Theists, why does God allow suffering.. (page 8)

mediator007

why did Jesus allow the demons to enter the herd of swine and cause them to run off the cliff?

donuthole

I don't have an answer to the question, but this thread has generated some food for thought.

The original question presupposes that God has the power to end suffering. I understand that it is a common assumption that if there is a God, such a God would be all powerful. I just wonder if it is necessarily correct.

The other thought I had that was interesting to me was while I personally am apalled at the thought that God would allow suffering in the world, on a personal level I do little about it. I try not to contribute to suffering and would hope that I would stop something from happening in my little world but I don't necessarily go out of my way to end poverty or antyhing like that.

Also as "god", or a higher being to animals, I have no problems with their death to feed and clothe me. Even if would be vegan would I feel remorse for stepping on a bug? Probably not. Would a being higher than humans look at us in the same manner?

Tater-T

What does the Bible say on the matter? .... let's consult the Watchtower to find out.....

why is no one ever concerned about plant life ... suffering droughts and what not... and being eating ...

I remember when I was young, Mom saying all life as we know it comes from other life.. so therefore there has to be a GOD .. thats the proof...

and now I'm thinking all life is sustained by the death of other life... so what does that prove...

factfinder

This is a very interesting thread. Thank you The Quiet One for bringing up this question. I also have wondered about this.

I see no answers that are satisfactory coming from the "theists" and it makes me more inclined to see God in a very negative light (as I usually do) or as evidence that God does not exist.

Twitch

A buddy has a saying "there is no altruism in nature" and I think it rings true. Mother Nature is unforgiving and ruthless. The young, the weak and the sick are usually the first to go. Many species breed fast and in large quantities just to ensure enough live long enough to reproduce. Even dem cute lil mice will eat their young. Ain't no picnic living in the forest, Yogi.

If god knows when a single sparrow falls, then I wonder what he does to ignore the constant din of all creation at any given point.

ThomasCovenant

Am I correct in saying that animals did not suffer prior to the year 2370BC? They simply died of old age? There was no predatory activity before that date was there?

Or am I a lunatic?

cofty

Am I correct in saying that animals did not suffer prior to the year 2370BC? They simply died of old age?

No suffering is inherent in the design of the animal kingdom. An eagle wasn't given the eyes and talons to catch and tear animal flesh after the naked lady ate the fruit. The same goes for all predators and parasites.

Here is a classic example. It is a fossil of a 3 - 4 year old child known as the Taung child. The fossil was discovered in a limestone quarry in South Africa in 1924 and consists of most of the face and mandible with teeth and, uniquely, a natural endocast of the braincase. We know it is not the fossil of an ape as the position of the foramen magnum, or the hole through which the spinal chord connects with the brain, was positioned well to the front of the skull, an adaptation of a bipedal creature whose head would rest atop the neck in a relatively balanced position. Conversely, a quadrupedal ape whose head would rest in front of the neck, would need a foramen magnum positioned to the rear of the head to keep its eyes facing forward, and not down, as it moved.

Taung child lived 2.5 million years ago in the Pliocene era.

Professor Lee Berger of Wits University's palaeoanthropology unit discovered that a bird of prey similar to the African crown hawk eagle had swooped down and seized the child with its large talons and beak, killing it immediately. He said the evidence was so convincing he could "prosecute the eagle killer in court".

Berger was asked to review a paper by Drs Scott McGraw, Catherine Cooke and Suzanne Schultz of the department of anthropology at the Ohio State University in the US. The paper looked at the primate remains from African crowned eagle nests in Ivory Coast's Tai Forest, and was to be published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology. The Ohio researchers isolated features of eagle damage on bone that was different from damage made by other predators like big cats.

These included flaps of depressed bone on top of the skull, keyhole-shaped cuts in the side of the skulls made by the eagles' beaks, and puncture marks and ragged incisions in the base of the eye sockets, made when the eagles ripped out the eyes of the monkeys.

Berger said, “I almost dropped down when I looked into the eyes of the skull as I saw the marks, as described in the McGraw paper - they were perfect examples of eagle damage. I couldn't believe my eyes as thousands of scientists, including myself, had overlooked this critical damage. I even went to look at an original 1925 cast of the child to make sure the damage had been there originally, and it had. I felt a little bit like an idiot for not seeing those marks 10 years ago, but at least we had them now."

How amazing to think of the last moments of that poor child millions of years ago and the distress of it’s mother, as he was lifted into the air by the eagle with talons in his eyes and then ripped apart by powerful beak and talons. His fossilised remains have become one of the most famous specimens in history.

For millions of years all animals suffered and died in similar ways.

cofty

robB - the correct answer is "C"

Please feel free to start a new thread on the moral defense for god, I will join in. Best to stick to the topic on this thread.

My question to you still stands, how do you connect the naked lady eating the fruit with suffering in animal kingdom?

The Quiet One

ROB-- I'm not talking about why animals don't live forever, I don't even expect to live forever. You seem to have missed my point. For instance.. Even I, as a wicked nonbeliever who dares to question God, am comfortable with the idea of dying, provided I go peacefully/instantly without SUFFERING or dying a long drawn out death..I don't think that I deserve such pain, I've never hurt anyone.. I have even more of a problem with innocent animals, who have never sinned and merely follow instinct (the way they were 'designed') being ripped to shreds by lions, dying slowly and painfully due to illness/cancers/parasites etc. MEDIATOR007-- Great point. As much as I used to like Jesus, that verse never sat well with me. DONUTHOLE-- Interesting post.. What I would point out though is that we're not talking about humans being allowed to kill animals, according to the Bible they were provided as food anyway, so most believers have no issue with that. I'm glad that the question has made you think, I thought at first that this topic would be ignored by many people.. COFTY-- Thanks again..Please keep such fascinating examples coming.

leavingwt

"Most of us reject the first statement....." I assume you were once a Witness. That you have come to the conclusion that the Watchtower is not God's prophet does not negate the existence of God.

Yes, I was a JW for 23 years.

You are correct. The validity of WT doctrine has absolutely nothing to do with existence of God. I'm simply unconvinced by all of the evidence I've examined so far. In fact, the more evidence I examine, the more I become convinced that I'm not special, I was lucky to have been born in the first place and one day I'll die, just like the billions of people before me.

If you'd like to briefly give a summary of the evidence that convinces you that God exists, I'd be happy to examine it. (For the sake of the discussion, you should probably define 'God', too. If you're a Christian, then I'm likely familiar with the general outline.)

Theists, why does God allow suffering..

Share this