Questions that believers cannot answer

[Trailblazer]

That is your assumption.
How can you really what God think or care about?

That is correct. I do not know that God does not give a rip if people suffer, but by the same token you do not know if God does give a rip if people suffer. Nobody know what is in God's Mind, so all we can have are personal opinions.

 

[firedragon]

No one ever likes my response to this issue whenever it comes up, because I'm saying that it's inappropriate to ask these questions in the first place.

To ask them we must stand in judgment of existence as if we know how "it should be" (free from suffering). But we don't know squat. We don't know why the universe exists. We don't even know why existence exists. We don't know if the universe is all that exists, or if existence includes more than the universe. We don't know if the universe or existence has any purpose besides it just being. We don't know what it's capacities or limitations are. We don't know if it has any boundaries or if there can 'be anything' beyond those boundaries.

So by what logic or reasoning are we presuming to know that existence should not involve suffering? I mean, what IS suffering, even, apart from our own preference to avoid it?

Yes. That's a good question. This question was discussed more than a thousand years ago and modern day philosophers respond with "I ask this question to make you feel doubt". This is not an internal critique that is made in the OP. It's an emotional response.

Charles Darwin was a theist or at least a deist when he came up with the "theory of evolution". It was later that he became an atheist. That's because his children died and he couldn't reconcile an all loving God vs death of his children.

There are some people who believe God exists. They have no choice after that to believe God exists. But they see suffering. E.g. Someone's death. So now what? There are some who start to hate God. Some who believe God is evil. Misotheism, and Dystheism. Two real world beliefs. They have to keep it hidden but it keeps coming out because everyone has a need to voice it due to remembering a suffering that occurred in life.

About a thousand years ago, a philosopher was talking about the slippery slope someone would get in with this argument answering your question. Thinking of a perfect world, where do we end? If humans had normal human minds, and everything was perfect, all healthy, no diseases, no disasters, they will live forever. So either they have to stop having sex or purchase some new worlds to spread as a species. The population will keep increasing forever. No one dies. They will inhabit the whole universe. Now what?

Then there are those called Antinatalists who believe it's better not to have kids. That will become the only solution. So people will suffer again because humans have a want to have children. Now God has to create humans with no urge to have children. Now you get immortal human beings, no children, just life. Now what? They need entertainment. They might get frustrated living forever. Thus God has to now make them not get bored living forever.

Eventually everyone has to be created as robots. No life. No feelings. Nothing.

This is the slippery slope you are speaking about. Good question.

 

[firedragon]

No, I never said that God is evil. I am only calling into question the claim that God is loving and just. That is a religious belief but there is no real world evidence to support that belief, not without resorting to religious apologetics.

I will cut and paste a response I gave to another gentleman in this thread.

 

[Spirit of Light]

That is correct. I do not know that God does not give a rip if people suffer, but by the same token you do not know if God does give a rip if people suffer. Nobody know what is in God's Mind, so all we can have are personal opinions.

I call it faith in God

 

[lewisnotmiller]

We only gain muscle by exercise. Life is difficult on purpose. Why?? God wants us to learn and grow.
We accept pain for a needed surgery. We accept that staying alive means we get old. We can also accept that life is difficult and that it’s okay.

Please...there is pain from which we can grow, and pure destruction and agony. To suggest all pain and suffering is a way for us to learn is trite.

 

[rational experiences]

We prove to ourselves what hu man commonsense is.

If we want to argue then arguing itself says any answer to an ask is questionable.

As it is. To argue.

We think.

We know what it is like to care. Seeing so much about suffering that we feel can pain about witnessing it. We cry. We plead asking for answers.

The truth ...

There isn't any answer that can claim a creator was righteous.

Fact. Once something higher was burning and being destroyed and removed.

Empty space as holes. Is the proof.

As you cannot claim a hole unless it previously was not a hole.

The question.... is perfection real and true?

Our lived answer states why there isn't perfection.

As to know one idea the opposite imperfection was expressed also.

