1. Hello Guest! You are browsing the forums as a guest; you will have limited permissions as a guest so we advise registering to enjoy the forums fully. Remember: we are a Christian ONLY site - any user who is not Christian will not be approved. Blessings, Christian Forum Site Staff
    Dismiss Notice

Philosophy blunder

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by Brian J. Rivera, Nov 16, 2014.

  1. Hi guys, it's been a while since I posted. From now on I want to post on every Sunday. Alot of dumb stuff happened and I'd love to go over it with everyone. I really enjoy my philosophy class, but there are times when people ruin it. The topic was "philosophy of religion:why does god allow suffering". The professor, let's call him Jimbo, decided to go over the atheist perspective first and then we went over the theist response. I won't go over anything, but I will just paraphrase a few main points.

    Atheist Johnson gives an example of "bad" arguments:

    J: "The idea that we should operate independently from god and work to help ourselves is a bad arguement. Mainly because god should help the areas that do not have access to fire departments, police, etc."

    Theist Hick:

    H: "Two types of evil which are moral evil and non moral evil.

    God cannot prevent moral evil because humans have free will.

    It is hard to tell which evil is moral evil and moral evil because they interact a lot. If god would stop all non moral evil (falling to death, fires, SIDs, accidents, etc.) then there would be no such thing as good. People would not have to work since no harm could come from not working. People would not have to eat since no harm comes from not eating. There would be no good acts since no one suffers from starvation, being poor, etc. This would be a world of perfect good and is the worst possible existence. Suffering allows us to soul build."

    Jimbo comments by saying: "I agree with some of these points but why does their have to be so much suffering. Why couldn't Hitler have killed only 300 people. Also (student says this) is all suffering really soul building for example a baby deer that gets eaten alive while no one watches."

    What do you guys think about this? I'll comment after I get a few responses.

    Side topic kinda interesting:
    Also one funny thing happened in class. (funny because it was stupid) Someone mentioned that god is responsible for most of the problems in the bible. He used the example of Cain and Abel and said that god caused Abel's murder. I won't comment to much on this, but I'm going to start working on a new series of notes I'll call it"reexamining bible stories".

    I suggest reading hebrews 11 and genesis 4. God did not want Cain to murder Abel and even talks to Cain to build him up. The Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your countenance fallen? 7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it.” Anyway what do you guys think about this? I think it's pretty dumb and some other things I cannot say right now. :p
  2. Silk likes this.
  3. Your question was.....
    "why does god allow suffering"?

    Colossians 1:24 says....
    "Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his bodies sake, which is the church".

    C.S. Lewis one said that the “problem of pain,” is atheism’s most potent weapon against the Christian faith.

    All true science and history, if rightly understood, support the fact of God. This evidence is so strong that, as the Bible says: “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God (Psalm 14:1).

    Most atheists, therefore, without any objective evidence on which to base their faith in “no God”, must resort finally to philosophical objections. And this problem of suffering is the greatest of these.
    That is, they say, how can a
    God of love permit such things in His world as war, sickness, pain, and death, especially when their effects often are felt most keenly by those who are apparently innocent?

    Either He is not a God of love and is indifferent to human suffering, or else He is not a God of power and is therefore helpless to do anything about it. In either case, the Biblical God who is supposedly one of both absolute power and perfect love becomes an impossible anachronism. Or so they claim!

    This is a real difficulty, but atheism is certainly not the answer, and neither is agnosticism. While there is much evil in the world, there is even more that is good. This is proved by the mere fact that people normally try to hang on to life as long as they can. Furthermore, everyone instinctively recognizes that “good” is a higher order of truth than “bad”.

    We need also to recognize that our very minds were created by God. We can only use these minds to the extent that He allows, and it is, therefore, utterly presumptuous for us to use them to question Him and His motives.

    “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Genesis 18:25).

    “Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed it, why hast Thou made me thus?” (Romans 9:20).

    We ourselves do not establish the standards of what is right. Only the Creator of all reality can do that. We need to settle it, in our minds and hearts, whether we understand it or not, that whatever God does is, by definition, right.
    Silk likes this.
  4. From the beginning, Adam's fall, right through to today - humankind is responsible for all evil and suffering by allowing evil in and to make itself at home. When one such as a Hitler turns to evil, we all suffer and allow it to build up and harm. And yet when good rise up - the tyrant no longer has sway. And then we allow it to build again. And blame God. But God did send Himself to heal.
    Major likes this.
  5. 1. Agreed, it is a bad argument. God does have 'our' backs. The missing cog in the statement though is that it is our decision to be someone He can or someone He can't help John 9:31.

    2. The only evil that exists is rebellion to God. David tells us to give thanks because God is good, not evil in Psalm 136:1. If God was behind any 'non moral' evil, we would not give thanks.

    3. A better question is... why did God allow someone as evil as Hitler, to live for so long? It points to a very merciful and longsuffering God. Also, god bashers conveniently forget the story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (God always has our backs ;) even with / in the 'appearance' of suffering).

