Why does God allow the suffering of little children?

This part right here bothers me a lot...

I understand where you are coming from on it... but I don't understand how you got there...

What is it you expect out of your god?

I've never seen a religious teaching that says god will make everything perfect for everyone, yet I hear people say things like they expect it. I just don't understand why...

Its actually these very issues that drove me away from religions.

It went something like this (stetched over years with many discussions and explorations)...

If there is an Omnipotent god, then he chooses to allow kids and other innocents to suffer. If this is true (for whatever reason), I want nothing to do with him, so expecting him to do things for me, would be pointless.

If there is a God and he isn't omnipotent, then why would I worship him? Which leaves me not expecting anything from him.

If there isn't a god, that means I can't sit around waiting for him/her/it to fix things for me.

All three answers led me to the same place... IF there is a god, he doesn't give a shit about, or can't do anything to help anyone down here, so why would we waste our time on him?

 

You had better hope there isn't a hell, cause if there is, you will be assaulted by bad puns for eternity... lol

 

Just pluggin... this provides the outlet. I hope this doesn't pop a fuse though- push you past the breaker point. God won't have to smite you.

 

Because of people's choices. That applies to both questions. We choose what we eat and what we manufacture and use.

Tis a good question. I have no answer as I don't agree with the premise.

lol, if that was my only criteria, I would have many more friends then I do... but its a start....

 

Because of people.

Not God.

 

A fertilized egg completely separates, but stem cells (which search for similar cells) find like-stem cells on the other twin and fuse the twins together.

from Wiki.

Sufficient?

Because God is not our babysitter. God isn't there to act upon our every whim.

Can, has in a way (all you need to do is recognise it), and finally will.

 

HEAR, HEAR!! :2thumbsup:

 

No, and you know it, but I really didn't expect an answer to an unanswerable. Thanks anyway - you gave it your best shot.

 

Well as Christians, we are a Paschal people. We have been changed by the death and ressurection of Christ.

We are promised the new life in the world to come. A thing is said to be certain conditionally when, another thing being given, the first infallibly follows. Supernatural hope is evidently certain in this way, because, granted that a man does all that is required to save his soul, he is sure to attain to eternal life. This is guaranteed by the infinite power and goodness and fidelity of God.

I hope for eternal life, but I will not say I deserve Heaven. I find baded on their doctrine that it is Protestants who claim they know or expect eternal life.

 

I do not know what you want me to explain? Facts about biology?

Do you want to know why we must eat, and we get sick if we don't eat properly too?

Do you want to know why some children are miscarried, or stillborn?


What exactly do you want to know about conjoined twins?

 

Well, what you are doing is betting this life on the possibility of another one afterwards...

Shitty bet to lose.

If there is a god, who allowed the things to go on in this world that go on, I spit in his face and curse him for a cowardly and cruel being.

See... I am more then willing to risk the possibility of a next life, in order to be a free willed being in this one who is responsible for his own fate.

 

I have this funny notion that if there really were god, it must have intended the bible to be a giant litmus test...
...anyone who falls for it definetly ain't getting into heaven. :2thumbsup:

ZW :beatnik:

 

There must be balance. This - awful, hard and especially undeserved things serve a balance.

 

I am being a free willed being. I chose a faith contrary to that of my parents and friends.

Archbishop Dolan (of New York) said, because the very culture declaring itself independent of God and morality has become “terribly dependent” on “money, insurance, gas, weapons, security systems or even upon alcohol, pornography, lust, gambling and drugs.”

From the Christian worldview, being bound by sin is being a slave--bound to death and destruction. Freedom comes from recognising the need for God in our own lives.

It seems you are putting me into a Pascalian Wager. This is not the case. Although I find it interesting you appear to be putting yourself squarely within a reverse-Pascalian Wager. I would try my darndest to love and serve God even if after life, there was nothing for eternity. I also do not think that simply believing is enough. I also think that I am responsible for my own fate. I am not sitting here saying "God save me, God save me", as chances for salvation float by. I reach out and grasp those things which God has put here for us. Contrary to popular idiom, god does not meet us halfway, but comes right down to meet us in the muck, joys, and suffering that is humanity. After seeing that I am a sinner, I do not sit by and say "Well God, its up to you to fix everything". He already has! I just need to ask "God, what do I need to do?"

Rene Girard has sayed all religions look for peace, but Christianity looks for Truth. He has also said, about relativism, "because all truths are treated as equal, since there is said to be no objective Truth, you are forced to be banal and superficial. You cannot be truly committed to anything, to be "for" something -- even if only for the time being" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-gardels/ratzinger-is-right_b_667.html

 

cause hes a lousy parent...

 

I don't know who I agree with. I would say suffering is necessary, not only on a personal level but large scale events and suffering of large populations. That doesn't need to be explained by god - if you put your hand in a fire, and it doesn't hurt then you won't remove it and lose your arm. Why the large scale suffering like epidemics, wars and mass poverty? Either there's no God and there doesn't need to be this (it's random, not planned), or God wants it there. If God wants it there, it must have a purpose. And if you think back, all this needless suffering, the wars and famine, all the pain, it has caused us to wake up and give back to the world.

 

So, all the people around the world dying of disease, being killed in wars, being stoned to death, being raped and murdered...

All of these are good things then?

I only assume this is what you mean when you say he has already fixed things.

If things are fixed, why would they need to be changed?

 

So, God is causing the pain and suffering to make a point?

 

Maybe, or it's there for a reason. Think about it - would we have courts of justice, medicine and health facilities if it weren't these horrible events? Would there be HipForums? No - everyone would be happy and in their own little world not needing anyone or anything. But because of pain, loneliness, hunger, agony more people are waking up and taking humanitarian action and doing God's work, being what God wants us to be. More people care about others and are aware of what's going on across the world. That's a good thing, and it's waking up to our potential as God's children. It's not yet a fraction of the world's population but it's more than 1000 years ago, I think. Just look at HipForums. If God is eternal he would know the future and could envisage a paradise where everyone would care for another as much as themselves. The only way to reach that is through enormous suffering and compassion for one another. Although I don't think that's what the bible says.

The other option is we're here after millions of years of evolution and it's partly because of the pain that we were successful. Large scale misery need have no reason. That's a mechanistic explanation, not a teleological one although it could be said to be part of God's plan. If there were no pain there would be no reason to strive so we might have been wiped out by other creatures or natural events.

Both are possible for me, but there's a point beyond this where I have to say I don't know.

 

moo.