Why does God allow so much suffering?

Announcements Posted on
How helpful is our apprenticeship zone? Have your say with our short survey 02-12-2016
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunnysideSea)
    So, you're arguing that causes are not things but are changes or events.

    But, accepting premise 2, that change or event needs to take place in 'nothing'. A change/event ex nihilo. A change or event, as you say, requires a framework in which to occur. Given that there is literally *nothing* to supply this framework (no space, no time, no atoms etc.) God is the most rational explanation for what the framework was/what created the first framework.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    :eek:

    God is never the most rational anything for anything...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    :eek:

    God is never the most rational anything for anything...
    That's a nice opinion you have there. Care to substantiate it at all? You could try using reason.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunnysideSea)
    That's a nice opinion you have there. Care to substantiate it at all? You could try using reason.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Believing in an entity that supposedly created the immensely vast universe with the sole aim of populating an insignificant planet with his chosen species, humans, that cares for us and yet lets us suffer, that we need to pray to and devote our life to else we rot in hell for eternity upon death, without ever revealing himself to us humans is already pretty ****ing stupid enough.

    On top of that, you people are the ones who come up with the most ridiculous of excuses for any challenges to this fable, bringing irrational thinking to a whole new level in that process.

    So you saying it is the most rational explanation is without words. Well, in the end of course you would think that, you suffer from the God delusion, which means you are incapable of reasoning objectively, as you have demonstrated in this thread. You actually believe that your "reasoning" is without fault and we are just haters.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    lol God is not a Guardian reader
    I assume she takes Cosmos Daily News and The Universe Magazine?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    If there are any Gods, they are far too brutal for me to blindly follow them.

    It could be argued that suffering is a man made concept, in the sense that we assume 'God' to be unjustly rewarding crooks with wealth for example, however we are the ones who choose to see wealth as a reward.... and having 'bad people' run the world and hence choose the values one which society is run, is the only reason that the wealthy are the 'better off'....

    I personally despise the willingness of these 'Gods' to allow such unreasonable suffering to happen, when in full knowledge that humans will never have a complete universal desire to do something (good) about it... it seems like a bit of blame shifting to say, 'God wills it as a test' either of the sufferers, or those witnessing the suffering, as if to suggest that we must let it happen and leave people be just because God chose them to live those experiences. If it's a test to see if we will help, it is a disturbing one - how can you choose a group to undergo hardship with an almost zero guarantee that the non sufferers will solve these problems.....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunnysideSea)
    That's a nice opinion you have there. Care to substantiate it at all? You could try using reason.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I just quickly skimmed through the arguments and I'm assuming that you are using the cosmological/Kalam argument?

    If so you have studied the challenges to the argument right? Because if you did you should know that there are a lot of contradictions/problems with the argument itself.

    I don't feel like elaborating but the conclusion itself is outragous. The premise of the argument points to God as a creator. That's quite the assumption you have there. What God is it? Biblical? You don't know.

    At most the argument might point towards something being there in the beginning but that doesn't have to be god.

    It could be a team of creators. Its more likely to some sort of incompetent creator judging by the state of the universe. The universe itself could be eternal. Oscillating universe theory. Quantum mechanics have already been discussed. The point is the argument can't accurately point to god.

    Also god is never the most rational explanation. It's the easiest one.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MamzZass)
    I just quickly skimmed through the arguments and I'm assuming that you are using the cosmological/Kalam argument?

    If so you have studied the challenges to the argument right? Because if you did you should know that there are a lot of contradictions/problems with the argument itself.

    I don't feel like elaborating but the conclusion itself is outragous. The premise of the argument points to God as a creator. That's quite the assumption you have there. What God is it? Biblical? You don't know.

    At most the argument might point towards something being there in the beginning but that doesn't have to be god.

    It could be a team of creators. Its more likely to some sort of incompetent creator judging by the state of the universe. The universe itself could be eternal. Oscillating universe theory. Quantum mechanics have already been discussed. The point is the argument can't accurately point to god.

    Also god is never the most rational explanation. It's the easiest one.
    Hey there,

    I admit I haven't done as much study as I'd have liked! But as to your objections:

    It's true that the argument doesn't explicitly point to the God of the Bible, and a team of creators may be a possibility. What it does point to is a timeless, spaceless, mind(s) with free will. Now, admittedly, this isn't enough to definitively say 'this is clearly the Abrahamic God', but these are traditional attributes of that God, and, frankly, disproving Atheism by showing the existence of a deity/transcendent powers is quite enough of an achievement for most religious people (as I mentioned earlier, I'm a 'Theist', and don't associate with a particular faith, for now anyway).

    It's the second premise which argues the universe's past is finite. To date, there is no successful model of an oscillating universe, they all fail due to problems like the build up of entropy. What's more, other scientific evidence such as the second law of thermodynamics and the Big Bang theory both also provide evidence for a finite past, as does the philosophical argument that it is impossible to traverse an infinite number of events, yet, seeing as we are here today, the number of events we (all matter) have traversed cannot be infinite. (Please look that up - I've given a pretty poor description, the real thing's much better and clearer!)





