If you were to leave the Adventist church, where would you go?

[John317]

You're right, the suffering people go through can never truly be made up. For instance, the awful suffering of millions of innocent children can never be "made up" even by God. Many people who undergo injustices will be lost, and therefore the injustices done to them will never be made right.

By the way, the great Russian author, Dostoyevsky, who was also a Christian, wrote about this very issue in his book, The Brother's Karamazov. It's found in the wonderful chapter called "Pro and Contra." Maybe you've read it. His character, Ivan, an atheist, talks about the suffering of all the innocents and says that those injustices can never be made right. And he's correct. How to "make it up" to all the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of babies and young children throughout history who've been murdered or even tortured by their own mothers or fathers! Can't be done.

But then when man sinned and revolted against the Creator, God allowed man to reap the consquences of his decision. Those consequences include every kind of evil, including the fact that innocents suffer immensely in an unfair world. God never said the fallen world-- where death reigns as king-- will be fair or that He can make everything that's happened be as if it never was. There's a sense in which sin leaves eternal scars that will never go away but will always remind us of the loss that sin brought. Yet God can do the next best thing, and that is to save all who really want to be saved, and give them new, immortal bodies to live with Him forever on the new earth He's going to make.

Sounds like it's better than nothing, anyway-- you think? :-)

On the other hand, do you think that the solution lies in atheistic beliefs, such as those of Neitzsche or Marx? They hold no solution to the injustices of the innocents, either. In fact, it is worse. Because, without God, one's rage at the moral injustices are about as efficacious as raging against the lightening. As Stephen Crane said, a universe without God doesn't care about our rage, let alone the suffering of the innocents.

[Dr. Shane]

The substitutionary death was required for justice. It allows God to be both just and merciful to the sinner. Without it, God would have to forgo justice in order to be merciful.

[cardw]

Substitutionary death is not justice. How is it just for one being to take the punishment of another? To me, that is the ultimate injustice.

Only in the most small minded way could that be considered just.

[cardw]

You quote Stephen Crane as saying a universe without God doesn't care about our rage, let alone the suffering of the innocents. All I can say is apparently God doesn't care either because he chooses not to stop it. And apparently the best solution he can come up with is to send down his son to die a cruel and painful death which simply adds to the suffering.

We all experience suffering because that seems to be part of the human experience. The results of suffering don't have to be all bad if something can be learned from it. The point of suffering is that it is painful to everyone, including those who become aware of it. Read Viktor Frankl's book on Man's Search for Meaning. There were those who were guards that were suffering because they were witnessing their own involvement with inhumanity. Many of them pleaded for forgiveness with their captives when the Americans came.

Suffering can change us into more compassionate beings. It is the basis of empathy.

To me, this idea that Jesus came down to die for all this suffering seems counter productive and cheapens what it means to be human. Christianity seems to have to make us all demons and keep us in shame so we never think to question the lunacy of some of its ideas. It has used shame to keep people ignorant.

So, no, I don't think Jesus coming down to die is better than nothing.

Let me remind you that atheism has NO beliefs. Atheists may have opinions, but there is no central gospel of atheism, other than the observation of the lack of evidence for any gods.

There are a number of "solutions" for the problem of suffering, but I doubt any are really satisfying, including Christianity. Christianity does not solve the problem of suffering. All Neithzsche or Marx do is observe the fact that there is no solution for suffering. They do recognize that suffering is disturbing and are willing to face this head on, without using myths of eternal life as a crutch. It is an attempt to be as honest as possible. They are following a deep tradition of honoring truth above all else.

And many who face the fact of suffering head on are inspired to try and make a difference. This, unlike the placid acceptance that the world is going to hell, often awakens compassion for the human condition and has inspired many secularists to reach out to reduce suffering in the world.

[doug yowell]

cardw,Substitutionary death is not justice for the substitution,but it is merciful to the one being substituted for. What other saving option is left to the offender?

[John317]

You say that God doesn't care about suffering in the universe because He doesn't stop it. I believe He proved He cares, by becoming one of us and suffering along with us and dying. That would be about like my becoming an insect forever in order to save the insects. If I did that, wouldn't that prove that I must love insects and care about their situation? Similarly, I think God's coming here proves He loves us and cares about our situation.

Consider a few questions:

Why is there suffering and death?

What if God were today to stop all suffering and death? Would that mean people would be forced to change against their will, or that murderers, etc., would go on living forever?

Would putting an end to suffering right now really solve the problem of evil in the world?

