The world's suffering as a result of original sin.

[Garrett V. F.]

I'm trying to find a way to explain why God does not stop suffering.

Some suffering is caused by a willful neglect of God's warnings. We know that the regular consumption of copious amounts of alcohol can be bad for us, and, if we suffer in our old age because of that, I don't believe God can be held accountable for a lack of intervention. We knew beforehand that it could cause us suffering, and we did it anyway. It was a trade-off that we knew we were making. This might even be a good way of explaining certain natural disasters. Pollution causes sickness; deep-sea drilling may disturb a fault line which causes a tidal wave, etc.

But it doesn't adequately explain other types of suffering. What about the suffering of the woman who was raped, tortured, and murdered? What did she do wrong? Walk through the wrong part of town alone? Does it matter that she knew the risk? Why wouldn't God stop that?

And what about when we just don't see God's warnings? What about the ancient alcoholics? What did they know about the sicknesses that came from alcohol? All they had was superstition. They didn't conduct medical studies or take blood samples. They falsely attributed some misfortune to alcohol, or they failed to connect the proper misfortune with it. How could they have prevented their suffering if they didn't know the cause?

Why didn't God step down and say, "Hey, maybe you don't want to do that." Why didn't he ever intervene to explain things to us? Why did it take until the past century to give us preventative medicine? Why did he wait until now to give us the technology to avoid fault lines?

The arguments go on. And they've given me some pause. During that pause, I thought of a solution, but there's a problem with it.

I think the world's suffering might be explained by original sin. It's the result of the Fall. This is why God told Adam not to eat the apple. But here's my question: if Adam knew that all this would result from eating the apple, do you think he would have eaten it? I doubt it. So why didn't God explain it to him? If God had lessened Adam's ignorance on this particular topic, He could have prevented all the suffering that has occurred since. And, since God is omniscient, he knew that. Doesn't this make God culpable?

If someone else has found a better answer to suffering, one that works better than any presented in The Twelve Officers (The Tale of the Twelve Officers), I'm interested in hearing it.

 

[Jpark]

I'm trying to find a way to explain why God does not stop suffering.

It leads to a barren landscape of despair with a gritty and dark sky but it's an interesting subject nonetheless and there is a reservoir of revelation within this terrain. Those who cannot find it should just abide by Eccl. 2:24-25 and Luke 13:1-5, which emphasize the importance of living life with God.

Some suffering is caused by a willful neglect of God's warnings. We know that the regular consumption of copious amounts of alcohol can be bad for us, and, if we suffer in our old age because of that, I don't believe God can be held accountable for a lack of intervention. We knew beforehand that it could cause us suffering, and we did it anyway. It was a trade-off that we knew we were making.

But where did the disposition for alcohol come from? Sure there's depression, peer pressure, curiosity. But where did those come from?

But you're right that He can't be held accountable for a lack of intervention as He does not have duties. Only interests.

This might even be a good way of explaining certain natural disasters. Pollution causes sickness; deep-sea drilling may disturb a fault line which causes a tidal wave, etc.

Natural disasters are of an entirely different category of suffering.

But it doesn't adequately explain other types of suffering. What about the suffering of the woman who was raped, tortured, and murdered? What did she do wrong? Walk through the wrong part of town alone? Does it matter that she knew the risk? Why wouldn't God stop that?

It's not about what she did wrong (unless she did something very wrong but that's not what we're looking into).

It's about what others will think about her fate and about what brought her to do such a thing. Again, disposition.

Consider Judges 9:22-24 and 1 Kings 22:19-23. 'An evil spirit between' can be interpreted as disposition. In both cases, it was because they had caused the suffering of others or acted wickedly.

But look at 1 Samuel 16:14. Saul had been continuously disobedient, but what happens if we remove that factor. God's Spirit was removed and an evil spirit took that place. Now go to Matt. 12:43-45 and consider Luke 13:1-5 again. Isn't it odd that Jesus doesn't identify why they suffered but stresses the importance of repentance?

Matt. 12:43-45 is actually being applied nationally, to Israel.

Now let's assume 'from the LORD' was never there. 'an evil spirit terrorized him' What does that mean? It means in God's absence, bad things happen.

Hence Jesus emphasizing repentance.

Also consider Job 15:14. To trace suffering, you must trace origins. Why God created man, what distinguishes man from creation, why man has to be sophisticated.

And what about when we just don't see God's warnings? What about the ancient alcoholics? What did they know about the sicknesses that came from alcohol? All they had was superstition. They didn't conduct medical studies or take blood samples. They falsely attributed some misfortune to alcohol, or they failed to connect the proper misfortune with it. How could they have prevented their suffering if they didn't know the cause?

Those would be condemnation or result of hardened hearts, although both are often occurring together.