Hence comparing is how a theory came about being said. Yet comparatives existed. So we understood comparing must have been expressed first to become a cause.

As its not an answer... as an answer is exact to the ideas and names.

Hence to say perfection already allows you to be aware. You express it knowing it isn't reality.

So what is said about god is real. Has higher purposes yet also expresses opposition.

Naturally.

Why we already knew there isn't an argument. Virtually we had to impose legal to try to stop human liars from claiming they know everything when it's impossible.

As just a matter of fact.

 

[Kenny]

However you want to answer it, if you have an answer.

The problem I have in answering is when do you call it apologetics and when do you call it an honest answer.

Why would one answer be apologetics but your statement of "I am not referring to suffering caused by our own choices we make that cause us to suffer, I am talking about suffering as the result of fate and predestination." isn't?

 

[PureX]

I did not claim that there should be no suffering in the world.
That is not what this thread is about.

None of this is about what 'should be.'
It is about the claims of religious people, that God is loving and just.
If God is a, then why c?
If God is b, then why d?

As I said, there are no answers that does not involve some kind of religious apologetic and just as I suspected that is all I have seen so far.

What is suffering? Just ask someone who is suffering and they will tell you.
Human suffering has nothing to so with avoidance, it simply exists.
Judging people who are suffering is cruel and insensitive and lacks compassion.

Why are we arguing with other people's religious beliefs? What business is it of ours what they believe?

Also, it is quite obvious to me that when people choose to believe that "God is good" that they are doing so out of hope, and with a desire to trust in the goodness of life even in a world that is often not good. Why on Earth would want to chastise them for that???

 

[Spirit of Light]

Why are we arguing with the other people's religious beliefs? What business is it of ours what they believe?

Also, it is quite obvious that when people choose to believe that "God is good" that they are doing so out of hope, and with a desire to trust in the goodness of life even in a world that is often not good. Why on Earth would want to chastise them for that???

Excelent answer

 

[rational experiences]

The review is the choice. Human position. By humans as humans only.

Equal humans owning created equality. The human. Position human.

Diversity owned by each one self.

Two human parents living legally by status.

Our exact position. Ownership.

I own my own vessel in other words euphemism.

Said so by intent. If I make a claim one way by words. Then I can also make another statement giving the same advice but said differently.

Legal. The human claim with status.

Ownership. Exact fixed held each one self position. Legal.

Two human beings. Adults. To have sex.

Stated exact legal position in creation.

Not creating. Legal. Exact.

Then you have the inheritance status any baby human born. Holy.

Inheritor of human life.

Exact and legal. The status.

Body O cell owned human woman.
Procreator of change adult human man. Notice man owning baby position procreation gain was a legal status.

Exact.

Life continuance also legally stated. By ice body.

Human sex. Human man. Human woman. Exact. Legal.

The testimonials new. Stated legal no man is God. Don't name creation.

Exact.

The teaching said after the dead destroyed attacked sacrificed giant life. Dinosaurs. The earth's God saviour body was born Inherited.

Legal exact science law of man's human observation.

The saviour of biology and a stable bio life was ice. A newly born earth body.

Exact.

Stated by men as a legal statement to other men who had theoried incorrectly.

As no human is any energy mass as types of body formed in cosmic history.

Exact and legal.

No theory existed from an attacked deceased dead bio giant life. As it had not returned to the living by the saviour status.

Human life had become the living body type. Was the saviour comparison no ice to ice about a human theist. Life on earth with the nature garden existing already. Exact.

Legal stated due to theists as humans who had lied. Earth direct to machine status when natural history earth and rooted was tree life. Not the machine.

It had been confirmed by study of the use of human theory.

Stated criminal men brothers had thought design as just a human. Became illegally rich and forced unnatural human control choices....making very bad choices for life on earth. Leading to criminal science. Exact wisdom. A review of life. Choices.

As stability of bio life on earth was owned only by a body that supported cooling. Position the new born. Ice mass. Now Reborn end of every year. Exact.

