Is God responsible for suffering?

[dyanaprajna2011]

It is quite disingenuous of you to talk about God's responsibility (in the case of sufferings/evil only) without first establishing the 'purpose of God's creation' , don't you think ? I don't think it is possible to have a constructive discussion of 'evil' and 'God's plan' without first establishing our purpose on earth and how it relates to hereafter (especially in the case of Islam because all those things are highly interconnected and interdependent). This seems to be as sadistic an attempt to justify(feel good about) non-belief at the expense of mocking the belief of (especially) the believers in Abrahamic faith.

It's not disingenuous at all, in fact, I've already established why that is. The reason why God created us, and all that entails, has nothing to do with why God would allow suffering. But maybe you're right, so let's discuss that. Why did God create us? You tell me that, and I'll give you my explanation.

And, it's not an attempt to justify non-belief at the expense of mocking the belief of believers, particularly of the Abrahamic God. It actually plays into the idea that two of those Abrahamic religions, namely, Christianity and Islam, are so intent on getting everyone to convert to their religion. Christians and Muslims expect everyone else to accept their religion, so is it wrong to expect a rational answer as to why your God would allow suffering? It's actually quite rational, and I don't think that anyone who would convert to either of those religions without first having established a rational reason why God would allow suffering hasn't thought it out enough. So please excuse me for attempting to analyze this from all positions.

So, I'll go along with your line of reasoning. So answer me the question from your point of view: why did God create us?

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Is knowledge to blame for ignorance?
Is light to blame for dark?
Perhaps then it would be correct to blame God for suffering.

Is it said of knowledge that it created ignorance and loves it?
Is it said of light that it created darkness, and wants the best for it?

I don't see how the comparison is valid.

 

[Levite]

If you haven't noticed what I've tried to point out by now, I'll spell it out. It seem the overriding opinion of those in the Abrahamic religions is that humans are the primary cause of suffering. But this poses a few problems:

1. It shows that God is either unconcerned with our suffering, doesn't care, or, delights in our suffering.
2. It gives humans more power than God, as humans have the power to cause suffering, and God is either unwilling or unable to stop it.
3. This, to me, is the primary point: why did God not make things where suffering was not a part of his plan? Could he not have done this? If he is indeed all-powerful and all-loving, he could have easily devised a plan where humans could live happy and peaceful.

Placing the blame on humans, to me, is sidestepping the issue: God, ultimately, is the root of suffering. He allows it, he gave humans the propensity for it, he has the power to stop it but doesn't, and the claims that he loves all beings is found wanting.

First of all, no one is disputing that God is, ultimately and indirectly, the root of suffering. God is, ultimately, the root of everything.

What is being disputed is God's direct responsibility for all suffering, and the presumption that His creation of the universe and human beings in such ways as permit suffering to exist indicates malicious intent in general or malice toward any specific individual. Nor does Judaism claim that God is omnibenevolent or all-loving, only that He is not malicious or specifically cruel, and that He cares for us all, even when it might appear otherwise.

Overall, the only answer to theodicy is faith: one either is willing to choose to believe in God's basically good intentions despite the existence of suffering or one is not. What our rabbis essentially tell us to have faith in is that, since this is the universe that God created, and since He made it (and made us) in such ways as readily permit suffering to occur, He must have reasons why He did not make the universe in other ways, and our free will must be terribly important to Him for some reasons also: so we trust God that His reasons are good ones.

Some have taught, and I tend to agree in a certain limited fashion, that God gave us free will because that is the capacity that is His "image," and that what God wishes of us in giving us a capacity He knows many will surely abuse, is for us to attain wisdom and compassion through experience. That He permits some individuals to suffer as the price, so to speak, of human moral evolution, much as a parent will give a child instructions so as to help them avoid misadventure, yet will know that sooner or later, the child will disobey, and only through experiencing the consequences of their disobedience-- sometimes more than once-- will they eventually grasp the reality and importance of the lesson initially given.

In the end, there is no objective proof of this hypothesis, just as there is no objective proof of anything about God. One either chooses to believe this particular theological hypothesis, or one does not.

 

[Falvlun]

If God exists, then he is at least partially responsible for suffering. Do humans bring a lot of it on themselves? Of course. But God has some skin in the game too. I really don't see how it can be honestly denied.

Also note that responsibility is a tricky concept.

 

[dan b]

My question is: is God responsible for human suffering?

This question came about from a conversation me and my father-in-law had. He's a fundamentalist Christian. Since me and my fiance only have one car, he takes me to work, and normally we just listen to classical music, and talk about everyday life. But sometimes, he'll bring up biblical topics, particularly on Wednesdays. Last Wednesday, apparently the sermon was on Job. As my father-in-law was talking about the sermon and what he thought of it, he said something that, while I was mostly trying to just nod along (they're in denial that I'm a Buddhist, and still think of me as a Christian), completely floored me, as I couldn't comprehend the logic that went into this statement.

