Debate: If God exists, why does God allow so much suffering?

Koldo · Feb 16, 2012

Nakosis said:
Awareness. You have to be aware of what could be to appreciate/see meaning in what is.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Could you rephrase it?

Nakosis said:
I've learn not to suffer unless I want to. So there is no unwanted suffering for me. Can I appreciate suffering yes, but perhaps because I can control my perception of it.

So you claim to have learnt not to suffer unless you want to...
First, I deny this claim unless you can provide empirical evidence.
Second, it raises another question as to why you weren't given this kind of control over your perception since the beginning, as to why you had to learn to control it.
Third, if you appreciate suffering then you consider it to be pleasant. And suffering is , by definition, unpleasant.

Nakosis said:
No, I don't know God's purpose to where I can speak with any authority. What I'm saying is regardless of God's reason, I don't see it as a problem. I see it as a blessing. I value the ability to know suffering and joy regardless of God's purpose.

There are people who don't value the ability to know suffering. What about them?

Nakosis said:
However I suspect God's purpose is so I can have the opportunity to value/experience these things.

Can God experience joy without suffering?

Koldo · Feb 16, 2012

meddlehaze said:
His glory.

Define objectively what 'His glory' means.

Heathen Hammer · Feb 16, 2012

meddlehaze said:
His glory.

So.... his glory is based on the unnecessary suffering of others?

Is that the kind of glory anyone with morals would want to praise?

meddlehaze · Feb 16, 2012

Koldo said:
Define objectively what 'His glory' means.

Praise to Him, not as though He needed it, but that we need it.

Heathen Hammer said:
So.... his glory is based on the unnecessary suffering of others?

Is that the kind of glory anyone with morals would want to praise?

No, His glory isn't based on the unnecessary suffering of others.

Ahh, but morals vary from person-to-person. How can one say they really have morals?

Heathen Hammer · Feb 16, 2012

meddlehaze said:
Praise to Him, not as though He needed it, but that we need it.

No, His glory isn't based on the unnecessary suffering of others.

That's how it appears given your statements

Ahh, but morals vary from person-to-person. Unless some form of objective moral basis existed from a moral law giver.

The 2nd to last statement, well, that certainly seems true.

It certainly appears that there exist some individuals who would praise the glory of a being who inflicts unnecessary suffering on others.

I find such individuals, in my own subjective morality, worthy of death.

I certainly do not view the God who gains glory from the suffering of others, the objective basis for any moral system.

How can one say they really have morals?

I really do

meddlehaze · Feb 16, 2012

Heathen Hammer said:
That's how it appears given your statements
The 2nd to last statement, well, that certainly seems true.

It certainly appears that there exist some individuals who would praise the glory of a being who inflicts unnecessary suffering on others.

I find such individuals, in my own subjective morality, worthy of death.

I certainly do not view the God who gains glory from the suffering of others, the objective basis for any moral system.

I think you're missing the point. These people who experience "unnecessary suffering" exist to be delivered whether that be spiritually, physically or both. I am one who experiences suffering, yet I endure miraculously through the strength of God's Spirit who dwells in me and give Him praise.

I really do

And how can you be sure that your morals are truly "morale"? You stated previously that you have subjective morality, which is about as effective as calling a flower ugly and vomit beautiful.

Nakosis · Feb 16, 2012

Koldo said:
I have no idea what you are talking about. Could you rephrase it?

It's a little bit difficult in that people tend to take knowledge of what they are aware of for granted. For example if it was always certain temperature which never changed you wouldn't be aware of the concepts of hot and cold. The concepts of hot and cold would have no meaning or value to you.

Koldo said:
So you claim to have learnt not to suffer unless you want to...
First, I deny this claim unless you can provide empirical evidence.

Ok, if you want to learn detachment from materialism then you can see for yourself. Until you take it upon yourself to learn this there's not much anybody can do to convince you of it.

Koldo said:
Second, it raises another question as to why you weren't given this kind of control over your perception since the beginning, as to why you had to learn to control it.
Third, if you appreciate suffering then you consider it to be pleasant. And suffering is , by definition, unpleasant.

I believe it was to experience the journey of learning this.

Koldo said:
There are people who don't value the ability to know suffering. What about them?

Likely because they have no control over it. You'd think if they find it unpleasant they'd be motivated to overcome/control it.

Koldo said:
Can God experience joy without suffering?

Yes, through us.
But that's not going to make any sense to you because you don't believe you have any control over suffering.