The term human good thoughts compared to human bad thoughts are a choice then an action.

Human men said as every cosmic body does not own the same earth answer ....a planet it's heavens as rock. Then you cannot claim answers.

Men themed as I look out I believe I'm looking within earths mass owned history. What once it must have been before it became just a rock.

Therefore if a machine does not exist. Yet human aware mutual consciousness does. There is no machine answer that says a mutual equal human is wrong first.

As we cannot be wrong first.

Theists are wrong first said law.

As rock where we stand is first in our life.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The premise is that "God is bad because suffering is bad and God created a universe that allows suffering". But the fact is that we know absolutely nothing of God and almost nothing of the universe. So thinking we are in any position to pass judgment on these because we "suffer" is just blinding hubris.

That's not the argument. The argument is that what is being called good doesn't become that because somebody says a god said or did it. The argument is that there is no tri-omni deity because to be good necessarily requires preventing all preventable gratuitous suffering. The term "a good god" is meaningless if man is stripped of the ability to decide what is good. If apparent "evil" can be good, why should anybody reject Satan? Maybe building a torture pit and keeping people conscious just to make them suffer for the benefit of nobody that isn't a sadist is actually perfect goodness? How would a mere mortal be able to know not to worship that one instead? Who did that - the good one or the bad one?

You can go ahead and think like you do if you consider it hubris to think otherwise. I consider it intelligence.

You don't see the idiocy of passing judgments on an "alleged deity"?

No, but I do see the idiocy of accepting that bad might be good in disguise when the bad is destructive.

Faith is not 'believing in' irrational presumptions.

Yes it is. That is exactly what it is. It is treating unjustified claims and unsound conclusions as truth, which is irrational. Irrational is OK until we are talking about ways of deciding what is true about the world. Irrational is OK in poetry, not epistemology.

Well, having no knowledge of the limitations of the "natural realm", it would be difficult to know when or whether something became "supernatural". But I guess the empiricist can't quite get that far in his reasoning.

The empiricist has transcended that. He has learned to disregard all such metaphysical speculation.

When you tell me that something is not merely contingently undetectable until we have the right detectors in the right place, but undetectable because it cannot impact any kind of detection device, you're telling me that that something is nonexistent. That's the definition of the nonexistent, and what distinguishes it from reality. Things that exist occupy a place through a string of consecutive instants, and can affect the things around them and be affected by them. Everything that is real fits that description, reality being the collection of things and processes that meet that definition.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Deflection and Obfuscation.
Just as I expected as said in the OP: Believers only want to look at the good things and thank God for those things, they do not want to look at the bad things for which God is responsible.

Of course there's bad in the world... and biblically the bad happens because of sin.
God allows them for now. I don't have a problem with that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Life is difficult on purpose. Why?? God wants us to learn and grow.

What did you learn from 6,372,638 deaths and 560,401,709 infections (that does not include the unreported) due to Covid-19? What about Monkey-pox now?
COVID Live - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer

 

[nPeace]

I am not an unbelieving Baha'i. I believe in God but I think for myself so I question whether God is loving and just rather than believing it just because it is in scripture..

You said the question is to believers. You specifically said believer. Therefore, you distance yourself from believers.
Wouldn't that mean you are an unbeliever?

Prove it. Otherwise it is just a personal opinion, a belief.

You yourself said you prove things to yourself.
I don't have to prove anything to you.
Are you therefore saying that all you have are beliefs?

I meant the earth, and if God created it and God is all-knowing, then God created a world that He knew would engender much human and animal suffering

The Bible does not say God knows everything, but there isn't anything he cannot know.
The difference is, he can and has chosen not to know some things.
Thus, God did not create a world that He knew would engender much human and animal suffering.

If God did not know there would be suffering wen He created this world, then God is not all-knowing.