So, he was discussing Job's suffering. He mentioned how Satan came to God, and asked that he be allowed to tempt him and make him suffer, in order to show God that Job would curse him if he didn't have such a good life as he had. God allowed Satan, on three different times, to perform three different torments. And then this is what my father-in-law said: "Some people ask why God makes people suffer? But in the story of Job, God didn't make Job suffer, God allowed Satan to make Job suffer, so God's innocence and goodness was left intact." I couldn't possibly comprehend the logic that went into this thought. It's the same as saying Hitler wasn't responsible for the Holocaust, because he wasn't the one doing all the experiments on the Jews. He then said that people ask "why do good people suffer?" He then made the statement that no one is good, so the question is invalid. But then he mentioned people that give millions to charities and to help those less fortunate, and admitted that he didn't have an easy answer.

So, is God responsible for people's suffering?

No, nature is.

 

[Falvlun]

No, nature is.

And who do you think created nature?

 

[dan b]

And who do you think created nature?

If your son comitted a crime when he was thirty years old, would you be held responsible.

These things cannot be logically explained lightly, To understand and really get the preciouse nugget at the center of the peelings we must not block our own way with small fry ideas. This is the discussion of sages and saints. This is the good stuff!

 

[atanu]

My question is: is God responsible for human suffering?

So, is God responsible for people's suffering?

I will say, NO.

Creation is so perfect that a very few, maybe a one in zillions, gets the view that creation is a 3D movie. It is perfect since no one suspects it to be a play.

 

[dan b]

I will say, NO.

Creation is so perfect that a very few, maybe a one in zillions, gets the view that creation is a 3D movie. It is perfect since no one suspects it to be a play.

The world is an illusion(Maya) only for those who are part of the "root of the tree of life." Then you are living underground and just following the repeating cycles of nature. Then you have karma and reincarnation. Because your live, die, get swallowed up by what eats you and live again as it.


But Jesus Christ brought us a possibliity to leaave this endless cycle of nature and join the spiritual existence which never ends. To understand this you can only enter if you empty your present cup of preconcieved ideas to allow it to be re-filled with the new. First you must accomplish your Yoga.

 

[nazz]

The world is an illusion(Maya) only for those who are part of the "root of the tree of life." Then you are living underground and just following the repeating cycles of nature. Then you have karma and reincarnation. Because your live, die, get swallowed up by what eats you and live again as it.


But Jesus Christ brought us a possibliity to leaave this endless cycle of nature and join the spiritual existence which never ends. To understand this you can only enter if you empty your present cup of preconcieved ideas to allow it to be re-filled with the new. First you must accomplish your Yoga.

perks up...

I like this

 

[Falvlun]

If your son comitted a crime when he was thirty years old, would you be held responsible.

Not legally. But if I was a horrible parent, abusing or neglecting my child, then certainly I bear some responsibility for him becoming a criminal.

And besides, the comparison is absurd. Parents are not omnipotent creators. They do not have blueprint control over how human nature was originally designed. God does.

These things cannot be logically explained lightly, To understand and really get the preciouse nugget at the center of the peelings we must not block our own way with small fry ideas. This is the discussion of sages and saints. This is the good stuff!

What is "small fry" about the idea that since God is the originator of everything, he therefore, is also the originator of suffering? Why is that not able to be logically deduced?

 

[dan b]

Not legally. But if I was a horrible parent, abusing or neglecting my child, then certainly I bear some responsibility for him becoming a criminal.

And besides, the comparison is absurd. Parents are not omnipotent creators. They do not have blueprint control over how human nature was originally designed. God does.


What is "small fry" about the idea that since God is the originator of everything, he therefore, is also the originator of suffering? Why is that not able to be logically deduced?

Jesus Christ told us that God is our "father." "Our Father, who are't in heaven, hallow be they name, thy kingdom come....." Matt.6;10

Human being are make special, not like animals at all. We are in the "image of God." We are his children.

So no, God is not responsible for our actions anymore than a parent is responsible for the acts of his grown up children. That is why he is called our father. Because we are his children. And children grow into adults who are then self responsible. Otherwise it doesn't make sense if we are all just designed and created to be robotic beings following programmed instructions. We have free will which makes us different than everything else in nature.

 

[Falvlun]

Jesus Christ told us that God is our "father." "Our Father, who are't in heaven, hallow be they name, thy kingdom come....." Matt.6;10

Human being are make special, not like animals at all. We are in the "image of God." We are his children.

Are you attempting to use the fact that God has been described as a Father to imply that he is literally exactly the same as a human father? You don't think there is any difference between how God created humans and how human men create children?