But suppose God never presented any warning? What does that make the situation? It makes it punishment in some cases, but what about the other case?

2 Chronicles 7:13-14 If I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or if I command the locust to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among My people, and My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

No warning for malicious intent = punishment
No warning for unknown intent = ?

Given Luke 13:1-5, I'm inclined to believe the lack of warning can also be done for a good intent: for repentance.

Zechariah 13:7-9 “That two parts in it will be cut off and perish;
But the third will be left in it.
9 “And I will bring the third part through the fire,
Refine them as silver is refined,

Why didn't God step down and say, "Hey, maybe you don't want to do that." Why didn't he ever intervene to explain things to us? Why did it take until the past century to give us preventative medicine? Why did he wait until now to give us the technology to avoid fault lines?

God's intervention is often conditional (Jeremiah 18:7-10). Furthermore, there's a "calendar" He goes by (Acts 1:7). When the Bible says appointed (i.e. Acts 13:48), what do you think that means? I think it means it's when He's going to intervene.

That doesn't mean that He just sits there and waits.

Dan. 2:21 “It is He who changes the times and the epochs; He removes kings and establishes kings; He gives wisdom to wise men And knowledge to men of understanding.

Now see 2 Kings 20:1-6.

2 Kings 20:2-3 Then he turned his face to the wall and prayed to the LORD, saying, 3 “Remember now, O LORD, I beseech You, how I have walked before You in truth and with a whole heart and have done what is good in Your sight.” And Hezekiah wept bitterly.

2 Kings 20:5 “I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; behold, I will heal you.

Notice how the author adds 'And Hezekiah wept bitterly'. Notice how God mentions that He has seen his tears.

Could have just been turning his face to the wall, but I think it signifies something similar to wearing sack clothes and ashes.

Which brings up to the next subject: Mordecai.

Esther 4:1-3 When Mordecai learned all that had been done, he tore his clothes, put on sackcloth and ashes, and went out into the midst of the city and wailed loudly and bitterly. 2 He went as far as the king’s gate, for no one was to enter the king’s gate clothed in sackcloth. 3 In each and every province where the command and decree of the king came, there was great mourning among the Jews, with fasting, weeping and wailing; and many lay on sackcloth and ashes.

Can you find God's intervention in this chapter?

Finally, Peter. Matt. 26:75. Now consider Judas' reaction: regret. Then see 2 Cor. 7:9-11. Now remember Jesus' words in Luke 22:31.

The arguments go on. And they've given me some pause. During that pause, I thought of a solution, but there's a problem with it.

To me they'll never be answered sufficiently (Eccl. 1).

I think the world's suffering might be explained by original sin. It's the result of the Fall. This is why God told Adam not to eat the apple. But here's my question: if Adam knew that all this would result from eating the apple, do you think he would have eaten it? I doubt it. So why didn't God explain it to him? If God had lessened Adam's ignorance on this particular topic, He could have prevented all the suffering that has occurred since. And, since God is omniscient, he knew that. Doesn't this make God culpable?

Sin is not bodily inherent. It is inherent in the mind, the very soul that God breathed into man. It is the mind that corrupts the body.

Suffering is not the result of an original sin, but of:

-the shifting in power. Satan gains worldwide influence and uses that influence to work his purposes in this world, which is why Jesus was prepared (1 John 3:8) and which is why free will is given out
-the gaining of a godly influence, a spirit from God, which wrestles with the soul (Gal. 5:17)
-God's ultimate test (Romans 8:20-21; 1 Cor. 15:19)

Anyways, God didn't explain it because it was a test to see if he would just obey (Rom. 8:14; John 3:8). Besides, Adam only had a soul at that point. How could he understand the consequences? Even if he did have a spirit when he was created, the flesh is weak (Matt. 26:41) and it would have been difficult to subjugate it. And of course God knew Adam would fail and what the devil would sow (Gen. 3:9-13).

If someone else has found a better answer to suffering, one that works better than any presented in The Twelve Officers (The Tale of the Twelve Officers), I'm interested in hearing it.

Interesting read. I'll give my view on it later.

 

[MrPolo]

If you like audio MP3s, check out Dr. Peter Kreeft's Making Sense of Suffering talk.

 

[James-49]

This thread caused me to consider: How many men, women and children were abused, tortured and killed - people who confessed and trusted in Christ - because Saul arrested them and brought them to the high priests?

Yet Saul went on to become Paul, and the means for bringing countless numbers to Christ.

God's grace and mercy extends to all - the woman who is raped, and the man who raped her. Suffering can be so devastating, but in this and all cases, the rapist may very well be God's means to extend His mercy while the woman who was raped may have a tremendous reward waiting for her.