[John317]

Yes, you are right-- except when that innocent person is God Himself, the Creator of the universe, the One who makes all natural as well as moral laws.

If He says that He has taken the punishment that is due to us for our wrongs, and that when we accept and believe what He's done, He can keep the punishment from falling on us and destroying us forever, why would we refuse and say God is wrong to do it? By what moral law in the universe is God shown to be wrong to do this?

Once we assume that He is the Supreme Being, I think it becomes clear that He would have a right to decide how to save mankind, wouldn't He? That would be far better than humans refusing His offer, taking the punishment on ourselves, and dying without any more hope than a dog.

[cardw]

Doug,

So, if substitutionary death is not for justice, but mercy then why not simply pardon the sinner.

In our justice system there is no requirement for someone to finish the sentence of a pardoned prisoner. Or if we are going to be dramatic, the Governor doesn't have to crucify his son to gain the ability to give a pardon.

A simple pardon seems to be a more rational option to me.

[cardw]

John,

God proving that he cares doesn't solve the problem of suffering. It only proves he cares.

Christianity has no solution for the problem of suffering because God simply changes the people who choose him. They become different people. I see no difference since many of those people are murders or within the theology of Christianity we all murdered Christ on the cross.

I know there is the issue of choice, but what choice is choose or die? Again the motivation is fear.

I think the solution to suffering is the provision of equal power and resources and learning how to live without fear. I think fear is the source of evil apart from insanity.

Maturity is what I observe happening in people who learn how to love. And maturity often involves suffering. So suffering may be a part of the natural order of things. I think our survival as a species is going to be dependent on our ability to move past our fears and learn how to love each other in a way that provides a network of co-operation. This is not only good, but it is rational.

[cardw]

John,

If god makes the rules, then why not simply pardon us without all the torture and fear mongering?

It basically boils down to this.

God speaking, "I have to sacrifice myself to myself for rules I made myself so that I can stop myself from killing everyone."

And, for me, since this god could not possibly exist, there is no offer to refuse.

This is iron age eye for an eye justice thinking based on tribalism and revenge. I would hope that we can perceive a much more mature system of dealing with each other than requiring our pound of flesh.

[phkrause]

You make a good point cardw. That's why I said that there may be a different meaning to that word. And it might even have more than one meaning. Do not know for sure myself. But know of a few other words that mean one thing here and one thing there. Someone with more knowledge of Hebrew than me would have to address this.

pk

[doug yowell]

I don't get it cardw, If suffering is a part of the natural order and necessary for maturity then why are you complaining about God not removing it??? If God changes people and they become different, loving more and fearing less,then apparently Christianity HAS a solution for suffering,particularly if Christians stop causing others to suffer.

[cardw]

First of all I'm not complaining about any god not removing it. I am stating that it's problem if there is an all powerful god as described in the Bible.

Well Christianity's solution is to populate the earth with a whole different set of people. That doesn't solve the problem of suffering, it ignores it completely. It fails to address the suffering that has taken place already.

Why not create people that way in first place?

Why all the drama and suffering if all god has to do is change people?

And apparently this change doesn't happen until after Jesus comes again, which basically makes it a myth with no proof, much like much of Christianity.

Sorry, this problem requires a little more thought...

[Dr. Shane]

One innocent person, being or angel could not take the punishment for another except for the Lawmaker. In order for justice to be served, the Lawmaker had to take the punishment of the law-breaker. God could not simply pardon the law-breaker without undermining the law. If rebellion against the law could simply be pardoned, then the law isn't that big of a deal. The fact that the Lawgiver had to die in order to pardon the law-breaker tells of the significance of the law.

Suffering is understood because God is on trial. Satan has accused God of not being fair. Satan has accused God's law of being too restrictive. Satan has aspired to sit in God's place. Thus God allows Satan to be here on earth so all the universe can see what Satan's world is like. All the suffering that takes place is a vindication of God. God did not and does not cause the suffering but He allows it because He is on trial.

[doug yowell]

So if there's not an all powerful God out there there's no problem?Or do you think that the problem IS an all powerful God,as described in the Bible, because He didn't create people who were incapable of causing suffering? Is that what you would have done if you were the all powerful God?

[Aliensanctuary]

I no longer care much for religion and church, and rarely attend any services. I'm listed as a member, but that is meaningless to me.

Once we discard our man-made religions and the culture that goes with it and begin to serve the LORD and mankind, we will unlock the chains that keep us restrained. We should all start something new, an Un-religion, with no more churches, paid preachers, conferences, membership roles, pleas for generous offerings, etc.

