What's Wrong With Suffering?

[Kenny]

I put this in the Religious Debate section because I often hear that God is bad because He allows suffering. Alright, pony up. What's wrong with suffering.

Some are good and some are bad, some are subjective and some are not.

After sore muscles because of that drill sargent at the gym, that suffering was good.

 

[Quagmire]

I put this in the Religious Debate section because I often hear that God is bad because He allows suffering. Alright, pony up. What's wrong with suffering.

Hats off, Sandy. You're the only other person I've ever seen ask this question in here, and you're getting all the same answers I always got.

(psst: be on the look out for the inevitable accusations that you get a kick out of starving children and burn victims)

 

[Quagmire]

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I put this in the Religious Debate section because I often hear that God is bad because He allows suffering.

What I see more often is people arguing that there can be no good, omnipotent, and omniscient god watching over us if what would be needless suffering under those circumstances is permitted.

What's interesting is seeing believers try to reconcile these three traits with the existence of apparently needless and useless suffering. In the end, they're forced to that call suffering good, which can have adverse consequences. Imagine somebody that ran hospices saying these things:

• "There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ's Passion. The world gains much from their suffering." - Mother Teresa

• "You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you." - Mother Teresa

Unbelievers consider this kind of thinking perverse.

One benefit of atheism is that when a cute little doe-eyed girl dies of leukemia sometime later today - and one will somewhere - the atheist has the comfort of knowing that it was just rotten luck, and not something caused by or allowed to happen by the ruler of the universe.

 

[idav]

I put this in the Religious Debate section because I often hear that God is bad because He allows suffering. Alright, pony up. What's wrong with suffering.

Suffering is the body reaching thresholds it cannot sustain, suffering is equivalent to your cells dying or coming close to death. Such as sickness which is the cells dying at a faster rate than their replenishing. Now cells die naturally without pain as our body is constantly rejuvenating but it’s basiclaly not recommended that we hasten cell death. That’s what we are feeling when we suffer, we are feeling death which I’m not a fan of.

 

[idav]

Suffering is often how we learn. If I stick my fingers in a fire, the resulting suffering teaches me not to do it again. In the East, this learning from suffering and pleasure is called karma.

There is nothing wrong with death

There is nothing unnatural about death but life is basically constantly trying to avoid death as cells don’t last without the millions and billions of replications that we call a multicelled organism. Life is natures avoidance of death and it’s a constant battle at the cellular level that we do not always realize or feel.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Jeebers, Sandy, you sure do know how to miss the point when you're determined to miss it. You can (as you say) observe that you don't like suffering. But that wasn't my point, now was it? My point was that you can observe that suffering has negative consequences. That's not the same point as "You can observe that you don't like suffering." Please ratchet up your game a notch or two.

Bottom line: You don't need me or anyone else to tell you why suffering is negative. That's something you can observe for yourself -- even if you pretend you can't.

Yet just calling it undesirable doesn't seem to justify impunging God for allowing it. Sure no one wants to suffer. It unpleasant. Yet some people suffer in childbirth where others who lost there legs in a war say it's my suffering. How can one concept be seen both ways. It only perception. Is perception evil?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Wrong? I have no idea what that means even.

Not correct or not true is how it's defined.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I don't think it's suffering that is at issue. Suffering can be necessary. If you've never suffered hunger you can never fully appreciate food. Everyone should suffer hunger at some point so that they can appreciate having food. The issue is unnecessary suffering. Once a person has experience true hunger and can truly appreciate having food, there's nothing to be gained by allowing them to starve to death.

So now suffering has to be qualified?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

That's part of one definition. But I'm talking about suffering as an effect, an inransitive verb, not a state of being.

View attachment 20606
I'm not leveling value judgements at an object and its state, but an action and effect based on how much relative positive and negative it causes to a person or society. Suffering is always a negative value, but there may be enough positive attributes to an action to counterbalance the negative. Thus, suffering is always bad/negative, but not every action which causes suffering is totally bad/negative. It depends on how much.

Just how much suffering is allowable before God is bad for allowing it. This seems very subjective.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

It's bad because it contradicts the advertising, the ultimate bait and switch..

God is sold as all-powerful, all-knowing, and simultaneously the loving Father, personal, benevolent and caring.

As against which, Epicurus is said to have said, on this very subject, words to this effect:

Is god willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.

Is god both able and willing?
Then where does evil come from?

Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him god?​

Of course, in Christianity this is the same God that either denies eternal life to those who don't kiss his ring (Paul, John, 1 John), or condemns them to eternal torment (Mark, Matthew, Revelation).

So some of the contradictions are built in.

All based on the assumption that suffering is bad.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

There is nothing unnatural about death but life is basically constantly trying to avoid death as cells don’t last without the millions and billions of replications that we call a multicelled organism. Life is natures avoidance of death and it’s a constant battle at the cellular level that we do not always realize or feel.

Another person with understanding. Frubals for you.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Some are good and some are bad, some are subjective and some are not.

After sore muscles because of that drill sargent at the gym, that suffering was good.

Where is that solid line that says this suffering is good and that is bad and who decides where the line is?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

What I see more often is people arguing that there can be no good, omnipotent, and omniscient god watching over us if what would be needless suffering under those circumstances is permitted.

What's interesting is seeing believers try to reconcile these three traits with the existence of apparently needless and useless suffering. In the end, they're forced to that call suffering good, which can have adverse consequences. Imagine somebody that ran hospices saying these things:

• "There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ's Passion. The world gains much from their suffering." - Mother Teresa

• "You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you." - Mother Teresa

Unbelievers consider this kind of thinking perverse.

One benefit of atheism is that when a cute little doe-eyed girl dies of leukemia sometime later today - and one will somewhere - the atheist has the comfort of knowing that it was just rotten luck, and not something caused by or allowed to happen by the ruler of the universe.

I see suffering as neither good nor bad. It just is. Certainly something to avoid, like stepping in dog mess.

 

[David T]

I put this in the Religious Debate section because I often hear that God is bad because He allows suffering. Alright, pony up. What's wrong with suffering.

really great question! Rare here. It can be reframed why the sugar coating of the Christian text by so many in the church?. That sugar coating has a lot with my degree, theology. Which to be honest is absolute total garbage in application to the bible but a great.psych tool of the development of the intellect in culture.

 

[David T]

I see suffering as neither good nor bad. It just is. Certainly something to avoid, like stepping in dog mess.

Not correct or not true is how it's defined.

yes I had to re-read the original.question. I read It At first like suffering is wrong why is suffering wrong? I am So used to reading assumptions dressed as questions here that an actual question threw me off.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

yes I had to re-read the original.question. I read It At first like suffering is wrong why is suffering wrong? I am So used to reading assumptions dressed as questions here that an actual question threw me off.

I try and use the correct meaning of words and use them for structured coherent thoughts. That's usually why my answers are short. I'm only just so coherent.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Leave the Socratic method to me please.

Is that what this is supposed to be?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Is that what this is supposed to be?

I couldn't find my sarcasm emoji.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I see suffering as neither good nor bad. It just is. Certainly something to avoid, like stepping in dog mess.

If it isn't bad, why avoid it?