Why does God permit suffering?

Intrepid wrote:

Chumly wrote:
Intrepid wrote:
I guess I am getting into the mindset that some might understand since they don't want to try to understand the bible.
To "understand" the bible is not a de facto confirmation of the literal or symbolic belief in the bible.

In fact "understand" means to comprehend or know thoroughly, it does not impute belief.

How does one believe without some measure of understanding?

You can certainly understand something without believing it and you can certainly believe something without understanding it.

There are many people in the world who believe astrology is real, yet there is no viable measure of understanding in a real world demonstrable sense.

There are many children who believe the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus are real, yet there is no viable measure of understanding in a real world demonstrable sense.

There are many people who believe alien abductions are real, yet there is no viable measure of understanding in a real world demonstrable sense.

Of course, as do all thing in language, linguistics / semantics play the dominant role. The word at hand in this case is "understanding"

Understanding:

1. To perceive and comprehend the nature and significance of; grasp. See Synonyms at apprehend.
2. To know thoroughly by close contact or long experience with: That teacher understands children.
a. To grasp or comprehend the meaning intended or expressed by (another): They have trouble with English, but I can understand them.
b. To comprehend the language, sounds, form, or symbols of.
3. To know and be tolerant or sympathetic toward: I can understand your point of view even though I disagree with it.
4. To learn indirectly, as by hearsay: I understand his departure was unexpected.
5. To infer: Am I to understand you are staying the night?
6. To accept (something) as an agreed fact: It is understood that the fee will be 50 dollars.
7. To supply or add (words or a meaning, for example) mentally.

Clearly though the word understanding can be used in the framework I gather you are suggesting vis-a-vis religious beliefs, as long as there is no viable measure of understanding in a real world demonstrable sense imputed.

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

Um. Assuming God creates everything, he would have created, hopefully unlike the natural father, the debilitating condition from which the child, god's child, suffers. That has a certain sadistic nature to it...........

The Bible states that when God created everything, it was very good. There was no disease or death when God created the world and all that is in it.

Disease and death are the aftermath of man's sin. So your assumption is founded in a misunderstanding of what the Bible says.

0 Replies

Neo,

Obviously it could simply be that no gods exist?

(I'm sure you said somewhere that you were an atheist at one time, so you would understand the position clearly enough)

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

Neo,

Obviously it could simply be that no gods exist?

(I'm sure you said somewhere that you were an atheist at one time, so you would understand the position clearly enough)

Could be. . .

But I have stated many reasons to believe otherwise.

0 Replies

If God doesn't exist, how does this extraordinary ecological balance exist on earth? And who provided the delicate balances in the world?

0 Replies

What balance Raul?
There is no balance.
All is constantly changing, some species become extinct, others are booming.

No gods are needed to explain anything in this world (or for that matter, this universe.)

0 Replies

So, Raul. Why does not God put an end to suffering?

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

What balance Raul?
There is no balance.
All is constantly changing, some species become extinct, others are booming.

No gods are needed to explain anything in this world (or for that matter, this universe.)

I could explain everything in your house without making reference to you. I could postulate how it is possible how each item MIGHT HAVE gotten there and in it's current condition without any such person as Eorl ever having existed or possessed the item.

It could sound very plausible and convincing. 'Cept it wouldn't be true.

0 Replies

real life,

that argument has been used to explain every unknown from the cause of lightning, to the colour of the sky, to the sudden inexplicable appearance of maggots where previously there had only ever been flies.

it's an argument that retreats a few more steps every day as ordinary explanations are found for every little detail of everything.

The simplest explanation for the things in my home is that some of them got there by my hand. To propose that they got there by magic instead would require some extraordinary proof on your part.

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

real life,

that argument has been used to explain every unknown from the cause of lightning, to the colour of the sky, to the sudden inexplicable appearance of maggots where previously there had only ever been flies.

it's an argument that retreats a few more steps every day as ordinary explanations are found for every little detail of everything.

The simplest explanation for the things in my home is that some of them got there by my hand. To propose that they got there by magic instead would require some extraordinary proof on your part.

No magic required. I could simply postulate that someone else, or a collection of someone elses left them there.

You aren't necessary to explain anything.

What you are positing is basically an argument from silence.

But worse, because yours involves an absurdity ' I see no physical evidence of a non-corporeal Being.'

It's like saying 'I have never smelled the color 9.'

That's because 9 is not a color. And even if it was, you don't smell colors. That's my point exactly.

0 Replies

Nonsense, real life.

Everything in my home has a boring unmagical explanation, even my wifes moods have real reasons and causes even if I don't understand any of them.

The number 9 cannot be smelled because it is merely a symbol invented by men to help them explain the world. The symbol can be whatever colour you like, and you can even bake a nice smelling pink cake in the shape of a 9 if you want to!

Until you show me why a magic being is required to explain anything, I'll continue to look for (and, sadly for you, find) ordinary explanations for everything.

0 Replies

Yes Eorl you are correct.

I will add that even if the explanation in question is of an extraordinary nature that is also acceptable, as long as the burden of increased proof is met commensurate with the increased extraordinary-ness. Modern physics is famous for this.

0 Replies

Then why is the atmosphere a perfect balance of N and O2; is this by some freak of nature? How would ife exist if this planet had no atmosphere? How did the flawless order in the whole universe come into being?

0 Replies

1) How did you come to the conclusion that "the atmosphere a perfect balance of N and O2"?

2) Where is your proof that "the atmosphere a perfect balance of N and O2"?

3) And perhaps most curiously what does your question have to do with my post?

0 Replies

Why does God permit my topic to suffer?

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

Nonsense, real life.

Thanks for the warning. Unfortunately I ignored it and ran smack into the nonsense that followed anyway.

Perhaps if you could shout your warning next time, or at least use exclamation marks.............

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Why does God permit my topic to suffer?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Eorl wrote:
Nonsense, real life.

Thanks for the warning. Unfortunately I ignored it and ran smack into the nonsense that followed anyway.

Perhaps if you could shout your warning next time, or at least use exclamation marks.............

Please! No more shouting! I get enuogh of it here.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

real life wrote:
Eorl wrote:
Nonsense, real life.

Thanks for the warning. Unfortunately I ignored it and ran smack into the nonsense that followed anyway.

Perhaps if you could shout your warning next time, or at least use exclamation marks.............
Please! No more shouting! I get enuogh of it here.

Reminds me of the lawyer who was running for political office and wrote himself a note in the margin of his upcoming speech next to the third Roman numeral -- "(Weak point, shout louder)"

Laughing

0 Replies

real life wrote:

The Bible states that when God created everything, it was very good. There was no disease or death when God created the world and all that is in it.

Disease and death are the aftermath of man's sin. So your assumption is founded in a misunderstanding of what the Bible says.

Man did not make himself sinful, and would not have "chosen" to sin if God had not designed us such that every human being inevitably offends him in some way or another. Man could not alter his own DNA to make his mind and body imperfect. Man is incapable of designing and creating bacteria, viruses, parasites, pests, weeds, predators, and all of the other life forms that plague us and cause so much suffering. That was all God's doing.

It took a very creative and sadistic mind to come up with worms that grow inside the eyes, disfiguring skin ailments, birth defects such as holes in the hearts of innocent babies, auto-immune diseases where the body destroys itself, paralyzing strokes, and cancer. But why do you suppose that God designed so many painful diseases and parasites specific to animals, as well as ones that prey on human beings who "deserve" to be punished for their alleged sins?

0 Replies

Why does God permit suffering?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know