# It makes no sense to point to the suffering in this world to argue against "God" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 19, 2009, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537 "2009-07-19T17:31:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/301 "2009-07-26T21:39:43Z")
> [@straggler](#): > > Uhm, no. I said compared to the other types of suffering, it’s less than 1 on the scale. Which it is. **straggler** , can you please state what iteration of the deity you believe in? No special reason; I just thirst for all knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![straggler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@straggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straggler)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/302 "2009-07-26T21:43:48Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > **straggler** , can you please state what iteration of the deity you believe in? No special reason; I just thirst for all knowledge. For the purposes of this discussion, we’re dealing with the Abrahamic God, which means any put down needs to knock out the Jewish, Christian and Muslim concept of God. Two out of three isn’t enough. Oh, I didn’t answer your question, did I? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/303 "2009-07-26T21:49:12Z")
> [@straggler](#): > > For the purposes of this discussion, we’re dealing with the Abrahamic God, which means any put down needs to knock out the Jewish, Christian and Muslim concept of God. Two out of three isn’t enough. All three lack foundation. Done. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/304 "2009-07-26T21:55:19Z")
> [@straggler](#): > > For the purposes of this discussion, we’re dealing with the Abrahamic God, which means any put down needs to knock out the Jewish, Christian and Muslim concept of God. Two out of three isn’t enough. > > Oh, I didn’t answer your question, did I? Sure you did, and I thank you for doing so. Please tell me why I should believe in that the Lord of Hosts rather than Wotan. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/305 "2009-07-26T21:56:31Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > All three lack foundation. It is not God’s fault that there are no good cosmetics available in Heaven. Everybody knows that Avon is evil. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/306 "2009-07-26T22:53:46Z")
> [@straggler](#): > > This conversation started when I challenged Mijin to provide a Islamic-based defence. You may as well drop in to a poker game, start losing, but then start arguing with everyone that you were playing blackjack. This is great this little tangent you’ve been going on. First of all, even if the Qor’an asserted that we chose a life of suffering, it doesn’t affect the POE. I admit, there was a post where I _implied_ that having a choice would make suffering OK, but in my next post I made my opinion clear; the notion doesn’t work for an omnimax god. He doesn’t need to give us options with drawbacks. And secondly, what you’re asserting isn’t even right. The part of the Qor’an you’ve linked, describes souls acknowledging god _as Lord_ prior to the mortal existence. From this you’ve somehow concluded that only souls in human bodies can worship god (erm, but isn’t calling someone “Lord”, worship?), so by worshipping him, we were choosing to become human, and by extension, choosing suffering. * * * And to the list of classic straggler reasoning, we have: **straggler:** Only the Creator is perfect, everything else is, by necessity of logic, flawed. **Der Trihs:** Wrong, an omnipotent god could create everything perfect, by definition. **straggler:** Who is arguing he couldn’t? \*You are arguing he couldn’t! “By necessity of logic”. \* ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/307 "2009-07-26T22:55:32Z")
> [@straggler](#): > > This conversation started when I challenged Mijin to provide a Islamic-based defence. You may as well drop in to a poker game, start losing, but then start arguing with everyone that you were playing blackjack. This is great this little tangent you’ve been going on. First of all, even if the Qor’an asserted that we chose a life of suffering, it doesn’t affect the POE. I admit, there was a post where I _implied_ that having a choice would make suffering OK, but in my next post I made my opinion clear; the notion doesn’t work for an omnimax god. He doesn’t need to give us options with drawbacks. And secondly, what you’re asserting isn’t even right. The part of the Qor’an you’ve linked, describes souls acknowledging god _as Lord_ prior to the mortal existence. From this you’ve somehow concluded that only souls in human bodies can worship god (erm, but isn’t calling someone “Lord”, worship?), so by worshipping him, we were choosing to become human, and by extension, choosing suffering. :dubious: * * * And to the list of classic straggler reasoning, we have: **straggler:** Only the Creator is perfect, everything else is, by necessity of logic, flawed. **Der Trihs:** Wrong, an omnipotent god could create everything perfect, by definition. **straggler:** Who is arguing he couldn’t? \*You are arguing he couldn’t! “By necessity of logic”. \* ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/308 "2009-07-26T23:53:34Z")
**Straggler** , you seem hung up on the idea that “rewards have to be earned” – that the suffering endured by human beings during their lives is NECESSARY in order for paradise to be appreciated, or deserved, or something. What you’re overlooking is that for an omnipotent being, NOTHING is necessary. Whatever result that God is attempting to achieve by having us endure suffering could be achieved just as well WITHOUT the suffering. God, as an omnipotent being, could merely pop us into whatever final state is appropriate without requiring us to go through any process to get there. If suffering is a NECESSARY part of our spiritual evolution, then God is not omnipotent. And if suffering is an OPTIONAL part of our spiritual evolution, then God is not benevolent (or, perhaps, not omniscient). ---
**Author:** ![straggler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@straggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straggler)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/309 "2009-07-27T00:32:50Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > **Straggler** , you seem hung up on the idea that “rewards have to be earned” – that the suffering endured by human beings during their