The Problem Of Innocent Suffering: An Unnecessary Monotheistic Invention

[Tankbuster]

I think everybody here is quite familiar with the Problem of Innocent Suffering.
For those who don't, the problem of innocent suffering (to be called POIS from now on ) is what keeps theologians out of their sleep at night.
"Why doesn't God heal amputees?"
"Why do the innocent suffer?"
I'm sure we've all used or heard this argument before.

Now, coincidence has it that we've been studying the POIS in religion class (yes, I have religion in school). Although many so-called 'solutions' have been offered, it still makes people feel uncomfortable. Simply saying "The ways of God can't be understood" doesn't cut it. Why should God let an earthquake happen? Why do people die in stupid ways? There's nothing to gain by it, and we know it.
Even Fjodor Dostojevski adressed the problem in the Brothers Karamazov, where Ivan questions Aliosja how he can still believe in front of all the suffering on Earth.
But even after 900 pages, Dostojevski barely gives an answer. The best thing he tries is bringing up the book of Job, since that is one of the books in the OT where the problem is also adressed, but sadly, not solved at all either.

On my oral exam, my teacher asked me what I thought about the subject. She asked me: "In the religious film Trois Couleurs Rouges, we saw a boat sinking, but whether God knew about it or not was not really adressed. What do you think? Why did the boat sink?". I answered quite instinctively: "The boat sunk in a heavy storm. A storm is caused when you have a center of low pressure surrounded by a high pressure field, and the interactions between the centers cause a storm." I told her that it was an explained natural phenomenon, and that I didn't see any Problem of Innocent Suffering. The boat got unlucky, that's all. This seemed to satisfy her, but it got me thinking up until now.

Why hasn't anyone thought of this before? When somebody asks a christian why a storm happens, why don't they gave the easy scientific explanation? Think about it.
"Why do earthquakes happen?"
Because the Earth used to be more hot than now, but now it's still cooling down. Plus, the Earth is divided into tectonic plates. These two phenomenons can cause strong forces and tremblements. We call these earthquakes.
"Why are there floods?"
Because of earthquakes under the sea...
"Why do some people have hereditary cancers?"
Because of the over-crossing of chromosomes, and failures in the process of the transcription of genes into protein combinations.


It has all been explained a bazillion times! Why do theists torture themselves with this Problem of Innocent Suffering when the answers are this simple?
But I think I understand now.
Theists don't like these scientific interpretations.
If they were to start thinking like this, they would immediately find an answer for earthquakes, floods,...
But it would be like opening Pandora's box. If you start explaining these phenomena in a scientific way, you have to continue all the way. Diseases, cancer, premature deaths, amputees, handicap, you're forced to keep the scientific interpretation. And you keep doing it, until there is no suffering or phenomenon left on Earth to interpret.
And then you wonder, where is God? If all is just a consequence of random events, of plate tectonic, chromosomal failures, where does God come in? If all those so-called 'divine punishments' are plate tectonics and coincidencal failures, then where does God intervene on Earth?
The answer is inevitable: we've already explained it all, there's simple no place left for him. We can still implement him, as a kind of office clerk who monitors these tectonics and failures and makes it happen without thinking of us... but then Ockham's razor starts itching uncontrollably. We don't need that assumption, and we bloody know it!

The most we can pull out of this, is deism. We might have explained all phenomena on Earth, but we can't say anything about the beginning of the universe. So a kind of watchmaker God still fits in, but again the question pops up: we really have no idea over the begin of the universe, so why would we still use the assumption? Ockham's razor doesn't allow it. Everything keeps working without the assumption!
And before you know it, you're an atheist.

I think this is why christians and others are determined not to explain storms, earthquakes and cancers in a scientific way. This is why the POIS doesn't cease to exist. They want to avoid, at all costs, to open Pandora's box, because they know it will drag them in an unstoppable spiral into the deep abyss of atheism. They sense that when they take a peek in the box, they'll end up in deism, or worse, atheism. So they don't open it, simple as that.
Then, of course, we get the Problem of Innocent Suffering, but that's really a small price to pay.
It's not at all necessary to want to see God's plan in a storm, but christians HAVE TO, there's no other way! It's that, the fruitless debate about whether or not God is responsable ... or the box.

