruition.
Why do you assume what God does is about what is best for humans? Maybe we're just meaningless tools for whatever the real purpose is.

The OP was just a fun exercise to see how many atheists would come out of the woodwork and start saying what God should do, and it worked!
That doesn't make them wrong though. We've agreed that we can't ask "should" questions of an omniscient and omnipotent being but that could just mean that God isn't actually omniscient and omnipotent or, of course, that God doesn't exist, disappearing in a puff of logic.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I did not say that these children would get spiritual qualities, I said:

.—These infants are under the shadow of the favor of God; and as they have not committed any sin and are not soiled with the impurities of the world of nature, they are the centers of the manifestation of bounty, and the Eye of Compassion will be turned upon them. Some Answered Questions, p. 240

We cannot know what will happen to these children whose lives were cut short except that they will be under the shadow of the favor of God.
Of course we can say that, if we assume a maximally benevolent God. We can safely say that those souls will have the same identical advantage of ll other souls. Why? Because if they did not, then wouldn’t God be maximally benevolent, since He would allow less bliss to souls that were there for reasons outside their control.

That is the problem with the claim of maximal, or omnibenevolence. It is self contradicting for the garden variety God people believe in, since no matter what you postulate, you can always imagine a scenario with more benevolence. You guys re basically trying to cover a king size bed, with 4 square inch blanket.

ergo, an omnibenevolent God can do only one thing: create all possible souls, and promote them directly to heaven, after having imbued them with any stuff needed to enjoy the eternal stay.

of course, nobody sane believe in such a God, since that is obviously not the current state of affairs. Therefore, unless we let fall the claim of maximal benevolence, and stop trying to join a square connector into a round hole by making up indefensible rationalizations, we need to conclude that the God people believe in, simply does not exist.

ciao

- viole
 
Last edited:
Top