lives is NECESSARY in order for paradise to be appreciated, or deserved, or something. > > What you’re overlooking is that for an omnipotent being, NOTHING is necessary. Whatever result that God is attempting to achieve by having us endure suffering could be achieved just as well WITHOUT the suffering. God, as an omnipotent being, could merely pop us into whatever final state is appropriate without requiring us to go through any process to get there. > > If suffering is a NECESSARY part of our spiritual evolution, then God is not omnipotent. And if suffering is an OPTIONAL part of our spiritual evolution, then God is not benevolent (or, perhaps, not omniscient). Hamster King, did you read the part where I said God only does good, and **ensuring rewards get earned** is good? ---
**Author:** ![straggler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3d9bf3/32.png) [@straggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/straggler)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/310 "2009-07-27T00:35:07Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > And to the list of classic straggler reasoning, we have: > > **straggler:** Only the Creator is perfect, everything else is, by necessity of logic, flawed. > **Der Trihs:** Wrong, an omnipotent god could create everything perfect, by definition. > **straggler:** Who is arguing he couldn’t? > > \*You are arguing he couldn’t! “By necessity of logic”. \* :smack: Yes, you’re right. I recently had a lengthy debate with someone about what “perfect creation” means, and I have misapplied the term here. For the purposes of this discussion, God’s creation is perfect in the sense it is entirely as he desired, to the atom. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/311 "2009-07-27T00:55:08Z")
> [@straggler](#): > > Oh, I didn’t answer your question, did I? I’ll answer it. You’re a a Christian. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/312 "2009-07-27T00:59:49Z")
> [@straggler](#): > > :smack: > > Yes, you’re right. I recently had a lengthy debate with someone about what “perfect creation” means, and I have misapplied the term here. > > For the purposes of this discussion, God’s creation is perfect in the sense it is entirely as he desired, to the atom. So God desires me to be an atheist then? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/313 "2009-07-27T02:50:52Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > If you’re trying to dodge him, then responding to all of his posts is probably not the best tactic. but occasionally entertaining. > [@](#): > > Sigh. It’s been said dozens of times in this thread. This argument does not disprove ‘god’, but only one particular definition of god. Well okay, but I didn’t say it related to God’s existence. I’m only showing a similar relationship with the lack of certitude about God. > [@](#): > > The existence of the kind of suffering we see in the world logically disallows a god that is defined as omnipotent, omniscient, _and_ omnibenevolent. It’s says nothing about a god defined by only two of those traits, just all three. It doesn’t even say that IMO. That’s my point. The argument becomes illogical because because of what we don’t and can’t know and through the mixing of two different perspectives. The argument is that the big G can’t be all three because of suffering, but we’re judging suffering from from a human perspective that is clearly not \*any \*of those three omni thingys. IMO whether or not God may be those things requires us to know the purpose of creation. If the purpose of creation of this world of perceived duality and positive and negative is simply to experience perceived duality then nothing contradicts those three qualities. > [@](#): > > How is a simulation in which you can’t really be hurt relevant? If we are spiritual beings as God is supposed to be then this physical life is only temporary. When we play a simulation game we attempt to experience something without any real risk and at some point we leave the simulation behind and all the ups and downs we experienced within the simulation are left behind. That’s what I mean by being a spiritual being that enters a world of perceived duality and choice. If ultimately we can’t be harmed by anything that occurs in the temporary world of perceived duality then nothing prevents God from having those characteristics. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/314 "2009-07-27T03:10:29Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > So now we’re back to “Well, evil really isn’t evil.” :rolleyes: > > If this is all just a simulation that we’ve all entering willingly, then NOTHING I do to another human being, no matter how heinous, can be considered evil. For example, I’ve “killed” thousands of “people” in multiplayer computer games over the years and it means nothing, because I know it’s not real. They’re still alive and happy because our actions in the simulation were just pretend. So if we’re really all timeless eternal souls and this life we’re experiencing is just a passing teaching exercise, it doesn’t really matter if kill or hurt my fellow participants. It’s all just part of the game. We’re just playing pretend. I can just as easily and just as logically say that if this life is it, x amount of years and then nothing, then it really doesn’t matter if I kill or hurt my fellow participants. Couldn’t I? > [@](#): > > Look, either evil really exists, in which case the omnimax God is a logical impossibility. Or evil doesn’t really exist and there’s nothing wrong with murder and torture. Do you really want to construct a theology that justifies committing evil acts? Look, you’re mistaken. Your logic doesn’t follow. If Evil does exist but only within our limited and temporary human existence then it does matter within that perceived existence. Or, when your playing your simulation you are bound by certain rules written into the game and what is considered winning until the simulation is over. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/315 "2009-07-27T06:57:26Z")
> [@straggler](#): > > Please explain how you earn in the ultimate reward in a world of no suffering. Please explain why we should care about some “ultimate reward” when no evidence for such exists? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 10:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/316 "2009-07-27T10:33:31Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Please explain why we should care about some “ultimate reward” when no evidence for such exists? because it’s the Christian thing to do. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/317 "2009-07-27T11:38:45Z")