God is not willing that any should perish, but that all men should come to salvation. I may not have raped, but guilty of one is guilty of all. So my lies, or thefts, or other ... why would I expect another chance while denying others theirs?

This life, as James says, is as a vapour - and it will all be explained to us after this life - but in the meantime we trust that it's all under God's careful watch and control.

 

[Zeena]

I'm trying to find a way to explain why God does not stop suffering.

Some suffering is caused by a willful neglect of God's warnings. We know that the regular consumption of copious amounts of alcohol can be bad for us, and, if we suffer in our old age because of that, I don't believe God can be held accountable for a lack of intervention. We knew beforehand that it could cause us suffering, and we did it anyway. It was a trade-off that we knew we were making. This might even be a good way of explaining certain natural disasters. Pollution causes sickness; deep-sea drilling may disturb a fault line which causes a tidal wave, etc.

But it doesn't adequately explain other types of suffering. What about the suffering of the woman who was raped, tortured, and murdered? What did she do wrong? Walk through the wrong part of town alone? Does it matter that she knew the risk? Why wouldn't God stop that?

And what about when we just don't see God's warnings? What about the ancient alcoholics? What did they know about the sicknesses that came from alcohol? All they had was superstition. They didn't conduct medical studies or take blood samples. They falsely attributed some misfortune to alcohol, or they failed to connect the proper misfortune with it. How could they have prevented their suffering if they didn't know the cause?

Why didn't God step down and say, "Hey, maybe you don't want to do that." Why didn't he ever intervene to explain things to us? Why did it take until the past century to give us preventative medicine? Why did he wait until now to give us the technology to avoid fault lines?

The arguments go on. And they've given me some pause. During that pause, I thought of a solution, but there's a problem with it.

I think the world's suffering might be explained by original sin. It's the result of the Fall. This is why God told Adam not to eat the apple. But here's my question: if Adam knew that all this would result from eating the apple, do you think he would have eaten it? I doubt it. So why didn't God explain it to him? If God had lessened Adam's ignorance on this particular topic, He could have prevented all the suffering that has occurred since. And, since God is omniscient, he knew that. Doesn't this make God culpable?

If someone else has found a better answer to suffering, one that works better than any presented in The Twelve Officers (The Tale of the Twelve Officers), I'm interested in hearing it.

Job 33-34

Rom 8:17
And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+8:16-18&version=KJV

 

[elopez]

I think the world's suffering might be explained by original sin. It's the result of the Fall. This is why God told Adam not to eat the apple. But here's my question: if Adam knew that all this would result from eating the apple, do you think he would have eaten it? I doubt it. So why didn't God explain it to him? If God had lessened Adam's ignorance on this particular topic, He could have prevented all the suffering that has occurred since. And, since God is omniscient, he knew that. Doesn't this make God culpable?

I would say some of the world's suffering is owed to original sin. Had our first parents knowledge of their sin's affect on their descendants I am not sure it would have made a difference at all, but how do we even know in the first place that they didn't know this? First, they knew they were meant to populate the earth. Second, once given the command they knew by disobeying death would result. Who's to say that they didn't have knowledge that it would affect the rest of humanity?

If we still want to say they were ignorant of the result why would we question God's withdrawal in telling them the full affects? God, being omniscient, perhaps would have known it would have made no difference in the end. Being omniscient He knew something about the scenario that we obviously have no clue on. Even then, first man had all the necessary components to make the right decision, he just failed to execute it.

 

[Garrett V. F.]

After discussing some of the points of The Twelve Officers with people, I realize that the parable is somewhat misleading. It misrepresents at least a few viewpoints, but it's still a good example of a tool we can use to "test everything" so that we can "hold fast to what is good" (1 Thes. 5:21).

 

[1-4 All OurGodAll 4-1Sad]

I heard a really good sermon from Jeff Vines(American)on sin etc.Basically he was saying that evil things like rape etc come from mans on selfish free will,which God had to give us so we could come to him freely.
After all,which Father or Mother would feel love if they forced their kid to say that they love them.
Then their are all the ins and outs that we are not aware of,"Gods ways are not ours"etc,His rational,judgement,thoughts etc.
What i find helps is the things i cannot understand i pretty much leave them at that, as as i know that God IS REAL and that their are some things that we will never understand,but at the same time knowing that God has it under control.Righteous judgement etc.
That changes if someone who doesn't believe in God is asking you those things about rape etc and i find that those people pretty much go through the emotions of,-First asking how could that happen,then not being able to understand why it happens,so that creates confusion,then anger,throw your arms up yelling "i don't get it,how could that happen,theirs no answer,Gods not true etc etc.
That's one of the awesome things about knowing that God IS REAL,leaving things like that in His hands for His righteous judgement.