Heathen Hammer · Feb 16, 2012

meddlehaze said:
I think you're missing the point. These people who experience "unnecessary suffering" exist to be delivered whether that be spiritually, physically or both. I am one who experiences suffering, yet I endure miraculously through the strength of God's Spirit who dwells in me and give Him praise.

No, actually, you've missed the point. If his glory is based on the suffering of others, it's not glory, it's villainy

And how can you be sure that your morals are truly "morale"? You stated previously that you have subjective morality, which is about as effective as calling a flower ugly and vomit beautiful.

Since my whole life is against that kind of Orwellian thinking, no, it's not at all like labeling vomit beautiful.
I am 'sure' [as far as that goes*] because, faced with a subjective system, my best bet is to follow the examples of others and observe what results they gained. If I do so I can best avoid the fog of my own ego. From an early age I learned of the various concepts of honor, protection of others, truth... essentially a grouping of similar ideas which can be summarized by the Nine Noble Virtues Nine Noble Virtues - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
These were instinctive to myself, independent of a guiding codification, which I found to exist later. These are the best things men are capable of; achieving them costs the individual in many cases and grants betterment to those around him. Where they are followed there is no harm. This is sufficient to show me they are the purest ideals to follow: I may suffer a bit, but my perseverance helps another and the sacrifice is worth it, because the world changes for the better and I had a hand in it, however small.

Thus, I know what glory actually is, for this is how I achieve it.

What is this God's glory, compared to mine?

* I don't need to be 100% sure, I simply need to be 'sure enough'. There are no subjective absolutes.

Koldo · Feb 16, 2012

meddlehaze said:
Praise to Him, not as though He needed it, but that we need it.

You said that what is best is what "...accomplishes what He had intended (fellowship with His children) with absolute and full effectiveness and appropriateness".

Then i asked you what was to be accomplished by 'unwanted suffering' that could not be done in some other way.

Now you say that it is praise to him, even though he doesn't need it ( but that we need it ).

If we put the pieces together it all means that : Unwanted suffering is justified by God's desire to accomplish ( with absolute and full effectiveness and appropriateness ) praise to him, even though he doesn't need it. He does not need praise, however, considering he can only gain praise if unwanted suffering exists, it becomes justified.

Is this really your argument?

Now i will deal with the second part of your reply:

Why can we only praise God if we feel unwanted suffering? Where do you take this idea from? And why is it necessary for humans to praise God?

Heathen Hammer · Feb 16, 2012

Yeah, um, if the system is 'suffer and praise him, or suffer and don't', I think it's smarter to prevent your tormentor from having the satisfaction of getting what he wants at your expense, since it's all the same to you. Screw that guy.

Might as well wipe him in the eye before you perish

Koldo · Feb 16, 2012

Nakosis said:
It's a little bit difficult in that people tend to take knowledge of what they are aware of for granted. For example if it was always certain temperature which never changed you wouldn't be aware of the concepts of hot and cold. The concepts of hot and cold would have no meaning or value to you.

If applied to this matter it would mean that absence of joy equals to suffering. But this certainly is not the case, or do you argue otherwise?

Nakosis said:
Ok, if you want to learn detachment from materialism then you can see for yourself. Until you take it upon yourself to learn this there's not much anybody can do to convince you of it.

Then i will consider this point invalid as it is not viable for you to prove it.

Nakosis said:
I believe it was to experience the journey of learning this.

This doesn't address neither of those points. :sarcastic

Nakosis said:
Likely because they have no control over it. You'd think if they find it unpleasant they'd be motivated to overcome/control it.

How did you come this conclusion?
Why would the ability to control your own suffering necessarily make you value suffering? Show how this conclusion can reached through logic.

Nakosis said:
Yes, through us.
But that's not going to make any sense to you because you don't believe you have any control over suffering.

Through us? What do you mean by this?

Nakosis · Feb 16, 2012

meddlehaze said:
Ahh, but morals vary from person-to-person. How can one say they really have morals?

Everyone has morals. Everyone has a inherent sense of what is right and wrong.

However it's kind of egotistical to think ones own morality should be the standard for anyone else.

I know what is right and wrong for me. I don't need you to have the same sense of right and wrong and you probably don't anyway. Why do you think we need a God to dictate everyone/anyone else's morals?

meddlehaze · Feb 16, 2012

Nakosis said:
Everyone has morals. Everyone has a inherent sense of what is right and wrong.

However it's kind of egotistical to think ones own morality should be the standard for anyone else.

Or maybe you might be mistaking egotism with justice. I think it's egotistical only when the person puts themselves as more righteous than the other person for their personal morale. However, the Christian takes no credit for his moral standard because it did not come from his "inherent sense", but the sense of his Creator.