    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunnysideSea)
    Hey there,

    I admit I haven't done as much study as I'd have liked! But as to your objections:

    It's true that the argument doesn't explicitly point to the God of the Bible, and a team of creators may be a possibility. What it does point to is a timeless, spaceless, mind(s) with free will. Now, admittedly, this isn't enough to definitively say 'this is clearly the Abrahamic God', but these are traditional attributes of that God, and, frankly, disproving Atheism by showing the existence of a deity/transcendent powers is quite enough of an achievement for most religious people (as I mentioned earlier, I'm a 'Theist', and don't associate with a particular faith, for now anyway).

    It's the second premise which argues the universe's past is finite. To date, there is no successful model of an oscillating universe, they all fail due to problems like the build up of entropy. What's more, other scientific evidence such as the second law of thermodynamics and the Big Bang theory both also provide evidence for a finite past, as does the philosophical argument that it is impossible to traverse an infinite number of events, yet, seeing as we are here today, the number of events we (all matter) have traversed cannot be infinite. (Please look that up - I've given a pretty poor description, the real thing's much better and clearer!)





    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Atheism is not the believe that there is no such thing as an eternal entity. It is the belief that there is no benevolent father like figure watching over us...so if you think you have disproved atheism, you are quite wrong.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I assume she takes Cosmos Daily News and The Universe Magazine?
    lol u r a 1 emma
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NeoMarxist)
    The same reason why your parents left a coin under your bed instead of the "tooth fairy".
    God is not real.
    Your proof?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    Atheism is not the believe that there is no such thing as an eternal entity. It is the belief that there is no benevolent father like figure watching over us...so if you think you have disproved atheism, you are quite wrong.
    what dictionary do you use? atheism is disbelief that there is any supernatural being/diety of any kind.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    lol u r a 1 emma
    In the august company of Bear, how can one not be? :bigsmile:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ZoëC)
    If there are any Gods, they are far too brutal for me to blindly follow them.

    It could be argued that suffering is a man made concept, in the sense that we assume 'God' to be unjustly rewarding crooks with wealth for example, however we are the ones who choose to see wealth as a reward.... and having 'bad people' run the world and hence choose the values one which society is run, is the only reason that the wealthy are the 'better off'....

    I personally despise the willingness of these 'Gods' to allow such unreasonable suffering to happen, when in full knowledge that humans will never have a complete universal desire to do something (good) about it... it seems like a bit of blame shifting to say, 'God wills it as a test' either of the sufferers, or those witnessing the suffering, as if to suggest that we must let it happen and leave people be just because God chose them to live those experiences. If it's a test to see if we will help, it is a disturbing one - how can you choose a group to undergo hardship with an almost zero guarantee that the non sufferers will solve these problems.....
    here's the trick. if God doesn't exist (or the like there of) your suffering is okay. it is here, you deal with it. bad things happen. you blame humans.

    if God does exist. you shift the blame to God for bad humans as he made the universe in a way you don't like.

    God exists or doesn't - your world comes to be the same except for afterlife. where does this blame come from?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by da_nolo)
    what dictionary do you use? atheism is disbelief that there is any supernatural being/diety of any kind.
    And in what dictionary will you find the conclusion that this entity that exists according to this (fallacious) argument is such a deity?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    And in what dictionary will you find the conclusion that this entity that exists according to this (fallacious) argument is such a deity?
    What are you talking about?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by da_nolo)
    What are you talking about?
    You have described a deity, a supernatural being of some sort.

    My point is so what? You still have to establish a link to your God. E.g. even if a supernatural entity existed, that in no way shape or form means it is the God that you wish exists.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    OK, look, here's the straightforward answer( I don't care whether you agree or not, this is what I believe is true, and simply because I'm trying to answer your question and perhaps even guide you to what I believe is the truth doesn't mean you should believe me):
    God exists.
    He made this world to test us.
    If life was perfect here, then what's the point of Paradise and Hell?
    Here's something to prove God exists:
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...31286987,d.d2s
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    You have described a deity, a supernatural being of some sort.

    My point is so what? You still have to establish a link to your God. E.g. even if a supernatural entity existed, that in no way shape or form means it is the God that you wish exists.
    again. what?
    all I did was correct the usage of Atheism ... perhaps that poster should view themselves as agnostic as that is how the term was represented.

    read what a person types instead of going off on them about something they didn't say or talk about.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anotheruserontsr)
    OK, look, here's the straightforward answer( I don't care whether you agree or not, this is what I believe is true, and simply because I'm trying to answer your question and perhaps even guide you to what I believe is the truth doesn't mean you should believe me):
    God exists.
    He made this world to test us.
    If life was perfect here, then what's the point of Paradise and Hell?
    Here's something to prove God exists:
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...31286987,d.d2s
    it appears some of the support in provided link is indirectly connective. so Quran says this A, we interpret it as A and science has shown us A exist or is possible. there fore conclusion. I'm not positive if that is scientific evidence though may be considered as evidence. seems to still be a more philosophical approach or at least basing conclusion on ability to see how things relate.

    no need to get behind scientific proof only. it's limiting.

    good notion of paradise and hell. if these things exist Earth would logically be a middle.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    :eek:

    God is never the most rational anything for anything...
    denial?
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: September 6, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Today on TSR
Poll
Would you rather have...?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.