All knowing is not found in the Bible. That's a religious belief that has many different definitions, depending on who you speak with.
*** it-1 pp. 852-853 Foreknowledge, Foreordination ***
Predestinarian view. The view that God’s exercise of his foreknowledge is infinite and that he does foreordain the course and destiny of all individuals is known as predestinarianism. Its advocates reason that God’s divinity and perfection require that he be omniscient (all-knowing), not only respecting the past and present but also regarding the future. According to this concept, for him not to foreknow all matters in their minutest detail would evidence imperfection. Examples such as the case of Isaac’s twin sons, Esau and Jacob, are presented as evidence of God’s foreordaining creatures before their birth (Ro 9:10-13); and texts such as Ephesians 1:4, 5 are cited as evidence that God foreknew and foreordained the future of all his creatures even before the start of creation.

This concept would mean that, prior to creating angels or earthling man, God exercised his powers of foreknowledge and foresaw and foreknew all that would result from such creation, including the rebellion of one of his spirit sons, the subsequent rebellion of the first human pair in Eden (Ge 3:1-6; Joh 8:44), and all the bad consequences of such rebellion down to and beyond this present day. This would necessarily mean that all the wickedness that history has recorded (the crime and immorality, oppression and resultant suffering, lying and hypocrisy, false worship and idolatry) once existed, before creation’s beginning, only in the mind of God, in the form of his foreknowledge of the future in all of its minutest details.

The predestinarian concept is not reasonable nor consistent with God's qualities or his character, as described in the Bible.

Just as I expected, religious apologetics in an attempt to cover God's actions

There is no religious apologetics going on here. There is only unreasonableness on the part of an unbeliever, insisting that their illogical unreasonableness is logical, because they have that strong belief that they are logical... when they aren't.
They just believe that.

I do not believe there was an Adam and Eve or a Garden of Eden. I believe that story was an allegory, but I attach a different meaning to it than you do.

What????? I attach no meaning to the account, so please don't put me on par with your injecting your ideas wherever you please.
Just believe whatever you want.

Just as I said in the OP, Believers only want to look at the good things and thank God for those things, they do not want to look at the bad things for which God is responsible. Since God is responsible for BOTH the good and the bad, that is patently illogical.

That's your belief. Why don't you apply your own recommendations for others to yourself? Is that beyond you? Prove it. Otherwise it is just a personal opinion, a belief.

What about people who do not want everlasting life?

They will get what they want - the opposite of everlasting life... everlasting death.

If you don't know the answer to that you need a course in logic.
Believers are so brainwashed by their 'belief' that God is loving that they cannot see the forest through the trees.

This just sounds like the rants of a person who has convinced themselves that God is not loving.
It is a fact that some people are miserable in life, and they want someone to blame for their misery. Some take it out on God, and are not open to reason, because they do not want to let go of their hate from their bitter heart.

He created a world that is a storehouse of suffering that we have no choice but to live through.
Storehouse of Suffering quote

No. God just allowed us to go through a world filled with suffering as a result of man's foolish choices and actions.
God did not create that world.
Where did you get that from, other than your own idea - your beliefs.

Again... Prove it. Otherwise it is just a personal opinion, a belief.

That is no more loving than a parent who has children and throws them into a cesspool and asks them to swim.

That's not fitting.
That would suggest that there is no way out. However, that's not the case, as God made a way out, and he helps those who accept his help, through it.

Allowing a child to go through a painful operation for a long term benefit, is more like it.

No, there is nothing logical about your answers. They are the product of religious indoctrination.

I can accept an illogical person would think that. No surprise there,
Your question was answered.
Your not accepting it is irrelevant.
Personal feelings, and emotional and unreasonable cries, do not change the fact that your question was answered.

Got any proof of the zillion years with zero suffering.

It's a promise. How does one prove a future promise.

Does not its fulfilment provide the proof?

No, that is just a belief and it only helps some of those who believe it.
What about the rest of humanity who does not hold such a belief?
And that does not negate the suffering people have to endure to get to the zero suffering

Everyone can go to a beach, and watch the waves roll in... if they want
Who wants to know, will know.
Who does not want to... like yourself... won't.