The only way to avoid the box of Pandora, is seeing God's divine plan in everything. A storm can't just be two pressure centra. An earthquake can't just be plate tectonics. God has to have something to do with it, otherwise we're back on the way to the not-intervening God.
The Problem of Innocent Suffering started of as a problem, but since the scientific progress solved the problem, the POIS has evolved into the collateral damage of / the price to pay for avoiding the scientific answer.
They don't like it, but it's the best deal they can get: the only other way available, the scientific interpretation, is lethal.


Time for a debate, I think.

[CtrlAltDe1337]

I don't have time to reply to all of this atm (maybe someone else will take you up) but I would like to say a few things.

But even after 900 pages, Dostojevski barely gives an answer. The best thing he tries is bringing up the book of Job, since that is one of the books in the OT where the problem is also adressed, but sadly, not solved at all either.

What?!?!? Have you even read the book of Job? The whole book is about the subject. But I will confine myself to a few verses.


"Then Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped, and said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD. In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly." Chapter 1 verse 20-22

God gives and God takes away, because "The earth is the LORD's, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein." (Psalm 24:1).

God is not Santa Claus; he is not under an obligation to bless people. Man is sinful and God must (because he is perfectly good and man is evil) destroy man, though he gives him many long years upon this earth is his great mercy, if preadventure he will turn from sin and repent. So #1, there aren't any "good" people except those who trust in the righteousness of Christ, (so all really deserve bad things to happen to them) and #2 when bad things happen its because God's mercy has expired for that person and he withdraws his protection from them.

There is really no problem at all from a theistic point of view.

[The Big Red 1]

Though I agree with both of the above. I feel that it is not our job to interpret why these things happen they will be answered in the end.

Although I do say the book of JOB explains it all.

Right now the only thing we can do is guess on God's intentions. I feel God is meant to guide us not to save us.(unless from sins) God does not intervene because he wants to watch how his people fair on earth through the hardships, to prove if they are ready for him.

[Tankbuster]

What?!?!? Have you even read the book of Job? The whole book is about the subject. But I will confine myself to a few verses.


"Then Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped, and said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD. In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly." Chapter 1 verse 20-22

God gives and God takes away, because "The earth is the LORD's, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein." (Psalm 24:1).

God is not Santa Claus; he is not under an obligation to bless people. Man is sinful and God must (because he is perfectly good and man is evil) destroy man, though he gives him many long years upon this earth is his great mercy, if preadventure he will turn from sin and repent. So #1, there aren't any "good" people except those who trust in the righteousness of Christ, (so all really deserve bad things to happen to them) and #2 when bad things happen its because God's mercy has expired for that person and he withdraws his protection from them.

There is really no problem at all from a theistic point of view.

Though I agree with both of the above. I feel that it is not our job to interpret why these things happen they will be answered in the end.

Although I do say the book of JOB explains it all.

Yes, I read the entire book of Job (in my free time! Holy cow, I'm a freak ).
Thing is, the book of Job gives a few vague ideas about how the problem could be solved, but it is not at all a coherent vision.

1) For example, you have the friends of Job, Elifaz and the others, who claim that God is punishing Job because of something he did. In other words, they propogate the image of God as the fair judge. But this image is clearly disarmed by Job, since he has done nothing wrong in his entire life! So Job says that his friends' view of God has to be wrong.
Furthermore, at the end of the book, God punishes Elifaz and the other friends, because they have propagated a bad image of God. This clearly suggests that the image of God as the fair judge, who punishes and rewards, is wrong.

On the other hand, you might say that if you look at the end of the book that is written in prose, God acts in every way like a fair judge! He rewards Job for his good work, and punishes the friends.

So is the image of God as the fair judge right or wrong? Apparently we can't be sure, since the poetic parts in the middle (the dialogues) seem to reject this image, while the prose parts at the end seem to consider this image accurate.
The fact that the views are contradictory is probably because there are different authors.

2) Another idea that is given, is that God might simply be unfair. Job starts crying this out loud, but immediately God comes out of the air with booming voice, telling him to chill out.
Apparently this view isn't correct either.

