If the universe were simply arbitrary, and the totality of people could only achieve happiness after, I don't know, an indefinite number of reincarnations struggling for enlightenment, suffering the very same great evils of the world every time, that sounds rather depressing to me, and I think having children in such scenario would only lead to unjustified and meaningless suffering. But in a christian paradigm, where history undoubtedly progressess towards something, and the suffering of each individual has meaning, and joy is waiting after death, then I think even a child who lives great hardships wouldn't live in vain.
I Googled "Why does God hate me?" and what I found was disturbing.
- Thread starter Kitty Katzington
- Start date
? I never said the universe was arbitrary or that there is reincarnation. And the "Christian paradigm" is by no means a clear or satisfactory explanation of suffering.
I hope that a place of less suffering exists after death, and I also hope it's not the exclusionary place many evangelical Christians and other religious fanatics seem to think it is, only open to those who believe to a certainty something that is neither proven nor proveable. The very existence of innumerable denominations of Christianity shows it isn't easy to define a paradigm of what Christianity is. I consider myself a progressive Christian BTW. There are a lot of us out there.
I hope that a place of less suffering exists after death, and I also hope it's not the exclusionary place many evangelical Christians and other religious fanatics seem to think it is, only open to those who believe to a certainty something that is neither proven nor proveable. The very existence of innumerable denominations of Christianity shows it isn't easy to define a paradigm of what Christianity is. I consider myself a progressive Christian BTW. There are a lot of us out there.
Oh, i see, I thought you did believe in something like it because you talked about buddhism. Sorry, my mistake.
What I don't understand then is that you said: "God would surely still be bound by certain rules, even if those are of his/her own creation. You can't pull matter out of nothing without creating anti-matter. You can't create light without creating darkness. Each thing creates its opposite and that goes for health and sickness, good and evil, joy and pain, etc." I don't understand how you can reconciliate that with the idea of heaven at all, because the idea is precisely that there is no sickness, evil or pain in heaven. And if there's no reincarnation in your model, then people would either go as they are more or less now to heaven (which would basically make heaven Earth 2.0), or they would be changed somehow to achieve real peace, and if so then God surely can create a world with different rules where there's no suffering, which is the opposite to your premise.
And to clarify, the traditional understanding of the subject seems to me to be that God certainly could create a better world in terms of less suffering (in Genesis, death only comes as a punishment from God) and perfectly happy individuals (say, angels). He just doesn't want to, because he wants to create a type of good which necesitates the experience of suffering (but it's not a ying-yang type of thing, but rather temporary step) towards absolute, universal good. So in a very real sense, the classic view is that suffering comes from God (Job is a good example of that). That's what I'm trying to defend. Your view that "the system runs itself now, without intervention from a higher power. Probably there's no decision that children starve - that is determined by weather patterns, human history and many other factors" seems to suggest that God didn't foresee, planned and approved the reality of the world. Which to me sounds like saying that the world is arbitrary, that the particular development and events of history don't matter because God only cared about the initial rules of the world.
What I don't understand then is that you said: "God would surely still be bound by certain rules, even if those are of his/her own creation. You can't pull matter out of nothing without creating anti-matter. You can't create light without creating darkness. Each thing creates its opposite and that goes for health and sickness, good and evil, joy and pain, etc." I don't understand how you can reconciliate that with the idea of heaven at all, because the idea is precisely that there is no sickness, evil or pain in heaven. And if there's no reincarnation in your model, then people would either go as they are more or less now to heaven (which would basically make heaven Earth 2.0), or they would be changed somehow to achieve real peace, and if so then God surely can create a world with different rules where there's no suffering, which is the opposite to your premise.
And to clarify, the traditional understanding of the subject seems to me to be that God certainly could create a better world in terms of less suffering (in Genesis, death only comes as a punishment from God) and perfectly happy individuals (say, angels). He just doesn't want to, because he wants to create a type of good which necesitates the experience of suffering (but it's not a ying-yang type of thing, but rather temporary step) towards absolute, universal good. So in a very real sense, the classic view is that suffering comes from God (Job is a good example of that). That's what I'm trying to defend. Your view that "the system runs itself now, without intervention from a higher power. Probably there's no decision that children starve - that is determined by weather patterns, human history and many other factors" seems to suggest that God didn't foresee, planned and approved the reality of the world. Which to me sounds like saying that the world is arbitrary, that the particular development and events of history don't matter because God only cared about the initial rules of the world.
