Diseases and Defects

[beechy]

I originally posted this in the Apologetics forum, but now realize that is meant for Christians only, and since I'm a self identified "seeker", I may not ultimately be welcome there. So I'm posting here as well. Here's my issue:

I'm sure this has been addressed a million times before, so sorry if I'm rehashing a tired topic. I'm curious, however, as to your thoughts on why little babies are born with diseases and birth defects that are terminal and/or cause great suffering. This seems difficult to reconcile with a loving God.

 

[drich0150]

I originally posted this in the Apologetics forum, but now realize that is meant for Christians only, and since I'm a self identified "seeker", I may not ultimately be welcome there. So I'm posting here as well. Here's my issue:

I'm sure this has been addressed a million times before, so sorry if I'm rehashing a tired topic. I'm curious, however, as to your thoughts on why little babies are born with diseases and birth defects that are terminal and/or cause great suffering. This seems difficult to reconcile with a loving God.

What or how does babies being born with afflictions have anything to do with God not being loving?

Because God did not make someone just like you, or did not create someone in the way you would approve of, somehow makes him unloving? Or does that make you the standard of the universe, or at minimum the standard in which to judge an all powerful God?

 

[ebia]

I originally posted this in the Apologetics forum, but now realize that is meant for Christians only, and since I'm a self identified "seeker", I may not ultimately be welcome there. So I'm posting here as well. Here's my issue:

I'm sure this has been addressed a million times before, so sorry if I'm rehashing a tired topic. I'm curious, however, as to your thoughts on why little babies are born with diseases and birth defects that are terminal and/or cause great suffering. This seems difficult to reconcile with a loving God.

Your question assumes that God wishes that suffering.

 

[beechy]

Your question assumes that God wishes that suffering.

No, my question assumes that God has the power to prevent it.

 

[ebia]

No, my question assumes that God has the power to prevent it.

God has and is doing something about it, but healing the world is a long term project.

 

[beechy]

What or how does babies being born with afflictions have anything to do with God not being loving?

Because God did not make someone just like you, or did not create someone in the way you would approve of, somehow makes him unloving? Or does that make you the standard of the universe, or at minimum the standard in which to judge an all powerful God?

I don't think everyone should be just like me. I'm wondering why God allows babies to be born with diseases or defects that cause them to suffer great pain.

I love my son -- and wouldn't love him less if he was sick -- but if I had the choice for him to be afflicted with an incredibly painful, fatal condition or not, I would choose for him not to have to suffer with the incredibly painful, fatal condition.

 

[beechy]

God has and is doing something about it, but healing the world is a long term project.

What is it that prevents God from immediately being able to keep babies from being born with terrible diseases?

 

[ebia]

What is it that prevents God from immediately being able to keep babies from being born with terrible diseases?

Scripture doesn't directly address that specific question. What it does address is why God doesn't just wipe out evil by force - by telling the Noah story. From then on it's more interested in addressing what God is doing.

 

[beechy]

Scripture doesn't directly address that specific question. What it does address is why God doesn't just wipe out evil by force - by telling the Noah story. From then on it's more interested in addressing what God is doing.

I don't remember the Noah story explaining why God won't wipe out evil by force -- didn't He just say (without explanation) that He wouldn't flood the world again?

As for what God is doing, I'm interested in why He permits babies to be born with diseases that cause them to suffer. I think it is relevant to our understanding of what it means to love. That is, if you love a little baby and you can permit her to suffer with a horrible illness or prevent her from suffering with a horrible illness, why is it loving to permit her to suffer?

 

[drich0150]

I don't think everyone should be just like me. I'm wondering why God allows babies to be born with diseases or defects that cause them to suffer great pain.

We all suffer. It is our lot in this life to suffer. It is also our lot in life to seek God to alleviate this suffering. Those who were born with suffering know God better than those who believe themselves to be born into "normalcy"

Why are some born to suffer in this life more than others? To show those who do not know pain daily, what true grace and mercy can look like.