I know what is right and wrong for me. I don't need you to have the same sense of right and wrong and you probably don't anyway. Why do you think we need a God to dictate everyone/anyone else's morals?

One's that come to the top of my head are; to lesson one's ego and to create an objective morale that deserves the right to stand as justice.

Nakosis · Feb 16, 2012

Koldo said:
If applied to this matter it would mean that absence of joy equals to suffering. But this certainly is not the case, or do you argue otherwise?.

It means neither joy nor suffering. Both in my opinion are states of mind. You need awareness of both to achieve either.

Koldo said:

Then i will consider this point invalid as it is not viable for you to prove it.

Click to expand...

It's only viable for you to seek this for yourself. Otherwise it like me asking you to prove you can feel hot and cold. You can claim being able to do so all you want but until I've experienced these things for myself it remains only something you claim.

Koldo said:

This doesn't address neither of those points. :sarcastic

Click to expand...

You ask why we weren't initially given control, my response was to have the experience of gaining control. The point is not reaching the goal it's getting there.

Your other point is assuming what I consider pleasant/unpleasant which you couldn't possibly know.

Koldo said:

How did you come this conclusion?
Why would the ability to control your own suffering necessarily make you value suffering? Show how this conclusion can reached through logic.

Click to expand...

I value the accomplishment. You never think to consider that without the obstacle to overcome there's nothing accomplished? Would you rather everything given to you so nothing you have is through your own merit?

Koldo said:

Through us? What do you mean by this?

Click to expand...

I suspect the duality of joy and suffering is not part of a transcendent nature. However while God is immanent and aware of us God is also aware of what we experience.

Nakosis · Feb 16, 2012

meddlehaze said:
Or maybe you might be mistaking egotism with justice. I think it's egotistical only when the person puts themselves as more righteous than the other person for their personal morale. However, the Christian takes no credit for his moral standard because it did not come from his "inherent sense", but the sense of his Creator.

No, it comes from yourself. You and everyone else fits the Bible to their own sense of morality and justify it by claiming it comes from God.

meddlehaze said:
One's that come to the top of my head are; to lesson one's ego and to create an objective morale that deserves the right to stand as justice.

I don't think it lessens one's ego, it justifies it. Makes it ok to push one's own sense of morality onto others. It still feeds the ego but it's ok'd because it been justified by the Bible.

godnotgod · Feb 17, 2012

Koldo said:
And how do you justify humans, in their former existence, being born into this condition where they are able to make this choice? Is there a purpose in making this choice?

One way of looking at it is the idea that you are actually the divine nature itself, which has created the world, knowing it to be an illusion. But you become entranced by its beauty, and wish to participate in it. So you immerse yourself in the dream ('and the Word became Flesh') and imagine that you are, let's say, a hero, and are involved in all sorts of exciting escapades always with triumphant outcomes. Or maybe you just want to be an ordinary plumber, or a teacher, or a criminal, and so on. However, you become so identified with the character you are playing, that you clean forgot it was just an illusion. So you begin to take the role seriously, with your divine nature falling asleep, and your false self taking over, and getting in all sorts of trouble. Now you need 'salvation' (The Religion Game), and so you pray to a God you imagine you are separated from, when what you actually need is simply to awaken from your sleep, and remember who you really are. But there is so much baggage in the way, that when you make efforts to return to the state of Absolute Joy, find it not an easy task. You keep slipping back into Identification, and Waking Sleep. In addition, the Ego is now aware that it is threatened, and ups the ante, putting up quite a fuss, creating all sorts of clever ways of keeping you asleep. On top of that, there are others who are asleep all around you who do not want you to awaken. They want you to stay under the control and manipulation of 'society'. They create all sorts of punishments just in case you decide to get smart. And then there is the DNA, which keeps you lined up with certain behavioral patterns which are actually against the enlightened state. The stakes are high, and the work is extremely difficult, and the world sure looks inviting. You face impossible odds to return to Absolute Joy. One of the symbols used in Buddhism is the brave little salmon, expending every last ounce of energy to return to its home, swimming against the current, always upstream, even leaping rapids to get there. This is called The Master Game, and is the most difficult of all the life games to play, demanding ALL your devotion and energy and attention. It's goal is Spiritual Awakening. The Hindus liken the difficulty of finding it to the metaphor of your being a sea turtle who surfaces once every hundred years in search of a floating plank of wood with a hole in it just large enough for you to stick your head through it. Your chances of finding the plank on the vast ocean of ignorance is astronomically dim.

