• 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!

Is God omni-benevolent?

Eddi

Panentheist and Psychedelic Cat
Premium Member
Question: Is God omni-benevolent?

As in totally good?
 

Eddi

Panentheist and Psychedelic Cat
Premium Member
I say no, because he allows suffering when he could stop it (e.g. childhood leukaemia)

But I think he makes up for this....

Because Jesus is

Jesus cares and heals afflictions

So, overall he is and he isn't :D

But the fact that in some regards he isn't fully good (e.g. not preventing childhood leukaemia when he could so easily stop it) disqualifies him from being omni-benevolent - as omni means "all"

If he was omni-benevolent then there would be no suffering in his creation

But I would say that he balances out as being mostly benevolent

And that no matter how awful the world is, everything will work out for the best in the end

I'd say God is very good, but not all good as he allows suffering when he could stop it

The prevention of suffering is obviously not a priority for him
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
I say no, because he allows suffering when he could stop it (e.g. childhood leukaemia)

But I think he makes up for this....

Because Jesus is

Jesus cares and heals afflictions

So, overall he is and he isn't :D

But the fact that in some regards he isn't fully good (e.g. not preventing childhood leukaemia when he could so easily stop it) disqualifies him from being omni-benevolent - as omni means "all"

If he was omni-benevolent then there would be no suffering in his creation

But I would say that he balances out as being mostly benevolent

And that no matter how awful the world is, everything will work out for the best in the end

I'd say God is very good, but not all good as he allows suffering when he could stop it

The prevention of suffering is obviously not a priority for him

The way God is doing things would be the best way to do things to make sure that evil and suffering are expelled while being just to all.
We don't know the future and so we can't say that allowing suffering of the innocent makes God less that completely good.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
I don't think anything could make up for childhood leukemia. Or any other suffering.

We do break and it is good when it hurts and lets us know it is broken. So we can start stepping away from the "any other suffering" judgment.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
We do break and it is good when it hurts and lets us know it is broken. So we can start stepping away from the "any other suffering" judgment.

i assume you have never seen a young innocent child (or adult) dying of leukemia. It is not good for the victim, it is not good for relatives and friends, it is not good for the medical staff.

If your god created everything then he created leukaemia and other suffering.

I am going to leave it here though there is much more to say
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Question: Is God omni-benevolent?

As in totally good?
To me, this is such a non-argument, and typically being something that the more irrational humans might posit. How on earth would we know what is the greatest quality of God or even possible, and as to whether any God has our existence as a priority, other than simply being our projection as to such? We really have such knowledge? Far more rational to observe that life is often so bad for humans and simply accept such, given it is so for much of all life too, hence why I never involve God in any arguments concerning what happens in the lives of humans - there are much better explanations for all such.
 
Last edited:

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
This world is full of suffering. Isn’t it the first of the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism, that all life is suffering?

So it takes a leap of faith to believe that a loving God created it all. And yet, I do believe that. And that all our suffering, even and especially the suffering of the innocent, must have a purpose which is hidden from us.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
We don't know the future and so we can't say that allowing suffering of the innocent makes God less that completely good.

What you are saying is that man isn't qualified to judge what is good. If that's the case, he's also unqualified to decide if God is good, much less infinitely good. That is decided by faith, which leads to some unfortunate ramifications. It basically forces one to accept as good that which his conscience tells him is harmful, like gratuitous suffering. It's a basic motif in Christianity that human suffering is just.

The Bible is full of stories where man is punished because a good god was angered. Why do we not live in paradise? We don't deserve it because a girl ate an apple. Why can't we all understand one another? Man reached too high once again, this time by building a tower and was punished with a world full of different languages. It's believed that some astronomical event destroyed the city of Sodom: Fire and brimstone: Sodom and Gomorrah perhaps destroyed by 'cosmic fireball,' evidence shows - Study Finds

Why did that happen? A good god punishing evil man again. The theme is that all suffering is God's will and therefore good. It's called divine command theory. The icing on the cake is describing human sacrifice as an act of love. Suffering is good in this religion.

So it takes a leap of faith to believe that a loving God created it all. And yet, I do believe that. And that all our suffering, even and especially the suffering of the innocent, must have a purpose which is hidden from us.

This is a nice illustration of that kind of thinking. If one goes from evidence to conclusion, he sees that there is much gratuitous suffering in the world and that no tri-omni god exists. If there is any kind of god, it is, as Epicurus noted, either not good, not omnipotent, or not omniscient. But with faith, we reverse the order. We BEGIN with the assumption that the god is all of those things, and THEN look at the evidence in that light, and are forced to come to conclusions like yours.

One of the most unfortunate examples of the harm this way of thinking can cause comes from Mother Teresa, who was the head of a series of hospices, which mission was to ease the suffering of the dying poor. You may be aware of the scandal regarding her collecting money from benevolent donors for that purpose, which was spirited off to the Vatican treasury instead, and the dying allowed to suffer. Let's let her tell us in her own words what she was taught by her religion and believed by faith:

"There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ's Passion. The world gains much from their suffering." and "You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you."
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
I don't think anything could make up for childhood leukemia. Or any other suffering.

That comes from evolution, since according to the Atheists, it cannot come from a God who does not exist. On the other hand, God is Spirit and not matter; two different realms. God would be more connected to consciousness, than to physical biology. Evolution controls physical matter and biology.

As a question to Atheists, why does evolution allow the pain of childhood leukemia? God or Jesus would comfort the child, with information; spirit, but evolution creates the problem. What is the selective advantage to this?

Is this need for suffering an artifact of evolution still using casino science odds? Gambling with life, is not rational enough to find health and perfection for all. Like buying lottery tickets, one has to take the win with the losses. This fits the data better.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
That comes from evolution, since according to the Atheists, it cannot come from a God who does not exist. On the other hand, God is Spirit and not matter; two different realms. God would be more connected to consciousness, than to physical biology. Evolution controls physical matter and biology.

As a question to Atheists, why does evolution allow the pain of childhood leukemia? God or Jesus would comfort the child, with information; spirit, but evolution creates the problem. What is the selective advantage to this?

Is this need for suffering an artifact of evolution still using casino science odds? Gambling with life, is not rational enough to find health and perfection for all. Like buying lottery tickets, one has to take the win with the losses. This fits the data better.

Since according to Christianity (and other religions) their god made it all.

But of course it comes from evolution, that is not the discussion, the discussion is god and the attributes given to god.

But feel free to excuse the bible
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
As a question to Atheists, why does evolution allow the pain of childhood leukemia? God or Jesus would comfort the child, with information; spirit, but evolution creates the problem. What is the selective advantage to this?
Perhaps one should put this question to all other life, amongst which we evolved, and all such being in a struggle for survival. Hence their impact on us. Not make better sense? :oops:
 

Aštra’el

Aštara, Blade of Aštoreth
“Benevolent” according to whom?

There is no such thing as “Omni-benevolence”, as what constitutes as “good” will always be a matter of opinion. Though… I suppose if you are the Supreme Architect of your own universe, then if you so choose you can probably dictate what is considered to be “good” and what is “evil”… regardless of how your creation feels about it.

No… my Supreme God is the ultimate embodiment of Creation, Destruction, and Divine Order over Primordial Chaos. “Omni-benevolence” has nothing to do with it… at all.
 
Top