No offense Santiago but this debate is starting to feel pointless and has gone off topic from the original post (now that you're bringing up the nature of Heaven etc). You seem to be wanting to defend an Old Testament Biblical concept of good/evil and suffering, which I'm not interested in discussing. Really I was trying to offer an alternative point of view about suffering to Kitty Katzington and other people who find the conventional religious position that God deliberately makes us suffer unsatisfying or disturbing.
For @Kitty Katzington, to keep it as simple as possible and if you're still watching this thread. In my opinion only,
- God doesn't hate you. God is often defined as the opposite of hatred, so it's blasphemous to say that God hates someone for something.
- God doesn't cause suffering. It is caused by a combination of 7 categories of sins: greed, lust, gluttony, wraith, sloth, pride, and envy. These kinds of sins are seeded into everyone (humans) when Adam and Eve eating the Forbidden Fruit in Eden.
- Suffering is not a form of discipline. It's simply an imperfection in human life and nature, which is often taken advantages of by demons and bad people.
- Suffering doesn't make you empty. It points out what is wrong with your life, what must be done and that you need helps to deal with that.
- God promises to provide us what can be done to deal with suffering. I feel like this is mostly emotional support in forms of prayers, fortunes and miracles. In a sense, God believes that we are able to overcome suffering with as much help as possible.
- If god doesn't hate anyone, how do you explain the majority of the Old Testament?
- You say God doesn't cause suffering, then go on to blame something that wouldn't exist if God didn't want to punish the pursuit of knowledge.
- I know it isn't, I wasn't agreeing with them
- Suffering without a point, and without respite, will eventually leave you empty and bitter at the entire world. It has for me at least
- God might believe we can overcome suffering with help, which is why he designed Depression in a way that destroys hope and makes you believe the people who actually want to help you are just lying, or secretly hate you. Pretty neat trick, happens to work really well. It's basically Gaslighting, but he can just download that shit directly into your brain without the effort of actually interacting with you
Im sorry if it will be a disturbing comment but...are we SURE, like sure the cause of suffering is all knowing God or gods ?
Technically people BELIEVE in gods, they don't KNOW if they exist or not. So your question is logically cannot be answered since we don't know if it's the reason. But for a person who strongly believes to the point he thinks he KNOWS(I used to be one) there's none. Because..let's imagine two different kids in different part of the world. Religious sources say(Christianity, Islam as I know more) those two kids suffering cannot be compared. Let's say the kid A has born to a poor family. He could never get educated. He could not even get proper health care, his parent would always fight about money and neglected him and he found himself in the 'wrong path' . Meaning he started using drugs and had very bad friends, got into gangs and ended up in jail. His mental and physical health is so poor he loses his faith and curses at gods. That was his test as they'd say. And he failed.
Lets imagine the kid B. B was born into a very cultured, rich and loving family. He got what he wanted all the time. He had all the opportunities and he almost never felt unloved or left alone. Meanwhile his puberty hit and he had some bad friends, went into similar path as the kid A. His parents disowned him and so on. The kid A and B looks very similar in the end. But let's not forget character has an effect too. And character mostly built by upbringing and education and whatever you read and see in life. Its not coded in your brain simply. At least that's my thought. So let say the kid B asked for forgiveness hoping he could find the good days again at some point and have a new chapter, he has hope since he didn't have a very crashed childhood. He didn't come to the point of hopeless ennui or nihilism. And gods forgive him for sure. In Islam or Christianity , they can be forgiven. But alas ..for the kid A he is in deep nihilism and since he never had hope about future he can never think of going back to salvation or whatever it is. He dies that way. Can you tell me how it is same level of test? Comparing life event ama suffering isn't a good thing I know but clearly the kid A couldn't come to the point of love and forgiveness gods offer. Because his childhood his all life and his tough nihilist disposition didn't let him do it. Life didn't let him do it. Now he will not be forgiven.
