What you feel is the meaning of brutal and senseless suffering?

[andremiguel]

Originally Posted by SanctusPeccator

"Reframing" involves supernaturally observing the terrestrial defeat of a crucified criminal as a celestial victory over the spiritual death of Original Sin.

Without the supernatural ability of sanctifying grace, it proves sadly impossible to experientially detect the invisible wavelengths of the Divine Spectrum [of Infinite Love] permeating throughout all of creation.

In the liturgy of Easter's Eve, it says: "Wonderful (is it wonderful???) sin of Adam that gave us such a Magnificent Savior, Jesus Christ"

[Hokomai]

Originally Posted by andremiguel

I do not agree.
There MUST be an explanation.
But what?

In my view the most suitable explanation, which fits all facts, is that there is no God, at least, not one of the Jewish or Christian type.

[SanctusPeccator]

Originally Posted by Hokomai

In my view the most suitable explanation, which fits all facts, is that there is no God, at least, not one of the Jewish or Christian type.

While the objective facts are not in dispute, our subjective perceptions are often egregiously inaccurate due to the restricted frame of reference. One can either pessimistically survey the wasteland or they can choose to elevate their gaze and observe beyond: “Two people looked out through prison bars; one saw mud and the other saw stars.”

[SanctusPeccator]

Originally Posted by andremiguel

In the liturgy of Easter's Eve, it says: "Wonderful (is it wonderful???) sin of Adam that gave us such a Magnificent Savior, Jesus Christ"

Yes, during the Exultet: “O happy fault, O necessary sin of Adam, which gained for us so great a Redeemer!”

[andremiguel]

Originally Posted by Hokomai

In my view the most suitable explanation, which fits all facts, is that there is no God, at least, not one of the Jewish or Christian type.

There are 2 hypothesis:

1. there is no God, your explanation. It solves all problems, except one: what are you going to do after death?
2. There is a God but we cannot find the answer for suffering. This is my choice but makes me suffer.

[Hokomai]

Originally Posted by andremiguel

There are 2 hypothesis:

1. there is no God, your explanation. It solves all problems, except one: what are you going to do after death?
2. There is a God but we cannot find the answer for suffering. This is my choice but makes me suffer.

The question: 'what are you going to do after you die" is an example of 'question-begging', as my conclusion is that there will be no 'me' after I die, if indeed 'I die' is a meaningful idea, and not a product of the fact I must view things from a brain trapped in a body. I am not sure I understand why your hypothesis 'makes you suffer'. If there is a Lord, he maketh the suffering to fall alike on the believer and non-believer.

[gabjus]

Originally Posted by Hokomai

I believe I have seen all the explanations Christians have to offer for the 'problem of suffering' and I have never seen one that is in the least convincing. If pain is caused by sin, why did it happen to animals before there were humans? Why does it still happen to animals, and to innocent humans? If God is all-powerful, why does he allow the innocent to suffer, even if he is not himself the cause of their suffering? If God is all-powerful, and allows suffering of the innocent, how can he be all-loving? And if Jesus' death atoned for sins, why do the innocent go on suffering? None of these questions have been answered in a way which seems in the least compelling to me. And this is without looking at the series of contradictory scriptural arguments on suffering, which indicate that even in its inception, Christianity had trouble understanding this.

Were you able to find convincing answers from other sources then? The problem of suffering (esp the innocent suffering) is something all humans will have to wrestle with. The bible that addresses the issue of suffering from a few different angles.

1) Retributive suffering: one suffers cos of sin - this is the most straightforward n can be seen time and again, however, this should NOT (apologies for the previous typo) be the ONLY answer to suffering. We cannot accuse say a baby born with physical or mental impairment of suffering because of their own sin. Jesus made it clear when he answered in John 9 "Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” Eccl cautious us to not apply this indiscriminately, since there are times that the wicked prosper. It could also be a combination of the below.

2) Redemptive suffering: one suffers for a greater good. - this is common found in the lives of prophets, and I believe (in a sense) is a calling for all Christians to do. Note that Jesus himself set the example of redemptive suffering.

3) Educative suffering: one suffers to learn something (Elihu in the book of Job talks about this). - Again, I would apply this with caution, since obviously it doesn't apply.