As I said above, I do not believe there was ever an Adam and Eve who disobeyed God. Baha'is don't believe that story is anything but an allegory.

It might not be Biblical but that does not mean it is false.

Only in your belief system. It is true in my belief system.

I covered that on the OP. To recap:

"To clarify, I believe that some things that happen to us are subject to human free will and some things are not, because they were predestined by God and we have no control over them. That is called fate.

All things that are not chosen by virtue of our own free are beyond our control and I believe they are predestined by God. God is responsible for both the good and the bad things that happen to us, if those things were predestined."

But in the brainwashed believer's mind, God is only responsible for the good things that happen even though that is patently illogical.

I never said that God set it up for Adam to sin. I do not believe God set anything up. People chose to sin because we all have a sin nature as well as a spiritual nature and free will to choose to act according to one of those two natures.

Some people, want to claim God is not responsible for anything bad.
This is the believer's idea - some, a mistaken idea; some, a deliberate false idea.

You are just repeating yourself here.

It is not a dead case, it is alive and well among people who actually use their rational minds to think, rather than just believing the religious indoctrination.
Me not being the Messiah is a red herring.

Some people think they are rational. That's just their belief.

You can have whatever interpretation you want because you have free will to choose.

No wonder you have one for everything you believe.

 

[nPeace]

That is correct. I do not know that God does not give a rip if people suffer, but by the same token you do not know if God does give a rip if people suffer. Nobody know what is in God's Mind, so all we can have are personal opinions.

...and there it is. You don't even believe your messengers of God... like Bahaullah.
Why tell people about Bahaullah when he himself - a manifestation of God / divine - can't even inform you about God?

I just have to shake my head.

 

[Qwin]

Questions that believers cannot answer…. without resorting to a plethora of religious apologetics.

If God is loving, why did God ‘intentionally’ create a world that He knew would engender so much human and animal suffering?

If God is just, why did God create a world in which He knew some people would suffer so much more than others, many people hardly suffering at all? How is that fair?

I am not referring to suffering caused by our own choices we make that cause us to suffer, I am talking about suffering as the result of fate and predestination.

To clarify, I believe that some things that happen to us are subject to human free will and some things are not, because they were predestined by God and we have no control over them. That is called fate.

All things that are not chosen by virtue of our own free are beyond our control and I believe they are predestined by God. God is responsible for both the good and the bad things that happen to us, if those things were predestined.

“Some things are subject to the free will of man, such as justice, equity, tyranny and injustice, in other words, good and evil actions; it is evident and clear that these actions are, for the most part, left to the will of man. But there are certain things to which man is forced and compelled, such as sleep, death, sickness, decline of power, injuries and misfortunes; these are not subject to the will of man, and he is not responsible for them, for he is compelled to endure them. But in the choice of good and bad actions he is free, and he commits them according to his own will.”
Some Answered Questions, p. 248

Man is compelled to endure the bad things that happen because God set it up that way since we live in a material world where some of the Bad things happen are beyond our control. Some of these Bad things are caused by the free will decisions of other people that affect us and some of them are simply accidents, misfortunes and diseases. These are our fate, for which God is responsible.

Believers only want to look at the good things and thank God for those things, they do not want to look at the bad things for which God is responsible. Instead, they try to say that all the bad things are really good because suffering is good, and God can never be responsible for anything bad. This is a religious apologetic and Imo it is an attempt to gloss over all the suffering in the world and say God is not responsible for it.

It would be unfair to blame man for things that are beyond his control so who is responsible for all the suffering in the world that is not caused by man? Logically speaking, if God is responsible for 'everything' then God is responsible for 'both' the good and bad things that happen to us.

Isaiah 45:7 ESV
I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the Lord, who does all these things.

I rest my case.