> [@straggler](#): > > Assuming your friend was killed: > > 1. I’m sorry to hear that > 2. If the worst someone ever has to suffer is they get hit by lightning, even if it kills them, they’ll be cool with it when they find out how they’re going to be spending the next phase of their existence, which will last an eternity. Are you saying that being killed by lightening is a good thing? What if being killed by lightening or any way for that matter meant you just become part of the universe? your body decays and you once again just become atoms etc. that make up what you are now,. If we are made of star stuff as sience proves then, all the chemicals etc. just change as we die. Like any plant or animal. People want there to be an after life, so it is comforting to think there is, but why a God would still have to judge them, when he knew they were going to suffer for all eternity is not a very loving thing to do, better to not create them to begin with. I would not purposely have achild I knew before conception that would have a life of suffering (even the short suffering it would have now). Why should the body suffer for the soul, or soul for the body? God created an imperfect being then punishes it for being imperfect when He could just have not created it. It makes such a God seem rather cruel to do so. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/318 "2009-07-27T14:00:53Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I can just as easily and just as logically say that if this life is it, x amount of years and then nothing, then it really doesn’t matter if I kill or hurt my fellow participants. Couldn’t I? Good and evil are social constructs like language or money. They exist through consensus. You can’t decide unilaterally that killing is good any more than you can decide unilaterally to pay for your latte with a crumpled gum wrapper, or that “goo-goo-goo” means “I am a materialist”. Now if you can convince enough people that killing and hurting others is good, then it will become good within that community. And if you can convince the entire world you will have redefined what it means to be a good person. > [@](#): > > Look, you’re mistaken. Your logic doesn’t follow. If Evil does exist but only within our limited and temporary human existence then it does matter within that perceived existence. Or, when your playing your simulation you are bound by certain rules written into the game and what is considered winning until the simulation is over. We’re bound to the rules of any game only to the extent that we accept their dominion. If suffering really is completely inconsequential and life is merely a game, then there is no \*obligation \*to follow the rules. ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/319 "2009-07-27T14:48:20Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > It doesn’t even say that IMO. That’s my point. The argument becomes illogical because because of what we don’t and can’t know and through the mixing of two different perspectives. The argument is that the big G can’t be all three because of suffering, but we’re judging suffering from from a human perspective that is clearly not \*any \*of those three omni thingys. We don’t need to be any of the three to judge suffering. We can observe needless suffering quite easily. We can watch as a parent who loves their child does whatever they can to save that child from needless suffering. We can also watch as god does absolutely nothing to save anyone from needless suffering. The whole ‘well we don’t/can’t understand god’ thing is just a cop out. It only seems to come out when a question that can’t be answered shows up. Up until then, it’s all ‘god wants this’ and god hates that’. But as soon as you point out something that doesn’t have an easy answer it’s ‘well we can’t understand god or his motives or plans’. If you have evidence that god is ‘unknowable’ or whatever, then lets see it. > [@](#): > > IMO whether or not God may be those things requires us to know the purpose of creation. If the purpose of creation of this world of perceived duality and positive and negative is simply to experience perceived duality then nothing contradicts those three qualities. Why would an omnibenevolent being do that to someone? > [@](#): > > If we are spiritual beings as God is supposed to be then this physical life is only temporary. When we play a simulation game we attempt to experience something without any real risk and at some point we leave the simulation behind and all the ups and downs we experienced within the simulation are left behind. > That’s what I mean by being a spiritual being that enters a world of perceived duality and choice. If ultimately we can’t be harmed by anything that occurs in the temporary world of perceived duality then nothing prevents God from having those characteristics. Ultimately? Why does that matter more than here and now? It’s ok to torture someone as long as it might stop later? This just a big what if. Unless you can show that it is relevant, then current suffering is much more important than anything else. I’d start by showing that there is an afterlife, or that we are actually spiritual beings. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537/320 "2009-07-27T16:01:17Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > Good and evil are social constructs like language or money. They exist through consensus. Disagree. I don’t believe that they are solely social constructs. We have instincts that make us feel emotional about certain actions that other people take. Being cheated for example. And numerous experiments have shown that people of wildly differing cultures have very similar emotional responses to such things. What society labels good or evil tends to corrolate with these instincts. Note: I’m not saying _never deviates_, I’m saying _most moral laws of most cultures_ do corrolate with our instincts. > [@cosmodan](#): > > I can just as easily and just as logically say that if this life is it, x amount of years and then nothing, then it really doesn’t matter if I kill or hurt my fellow participants. Couldn’t I? I don’t see how. I’d like to hear a logical argument to support your assertion. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/it-makes-no-sense-to-point-to-the-suffering-in-this-world-to-argue-against-god/503537.md?page=17)