Should God have created a world without suffering?

Trailblazer said:

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

Click to expand...

Creation starts at conception... not much suffering yet it seems to me... most suffering people create themselves when fighting each other (religious wars, religious is a misnomer here)

I always wonder why people blame others/God for their own messes

Life is Granted to you. It's a gift. Don't like it, end it. God won't blame you (free choice etc)

Trailblazer said:

"O Great Spirit, May I never judge another man until I have walked a mile in his moccasins."

Click to expand...

What I find I struggle with, I agree with stuff with stuff like that. I know it does no good to spread hate and anger. Mistreating others and cold shoulders aren't good. But it's so easy to do to others when it's what you've known. Lying, cheating, scheming and stealing become easy to do as an adult when it's survival and some sort of advantage at your disposal. And for me, lying and not following the rules are so easy for me, just as easy as being honest and doing things right, because I had to do it so many times just to my mom it became a well practiced skill for the rest of the world. My siblings are much the same in these areas.

Trailblazer said:

Obviously, but some people want to blame God so they can relinquish all responsibility.

Just imagine if they tried to do that in a court of law.
Your honor, I did not not kill my wife! God knew I was going to kill my wife so God caused me to kill my wife
That is essentially what is being argued on this thread and others, that God has foreknowledge of everything so God is the cause of everything!

Click to expand...

Blaming God is in it self a form of sin, so in my understanding it should not be done

stvdv said:

Don't like it, end it.

Click to expand...

Is that really necessary? I mean, seriously? End it?

Trailblazer said:

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.

Click to expand...

1. God could have created a world without (or less) suffering. Is God good and moral? Then he should have created a world without (or less) suffering. Or not even created a world at all.
2. I don't know, but people tell me he is omniscient and omnipotent, so he should be able to. At least there could me less suffering.
3. See 3
4. At least he could end the suffering in which people don't play a part in, like cancer.
5. I don't think so.

Shadow Wolf said:

Is that really necessary? I mean, seriously? End it?

Click to expand...

Is it really needed to blame God, I mean, seriously, you not even met I guess?

And sure, why not

If life gets unbearable for me, I will end it. For me no need to blame God.

God Granted life and fortunately God is "pro-choice" as in free will

I see no problem at all. 1 thing I know for sure "my body will die 1 day". And I am not my body, so no problem there for me, when it's the right time

Shadow Wolf said:

End it?

Click to expand...

Best is to "end the illusion" and realize "True Self,

Conscious thoughts said:

Blaming God is in it self a form of sin, so in my understanding it should not be done

Click to expand...

It is a sin because it is a form of hating God, and hating God id the one unforgivable sin. Atheists think they can get away with hating God because they say God does not exist, but as soon as they invoke God by blaming Him, they are saying God exists because you cannot blame a nonexistent entity.

Matthew 12:31-321 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost means detesting the Light of God. One can detest the Messengers (Manifestations of God) and be forgiven, but one cannot be forgiven for detesting the Light of God.

"This detestation of the light has no remedy and cannot be forgiven—that is to say, it is impossible for him to come near unto God. This lamp is a lamp because of its light; without the light it would not be a lamp. Now if a soul has an aversion for the light of the lamp, he is, as it were, blind, and cannot comprehend the light; and blindness is the cause of everlasting banishment from God…..

This is why many people who were the enemies of the Manifestations, and who did not recognize Them, when once they had known Them became Their friends. So enmity toward the Manifestation did not become the cause of perpetual banishment, for they who indulged in it were the enemies of the light-holders, not knowing that They were the shining lights of God. They were not the enemies of the light, and when once they understood that the light-holder was the place of manifestation of the light, they became sincere friends of it.

The meaning is this: to remain far from the light-holder does not entail everlasting banishment, for one may become awakened and vigilant; but enmity toward the light is the cause of everlasting banishment, and for this there is no remedy.”
Some Answered Questions, p. 128

Once the vital things such as access to food, shelter and certain freedoms of behaviour and expression are taken for granted, people tend to suffer by other things such as someone's way of speaking or dressing, or the sight of a crooked painting or the TV screen being too small.

When this gets too bad, it'll result in division, hostility and oppression, taking away the things that were taken for granted, reminding the people what it was like again to have nothing, making it seem petty to get upset over someone's choice of words or way of dressing, or a crooked painting or a TV screen being too small.

Trailblazer said:

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.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that suffering actually adds depth and enjoyment to the world, as the components of suffering are layered. So there is physical suffering, emotional suffering, suffering caused by random accidents, suffering caused by other people etc etc. But think of how much entertainment humans find in suffering vs no suffering whatsoever.

