RE: The Problem of Evil (XXVII)
June 8, 2016 at 8:13 pm
(This post was last modified: June 8, 2016 at 8:13 pm by SteveII.)
(June 8, 2016 at 8:34 am)bennyboy Wrote: If God is really a personal God, and by that I mean one which people should care about, then there should be some symmetry between the knowledge of God gained and the evil one must endure. However, this is not the case: a young infant can suffer greatly, with no real understanding of anything, and then cease to exist. Its contract with a personal God has been broken.
God, therefore, is at best a force of nature-- something hidden in the variables and functions BEHIND life. But we already have something like this-- the universe. Defining an impersonal struggle among humans to either suffer or not to suffer makes very little sense of the implied contract: "Suffer that you may learn," is not universal when some of the evils involve things or beings which do not have the capacity to learn about God. The only case in which it is logically true that suffering = gaining knowledge of God is that God is a God of suffering.. But if that's the case, God must be avoided at all costs, because, you know, suffering sucks.
First, it is your view that the infant ceases to exist. Your example was written to invoke an emotional response--which works because our limited perspective categorizes such an event as one of the worst things that can happen. However, if you have an eternal perspective, what is a great tragedy today is not even measurable as the child lives into eternity. A far greater tragedy is for one soul to miss out on the knowledge of God. I in NO WAY am trying to minimize the unspeakable tragedy of the death of a child. I am merely pointing out the perspective that God has.
There is no direct relationship between suffering and knowledge of God. While it might be the case for some, suffering itself does not necessarily lead directly to knowledge of God. Some people will die suddenly and perhaps do so without the knowledge of God. It is the infinitely complex "greater good" perspective that justifies not intervening.
Your argument needs to address why free will would not have a higher purpose than God permitting suffering.