There are probably more answers to suffering, since the Bible never claimed to have ALL the answers for suffering. I believe one could get good answers from non-Christian sources as well.

I think one of the best books to address the problem of suffering is the book of Job.
It teaches us that while sin always leads to suffering, one cannot conclude the converse, ie suffering is always because of sin. While the book of Job does not exactly give us the answer of suffering, it does highlight 2 things:
1) In the midst of our own suffering, we have the assurance of that God is still in control.
2) In the midst of other people's suffering, what they really is not answers, but presence. A Christian is to provide comfort through his/her presence, and to bring God's presence, because ultimately, it is presence and not answers that gives comfort for a sufferer. A Christian is a Christian not because of what he/she knows, but who he/she knows.

Lastly, Christians have hope amidst all the suffering happening.

Hope this is helpful. (P.S. I think all people struggle with this issue as long as suffering itself exist)

[Hokomai]

Originally Posted by gabjus

Were you able to find convincing answers from other sources then? The problem of suffering (esp the innocent suffering) is something all humans will have to wrestle with. The bible that addresses the issue of suffering from a few different angles.

1) Retributive suffering: one suffers cos of sin - this is the most straightforward n can be seen time and again, however, this should NOT (apologies for the previous typo) be the ONLY answer to suffering. We cannot accuse say a baby born with physical or mental impairment of suffering because of their own sin. Jesus made it clear when he answered in John 9 "Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” Eccl cautious us to not apply this indiscriminately, since there are times that the wicked prosper. It could also be a combination of the below.

2) Redemptive suffering: one suffers for a greater good. - this is common found in the lives of prophets, and I believe (in a sense) is a calling for all Christians to do. Note that Jesus himself set the example of redemptive suffering.

3) Educative suffering: one suffers to learn something (Elihu in the book of Job talks about this). - Again, I would apply this with caution, since obviously it doesn't apply.

There are probably more answers to suffering, since the Bible never claimed to have ALL the answers for suffering. I believe one could get good answers from non-Christian sources as well.

I think one of the best books to address the problem of suffering is the book of Job.
It teaches us that while sin always leads to suffering, one cannot conclude the converse, ie suffering is always because of sin. While the book of Job does not exactly give us the answer of suffering, it does highlight 2 things:
1) In the midst of our own suffering, we have the assurance of that God is still in control.
2) In the midst of other people's suffering, what they really is not answers, but presence. A Christian is to provide comfort through his/her presence, and to bring God's presence, because ultimately, it is presence and not answers that gives comfort for a sufferer. A Christian is a Christian not because of what he/she knows, but who he/she knows.

Lastly, Christians have hope amidst all the suffering happening.

Hope this is helpful. (P.S. I think all people struggle with this issue as long as suffering itself exist)

Thanks for explaining that; most interesting. This does not address the issue of non-human suffering. How could a loving God inflict such pain and misery on animals, long before there were any people to sin? I read Job in a different way, which I hope does not cause offense, as it is based on the plain meaning of the story told: the book makes clear that God causes suffering for no particular purpose, or worse, simply as an experiment. What God did to Job would be banned in the world today were it to be attempted in a classroom on a rat. A particularly vile action attributed to God was the killing of Job's 10 children. Possibly more vile still was God's later action in 'replacing' them, as if he could. While there may be inspiration in Job's reaction to suffering, the background story, of an abusive and uncaring God, concerned only with his own pride, and flaunting his power, cannot in my view give any comfort to one who seeks a loving, or caring God. In fact, I have found that most Christians, including Catholics will resort to distinguishing the "God of the Old Testament' from that of the New, as if they were entirely different people. when this is pointed out, we are back to 'mystery'.

[gabjus]

Originally Posted by Hokomai

Thanks for explaining that; most interesting. This does not address the issue of non-human suffering. How could a loving God inflict such pain and misery on animals, long before there were any people to sin?

I admit what I wrote did not address non-human suffering. Perhaps books on animal protection would address that. Such books does not give answers on why animals suffer, but provide suggestions for humans to do to help lessen it. The Bible in a sense does that as well. However, if I were forced to give an answer, I would say that it is because of the reality that when one does something wrong, others are affected. That is the nature of sin (and a lot of other things), it spreads.