I love my son -- and wouldn't love him less if he was sick -- but if I had the choice for him to be afflicted with an incredibly painful, fatal condition or not, I would choose for him not to have to suffer with the incredibly painful, fatal condition.

It is because you have taken your life your circumstances as the standard in which to judge all forms of love. What if your sons pain is what it took to save billions? would you allow Him to suffer then? What if it meant his brutal death at the hands of those who hated him? Would you allow him to die is a terrible way for the sake of others?

That's what the Father has done for you through the death of His Son on the cross. Why would our children be exempt if it meant others could be saved or even have the opportunity to see God working in a broken child's life? Why would you ask God to sacrifice His son for your benefit and then question Him when he does not protect (to the degree you would) all other sons?

 

[ebia]

I don't remember the Noah story explaining why God won't wipe out evil by force -- didn't He just say (without explanation) that He wouldn't flood the world again?

the story IS the explanation. You do need to read the whole story to the end of chapter 9 though, not finish where everyone stops at the rainbow.

As for what God is doing, I'm interested in why He permits babies to be born with diseases that cause them to suffer. I think it is relevant to our understanding of what it means to love. That is, if you love a little baby and you can permit her to suffer with a horrible illness or prevent her from suffering with a horrible illness, why is it loving to permit her to suffer?

if the cost of preventing it immediately is too high - the destruction of the whole creation say - that would justify not doing so, would it not?

 

[beechy]

We all suffer. It is our lot in this life to suffer. It is also our lot in life to seek God to alleviate this suffering. Those who were born with suffering know God better than those who believe themselves to be born into "normalcy"

How can a little baby seek God for anything?

Why are some born to suffer in this life more than others? To show those who do not know pain daily, what true grace and mercy can look like.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that we need to be able to see suffering babies to appreciate how merciful God has been to us by not afflicting us with the same condition?

It is because you have taken your life your circumstances as the standard in which to judge all forms of love. What if your sons pain is what it took to save billions? would you allow Him to suffer then? What if it meant his brutal death at the hands of those who hated him? Would you allow him to die is a terrible way for the sake of others?

If all things are possible wih God, why is it ever necessary for someone to suffer in order to save anyone else? Why can't God save everyone from suffering?

That's what the Father has done for you through the death of His Son on the cross. Why would our children be exempt if it meant others could be saved or even have the opportunity to see God working in a broken child's life? Why would you ask God to sacrifice His son for your benefit and then question Him when he does not protect (to the degree you would) all other sons?

I've never understood why Jesus had to die on the cross. Why couldn't we all have been saved without that happening?

 

[beechy]

the story IS the explanation. You do need to read the whole story to the end of chapter 9 though, not finish where everyone stops at the rainbow.

I did. Still don't get it.

if the cost of preventing it immediately is too high - the destruction of the whole creation say - that would justify not doing so, would it not?

If God can do anything, why can't he find a way to save the babies without destroying the whole creation?

 

[drich0150]

How can a little baby seek God for anything?

I didn't say the baby was to seek God. Who seeks for God when their children are sick now? Who sees God working in their children's lives?

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that we need to be able to see suffering babies to appreciate how merciful God has been to us by not afflicting us with the same condition?

No. I am saying that those who suffer know God better than those who live independently of Him. Suffering is a gift from God. Some are blessed from birth, others have to suffer through self righteousness and pride before the are humbled and can truly learn to seek Him.

If all things are possible with God, why is it ever necessary for someone to suffer in order to save anyone else? Why can't God save everyone from suffering?

To what end?
Suffering brings spiritual maturity. This is God's goal, not just salvation.

I've never understood why Jesus had to die on the cross. Again, couldn't we all have been saved without that happening?

again to what end? Is God to save all of humanity to be spiritual infants for eternity for the sake of you personal understanding of love? Or should He allow 70 or 80 years of well controlled hardship allowed one to develop and grow into a stronger more mature being?

For some of us it is all we can do to become a spiritual infant for eternity. For others we have excepted this controlled suffering as a way to grow in spirit and in truth. Why should all be made or forced to be spiritual infants when the capacity for greater wisdom is available to them?

