Why are children allowed to suffer in this world? Because.........

[Soyeong]

This guy is a very articulate, knowledgeable Christian who does a good job of answering the atheist question on "why are innocent children allowed to suffer?"
Sorry its a bit long. Wish I'd got onto him ages ago. I'm a fan!

Pain helps us to know when something is wrong. If children couldn't feel pain, then it doesn't take much imagination to see how they could easily cause serious or permanent harm to themselves. If they touched a hot stove, they wouldn't know to yank their hand back and could end up with severe burns that left untreated could cause permanent damage. This is why diseases such as leprosy that destroy nerve endings can lead to debilitating conditions.

 

[Rajni]

The framing of the question is problematical. Why is the suffering of 'innocent children' more of a concern than all the rest of suffering? Suffering is suffering, cruelty is cruelty, inhumanity is ...

Ivan K. almost seem to be saying in his rant that as long as the 'innocent children' weren't suffering he'd be ok with all the other suffering.

In my many years on social media, including forums, I'm finding that the addition of "innocent children" into the question of suffering is a strategic move to add more emotional weight to the issue of suffering.

Yet, who would be the first to inform suffering children that once they shed their baby-fat, their suffering will no longer really matter?

Another reason I prefer my paradigm in regards to this issue.

 

[keith99]

In my many years on social media, including forums, I'm finding that the addition of "innocent children" into the question of suffering is a strategic move to add more emotional weight to the issue of suffering.

Yet, who would be the first to inform suffering children that once they shed their baby-fat, their suffering will no longer really matter?

Another reason I prefer my paradigm in regards to this issue.

While you are correct that it has an emotional appeal it also serves a legitimate purpose. Children are the face on innocence. It serves to eliminate or at least reduce the line of argument that those who suffer somehow deserve it.

 

[afishamongmany]

In my many years on social media, including forums, I'm finding that the addition of "innocent children" into the question of suffering is a strategic move to add more emotional weight to the issue of suffering.

Yet, who would be the first to inform suffering children that once they shed their baby-fat, their suffering will no longer really matter?
Another reason I prefer my paradigm in regards to this issue.

Hello chaela - Yes and emotions that we all (well, sadly, not all) feel the weight of. But emotions are not usually helpful to clear thinking through to understanding. In the book in that same rant Ivan K. actually says that he doesn't want to understand. What consumes him are emotions - desire for justice - anger against the abusers and against God, who he judges to be unjust. And when his brother offers another possible way of seeing/understanding that involves the person of Jesus Christ, Ivan slaps it down and launches another rant this time against what he perceives as 'The Church'.
My belief is that Christians should freely admit they do not have a clear, definitive, cerebral answer for the question and the horror of suffering. This is because God Himself does not give one. Does He answer Job's questions about all Job's pain and grief? No, His answer is to ask Job questions.
Go well
><>

 

[Phil 1:21]

If God intervened in every injustice there was, even you would get punished for something wrong you did.

God loved us so much that He gave us free will. Some will use that gift to glorify Him. Other's will choose to metaphorically call Him a...

vile piece of crap.

 

[afishamongmany]

While you are correct that it has an emotional appeal it also serves a legitimate purpose. Children are the face on innocence. It serves to eliminate or at least reduce the line of argument that those who suffer somehow deserve it.

Hi Keith - well yes they are used for that purpose. How 'legitimate' that is it debatable. The whole linking together of suffering and innocence - punishment - payment - deserved - undeserved tends to complicate and cloud our understanding more than helping it. One doesn't have to live very long or be be very observant to understand there is no direct, overall, correlation between suffering and individual morality.
Goldstein quotes Ivan F. (around 6.40) as saying, "If all must suffer to pay for the eternal harmony, what have the children to do with it?" Where does this strange idea that, our suffering pays for the eternal harmony (what ever that is), come from?
Suffering is an inevitable consequence of the human condition. People have written much about it but in the end we have to live with it, deal with it and die with it.
Go well
><>

 

[bhsmte]

I find this video, to discuss some of the issues with suffering, quite well.

 

[quatona]

God loved us so much that He gave us free will.

How exactly is that a token of love? This view seems to require you to have a very particular definition of "love".

 

[Ygrene Imref]

"If God love us, why do innocent people suffer?"

Because people are grade-A jerks. God has nothing to do with it.

Grade A, organic non GMO jerks.

Well, some are non-GMO, but still grade A jerks.

