Why would a just and loving God allow a serial killer to claim thirty victims?

[QuestioningMind]

QuestioningMind,Wrote: ". . .However, this is the same God that has control over when you die. . . "

Clearly, whatever preachers you may have met have failed to tell you that the God who created our world is not currently the god who manages world affairs. Consider the exchange between Jesus and Satan recorded by Matthew in ch 4, vs 8-10: Satan offered Jesus control over all the world's kingdoms. He could not have done so if he did not have it. Indeed, he refers to Satan as "the ruler of this world" in John 14:30.

However, Satan's lease is about to expire.

Interesting... I never realized that God was so weak and ineffectual So Satan offered Jesus (God) control over the world that Jesus (God) created. Care you tell me why God decided to turn over control of his creation to Satan in the first place?

 

[Thana]

Wow... it sure doesn't sound like you love your life very much, if you don't feel that the happiness you get from it is worth it. Sounds to me like you're overlooking the true joys of life if you look at death as a mercy and this life as something that's keeping you from it. How can you truly enjoy life if on some level you can't wait for it to be over?

So you're saying you can't enjoy a movie if you're waiting for the end/big reveal? That's just.. not true at all.

And I'm happy because my happiness does not depend on my life or my circumstances.

 

[chickenrun]

ladies and gents this is pretty tough.isn´nt it? One can only say that´s there a personal origen,and then is or are the owners bad deal ?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm not aware of the belief that God controls when you die.

 

[Parsimony]

I'm not aware of the belief that God controls when you die.

Calvinist predestination perhaps?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Calvinist predestination perhaps?

Doesn't that pertain to God supposedly predestining people to either Heaven or Hell?

 

[Parsimony]

Doesn't that pertain to God supposedly predestining people to either Heaven or Hell?

According to Wikipedia at least, it's about God predetermining all events. I do suppose individual interpretation may vary.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

According to Wikipedia at least, it's about God predetermining all events. I do suppose individual interpretation may vary.

Oh, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.

Anyway, that's not what I believe so this thread doesn't pertain to me.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I’ve never understood why a just and loving God would ever allow a serial killer to murder thirty innocent victims. I’ve heard the argument that it’s all because God gave his creation’s free will; that we are not robots programmed to do only as God desires, but have been given the freedom to choose to do good or to do evil. That’s all well and good. I can understand a God that allows his creations to make their own path in life and generously gives them the opportunity to repent for the atrocities they may commit.


However, this is the same God that has control over when you die. Clearly exercising this control over how long you remain within the Earthly realm does not violate a person’s free will; otherwise no one would die unless that was what they freely willed to have happen. So why would God wait until this serial killer has murdered thirty innocent victims before giving him a fatal heart attack at the age of sixty-seven? After the third or maybe even fourth victim, hasn’t this killer pretty much demonstrated an unwillingness to repent? Why didn’t God give him a heart attack after victim number four? Why would God allow this person to claim another twenty-six victims prior to ending his life?

I feel everyone deserves to life no matter how many ans what type of crimes they have done. Life and death are one on the same coin. No side better than the other.

With that note, I dont see god s an entity and to where he can "make decisions". God is life/death; mess happens either as blessings or not.

Life doesnt decide who takes whose life. We have consequences already put in place (our karma) already put to action when we do an act.

So god didnt let crime happen. Its like god is the football field and wr "blame him" every time one team looses. The field doesnt do nothing but support the foundation of the team.

I know thats kind of deistic as many feel god interacts with them. As an entity, why would god have the advantage to control a person's actions? We have free will to do good to. Does god let us do good, no. We do so by our interaction with "him". He gives us the choice to let him come through us; as a result, good actions come.

According to some believers, without god, bad thing happen. So its not god. Its the person without god whose at fault because according to many he should have seeked god.

I disagree with these two last comments. Its a general and somewhat logical consensus of some believers.

On the other hand, which god?

 

[Thanda]

Pardon my ignorance, but that passage makes absolutely so sense to me. Is it saying that one should not take steps to save the lives of suffering people, because when those people die God with receive them upon himself, in glory? I'm confused.