And in most cases the value isn't in the suffering itself but how someone overcomes that suffering as an obstacle. Most good stories and experiences are a result of someones past suffering and how that influences the story by adding depth that people can relate to.

So my conclusions is:

Without suffering, there are no obstacles, and without obstacles, life has no value. People do not feel that their life is worth anything if they haven't overcome obstacles which add meaning and accomplishment.

My question then to you is:

How can we find self worth. entertainment, depth and accomplishment without the existence of suffering?

Trailblazer said:

I heartily disagree because that is as much as blaming people because they are suffering by saying they could avoid suffering if only....

My training is in psychology so I know that is not true. I cannot even imagine saying that to a client. Such an attitude is completely devoid of compassion.

Click to expand...

I choose to do things that require suffering because the end goal is worth more than that suffering. Thus after I have overcome that obstacle, I feel like have more self worth.

Heck, videogames are a good example. Generally people do not like easy games because they accomplish nothing by playing it easy. The more difficult the game the more enjoyable it becomes because even though you will suffer defeat many times, the suffering is a challenge to overcome. There is a point where games become so difficult that they eliminate enjoyment, which shows that there maybe needs to be a limit to suffering.

Conscious thoughts said:

Blaming God is in it self a form of sin, so in my understanding it should not be done

Click to expand...

If God is an author of something then he should be blamed. Maybe the problem really is the negative connotation the word "blame" has? The premise would be that whatever someone is blamed for must be bad. If we say we "credit" suffering to God then that might have a different emotive impact. But if the creator is the cause of all existence besides itself, then it is definitely the cause of everything in existence so is blamed for everything.

Israel Khan said:

If God is an author of something then he should be blamed. Maybe the problem really is the negative connotation the word "blame" has? The premise would be that whatever someone is blamed for must be bad. If we say we "credit" suffering to God then that might have a different emotive impact. But if the creator is the cause of all existence besides itself, then it is definitely the cause of everything in existence so is blamed for everything.

Click to expand...

Suffering is not bad ( in spiritual way of life) it means there is more to be corrected so we can become closer to God.
But many see their own Suffering as negative that is true

Trailblazer said:

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.

Click to expand...

Dear Trailblazer

To legitimately answer those questions, one would need to know the purpose of worldliness, and - as far as I’m aware of - Scripture does not give us that.

My answer to the questions in your OP are therefore instead based on my own spiritual experiences:

If worldliness is the experience of a divine chosen, hypothetical code on trial, and it’s purpose is to understand what it stands for (think of my saying “God knows the symphony but cannot hear it, save through the ears of Man.”), then, suffering exists because it is embedded in the code that is being played out and tried. If God were to “remove” the effect of suffering, the code on trial would be a different one.

Should God have chosen a different code to assess? I believe it likely that God is simultaneously assessing all possible codes (combinations of data from within), but you and I are manifested in this one and in this one, suffering exists (embedded as an effect in the code itself) and cannot be removed without changing the whole experience of what the code signifies when manifested.


Humbly
Hermit


NOTES

On Divine Omnipotence
God is omnipotent in the sense that God both is and knows all that is. But all that truly is, is data that can be combined into codes and “played out” as hypothetical realities.
The codes that are chosen only receive meaning as they “play out” (manifest) and are experienced (by God, through manifested/embodied consciousness).*

*) I always feel a need to add that when I say that God experiences “through” Man, I do not mean that God is in you, but rather that you are (only) in God.


On Worldly Free Will
I use this silly paradox to understand whether worldliness is determined or free: Man is evolutionarily determined to acquire free will.

Worldly free will is embedded in the code that we are manifesting. That is; the option of free-will is there. We use it when we intervene with causality.

Trailblazer said:

I have several questions:

Click to expand...

I don't believe in any gods so can only answer these question in logical abstract;

Trailblazer said:

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

Click to expand...

I don't see why not. If you have the free option to cause suffering or not, why would you ever choose to cause suffering?

Trailblazer said:

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

Click to expand...

I don't know but I've been told God can do anything. Of course, this question presumes God creates humans with physical bodies at all.

Trailblazer said:

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

Click to expand...

That would be the default wouldn't it? Suffering doesn't exist because of the material world, it exists because of sentience and consciousness. Rocks, water and air don't suffer.

Trailblazer said:

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?

Click to expand...

Again, these questions make no sense to me? Why would anyone choose to cause suffering if they didn't need to?

This kind of think leads me to one of the fundamental logical holes in the common monotheist representation of this kind of anthropomorphised God. You can't attribute human-like emotions, ideas and choices to a god without automatically bringing in the flaws and errors of humans too. Either God is like us or isn't. I don't think you can pick and choose aspects to try to make God recognisable and understandable but distant and mysterious at the same time.