How can it be just? While the life event and everything aren't even equal. People arent manufactured. They're all different and they are affected very differently. If same event happen to a kid named C, maybe he'd react in s different way because of his own upbringing, his education, his life events and his chemistry. But they're not in the same level then. They cannot react in the same way. Saying that you should just accept god and ask forgiveness is so naive in my opinion.
Anyway it's been a long post. That's what I think. I don't think I'm sure gods exist. But if you're sure in your mind I can say it is not just at all for a god to 'test' different people with so ranging different level of pain, btw some don't seem to endure much of pain too, so yeah I don't think it is just.
But if you say it's because we are poor humans and cannot comprehend his ways. Then there's no point of questioning him and we should just accept like a robot, which then doesn't make sense since he gave you logic and brain(if you believe so)
Technically people BELIEVE in gods, they don't KNOW if they exist or not. So your question is logically cannot be answered since we don't know if it's the reason. But for a person who strongly believes to the point he thinks he KNOWS(I used to be one) there's none. Because..let's imagine two different kids in different part of the world. Religious sources say(Christianity, Islam as I know more) those two kids suffering cannot be compared. Let's say the kid A has born to a poor family. He could never get educated. He could not even get proper health care, his parent would always fight about money and neglected him and he found himself in the 'wrong path' . Meaning he started using drugs and had very bad friends, got into gangs and ended up in jail. His mental and physical health is so poor he loses his faith and curses at gods. That was his test as they'd say. And he failed.
Lets imagine the kid B. B was born into a very cultured, rich and loving family. He got what he wanted all the time. He had all the opportunities and he almost never felt unloved or left alone. Meanwhile his puberty hit and he had some bad friends, went into similar path as the kid A. His parents disowned him and so on. The kid A and B looks very similar in the end. But let's not forget character has an effect too. And character mostly built by upbringing and education and whatever you read and see in life. Its not coded in your brain simply. At least that's my thought. So let say the kid B asked for forgiveness hoping he could find the good days again at some point and have a new chapter, he has hope since he didn't have a very crashed childhood. He didn't come to the point of hopeless ennui or nihilism. And gods forgive him for sure. In Islam or Christianity , they can be forgiven. But alas ..for the kid A he is in deep nihilism and since he never had hope about future he can never think of going back to salvation or whatever it is. He dies that way. Can you tell me how it is same level of test? Comparing life event ama suffering isn't a good thing I know but clearly the kid A couldn't come to the point of love and forgiveness gods offer. Because his childhood his all life and his tough nihilist disposition didn't let him do it. Life didn't let him do it. Now he will not be forgiven.
How can it be just? While the life event and everything aren't even equal. People arent manufactured. They're all different and they are affected very differently. If same event happen to a kid named C, maybe he'd react in s different way because of his own upbringing, his education, his life events and his chemistry. But they're not in the same level then. They cannot react in the same way. Saying that you should just accept god and ask forgiveness is so naive in my opinion.
Anyway it's been a long post. That's what I think. I don't think I'm sure gods exist. But if you're sure in your mind I can say it is not just at all for a god to 'test' different people with so ranging different level of pain, btw some don't seem to endure much of pain too, so yeah I don't think it is just.
But if you say it's because we are poor humans and cannot comprehend his ways. Then there's no point of questioning him and we should just accept like a robot, which then doesn't make sense since he gave you logic and brain(if you believe so)
I don't defend the Bible. I stopped calling myself a Christian in a forgotten thread. My opinions, because I cannot answer your questions, are what I gathered from the knowledge and experience from the time I was more rurious and hopeful, a part in me that is not suicidal thoughts.
Sins, in what I wrote, are just explanations for why suffering exists. Different religions and thoughts have different terms to answer for why we suffer. There is no true answer, just more explanations.
I think you are experience "Weltschmerz", a deep sadness about the wrong in this world. A good thing is that this only affect people thinking, feeling and sensing deeply. A bane of geniuses, I guess.
I don't know what to believe, not even in myself. Maybe a promise that everything would be better, that I'm not lonely, that I deserve to be helped. I don't know, but that sounds like a God I want to believe in, I think.
Sins, in what I wrote, are just explanations for why suffering exists. Different religions and thoughts have different terms to answer for why we suffer. There is no true answer, just more explanations.