 

[beechy]

I didn't say the baby was to seek God. Who seeks for God when their children are sick now? Who sees God working in their children's lives?

So babies need to suffer in order for their parents to seek and know God?

No. I am saying that those who suffer know God better than those who live independently of Him. Suffering is a gift from God. Some are blessed from birth, others have to suffer through self righteousness and pride before the are humbled and can truly learn to seek Him.

Babies who suffer greatly with disease know babies better than those who don't?

To what end?
Suffering brings spiritual maturity. This is God's goal, not just salvation.

Why can't God find a way for us to reach spiritual maturity without requiring us to

again to what end? Is God to save all of humanity to be spiritual infants for eternity for the sake of you personal understanding of love? Or should He allow 70 or 80 years of well controlled hardship allowed one to develop and grow into a stronger more mature being?[/quote]

For some of us it is all we can do to become a spiritual infant for eternity. For others we have excepted this controlled suffering as a way to grow in spirit and in truth. Why should all be made or forced to be spiritual infants when the capacity for greater wisdom is available to them?[/QUOTE]My question was why did Jesus have to die to save us?

 

[drich0150]

If no one is suffering and everyone is happy, why would I care about choice?

Because you have all of eternity to wonder what it would be like if you did not have God "choosing" for you.

Everyone gets what they want, there are no losers.

That's just it, your don't necessarily get what you want. You get what God wants for you. For some Lucifer and a very large number of angels along with Adam and Eve this was too much to ask for on an eternal scale.
Something tells me if you have not lived your life in the footsteps of God to this point, (17 years) then asking you to live an eternity doing what He commands would be too much for you as well.

So call it a "cheap excuse" if you want, but know you are reaping the full benefit of living in a world of free choice/will.

That seems quite benevolent, instead of allowing people to bring suffering upon themselves because of things they cannot foresee the results of their actions, or worse suffering that is not their fault.

So choose to live out the rule of law in the bible. This is what God chose for you.

The cry to be able to make 'meaningful choices' seems like a cheap excuse to allow people to suffer for eternity. If there is an all-powerful, all-knowing God, who created the universe, then there is no true meaningful choice to begin with. God already knows how you will react to every situation, and what needs to happen to get you to do just about anything, it is only up to him to decide how things will play out.

You are correct it has been decided, in that we are to live in a world subject to the consequences of sin. Which means we will have babies born to suffering and pain, as these are the results of sin.

 

[drich0150]

So babies need to suffer in order for their parents to seek and know God?

If that is all you can extrapolate from my statement then yes lets start from their.

Babies who suffer greatly with disease know babies better than those who don't?

Yes, Babies who live and grow into adults, or Parents of Babies who die have a better opportunity to know God than those who do not.

Why can't God find a way for us to reach spiritual maturity without requiring us to suffer?

Because we tend to live for self, unless we are in a situation where we are forced to seek Help. Our first reaction is to seek help from our peers/family. When they fail we generally turn to God. That means we have to be placed in situations where we can not get help from family or peers more often than not to learn to earnestly seek God. So a perpetually sick child is a situation where a parent spends more time interceding on the behalf to God than one who does not.

It is one of the big reasons my mother is no longer a Buddhist.

[/quote]My question was why did Jesus have to die to save us?[/quote]
Because above all else God is righteous. Righteousness DEMANDS a Death for sin in God's economy.

 

[ebia]

.

 

[ebia]

I did. Still don't get it.

Did flooding the world solve the problem?

If God can do anything, why can't he find a way to save the babies without destroying the whole creation?

Who said God can do anything? Perhaps some combinations are mutually exclusive.

 

[Faulty]

Scripture teaches that because of man's sin, we are all born in sin, and are therefore subject to the curse brought about by our sin, including sickness and death, and this would include even our children.

Certainly, God could do anything He wanted to with the children, but remember, they aren't innocent in His eyes either, because they do have a sin nature, even from birth. So I think a misconception here isthat the children are the innocent among us, and is therefore unworthy to be under the same curse, but that's not the case. The initial assumption is faulty.