You address "believers," but what does that actually mean? Everyone believes in something, and atheists are no exception. I imagine there's atheists who don't believe mankind has a future, and then there's others who do. Your other questions probably aren't fitting for Christians, whom I assume you are targeting, but if you care to look at the Tao, then you'll learn the answer to your question one, and more. You obviously obviously don't know the answer, so I'll give you a brief and probably flawed explanation, and with all due respect, 'flawed' fits your unclear questioning.

Roughly then, from the Tao: life comes to the lands of mortality to learn, to be purified something like the process of purifying gold. Life involves suffering, and the types of suffering are numbered, and the stories of tragedies, often Shakespearean can take you though suffering without properly experiencing it personally. Certainly a God, or something, or groups, set up the mortal world. I'm not a Taoist but their teachings are very in-depth, and would assist you.

Latterly in your post, you've done a good job of explanations about the mortal world's laws and so on. However, as I inclined about you aiming your questions at Christians... I'm only presuming your question goes beyond Christians. I think what you ask is information that Christians don't really want, but they take what they have on faith. I admire that they have that kind of faith. Probably that kind of faith is immensely superior to atheistic faith, because just like belief, everyone has faith in something. Their machines, their spouses, whatever...

 

[Segev Moran]

Questions that believers cannot answer…. without resorting to a plethora of religious apologetics.

Cool.

If God is loving,

It really depends on what you mean by "loving".
God is a giver. In that sense, yes. God is loving.

why did God ‘intentionally’ create a world that He knew would engender so much human and animal suffering?

It did not.
It created a world that contains both suffering and pleasure.
Life (Adam), "chose" (not really) to experience suffering as well as pleasure.
The choice to know (it is referred to as the tree of knowledge (in general) in the story [knowing, means knowing everything, good and bad), had consequences that were clearly stated.

If God is just, why did God create a world in which He knew some people would suffer so much more than others, many people hardly suffering at all? How is that fair?

It is not a question of fairness.
The vast majority of suffering can be "easily" cured if humans (as a whole) acted more "humane".

I am not referring to the suffering caused by our own choices we make that cause us to suffer, I am talking about suffering as the result of fate and predestination.

This is part of the reality we chose to experience in order to be able to grow.
It is clear to (almost) anyone that the only way to learn and improve (humans and animals alike), is through pain and failure and not success and pleasure.

To clarify, I believe that some things that happen to us are subject to human free will and some things are not, because they were predestined by God and we have no control over them. That is called fate.

On the vast majority of things in our lives, we do have control. the number of things we cannot control is very small, and shouldn't really bother us whatsoever rather be used as inspiration to learn.

All things that are not chosen by virtue of our own freedom are beyond our control and I believe they are predestined by God.

Seems like it. Yes.

God is responsible for both the good and the bad things that happen to us, if those things were predestined.

Again, most of them are not.
The general idea is that we have a path to walk through. The end goal is the same. no matter what route you take, the end result is predetermined.
The "challenge" we took on ourselves, is to reach the goal and try and learn the best route to reach it.
This is the "Forbidden fruit" challenge. It was the first step of our path to reach back to heaven. Eventually, everyone will reach it one way or another.

“Some things are subject to the free will of man, such as justice, equity, tyranny and injustice, in other words, good and evil actions; it is evident and clear that these actions are, for the most part, left to the will of man.

Not accurate.
Your free will, although free, is not really only your own will.

But there are certain things to which man is forced and compelled, such as sleep, death, sickness, decline of power, injuries and misfortunes; these are not subject to the will of man, and he is not responsible for them, for he is compelled to endure them.

Yes. We are indeed bound to our physical limitations. some more and some less.

But in the choice of good and bad actions he is free, and he commits them according to his own will.”

That is true in a sense, but much more complex that presented here.
"Own will" , is not an accurate term.

Man is compelled to endure the bad things that happen because God set it up that way since we live in a material world where some of the Bad things happen are beyond our control. Some of these Bad things are caused by the free will decisions of other people that affect us and some of them are simply accidents, misfortunes and diseases. These are our fate, for which God is responsible.