The passage is saying God allows people to die - even very good people - because death is not the end and because this life isn't "the best thing that we'll ever experience".

In the particular example in this passage it is clearly explained that God was satisfied with the lives the good people had lived and was allowing them to die in order to bring them to their glorious destiny. On the other hand he had given up on the wicked and was allowing them to commit murder so that there could be ample evidence to show they deserve the eternal punishment that awaits them.

 

[QuestioningMind]

The passage is saying God allows people to die - even very good people - because death is not the end and because this life isn't "the best thing that we'll ever experience".

In the particular example in this passage it is clearly explained that God was satisfied with the lives the good people had lived and was allowing them to die in order to bring them to their glorious destiny. On the other hand he had given up on the wicked and was allowing them to commit murder so that there could be ample evidence to show they deserve the eternal punishment that awaits them.

Really? Are we to then conclude that God does not want us to intervene to stop murderers, because those they murder are now experiencing something better? And if we were to say, catch this fictional serial killer after he's only murdered four victims and put him to death, are we flouting God's will, because God wanted to have thirty victims with which to condemn this killer?

I'm afraid that I'm even more confused than ever.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I'm not aware of the belief that God controls when you die.

I'd say it's a rather common belief, based upon the number of people at funerals who say "God decided to call her home" or those who say after someone survives a bad car accident "I guess God decided it wasn't his time." or the number of people who pray to God not to 'take' their gravely ill loved ones. The entire concept of There Are No Atheists in Foxholes is all based on the premise that when you're life is threatened, you will ask God to spare you. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but doesn't that suggest that a great number of people believe that God controls when you die?

 

[QuestioningMind]

So you're saying you can't enjoy a movie if you're waiting for the end/big reveal? That's just.. not true at all.

And I'm happy because my happiness does not depend on my life or my circumstances.

It's true if you see the big reveal as a 'mercy' because you don't find the enjoyment of watching the movie up until the big reveal to be 'worth' it. Those are your words, not mine. And because your happiness doesn't depend on this life, it suggests that you're not truly enjoying all that life has to offer. Destinations are great and it wonderful to look forward to them, but focus too much on the destination and you end up missing some truly fabulous journeys.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'd say it's a rather common belief, based upon the number of people at funerals who say "God decided to call her home" or those who say after someone survives a bad car accident "I guess God decided it wasn't his time." or the number of people who pray to God not to 'take' their gravely ill loved ones. The entire concept of There Are No Atheists in Foxholes is all based on the premise that when you're life is threatened, you will ask God to spare you. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but doesn't that suggest that a great number of people believe that God controls when you die?

I think those fall into a category of things people say/think when they're in a distressing situation and trying to make sense of something traumatic that's happened, rather than a cogent theological point that they adhere to.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yeah, how sad that they get to avoid suffering and slowly dying from whatever disease they'll inevitably get whether it's the painful death of cancer or the slow decline into dementia. Yeah sure, pity the guys who get an instant, early death and don't have to live with debt or divorce or global warming or the infinite number of things that make life suck.

The only thing that was cut short are their bad experiences, and if you believe in the afterlife, actually even if you don't then the good experiences in life don't mean a damn thing because you'll either not exist and therefore not remember or you will exist for eternity in a place far, far better.

Actually I love my life.
I just realize that the happiness we get is not worth it, and isn't comparable to the peace of God and the mercy of death.

I agree with this perspective. I'm a nihilist, myself. Life is full of suffering and is rather pointless. It's really only my fears and concern for how it would effect others that keep me from checking out of this hellhole. Thankfully, we're all going to die eventually anyway.

I do think it's tragically sad when innocent people are murdered, but it's just another symptom of humanity's wretchedness.

 

[Thana]

I agree with this perspective. I'm a nihilist, myself. Life is full of suffering and is rather pointless. It's really only my fears and concern for how it would effect others that keep me from checking out of this hellhole. Thankfully, we're all going to die eventually anyway.

I do think it's tragically sad when innocent people are murdered, but it's just another symptom of humanity's wretchedness.