Remember the prisoners in Plato's Cave Allegory? When they were told that they were living in delusion and that a greater reality existed outside their cave, they adamantly refused to believe it. These are like many of the people around us, who reinforce our state of ignorance via punishing fear tactics and sensual gratifications and rewards, which include the promises of heavens and threats of hells.

Whether the world itself is an illusion (maya) or whether our vision is faulty is the question. In the rope/snake metaphor, there is no snake; there never was. So the world will look right once we take care of our vision. Christianity, for example, has it that there is an indwelling evil in the world, and the world is in need of reform. Go figure.

'The spiritual experience is a flight of the alone, to the alone'
Author unknown

InChrist · Feb 17, 2012

One of the effects of suffering is to loosen our grasp on this life, because we shouldn't be thinking that life in a fallen world is as wonderful as we sometimes think it is. Pastor Dick Bacon once said, "If this life were easy, we'd just love it too much. If God didn't make it painful, we'd never let go of it." Suffering reminds us that we live in an abnormal world. Suffering is abnormalour souls protest, "This isn't right!" We need to be reminded that we are living in "Plan B." The perfect Plan A of God's beautiful, suffering-free creation was ruined when Adam and Eve fell. So often, people wonder what kind of cruel God would deliberately make a world so full of pain and suffering. They've lost track of history. The world God originally made isn't the one we experience. Suffering can make us long for the new heaven and the new earth where God will set all things right again.

excerpt from;
The Value of Suffering
The Value of Suffering | Bible.org - Worlds Largest Bible Study Site

Heathen Hammer · Feb 17, 2012

meddlehaze said:
One's that come to the top of my head are; to lesson one's ego and to create an objective morale that deserves the right to stand as justice.

Since you absolutely lack an actual objective communication or direction from said God, the things you hope to avoid, are actually all you have.

Looncall · Feb 17, 2012

InChrist said:
One of the effects of suffering is to loosen our grasp on this life, because we shouldn't be thinking that life in a fallen world is as wonderful as we sometimes think it is. Pastor Dick Bacon once said, "If this life were easy, we'd just love it too much. If God didn't make it painful, we'd never let go of it." Suffering reminds us that we live in an abnormal world. Suffering is abnormalour souls protest, "This isn't right!" We need to be reminded that we are living in "Plan B." The perfect Plan A of God's beautiful, suffering-free creation was ruined when Adam and Eve fell. So often, people wonder what kind of cruel God would deliberately make a world so full of pain and suffering. They've lost track of history. The world God originally made isn't the one we experience. Suffering can make us long for the new heaven and the new earth where God will set all things right again.

excerpt from;
The Value of Suffering
The Value of Suffering | Bible.org - Worlds Largest Bible Study Site

Oh yeah, sure. It sounds to me more like a scheme to keep the suffering masses in their place, under the jackboots of the clergy.

Is there no evil that some clergy will not try to excuse?

Koldo · Feb 17, 2012

Nakosis said:
It means neither joy nor suffering. Both in my opinion are states of mind. You need awareness of both to achieve either.

How so? How did you come to this conclusion?
If the absence of one does not entail the presence of the other, then why would it be required to be aware of both to feel joy? It doesn't make any logical sense.

Nakosis said:
You ask why we weren't initially given control, my response was to have the experience of gaining control. The point is not reaching the goal it's getting there.

What is the point of this experience?

Nakosis said:
Your other point is assuming what I consider pleasant/unpleasant which you couldn't possibly know.

Then you didn't understand what I said.
Suffering can NOT, by definition, be pleasant.
If it is not unpleasant then it is not suffering.

Nakosis said:
I value the accomplishment. You never think to consider that without the obstacle to overcome there's nothing accomplished? Would you rather everything given to you so nothing you have is through your own merit?

Do you mean in the same manner that it works with God? Yes.

Nakosis said:
I suspect the duality of joy and suffering is not part of a transcendent nature. However while God is immanent and aware of us God is also aware of what we experience.

Being aware of our experience is completely different from experiencing it by himself. If God does not experience suffering, why should humans?

Debate: If God exists, why does God allow so much suffering?

Outstanding Member

Outstanding Member

Nope, you're still wrong

Ambassador

Nope, you're still wrong

Ambassador

Non-Binary Physicalist

Nope, you're still wrong

Outstanding Member

Nope, you're still wrong

Outstanding Member

Non-Binary Physicalist

Ambassador

Non-Binary Physicalist

Non-Binary Physicalist

Thou art That

Free4ever

Nope, you're still wrong

Well-Known Member

Outstanding Member