So no, God is not responsible for our actions anymore than a parent is responsible for the acts of his grown up children. That is why he is called our father. Because we are his children. And children grow into adults who are then self responsible. Otherwise it doesn't make sense if we are all just designed and created to be robotic beings following programmed instructions.

Did you miss the part where I say how a parent raises a child certainly effects the outcome of the sort of adult he will become?

Do you think that a father who beats his child has no responsibility for raising an adult who then beats his children?

Do you think that a parent who raises his kid to be a moral, upstanding citizen is equal to a parent who teaches his kid that lying, cheating, stealing, and murdering are okay? Do you think the good parent had no role in creating the upstanding, productive adult, and that the bad parent had no role in creating the prison-bound criminal? You do not believe there is any link, no responsibility at all there?

We have free will which makes us different than everything else in nature.

Yup. And God set it up so that making bad choices come easier than good ones. For example, if God had created things so that everyone had everything they needed to survive, do you think that there would be wars over resources and territory? Do you think that people would steal for food or money?

And depending on your brand of theology, God made it so that we are all born with a sinful nature! We don't even have the benefit of a blank slate. Our free-will choices are slanted towards sin.

Let's imagine that I built a robot with free-will.

Scenario 1:
Robot with free-will goes on shooting rampage. I manufactured it with those capabilities. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?
Scenario 2:
Robot with free-will decides to go on a shooting rampage. I am fully capable of stopping the robot after his choice becomes clear, but I choose not to. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?
Scenario 3:
Robot with free-will decides to go on a shooting rampage. I am fully capable of healing its victims, but I choose not to. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?
Scenario 4:
I built my robot with free-will, but also programmed it to feel pleasure whenever it shoots a human. It then decides to go on a shooting rampage. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?
Scenario 5:
I choose to place my robot with free-will in a location full of people who specifically despise robots. My robot accidentally shoots a child in a shoot-out that develops between my robot and the people who hate robots. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?

The point being that free-will does not exist in a vacuum. All of these scenarios have human-God parallels. God gave us the ability to do evil things (he didn't have to), God gave us a nature which inclines towards doing evil things (and he didn't have to), God specifically built us to feel pleasure by doing things he considers sinful (like sex, which he didn't have to), God is capable of preventing harm from occurring when humans choose to express their free-will in harmful ways (and he doesn't), God is capable of healing those who have been harmed (and he doesn't), and God placed us in a world in which it is difficult to avoid making free-will decisions that cause suffering due to struggles to survive (and he didn't have to).

Free-will does not absolve an omnipotent Creator God from the suffering caused by humans. And that doesn't even cover suffering caused by natural means. The idea is downright obscene.

 

[dan b]

Are you attempting to use the fact that God has been described as a Father to imply that he is literally exactly the same as a human father? You don't think there is any difference between how God created humans and how human men create children?


Did you miss the part where I say how a parent raises a child certainly effects the outcome of the sort of adult he will become?

Do you think that a father who beats his child has no responsibility for raising an adult who then beats his children?

Do you think that a parent who raises his kid to be a moral, upstanding citizen is equal to a parent who teaches his kid that lying, cheating, stealing, and murdering are okay? Do you think the good parent had no role in creating the upstanding, productive adult, and that the bad parent had no role in creating the prison-bound criminal? You do not believe there is any link, no responsibility at all there?


Yup. And God set it up so that making bad choices come easier than good ones. For example, if God had created things so that everyone had everything they needed to survive, do you think that there would be wars over resources and territory? Do you think that people would steal for food or money?

And depending on your brand of theology, God made it so that we are all born with a sinful nature! We don't even have the benefit of a blank slate. Our free-will choices are slanted towards sin.

Let's imagine that I built a robot with free-will.

Scenario 1:
Robot with free-will goes on shooting rampage. I manufactured it with those capabilities. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?
Scenario 2:
Robot with free-will decides to go on a shooting rampage. I am fully capable of stopping the robot after his choice becomes clear, but I choose not to. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?
Scenario 3:
Robot with free-will decides to go on a shooting rampage. I am fully capable of healing its victims, but I choose not to. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?
Scenario 4:
I built my robot with free-will, but also programmed it to feel pleasure whenever it shoots a human. It then decides to go on a shooting rampage. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?
Scenario 5:
I choose to place my robot with free-will in a location full of people who specifically despise robots. My robot accidentally shoots a child in a shoot-out that develops between my robot and the people who hate robots. Do I bear any responsibility for the suffering caused by my robot?

The point being that free-will does not exist in a vacuum. All of these scenarios have human-God parallels. God gave us the ability to do evil things (he didn't have to), God gave us a nature which inclines towards doing evil things (and he didn't have to), God specifically built us to feel pleasure by doing things he considers sinful (like sex, which he didn't have to), God is capable of preventing harm from occurring when humans choose to express their free-will in harmful ways (and he doesn't), God is capable of healing those who have been harmed (and he doesn't), and God placed us in a world in which it is difficult to avoid making free-will decisions that cause suffering due to struggles to survive (and he didn't have to).