The main goal of the Un-religion would be to serve others, even if it makes us poor or vicious people kill us for it. In serving others we ultimately serve the LORD. If we fail to try to meet the needs of others, especially if they're less fortunate than ourselves, we fail to serve the LORD. The only thing the LORD really wants from this planet is willing servants.

Forget religions. They're all next to worthless unless they are somehow able to transform us into meek and humble servants who will willingly work for the LORD and not harm ourselves or others.

Like it or not, if the Bible is true, then this life is a test to determine who will qualify for the next life. If the Bible is true, then we will ultimately have only two choices. If we think the LORD is unjust, and we doubt his words, our rebellion and unbelief will then determine our sentence. If we choose to serve the Good master over the Evil Master, we will have no fear.

If we don't believe the Bible is true, then there is no black or white, right or wrong, truth or lies, heaven or hell, good or evil...because without a compass to guide us, everything is relative to context only. Without faith in the goodness of the LORD, who incidentally happens to own this planet, we are like a helpless cork bobbing aimlessly on the ocean in a storm. With no compass and no map, its a journey with no destination, and no hope.

Most of Jesus' work was done one-on-one. That's our main job, too. To create religious denominations and other barriers that divide people works against the principles of the Kingdom of the LORD.

[Woody]

Have you noticed a difference now since you are no longer restrained with the church. Has your witness improved?

[John317]

Questions:

Why don't you talk to your pastor about your feelings and thinking? Or have you already?

Do you have close friends in the local church? Who do you hang with?

Are you getting your views from the Bible? Or do you think it doesn't matter what the Bible teaches about it?

[cardw]

Doug,

If you have been reading carefully I have clearly stated that no one has a solution to the problem of suffering. So the absence of an all powerful god doesn't solve the problem.

My point is that Christianity doesn't solve the problem. And if you read the discussion throughout the ages you will find many great minds admitting to this fact.

And remember people are not the only source of suffering. I would think that the situation in Haiti in the news would make that rather prominent, unless you take Pat Robertson's view that they made a pact with the devil.

[cardw]

Shane,

The idea that god is on trial would make sense if god's behavior in the OT was better. If any Christian group could hold this trial of god to be true would be certain groups of gnostics because they believed the god of the OT was the devil and Jesus came to reveal a different way.

If we take the behavior of god in the OT, god has already lost this trial.

[cardw]

Doug,

I want to comment on your suggestion that god create people incapable of causing suffering.

This would have certainly avoided the suffering created by humans we have already.

And for those that would suggest this would restrict freedom of choice, I would point out that even if people were created to not want to create suffering, they would have choices to do many other things.

We don't have complete freedom of choice ourselves simply because we are not all powerful, nor do we have all knowledge. These serve to restrict choice. The only difference is which choices are restricted.

And in a more realistic analysis, cruelty and malicious intent are not required to create suffering. Ignorance is just as capable of creating suffering. It would appear that suffering is built into the fabric of this universe even without the presence of evil.

And who, but an all powerful god, would be responsible for this?

[doug yowell]

I agree. When the human race put the God of the OT on trial they found Him guilty of claiming to be the God of the OT and crucified Him. ... ad infinitum. You're judgment appears to be against the same Person.

[cardw]

Doug,

The god in the OT killed and order killed thousands and possibly millions of people. This god passed down laws that included the death penalty for even the most minor infractions. This god apparently never overcame jealousy, which indicates that this god has an ego and covets. This god played with humans, ordering one to sacrifice his son, allowing another to suffer not because he had done anything wrong, but because he made a wager. This god promoted slavery, treated women as property, and ordered rape and genocide.

This god is hardly deserving of our respect or worship. The only thing this god does is to make people fear.

[doug yowell]

I wholeheartedly agree with you,cardw. The god that you've described is undeserving of our worship or respect.It is only the God who is ...that deserves respect. One whose .... One who declares ... One who ... One who ... One who is ... Don't you think that a God like that deserves some sort of positive affirmation?

[cardw]

Doug,

The god you are describing, according to the Bible, is the same one described in the OT. There is no amount of rationalizing that I can come up with to make that god good or worthy of my worship.

And a god who thinks that the solution to the worlds problems is to sacrifice his own son, as if that changes anything, is not worthy of my admiration.

Like I posted before, this is like god saying, "I am sacrificing myself to myself, because of laws I made myself, so that I can prevent myself from killing every person born on the planet."

It makes no sense at all and doesn't impress me as loving at all. It just seems like a very self centered god.