Originally Posted by Hokomai

I read Job in a different way, which I hope does not cause offense, as it is based on the plain meaning of the story told: the book makes clear that God causes suffering for no particular purpose, or worse, simply as an experiment. What God did to Job would be banned in the world today were it to be attempted in a classroom on a rat. A particularly vile action attributed to God was the killing of Job's 10 children. Possibly more vile still was God's later action in 'replacing' them, as if he could. While there may be inspiration in Job's reaction to suffering, the background story, of an abusive and uncaring God, concerned only with his own pride, and flaunting his power, cannot in my view give any comfort to one who seeks a loving, or caring God.

No offence taken. ^_^ Job is not the only book written in this manner that addresses the question of suffering. So it is likely a book that does (although not by providing answers). It is a book that teaches the reader what to do amidst suffering, rather than provide answers for it. On a side note, God did not 'replace' Job's children, nor did he killed them (but that is another long discussion).

Originally Posted by Hokomai

In fact, I have found that most Christians, including Catholics will resort to distinguishing the "God of the Old Testament' from that of the New, as if they were entirely different people. when this is pointed out, we are back to 'mystery'.

The short answer of this is: Just as people act/react differently to different circumstances (let's say hypothetically the person remains exactly the same), God does too. It is not being inconstant just like you would not say a person that does so inconstant.

This is just my view (which might change or develop over time) in my very limited knowledge. But I hope it was helpful.

[Hokomai]

Originally Posted by gabjus

I admit what I wrote did not address non-human suffering. Perhaps books on animal protection would address that. Such books does not give answers on why animals suffer, but provide suggestions for humans to do to help lessen it. The Bible in a sense does that as well. However, if I were forced to give an answer, I would say that it is because of the reality that when one does something wrong, others are affected. That is the nature of sin (and a lot of other things), it spreads..

The problem with this is that there were animals for billions of years before people were around to sin. It is simply not possible that an all-loving all-powerful God could allow such suffering as we see in the fossil record to occur. Animals have, according to Catholic teaching, no immortal souls, so there can be no compensation. And they are innocent. It is also not conceivable that an all-knowing God who communicates with people would not explain these points, were he to be there, and were there to be an explanation. remember we are talking about a God that thought it worthwhile to pass on the information, through the church, that Mary was assumed bodily into heaven, and a 14-year-old boy can go to hell for masturbating,and that the Father and son are consubstantial as distinct from 'one in being'. It is simply inconceivable that a God who would bother to explain that would not address the issue of suffering in a way which could be understood. In my view this single issue is the greatest weakness of Christianity and the many writings on 'the problem of pain' manage to sidestep the tough questions in favour of advice on how to feel OK about suffering.

[johnnyjones]

The consciouness of an animal is not the consciousness of a human. As well we say "suffering" but many animals and even humans go into a protective state of shock or numbness. Most animals go for the throat causing a quick death attacking other animals. Sometimes they are shaken to snap the neck. Is it suffering? I suppose momentarily.

Many of us do ask, why not bliss? Just a pefect indestructible body with no discernable weakness. I think Christianty as opposed to popular movements is about self sacrifice. Jesus himself was born to suffer. I would say the overwhelming thrust of scripture and the lives of the saints is suffering.

The reality is everything breaks down. But could a univerese exist that perpetually remains stagnant? I guess God could do that but the choice was different.
"Fearfully and wonderfully made" says the bible. Maybe intricacy and marvel was the aim which in turn is frail. That model was needed for all to become dust anyway and the living soul (man) to enter into Gods realm. A third heaven if you will.

The thing about suffering is that it ends, however long and brutal. The Holocaust, abducted children etc. are all very hard for me. God knew all this at creation. It does hurt but the mind of God is not the mind of man. Something deeper we may never know on this earth.

[andremiguel]

Originally Posted by johnnyjones

The consciouness of an animal is not the consciousness of a human. As well we say "suffering" but many animals and even humans go into a protective state of shock or numbness. Most animals go for the throat causing a quick death attacking other animals. Sometimes they are shaken to snap the neck. Is it suffering? I suppose momentarily.

Many of us do ask, why not bliss? Just a pefect indestructible body with no discernable weakness. I think Christianty as opposed to popular movements is about self sacrifice. Jesus himself was born to suffer. I would say the overwhelming thrust of scripture and the lives of the saints is suffering.