Free-will does not absolve an omnipotent Creator God from the suffering caused by humans. And that doesn't even cover suffering caused by natural means. The idea is downright obscene.

But the Bible lays it out that God is our father in heaven. It would not use the term "father" if it wasn't appropriat to describe the relationship. Jesus tells us the paragle of the "son returning to his father." That is meant to be us returning to God.

God gave us life to be sons and we drive whereever we want now. Thats why there is a Judgment Day at the end. It is because the way he set it up we are responsible for our own lives and choices. Life therefore has a purpose. To earn Jesus's eternal life offering" by following his teachings. It's a beautiful thing!

 

[Falvlun]

But the Bible lays it out that God is our father in heaven. It would not use the term "father" if it wasn't appropriat to describe the relationship.

It describes an aspect of the relationship, sure. But I'm not talking about the relationship. I am talking about God's role as the Creator of Humans. The Father analogy really has nothing to do with that part.

God gave us life to be sons and we drive whereever we want now. Thats why there is a Judgment Day at the end. It is because the way he set it up we are responsible for our own lives and choices. Life therefore has a purpose. To earn Jesus's eternal life offering" by following his teachings. It's a beautiful thing!

Nothing you said there even remotely addressed any of my criticism. You just used it for a pulpit.

 

[dan b]

It describes an aspect of the relationship, sure. But I'm not talking about the relationship. I am talking about God's role as the Creator of Humans. The Father analogy really has nothing to do with that part.


Nothing you said there even remotely addressed any of my criticism. You just used it for a pulpit.

The point that you may be failing to see is that Mankind was not just "God's creation" and thats it. God's creation over the six Genesis days consisted of the elements, plants, planets, animals and mankind. But he did not assign a special role to any of the other creations except to Mankind. '

This fact that God could assign this special role and that he could place expectations upon human beings meant that he must have endowed them with the capacity to meet these requirements. And what was this capacity with which mankind would use to make independant desisions as whether to obey God or not. This capacity is that mankind was the only creation made "in the image of God." He had free will.

Mankind is the only one of God's creations which has free will just like God our father has. All of the other creations are a part of nature and follow the commands of action and reaction. God could never expect any of the other creations to follow or obey commandments which he gave them. But he gave mankind commandments. So we know that he must have given mankind the ability to choose his own choices and not just react out of nature.

 

[Sir Doom]

And before he gave commandments at all, he decided that humans would be easily damaged and that damage would be agonizing. And before that he stocked the world with tons of sharp things.

Explain how this is not god being responsible for suffering.

 

[Falvlun]

Mankind is the only one of God's creations which has free will just like God our father has. All of the other creations are a part of nature and follow the commands of action and reaction. God could never expect any of the other creations to follow or obey commandments which he gave them. But he gave mankind commandments. So we know that he must have given mankind the ability to choose his own choices and not just react out of nature.

I never said that humans didn't have free will, nor do I maintain that they don't have any responsibility for the decisions they make. The point is that free-will does not exist in a vaccum. And God is very much responsible both for our innate nature and for the environment in which we find ourselves. This means that he shares partial responsibility.

Care to actually address any of the scenarios I offered? Do you still hold the ridiculous notion that parents don't have any responsibility in the way their kids turn out, despite the fact that adults have free-will?

 

[dan b]

And before he gave commandments at all, he decided that humans would be easily damaged and that damage would be agonizing. And before that he stocked the world with tons of sharp things.

Explain how this is not god being responsible for suffering.

God is our father. We are his 30 year old sons. Do we love to be alive and in this present natural world?

A healthy person will answer yes, without the bad points, i love to live life in this world of elements, plants, animals and mankind. But without the many unpleasantries is possible, no hurt, no saddness, no tired, no death at the end. That is what God has created us to be. Healthy people with this attitude.

A child can say the same about is dad. Dad, why did you bring me into this world?

Son, "don't you want to live here and grow up as a human being?"

Yes, i do want to live as a person in this natural world, i can do things, i can have so much fun, i am interested in quite a few things here

The dad then tells his son that he too thinks that life is good and fun and that is why he brought him into this natural physical world.


We are the son, God is the dad. What is it now again that we are diss-satisfied with? I quite forgot the question.

 

[dan b]

I never said that humans didn't have free will, nor do I maintain that they don't have any responsibility for the decisions they make. The point is that free-will does not exist in a vaccum. And God is very much responsible both for our innate nature and for the environment in which we find ourselves. This means that he shares partial responsibility.

Care to actually address any of the scenarios I offered? Do you still hold the ridiculous notion that parents don't have any responsibility in the way their kids turn out, despite the fact that adults have free-will?

Is he more responsible than a dad is when he fathers a son in this world?