Believers only want to look at the good things and thank God for those things, they do not want to look at the bad things for which God is responsible.

I think it really depends on the believer.
The Jewish religion mainly focuses on the bad things, lol. Just look at our holidays

Instead, they try to say that all the bad things are really good because suffering is good,

I think you (or they) are mixing it up with "suffering is effective".
I have no doubt, that the vast majority of believers, will prefer pleasure over suffering.

and God can never be responsible for anything bad.

That's because there is not really a bad or good thing.

This is a religious apologetic and Imo it is an attempt to gloss over all the suffering in the world and say God is not responsible for it.

God is everything.
Every baby that died. every animal that was brutalized. every beating, abuse, rape, murder, curse you name it.
Everything is part of God. there is no other way.
In that sense, yes. God is "responsible" for everything same as "Life" is responsible for billions of animals dying.
But as a general concept, would you rate "Life" as being bad or good?
At the end of it. Life is neither. It simply is .. Life.
God is not good or bad, it simply is God.

It would be unfair to blame man for things that are beyond his control so who is responsible for all the suffering in the world that is not caused by man?

God. In the sense, you use the word "responsible", yep. God is responsible for everything. Good and bad.

Logically speaking, if God is responsible for 'everything' then God is responsible for 'both' the good and bad things that happen to us.

Exactly.

I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the Lord, who does all these things.

Indeed.
In other words, there is nothing other than God.
The idea of good and bad is not relevant to god.
What you experience as good, is not necessarily good and the same goes for bad.
We all have free will, but it is not really free and it is certainly not our "own" will (it is beautifully explained in Genesis).
There are very few things that are really what you refer to as "fate" that determine our life quality. it really depends on the POV you take.
That said, nothing is really random. randomness is not a real thing. Random, is simply "unknown". it is not really "random" in the sense of can never be predicted.

I rest my case.

Indeed, your case looks well-rested

 

[1213]

....
If God is loving, why did God ‘intentionally’ create a world that He knew would engender so much human and animal suffering?...

Actually, by what the Bible tells, that what God created was good. Later people rejected God and were expelled to this first death where we can learn to know what good and evil truly means.

I think this is like Matrix, virtual reality where many evil things can be experienced, but I think this is just a lesson world, not real life.

 

[Trailblazer]

The problem I have in answering is when do you call it apologetics and when do you call it an honest answer.

I will consider it an honest answer if you answer honestly, but I might also consider it apologetics.

Why would one answer be apologetics but your statement of "I am not referring to suffering caused by our own choices we make that cause us to suffer, I am talking about suffering as the result of fate and predestination." isn't?

Why would what you cited that I said above be apologetics?
Maybe you need to define apologetics from your perspective...

The way I define apologetics in the context of my questions that cannot be answered, as stated in the OP, is making excuses/rationalizing why there is so much suffering in the world if God is loving and why the suffering is so unequally distributed if God is just (fair).

 

[Trailblazer]

Why are we arguing with other people's religious beliefs? What business is it of ours what they believe?

I am not arguing with other people's religious beliefs. Look at my OP. That is not what this thread is about. I might disagree with what people believe about God being loving and just, and they might disagree with me. That can lead to a discussion, but it does not have to be an argument.

Also, it is quite obvious to me that when people choose to believe that "God is good" that they are doing so out of hope, and with a desire to trust in the goodness of life even in a world that is often not good. Why on Earth would want to chastise them for that???

When people choose to believe that "God is good" that they may or may not be doing so out of hope, and with a desire to trust in the goodness of life even in a world that is often not good. They might also believe that simply because their scriptures say God is good.

But my OP is not about whether God is good, it is about whether God is loving and just. God might be good even if God is not loving and just.

Do you see me chastising anyone. Disagreeing is not chastising. I have a right to my own beliefs as do other people. If they want to believe God is loving and just that is their prerogative. If they want to offer some reasons (other than scriptures) why they believe that God is loving and just, I might even be swayed by what they say. We can learn from these discussions, that is why I post threads like this.