The reality is everything breaks down. But could a univerese exist that perpetually remains stagnant? I guess God could do that but the choice was different.
"Fearfully and wonderfully made" says the bible. Maybe intricacy and marvel was the aim which in turn is frail. That model was needed for all to become dust anyway and the living soul (man) to enter into Gods realm. A third heaven if you will.

The thing about suffering is that it ends, however long and brutal. The Holocaust, abducted children etc. are all very hard for me. God knew all this at creation. It does hurt but the mind of God is not the mind of man. Something deeper we may never know on this earth.

Moving post. thanks.

[andremiguel]

Originally Posted by Hokomai

The problem with this is that there were animals for billions of years before people were around to sin. It is simply not possible that an all-loving all-powerful God could allow such suffering as we see in the fossil record to occur. Animals have, according to Catholic teaching, no immortal souls, so there can be no compensation. And they are innocent. It is also not conceivable that an all-knowing God who communicates with people would not explain these points, were he to be there, and were there to be an explanation. remember we are talking about a God that thought it worthwhile to pass on the information, through the church, that Mary was assumed bodily into heaven, and a 14-year-old boy can go to hell for masturbating,and that the Father and son are consubstantial as distinct from 'one in being'. It is simply inconceivable that a God who would bother to explain that would not address the issue of suffering in a way which could be understood. In my view this single issue is the greatest weakness of Christianity and the many writings on 'the problem of pain' manage to sidestep the tough questions in favour of advice on how to feel OK about suffering.

You are putting too many questions in the basket.
Let's face it: we are in the same boat, believers and unbelievers. We all suffer, we all die. Now, I, as a believer, say that I trust in God, I believe in God though I suffer, I will die, I see the suffering of the world. And I do not understand it and I am trying to understand like here. But, not understanding or trying to understand, I stick to my belief to God. There must be a reason that I do not understand.

Now, what is your option? God is too powerful and too intelligent and too good and there must be a reason OR you think that the suffering and the death proves that God does not exist?

Foreseeing, I think that non believing in God brings other problems...But I would like to hear your option what is.

[Hokomai]

Originally Posted by johnnyjones

The consciouness of an animal is not the consciousness of a human. As well we say "suffering" but many animals and even humans go into a protective state of shock or numbness. Most animals go for the throat causing a quick death attacking other animals. Sometimes they are shaken to snap the neck. Is it suffering? I suppose momentarily.

Many of us do ask, why not bliss? Just a pefect indestructible body with no discernable weakness. I think Christianty as opposed to popular movements is about self sacrifice. Jesus himself was born to suffer. I would say the overwhelming thrust of scripture and the lives of the saints is suffering.

The reality is everything breaks down. But could a univerese exist that perpetually remains stagnant? I guess God could do that but the choice was different.
"Fearfully and wonderfully made" says the bible. Maybe intricacy and marvel was the aim which in turn is frail. That model was needed for all to become dust anyway and the living soul (man) to enter into Gods realm. A third heaven if you will.

The thing about suffering is that it ends, however long and brutal. The Holocaust, abducted children etc. are all very hard for me. God knew all this at creation. It does hurt but the mind of God is not the mind of man. Something deeper we may never know on this earth.

So what is your response to the famous comment of Charles Darwin?

I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created parasitic wasps with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars.

[Hokomai]

Originally Posted by andremiguel

You are putting too many questions in the basket.
Let's face it: we are in the same boat, believers and unbelievers. We all suffer, we all die. Now, I, as a believer, say that I trust in God, I believe in God though I suffer, I will die, I see the suffering of the world. And I do not understand it and I am trying to understand like here. But, not understanding or trying to understand, I stick to my belief to God. There must be a reason that I do not understand.

Now, what is your option? God is too powerful and too intelligent and too good and there must be a reason OR you think that the suffering and the death proves that God does not exist?

Foreseeing, I think that non believing in God brings other problems...But I would like to hear your option what is.

Well, I do not say that innocent suffering proves there is no god or gods - just that it proves there is no all-loving, all-powerful God. he is clearly not all-loving, since he allowed the suffering we see in the fossil record before there was any sin, or not all-powerful, since he did not stop it. People who argue that animal suffering is not suffering have an awful lot of animal welfare science to overcome.