I think you are experience "Weltschmerz", a deep sadness about the wrong in this world. A good thing is that this only affect people thinking, feeling and sensing deeply. A bane of geniuses, I guess.
I don't know what to believe, not even in myself. Maybe a promise that everything would be better, that I'm not lonely, that I deserve to be helped. I don't know, but that sounds like a God I want to believe in, I think.
I'll just say that I think that the view that God is responsible for our suffering is more comforting, because then he also has a responsibility towards us to help us and care for us. Whereas if suffering is only the fault of humanity, or the arbitrary result of some set of rules, then we are alone in our suffering and we have only ourselves to blame.
You keep forgeting the most important things, like the fact that God is, by definition, lacking any sort of passion or need. The insinuation that God is like an abuser would imply that he enjoys suffering or that he acts irrationally, and the starting point of any theology is that that is not the case. And it seems to me that you could use that same argument about just any belief that you just not find pleasent. "Why are people justifying this thing I don't agree with? Oh, they are just fools interiorizing abuse." That's not a real argument.
Oh trust me, I feel the same way about all religions. I'm only picking on Christianity because it's what I've been surrounded by my whole life, so there's some resentment there. It's hard not to be bitter towards any ideology that condemns you for just being...well, you. I had to grow up hearing about the evils of homosexuality, all the time trying to figure out the feelings I was having in this area. When I came out as bisexual, my mom rationalized it with "well, at least he likes girls too. I'll just try to nudge him in the direction of a heterosexual relationship, and I'll be praying that this is just a phase"
...I still haven't told her that I've been struggling to figure out whether the feelings I've been having for a while now mean I'm Trans, or if I just generally hate how ugly I am (It's not just looks, there are other factors that I'm still trying to process)
She sorta accepted the bisexuality, but there's no way in hell she will accept me as her "daughter"
...I still haven't told her that I've been struggling to figure out whether the feelings I've been having for a while now mean I'm Trans, or if I just generally hate how ugly I am (It's not just looks, there are other factors that I'm still trying to process)
She sorta accepted the bisexuality, but there's no way in hell she will accept me as her "daughter"
I guess (and again this is speculation, a possibility, so really there is no need to argue about it) that in my view God is still responsible for our suffering but not as much on a personal level, like if God created life and death, there must be a logical means for people to die. Therefore we have heart disease, cancer, dementia etc which are cause by an intricate system of genetics and environment. Thus if I get something horrible like dementia, it isn't that God decided on a personal level I must suffer for years and years with the terror of losing my mind, and that everyone around me must suffer watching me lose my mind, and that this might be some kind of "lesson" for me or punishment, and God is ignoring my pleas. Meanwhile someone else just dies quickly in their sleep with no suffering. I personally believe it's possible (and I said possible) that God isn't sitting up there in the sky making these decisions - they are a result of a very complex system that we don't understand in fullness.
Of course this also means that God must not, rather than chooses not to, respond to our pleas for things to be different. Which contradicts what most people believe about the power of prayer etc. God will not (or cannot) intervene. Although perhaps some kind of Divinity or God exists within us that may help with these things in some cases.
Again this is speculation. Believe what gives you comfort - I personally feel more comforted by this than the idea that God decides on a personal level that one person will have psychotic delusions while another enjoys good mental health. That one young boy delivering newspapers will get kidnapped by a pedophilia ring and another just happened to get delayed because his dog chewed up one of his shoes and wasn't delivering his newspapers at the precise time the kidnappers drove by. Did God decide "I will delay Johnny with a broken shoe so he doesn't get kidnapped, but the kidnappers will find Billy three blocks away and I won't save Billy."
Not in my opinion. Not the way I hope things work.
Of course this also means that God must not, rather than chooses not to, respond to our pleas for things to be different. Which contradicts what most people believe about the power of prayer etc. God will not (or cannot) intervene. Although perhaps some kind of Divinity or God exists within us that may help with these things in some cases.
Again this is speculation. Believe what gives you comfort - I personally feel more comforted by this than the idea that God decides on a personal level that one person will have psychotic delusions while another enjoys good mental health. That one young boy delivering newspapers will get kidnapped by a pedophilia ring and another just happened to get delayed because his dog chewed up one of his shoes and wasn't delivering his newspapers at the precise time the kidnappers drove by. Did God decide "I will delay Johnny with a broken shoe so he doesn't get kidnapped, but the kidnappers will find Billy three blocks away and I won't save Billy."