Mmm, I'm a bit of a nihilist myself.
Cept where I don't see life as completely meaningless, rather just life without God and everything that isn't to do with God.
Feel like they should come up with a label for that. Maybe Nitheilistic? Eh, maybe not. Bit of a mouthful. Sorry it's late and I'm tired

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Mmm, I'm a bit of a nihilist myself.
Cept where I don't see life as completely meaningless, rather just life without God and everything that isn't to do with God.
Feel like they should come up with a label for that. Maybe Nitheilistic? Eh, maybe not. Bit of a mouthful. Sorry it's late and I'm tired

I agree with that, too. I see that life in this world is pointless and meaningless on its own, so I hope that there's a reality beyond it where solace may be found. Even if I'm delusional and there's no God or afterlife, it is a comforting delusion because it's not very healthy to meditate too much on the inherent absurdity of existence. (Not healthy for me, anyway, since I'm a depressive type. Some people find a sense of liberation and freedom in nihilism. I don't, even though I recognize it as the state of things here, which is why I'm a Gnostic and have some rather negative views of this realm.)

 

[rrosskopf]

Pardon my ignorance, but that passage makes absolutely so sense to me. Is it saying that one should not take steps to save the lives of suffering people, because when those people die God with receive them upon himself, in glory? I'm confused.

There are several aspects to this that need to be considered. First, it bears mention that the whole system is designed to be temporary; death ends all suffering. So there is a limit to how suffering can be caused by evil designs.
Secondly, in the parable of the wheat and tares, we are taught that the premature destruction of the wicked hurts the righteous. God waits until either all the fruit is ripe, or until it can be shown that there will be no fruit. Righteousness may actually need a somewhat adverse environment to properly grow. How many people become so disgusted of wickedness that they choose to be righteous?
Third, God lets mankind govern themselves. With rare exception, he doesn't interfere in what he considers to be our own responsibility. He even let his own son be tortured, rather than interfere.
Forth, God lets men choose how they will act, before judging them. A crime has to be committed before the punishment is just.

Amulek thought that he was in a position to call upon God to end the suffering of the women and children, but Alma was constrained to let the wickedness take its course, so that the ultimate punishment would be just.

One consideration is whether the people have been taught the truth of the gospel and subsequently rejected it. God is far more tolerant of people who sin in ignorance, perpetuating societal ills because of their false traditions. Another consideration is whether it is the act of one man, or the act of an entire society. With Sodom and Gomorrah, just the presence of ten righteous people would have averted disaster. He doesn't seem to micromanage; he waits for a society to ripen in wickedness before passing judgement. Until that happens, many people will suffer at the hands of the wicked, and societies are left alone to govern themselves.
God certainly does make exceptions from time to time, particularly when it comes to missionary work. He wants everyone to have a chance to hear the gospel, either in this life, or in the spirit world, but preferably in this life. He works through subordinates, so there is a manpower issue.

 

[Machavelle]

The same God that drowned the entire Human race except for Noah and his family.

The same God that ordered the killing of Children.

 

[Thanda]

Really? Are we to then conclude that God does not want us to intervene to stop murderers, because those they murder are now experiencing something better? And if we were to say, catch this fictional serial killer after he's only murdered four victims and put him to death, are we flouting God's will, because God wanted to have thirty victims with which to condemn this killer?

I'm afraid that I'm even more confused than ever.

It is important to read the passage carefully that has been quoted. The passage does not say that the two simply decided not to intervene while people were being murdered (in fact there are many examples in the same book from which these quotes come where people fight to save the innocent). What the passage says is that as they thought about using the power of God they felt restrained by God to not intervene and to allow what was about to happen to happen.

The fact that God in this case commanded them not to intervene does not mean they were not to intervene in all cases. There was a reason why in that particular circumstance they were commanded to act they way they were.

God is not a robot. While He is unchangeable and consistent He always makes the best choice given the particular circumstances that prevail. And while it may seem to you and I (on face value) that two situations are the identical - they may not be so to a being that sees and knows all.