    4. God is an all consuming fire of goodness, holiness and righteousness. There are no evil thoughts, intentions or actions from Him / existing with Him. What is happening here is that people are making assumptions on the unknown. Taking only God's omniscience into the equation / = half truth. God is omniscient and God is good. Our minds can simply not grasp how God achieves righteousness with His omniscience but God wants us to give Him the benefit of the doubt!! Eph 3:18 may have power, together with all the Lord's holy people, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ.

  6. Whew good response, sorry I didn't really respond that quickly. I actually have really bad allergies and I've also been experiencing a runny nose for 1 day straight. Very good responses btw. I would also say that Jimbo's number of 300 was completely arbitrary and he should have said "why not just 1 person". Anyway your argument is correct it is better to say "why was Hitler allowed to live for so long?". I also feel like the teacher was kind of pointing to the question of "why doesn't god just create a world where humans can do every other wrong except for murder and rape". I justify it with the following points: God does not appear and reward us when we do good so it is only fair that he does not hinder wronger doers, God works through people on some occasions, everyone will get their fair due in the end(Hitler will suffer more after killing so many than he would have if god stopped him). Those are all the reasons i have come up with.

    Anyway what do you guys think of the whole Abel and Cain deal?
  7. Jewish apocrypha indicates that Cain slew Abel because Abel got the sister as wife that Cain wanted. Cain used violence to resolve his problems. God did try to alert him prior to the act.
    Abdicate likes this.
  8. Interesting do you know which one states that?

    Also for everyone some will object saying Yahweh does intervene against our free wil like during sodom and gomorah. What would you guys say in response
  9. I think? it is in the midrash about Cain and Abel.

    I don't agree at all that God intervened with free will in the Sodom and Gomorrah instance. I think the verses where Abraham is said to "negotiate" with God about destroying these cities is a clue. They got down to 10 righteous men. Lot seperated from Abraham because there was not enough land and resources and it's often implied that Lot's wife was behind this move. Abraham loved Lot like a son - not having had any to an old age. I don't think, even when Lot and his men were captured and Abraham and his men went to save him that Lot lost all his men. Personally I believe Lot had become tainted/corrupt where he was living. And I think his men had all gone over to the dark side. That tells us that there was naught but evil having taken over. People who follow the seed of Ham indicate these cities are in the midst of nephilim blood lines and that's why men, women, children, and animals were all destroyed. If you look at Lot's actions in offering his 2 virgin daughters and then later taking same daughters and impregnating same after, you cannot conclude Lot is righteous. The offspring of the daughters all became Israel's enemies.

    **Edit - I meant to add follow the seed folks think that the towns people knew these 2 were angels and that is precisely why they wanted intercourse - to produce offspring.

  10. Lot impregnated his daughter's out of necessity if I recalled and I don't believe it was a sort of happy joy message trying to be displayed
  11. #11 Silk, Dec 6, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2014
    Necessity? The 2 daughters got Lot drunk.

    Gen 19:26 But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar of salt.
    Gen 19:27 And Abraham gat up early in the morning to the place where he stood before the LORD:
    Gen 19:28 And he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the plain, and beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace.
    Gen 19:29 And it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the plain, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when he overthrew the cities in the which Lot dwelt.
    Gen 19:30 And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters.
    Gen 19:31 And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth:
    Gen 19:32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.
    Gen 19:33 And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.
    Gen 19:34 And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.
    Gen 19:35 And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.
    Gen 19:36 Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.
    Gen 19:37 And the firstborn bare a son, and called his name Moab: the same is the father of the Moabites unto this day.
    Gen 19:38 And the younger, she also bare a son, and called his name Benammi: the same is the father of the children of Ammon unto this day.
  12. Wow I thought it was out of necessity, but clearly I was wrong. They were just being dumb.
  13. Do I detect sarcasm? Or perhaps you think all 3 or at least one was God led?
    Major likes this.
  14. Of course you are free to think as you will - Lot and daughters were :D.
  15. No I was being serious, silly. I thought the only reason lot's daughters got impregnated was out of necessity. However it looks more like they kinda jumped the gun.kinda makes you think if lot and his daughters were that bad, then how bad was everyone in that city.

    Idk what you mean by that.
  16. Apologies - I wasn't sure/clear if you weren't still thinking that Lot and his daughters were justified in their actions, after the miraculous save from Sodom & Gomorrah. And my last remark was directed at your original question about how S&M somehow interfered with free will. I don't see how it did. As I said before, IMO, Lot and his household were saved out of God's love of Abraham. And this story in particular, has me a bit fascinated with the influence of a righteous person and households. It bears on the question, or so it seems to me, of what might stay God's wrath/judgement. And has revelance, scripturally, to what/who is the restrainer in Thessalonians.
    Major likes this.
  17. Rofl - oops...I meant S&G not cough..S&M (bad silk self administered thwak)
  18. XD I just noticed that. At first I thought it was the name of lot's daughter.

Share This Page