JCC If there is a God, then why is there evil and suffering?

IF there is a God, then
1. why is there human-caused suffering? why is there evil? (examples: murder, rape, wars, burglaries, vandalism, car accidents, persecution, etc.)

Because God completely respects our free will. Obviously he would be much happier if we didn't do so much evil stuff, but he's not going to force us into doing good, because that would essentially destroy our free will. God doesn't want the humanity to be a bunch of puppets who, while good, don't have free will. It's our choice entirely whether we do good or evil.

 

It does not follow from the assumption of an intelligent, self-aware universe creator that it is interested in how we treat each other or what happens to us.

 

Yet, looking at some of the people running around these days, one should think that teaching basic morals, etiquette and social behavior in schools would improve the state of society. Of course those would differ from country to country.

I also don't like how God is linked to moral. God is probably the most amoral fictional character there is.
Why do religious preachers/ leaders love to claim that belief is the moral fabric of our society?
Separation of church and state? Start at separation of church and moral 101.

 

Just to throw a monkey wrench into the works, exactly how is perfect divine foreknowledge (knowledge of past, present, and future all as one) compatible with human free will (the idea that the future is not set, but is dependent on our decisions)? How is this not simply the *appearance* of free will to us, rather than genuine free will?

 

I believe most classical Christian (and to some extent other, similar monotheistic religious traditions) theologians have this "bigger picture" type of answer in their theodicy (answer to the problem of God and evil). However, some splinter traditions (Pelagians, Open Theists, etc) take at least one if not more planks out of the "omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent" platform of God, and replace it with a stronger emphasis on free will.

Which, actually, could be viewed as a different kind of "bigger picture" - the importance of individual choice.

Just putting some thoughts in, not necessarily advocating them.

 

That is kind of the question. It all depends on what you take as the primary - is omniscience primary, or is individual autonomy primary? Quite a few theological groups have posited that there is some kind of synthesis of the two involving some kind of mystery.

And then there's the radical philosophical libertarians (not political) who prioritize free will over all, and the determinists, who prioritize foreknowledge and power over all.

 

Lots of 'assuming free will exists' in this thread

 

i can see lord_vivec's point to a degree. when all of your possible options have already been determined, freedom is irrelevant. but, does this imply free will, as well?

 

Well what does science show us? How can we even know if it does or does not?

I'm a deist/borderline agnostic so if there is a creator, I'm not sure the creator would have to stop evil from occurring or bad things from happening.

Maybe in the larger scale of things, a creator capable of creating something as vast as the cosmos, bad stuff happening to us isn't that bad in universal context?

So it's really kind of silly to blame "God" in that respect.

 

Why is it irrelevant? The motivations and actions are both there, and both still have weight.

 

there is an element of predetermination that you seem to be neglecting from that line of thinking

 

Well...cards on the table, I am a hard determinist who still believes that individuals are responsible for their actions, so I posit both some element of "mystery" and some elements of co-determinism, where an external determination can be paralleled by self-determination.

 

Schopenhauer had the right of it.

 

yes. you are responsible for your choices amongst the predetermined. but you aren't free to do whatever it is you want.

 

Actually, I think all we ever do is what we want - we never act contrary to our desires, which is where I think responsibility comes in. We aren't free to do anything at all - we are finite beings, after all - so I can't, for example, fly, even though I want to, but I can buy a plane ticket, if that's what I want.

 

I'm pretty familiar with all of this, being a philosophy professor and all. I raised the question to poke the bear.

EDIT:

Merk, that analogy doesn't really work - your understanding of your kid isn't the same theological claim that is being raised about perfect divine foreknowledge. The model is much more akin to God watching the The Matrix again - he knows the outcome of every "choice" Neo makes because he's seen the movie, and the movie does not change, but Neo believes that his choices are up to him. Neo believes he possesses free will (i.e., he is experiencing the *appearance* of choice), but can not do anything other than what God knows we will do. Perfect divine foreknowledge appears to constrain human agency to only the decision path God knows (this is the example I use when I teach the Philosophy of Religion in my Introduction to Philosophy courses).

 

If someone says “you don’t know what 2+2 is” you could just say “yeah I know”. But if you say “2+2 is 4” then you don’t have to prove yourself to that person or anyone who witnessed you giving that answer ever again.
When God created all life in the heavens (angels) and on Earth (humans) he gave them free will. Even though Adam and Eve were perfect they decided when given a choice to disobey God.
The reason why there is suffering on Earth is because Satan brought up a challenge that humans could govern themselves without needing God. God could just of said “Of course they need me. I created them and I know what’s best for humans.” But by allowing Satan to ‘try’ to prove his point, God will prove him a liar. And we have all seen it. No government/kingdom on Earth has brought about peace. Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Rome, United States and so forth have not solved man’s problems. There is still wars, hunger, crimes, ect… going on that none of these government’s have fixed.
So God has allowed allll this time to take place to prove Satan a liar and to show every living being (Angels, fallen angels aka Demons, humans) that we need God to rule… not us… and not have Satan around.
Gods time to step in is soon. He gives us this promise at Danial 2:44 “And in the days of those kings (kingdoms on Earth or Goverments on Earth) the God of heaven will set up a kingdom (His Kingdom) that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms (Human Goverments), and it itself will stand to times indefinite.”
Once God does that, and Humans are under his rulership. Never again will God have to prove he is the Supreme ruler. Even if an Angel thousands of years from now says “Hey I can rule humans better then you” God will never have to prove that again. It’s being proved now for time indefinite. So Satan will be removed and humans will no longer be ruling themselves. Then humans will live forever under peace under his rulership.

Many people view God as the ‘bad guy’ but that is the furthest from the truth.

 

Or, you know, none of that, since we're talking about faith claims.

EDIT:

And the idea of being given free will is a bit of a fiat and theologically inconsistent. Incidentally, do you believe in biblical prophecy? If so, doesn't that necessarily assume a fixed future, which is also incommensurate with genuine human free will?

 

So how exactly did those experiences happpen? And how can you be certain those visions -- which seem to be colored by traditional images of what "God" and angels should look like - weren't dreams or hallucinations?

 

So God has allowed allll this time to take place to prove Satan a liar and to show every living being (Angels, fallen angels aka Demons, humans) that we need God to rule… not us… and not have Satan around.


So, our suffering is just a means to god showing up a guy? Sounds like god's a jerk.

 

I've been trying to find a place to jump into this discussion. But over and over again I'm hit with the realization that I just don't think it matters. And even if it did, I don't think I really care. I know that when I act, most of the time, I am making a conscious decision to perform whatever action I am performing. And I believe that people should be held responsible for the conscious decisions they make, and the consequences of those decisions. But I don't honestly don't care whether the root of that biological process is predetermined or scripted or completely unknown to the universe before I make it. The answer to that question doesn't influence what I think about how the world works, what makes things bad or evil, or god.

 

T.J. Mawson. "How can I know I've perceived God?" International Journal for Philosophy of Religion. (2005) 57: 105-121.

Clickie

 

There is no measurable way to know. You can only say they were what they were but you cannot know "God" created them or sent them to you. You cannot even say for certain what happened at all. Was it a vision? Was it a dream?

We tend to fill in the "unknown" with what we individually believe. But it doesn't make it factual.

 

This actually touches on one of the book proposals I'm writing now. The idea of moral responsibility for choices needs to change - there's just too much neurobiological evidence against what you are arguing.

 

Can you shoot me some links and reading on that? I'd be really interested exploring that more.