DiscussMormonism.com

A thread was started at MAD and I can't answer there for a few reasons (I'm not banned), and I'm having mental fits that I can't. So, I'll do it here. :)

The title of the thread in bold and the question posed directly under it:

My New Response To A Classic Atheist Question., If god exists, why does he let good people suffer?

Why do YOU let good people suffer?

~~~~Then there's this reply that I can make no sense of. Obviously I'm not a very good atheist 'cause it confuses the hell out of me!~~~

Most atheists are into personal freedom, yet if evil didn't exist, there wouldn't be any personal freedom. Now, there is the paradox, their version of a good god wouldn't permit personal freedom by not permitting evil to exist, yet their version of a good god would permit personal freedom by permitting evil to exist.

There god wouldn't permit extremely evil actions to happen, yet if all extremely evil actions could not happen because of their god's will, how long would it be before a moderate evil action would be considered to be extremely evil?

So, what the atheists I have talked with about this subject want, as far as I know, are the ability to commit all and any actions, but there not to be any bad/evil consequences from those actions.

My reply:

Most atheists are into personal freedom, yet if evil didn't exist, there wouldn't be any personal freedom.

Huh?

Now, there is the paradox, their version of a good god wouldn't permit personal freedom by not permitting evil to exist, yet their version of a good god would permit personal freedom by permitting evil to exist.

I don't have a version of a "good god" 'cause I don't have a belief in God.

There god wouldn't permit extremely evil actions to happen, yet if all extremely evil actions could not happen because of their god's will, how long would it be before a moderate evil action would be considered to be extremely evil?

I'm confused. What God is this, precisely, that atheists believe in?

So, what the atheists I have talked with about this subject want, as far as I know, are the ability to commit all and any actions, but there not to be any bad/evil consequences from those actions.

What are evil consequences? I'll take bad! A bad consequence could be a punishment for behavior that hurts others in society. Although I wouldn't phrase it that way. I'd just say a consequence. There are usually consequences for most actions...

I fear the atheists you've talked to about this subject (those that believe in a "good god") may be confused. At least more so than I am, at the moment.



As to the OP: Are you equating a human being to God by this question? You think a human being could possibly be in the same realm as God as to alleviating suffering? That doesn't say much about God, does it?

I don't let good people suffer. If I was the cause of suffering and did not intercede then that would be letting good people suffer. If I saw someone suffering and did not intervene then I would be letting good people suffer. Fortunately I'm not too keen on suffering and try to avoid hurting others and try to do all I can to alleviate suffering when I witness it. Sometimes I'm better at this endeavor than at other times. Fortunately no one is sending up prayers to me that I may feel compelled to answer.

Moniker wrote:A thread was started at MAD and I can't answer there for a few reasons (I'm not banned), and I'm having mental fits that I can't. So, I'll do it here. :)

The title of the thread in bold and the question posed directly under it:

My New Response To A Classic Atheist Question., If god exists, why does he let good people suffer?

Why do YOU let good people suffer?

~~~~

Other than the fact that I'm human, nowhere near omnipotent, and possessing quite constrained resources, I'm not sure.

I don't have a problem with the whole 'how can can allow suffering' stuff. If one believes there's no God, or one believes that there is a God but it's basically a hands-off God, then suffering is fully compatible.

The problem really is one for the firm believer who posits a charitable, loving, caring God who helps little boys find lost car keys. How to fit a callous, seemingly uncaring God into THAT framework is the problem.

For those of you who hold this belief, I'd be interested in any evidence that God intervenes according to certain established principles.

From where I sit, if there's a God, and it does intervene, it does so in a highly capricious manner.

Urroner said:

So, what the atheists I have talked with about this subject want, as far as I know, are the ability to commit all and any actions, but there not to be any bad/evil consequences from those actions.

This is complete and utter b***s***.

Yeah, I can just imagine the conversation urroner had with atheists:

urroner: how could you have personal freedom if evil didn't exist?

urroner's bizarre and troubled atheist respondent: what I really want is to do anything I want without having to suffer consequences from those actions, dude!!!

I have a suspicion that whatever the atheist may or may not have said suffered mightily under urroner's translation.

Obviously, the person posting this thread isn't very smart. There are no implications for the existence of atheists given that they allow bad things to happen.

Gadianton wrote:Obviously, the person posting this thread isn't very smart. There are no implications for the existence of atheists given that they allow bad things to happen.

Obviously the person that wanted to reply to this OP from MAD wasn't very smart either -- since she didn't even think about that!

by the way, Gad, I like your new avatar.

Moniker wrote:

anonymous MADite wrote:Most atheists are into personal freedom, yet if evil didn't exist, there wouldn't be any personal freedom.

The anonymous MADite you quote is stupider than average. He supposes that evil must exist or else there wouldn't be any personal freedom, but all you need is good and more good choices, with appropriate rewards and punishments, and there would be plenty of personal freedom.