Not in my opinion. Not the way I hope things work.
You make it sound as if a God who has control over suffering would be more cruel than a God who has no control over his creation, but I would argue that's not the case because the fact remains that both created a world with the same suffering. You can blame the first God for thinking that individual and collective suffering is useful, but we can equally blame the second one for imagining a world where Billy get's kidnapped by pedophilia ring and thinking "Yeah, that's a good enough world, I'll make that one, can't do better than that".
I would put it this way: the world in both cases is the same environment of dangers and horror, and they both throw children into it, the difference is that the first one manages the suffering in order to make sure that at the end of all things the children become better people through the experience, whereas the second one just leaves them to fend for themselves in suffering without meaning because that's the best world he conceived. Surely, I see how you can think of the first one as cruel, but if anything, the second one is the other extreme: absolute negligence and indifference about reality. It doesn't change at all the ammount of suffering, only the meaningfulness of it. And I still don't understand how is it that the second God can create the whole of reality, but nevertheless is powerless in it.
I would put it this way: the world in both cases is the same environment of dangers and horror, and they both throw children into it, the difference is that the first one manages the suffering in order to make sure that at the end of all things the children become better people through the experience, whereas the second one just leaves them to fend for themselves in suffering without meaning because that's the best world he conceived. Surely, I see how you can think of the first one as cruel, but if anything, the second one is the other extreme: absolute negligence and indifference about reality. It doesn't change at all the ammount of suffering, only the meaningfulness of it. And I still don't understand how is it that the second God can create the whole of reality, but nevertheless is powerless in it.
That's a very though situation you are going through, I'm sorry to hear it. I understand a little bit what's like fighting with your family in terms of religion and belief; when I was in school, I became an atheist, and also vegan (that I still am), and that caused a lot of anger, insults, and so on. What helped me, in a sense, is to realize that their opinions are only their individual opinions, and that they are not exactly the representatives of religion and society standing there to judge me. Because I think that's what's really upsetting, the feeling that is you against the whole of humanity. Thinking about how people are ignorant of their own beliefs and culture, and how theirs contradict those of other traditions, helped me see that their opinions actually had little weight, and that society is more of a sea of discourses than a unified thing. I don't know if that helps.
So in your view, Johnny gets kidnapped and raped because God wants it to happen to make Johnny a "better person". I don't accept that.
In my view God is neither negligent nor indifferent, but simply unable to step in and save them because of the laws the system operates under. The free will (however limited) that people have. God cannot operate outside nature to save people.
Again this is my opinion and no need to argue about it. If you continue arguing I will probably cease to respond because this is pointless. You see God as all powerful and I don't.
In my view God is neither negligent nor indifferent, but simply unable to step in and save them because of the laws the system operates under. The free will (however limited) that people have. God cannot operate outside nature to save people.
Again this is my opinion and no need to argue about it. If you continue arguing I will probably cease to respond because this is pointless. You see God as all powerful and I don't.
Ok, ok, I'm sorry for insisnting so much. At this point I don't want to convince you of anything, I just want to understand one thing; please explain it to me because I just can't get my head around this idea: how is it that if God makes the rules, he couldn't create rules where he could act to do good? Why couldn't he create a universe with the paradigm nature+divine intervantion? Why is having a purely naturalistic reality so important that it outweights the possibility of using his power to prevent children from dying from horrible diseases? Even if you say that is to not interfere with free will, what about diseases and natural disasters? Or is he bound by other pre-existent rules and if so what determines those? Why are the rules of the system as they are and necessarily exclude God from acting? What is the rationale here?
The shocking truth is that God simply doesn't exist and there really is no meaning in anything.
The way I see it, if there really was some kind of God out there then this world would be much more advanced, much more human-centered and there would have been far far less misery, poverty, oppression and discrmination of all kind, economic injustice and so many diseases that there is no cure for.
The way I see it, if there really was some kind of God out there then this world would be much more advanced, much more human-centered and there would have been far far less misery, poverty, oppression and discrmination of all kind, economic injustice and so many diseases that there is no cure for.
Last edited: