(June 7, 2016 at 11:15 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:SteveII Wrote:I pulled these statements from your post (it seemed to be your theme). Your reasoning is that God would somehow necessarily have to create a word in which there was no (let's use suffering). I don't think you can support that logically because there is no implicit nor explicit reasons that that should be the case. As long as we can conceive of a possible situation where God would have morally sufficient reasons to permit suffering, there is not a contradiction. Rather, I think it crosses over into a probabilistic argument.
So you've conceived of a possible situation where God would have morally sufficient reasons to permit suffering, despite his tri-Omni super powers. I'd like to hear what it is.
Only an infinite (or nearly so) mind can calculate all the outcomes of a storm or one earthquake--not just in the near term but from that point on through eternity. Just a few possible "good" outcomes from such an event:
1. Community grows stronger in time of crisis.
2. Neighbors helping neighbors. Recipients lives are touched/changed by compassion. Those giving aid or compassion are themselves changed.
3. Outsiders helping. Some results as #2 but they go back to another place a changed person.
4. People's lives are refocused on things that matter. More introspection.
5. Possibly as a result of #1-4 people gain a knowledge of God.
6. People from #5 live lives, come in contact with others, have families, possibly affecting hundreds, thousands, or even millions of future lives.
I'm sure you are familiar with Chaos Theory and the butterfly effect. It cannot be fathomed what effect one little change can have on the rest of eternity.