Why evil? Okay, granting evil, why just this magical amount of evil instead of lots of evil -- or else way, way less evil? I can envision a world where evil people can blow up their enemies' brains just by thinking about it, but that evil doesn't exist except in pulp horror movies (like Scanners, which I watched with my kids this weekend. Fantastic!) But why doesn't that level of evil exist in god-created reality? Isn't personal freedom restricted by disallowing the power to evilly explode minds?

There's just the magical amount of evil allowed. It's just right.

Riiiight

This movie freaked me out as a kid. Mainly that my brother would give me the evil stare and tell me to prepare for the inevitable... eep!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY-03vYYAjA

What was God thinking to not allow that sort of evil in the world now? I feel deprived! No free will without the ability to blow up minds! Curse you God!

Are you equating a human being to God by this question? You think a human being could possibly be in the same realm as God as to alleviating suffering? That doesn't say much about God, does it?

All I know is that if there is a God, she (God would be a lady) would look and sound like Yael Naim.

God I love her.

The other thread is actually fairly interesting.

It's morphed into talk about agency and I suppose that's what urroner was talking about -- which went right over my head 'cause I don't think in religious terms such as that.

I used to get rather excited when there was talk about God allowing certain acts of nature or man to destroy others. I couldn't reconcile those that said they received little blessings from God (or big ones - a life saved) and yet, so many others are virtually ignored by this God. Why would God intercede for some and not others? God delivers curses according to LDS?! God intercedes for some with blessings and essentially becomes a Mafia Boss (thanks Beastie!) that doles out favors to his favorites.

This used to sum up my thoughts on God in relation to evil in the world and what I assumed most others that believed in God would think, as well:

The Pope at Aushwitz

"In a place like this, words fail. In the end, there can only be a dread silence - a silence which is itself a heartfelt cry to God: Why, Lord, did you remain silent? How could you tolerate all this?" he said in a speech in Italian.

"Our silence becomes in turn a plea for forgiveness and reconciliation, a plea to the living God never to let this happen again."

I've been to Hiroshima as a child. I understood that horrific acts happened in our world. There was suffering, disease, poverty, etc... -- God did not exist.

Later I wondered often how those that viewed God as loving (at least loving them) could view natural disasters, disease, etc... and reconcile why God helped find lost kitties, pay mortgages, and yet there is so much suffering in our world! I was told once that my views of suffering were exaggerated and that I was viewing others from my own Middle Class existence and these people were happy. Happy? Children sold into the sex trade? Women wailing over the dead bodies of the deceased? AIDS withering away the vibrancy of life? Ebola seeping out the life of those infected? War? Poverty? Etc... Was I exaggerating suffering? Do those that attempt to believe in a personal God and think he offers blessings to them and not to others somehow downplay the suffering of others? I really used to question how those that saw suffering kept their belief in God for this was precisely why I lost it as a child.

When I finally was able to recognize that God was not present and men and nature alone were accountable for the world I no longer struggled with the question of who and what God was. I seriously do NOT understand how others make this work for them. I don't understand how anyone can believe in a personal God. Matter of fact this is one thing that can quickly infuriate me when I see people on these sites praising God for their happy middle class American existence and finding their lost kitties.

Then on the other board there is talking about testing those who believe. Those that already believe get their rewards in retrieval of car keys. God can't really intercede everywhere or else they would just believe too easily. Oh, I can make no sense of these defenses of an indefensible arbitrary God.

Deborah replied with this:

It's obvious that a person who believes in a pre-mortal life, mortal life and after-life has a totally different view of life and it's purpose than someone who has no belief in God at all. If God doesn't exist it's all a matter of chance and if you are lucky you get to be born in an affluent family in a free country. If not then you spend your life in misery. The sad thing is none of this has any meaning. I can't even imagine how miserable it would be to think that.If mortal life is looked at as a school where even infants are actually adults in spirit who chose their short sojourn on earth just for the taste of mortality and the opportunity for a physical body, then even the most tragic events have some meaning. Suffering is only a happenstance of mortality and is short-lived and hope is the theme that enables people to endure.

I don't understand why those that believe can not accept that atheists can see meaning. There is meaning in each life, in our world, in joy, in hunger, in horror, in ecstasy -- each bit of the human condition has meaning! It just is not a fantasy of a plan and an idyllic afterlife. The meaning, for me, is to recognize our world AS IT IS and do what is in my power to enjoy my life and help my fellow man when I can for I recognize that it is ONLY US. If I were to believe that tragic events always had some meaning placed upon them by God then I would hate God!

If God can intervene to find lost keys is that NOT changing free will? For goodness sake -- let car keys and kitties stay lost! How does intervening with some not destroy their agency? I don't get their arguments, at all!