 

[Phil 1:21]

How exactly is that a token of love? This view seems to require you to have a very particular definition of "love".

It's not my definition; it's God's.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

"If God love us, why do innocent people suffer?"

Because people are grade-A jerks. God has nothing to do with it.

Grade A, organic non GMO jerks.

Well, some are non-GMO, but still grade A jerks.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

I'll try.
He answers that love can only exist in a world of free will. People cant be forced to love. Otherwise its not love. They must choose. A world of free will is imperfect. because many will choose hatred and evil and cruelty towards each other.
I realise this doesn't answer doesn't cover all children' suffering.

I would just say drop free WILL, and stick with free CHOICE.

I don't think any entity made - especially imperfect ones - are given "free" will. We have 100% freedom to choose how to react to things - including giving and receiving love.

But, you do have the choice to love, or hate by design. Most people forgot God created us as gods, and even after we fell we had a responsibility to our fellow man.

A lot of people don't agree with that "my brother's keeper 'nonsense'," and extrapolated over millions of people who keep that attitude over billions of life interactions - you get Earth (physical heaven desperately trying to be hell.)

 

[quatona]

It's not my definition; it's God's.

How amazingly circular.

Can you support this your claim, btw.?

 

[Ygrene Imref]

If God intervened in every injustice there was, even you would get punished for something wrong you did.

Yep.

If God was fair, rather than just, we would all knock the bottom out of hell.


Fair would be He avenge, or punish someone who did someone wrong. That is the entire planet minus fetuses, and kids perhaps under the age of accountability. Although, these days kids as young as nine are mudering people knowing full well what they are doing.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

To compare God to a "head in the sand, wash my hands Pontius Pilate type" is unfair I think. God is responsible for all the good in the world, Satan for the evil. Not all suffering can be explained. There is a bigger picture than this life. A child who dies of cancer, must receive eternal reward in my view. So in the scheme of things, maybe their suffering is short. Hopefully anyway.

How long does a spanking last? About 15 - 30 seconds, no?

Assuming you live to 85, that means if you got ONE spanking your entire life, that is 0.0000011% of your life.

85 years of pure suffering to translate to a "spanking" in terms of one''s life would mean that person lives for about twice the age of the universe - still much less than eternity.

We are myopic about many things, then, that God clearly sees, and understands about our overall life - not just this terrestrial life in this rotting meat sack.

 

[Allandavid]

I'll try.
He answers that love can only exist in a world of free will. People cant be forced to love. Otherwise its not love. They must choose. A world of free will is imperfect. because many will choose hatred and evil and cruelty towards each other.
I realise this doesn't answer doesn't cover all children' suffering.

Ask most Christians....does free will exist in heaven? Most say yes.

Is there evil in heaven? Most say no.

Argument over.....

 

[possibletarian]

How would god intervening conflict with our free will. ?

If I stop someone from killing a child (and I hope you agree that I should) how is that an interference with free will, I find the argument beyond stupid.

Don't we have a system of justice set up in the old testament supposedly inspired by a god ? what is the point of punishment and a set of justice if not to interfere with, stop, remove forms of evil and wrongdoing (free will) in society ?
If god was truly against interference in free will, why even have a set of laws ?

The bottom line is if someone can interfere in a child's or adults rape, murder, whatever then they should, and for someone or some claimed deity to have unlimited power to do so, yet does not is beyond belief.

If say you heard of a court case where a father stood by watched one of his young children stab the other in there eye, and his excuse for his non action was ''well they have to learn, they cannot know what consideration and love is unless they experience the pain and suffering their anger can cause, and in any case if i interfered here I would have to interfere in everything, and i want them to exercise their free will " I hope you would rightly be disgusted.

To me it is much more likely there is simply no god, to the believer because they are locked into a world with a god they have to go to excruciating lengths to explain why a god of love, who numbers every hair on our heads, has the power to intervene, to forgive, to all intents and purposes simply ignores the situation.

 

[possibletarian]

Ask most Christians....does free will exist in heaven? Most say yes.

Is there evil in heaven? Most say no.

Argument over.....

And when you ask.. how do you know it won't all happen again given that things were supposedly made perfect in every way first time around .. the answer

We will have resurrection bodies, not given to sin.. hmmm

 

[Phil 1:21]

How amazingly circular.

Can you support this your claim, btw.?

It's all in the Bible, my friend.

 

[bhsmte]

It's all in the Bible, my friend.

Yep, circular.