Trailblazer said:

That would work to prevent physical suffering but without the physical world we would have no way to prepare for the spiritual world. It is like a child who needs to develop in the womb world in order to be prepared for life in the physical world. There will be no physical suffering in the spiritual world but if we are not prepared to enter it there will be psychic suffering, the suffering of the soul, and it could endure for all of eternity.

Click to expand...

Billions of humans died before being born. Ergo, they will be unprepared for the spiritual world.
Ergo, there will psychic suffering. By the billions. For ever.

Even worse.

In that case they should be terminated also spiritually, if God is benevolent.

Ciao

- viole

Nakosis said:

Humans choose to suffer.

Click to expand...

As someone who has seen the devastating results in a family who's child died of leukemia and have also stood by a good friend who also died of leukemia i find such a comment insulting to the human race.

You know how i feel about this but I'll comment anyway. Taking it to the logical view of a believer. Of course, most believers will poopoo this because god...

Trailblazer said:

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

Click to expand...

Yes, god is claimed perfect therefore he should make perfect products,

Trailblazer said:

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

Click to expand...

Onmi everything remember

Trailblazer said:

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

Click to expand...

See 2

Trailblazer said:

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

Click to expand...

Well, long answer short, it seems like the various religious beliefs believe other religions are false and as such deserve whaterver suffering their gor bestows on them.

Trailblazer said:

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

Click to expand...

See 4

Ah, so it's moved here huh?

Trailblazer said:

I have several questions:

Click to expand...

I doubt this, as questions come from someone seeking answers. You already have your answer, and I'm more than certain (given past interaction) that you're going to ignore sound arguments with evidence to call us all whiny children (which I notice you've already primed that line here) and tell us to grow up. Oh, and incorrectly accuse us of false equivalence because "he's a god", and slander other religions by calling our gods imaginary... Are any of these tracking? By all means, confirm my Prophet status; published with a message of the gods, and gifted with the foresight of Frigg--I have spoken.

I will have you bear in mind that you are asking these questions. You are putting these to test. It is thus poor show, should you accuse of false equivalency down the line, as you are setting up this comparison below and are calling the actions of your god into question.

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

Click to expand...

If a god is to be touted to others as the pinnacle of moral perfection (e.g. benevolent, as you claimed yesterday) then yes: anything short of a creation unmarred by suffering is not benevolence. We see this claim in the myth of Genesis: Creation was perfection (nevermind the big Self-Destruct Tree smack in the middle of it) and all things got along in harmony (nevermind the Serpent that Yahweh created). Wouldn't ya know it, even lions were vegetarians. But then ooooh those dirty rotten humans with their minds as of infants had to listen to the Serpent that Yahweh created and allowed into this Paradise, eat fruit that was both created and placed in the garden, and muck it all up. *shakes fist*

Those darn kids.

The Problem of Evil (the existence of suffering as created/permitted by a benevolent deity) is uniquely a Monotheistic problem, but the solution is quite simple: god isn't good. Now, this doesn't necessarily mean that he's evil, perhaps there's-- Oh, no. He's claimed to be the sole source of creation and everything that happens stems from him. Well, there goes that.

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?

Click to expand...

Quite simple for an all-powerful being; you create things to perfection. That imperfections through suffering and mortality exist is clear and present evidence that either your god intended for there to be these imperfections (in which case he is not benevolent), or he is not all-powerful and his little project grew out of his control.

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?

Click to expand...

If your god is to be called Benevolent, all suffering indiscriminate of any of his creations ought be prevented. Not because "we don't like it, give give mommy", but because that is what benevolence is. If a being - your god - has the means and the ability to end something, but does not, he is not benevolent. Throwing this aside with "he's god, he's unknowable" is both unsatisfactory and hypocritical in that claiming he is benevolent is claiming knowledge of him. And if he prioritizes the alleviation of suffering for those of his creations that are good little ducks? Well, all the more malevolent.

The Sun shines her light and warmth on all, neither brighter or dimmer for opinions given in return.

Trailblazer said:

It is a sin because it is a form of hating God, and hating God id the one unforgivable sin. Atheists think they can get away with hating God because they say God does not exist, but as soon as they invoke God by blaming Him, they are saying God exists because you cannot blame a nonexistent entity.

Click to expand...

To blame somebody is holding somebody accountable for a mistake they have made. It has nothing to do with hating. I was once involved in a car accident and it was the fault of the other person. He was the one to blame. I haven't hated him even for one second.
Also, I think it's kind of strange you "blame" atheists for humoring you by answering your hypothetical questions and then implying they are inconsistent for blaming God when they don't believe God exists. I hope you understand that they don't believe in the hypothetical, but that they try to answer the question within the premisse God exists.

Do you believe God is good and moral? And if so, how did you come to that conclusion?