3) The last clue that is offered in the book of Job, is in the answer of God himself. For those unfamiliar, it comes down to this: God tells Job to stfu, and starts bragging about all the stuff he has already done ("Can you make the lightning go away, Job? Huh? Can ya?" "Does the rain obey you? Huh?" "Did you create the universe?").
Job seems to be satisfied with this answer, since he gives up ans tells God that he's right.
So what reason does God give? None! The only thing he seems to be saying is that he's the big boss and he can do whatever the **** he wants to, if it pleases him.
But again, this does not answer the problem of innocent suffering, since there is a lot of suffering that is simply pointless, and could be taken away without affecting anything else on Earth.
Unless the idea is that God is some kind of ass who does everything he wants, not a positive image either.

On top of that, at the end of the book God gives Job everything he needs, so at that point he did feel good enough about intervening with the harmony on Earth.
Contradictions once again.

4) Another idea could be that God is trying to 'teach' Job something, but since Job is old and has led a good life, what is there to learn?
This view is not at all propagated in the book of Job

So sadly, the book of Job doesn't tell us a dang thing. Gives a couple of ideas at best, but the contradictory ideas of different writers destroy all coherence.

Right now the only thing we can do is guess on God's intentions. I feel God is meant to guide us not to save us.(unless from sins) God does not intervene because he wants to watch how his people fair on earth through the hardships, to prove if they are ready for him.

Yeah, I wonder what the intention is to let a kid be born with horrible diseases, and let innocent people die horrible deaths by random events like vulcanoes.

And by the way, you blatantly contradict yourself.
First you say that we can't know God's INTENTIONS, WHY he summons earthquakes.
Then you say he doesn't intervene.

Which of the two is it? Does he make them or doesn't he?

Interesting isn't it that man creates all the suffering through sin and then blames God for not stopping the suffering..

Whooooooooooooooosh!

That's the sound of Turbo shooting right past the problem of innocent suffering.

Man cannot create vulcanoes because of sinful behaviour.
And what about babies? They haven't done anything wrong yet, so how come some of them are born with hereditary cancers?
On top of that, some of the most sinful regions in the world have never been struck by natural disasters.

So in short, the sin-causes-disasters is a ridiculous concept.

Man doesn't create natural disasters affecting men. Such as earthquakes. Or volcanoes. Or... well... anything else like that.

Prove he doesn't

Easy.
If it's man who creates earthquakes, how come there are earthquakes in the middle of the rainforest and in the middle of the ocean?

Earthquakes are caused by random forces interacting on the plates.
The fact that we can sometimes predict these events, loooong before they happen, is clear proof that they are not caused by man's sinful behaviour on a particular moment.

Man is to this date unable to create large sismical disruption that causes earthquakes, and certainly he was unable to do so in the Ancient Times or the Middle Ages. If there's a God, then he would be the only one able of doing this.

Alas, Tankbuster, +rep.

Correct. And thank you

Because it makes their god irrelevant.

That's what I wrote!

As far as I can tell, this problem only arises in monotheism.

I don't see the Gods as omnipotent, omnibenevolent beings. I see them as powerful entities, and intertwined with nature. So, when natural disasters happen, it's not their fault we got in the way. They are nature, and nature is indifferent to human free will.

Granted. As mentioned in the title, the POIS is a monotheistic invention. If you believe in a kind of natural force as a god, then it's possible that you don't have this problem. Depends on how you look at it.

These other religions have problems on their own though

[CtrlAltDe1337]

1) For example, you have the friends of Job, Elifaz and the others, who claim that God is punishing Job because of something he did. In other words, they propogate the image of God as the fair judge. But this image is clearly disarmed by Job, since he has done nothing wrong in his entire life! So Job says that his friends' view of God has to be wrong.
Furthermore, at the end of the book, God punishes Elifaz and the other friends, because they have propagated a bad image of God. This clearly suggests that the image of God as the fair judge, who punishes and rewards, is wrong.

Errr, no. I think you are misunderstanding it. Job wasn't suffering for his sins per se (not that people don't) as is explained in chapter 1:

"8And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? 9Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 10Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. 11But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. 12And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD."

So basically Satan says, "Job only fears you because you protect him; let me at him and he will curse your face" and God says basically "Nope, Job is gonna stick with me no matter what and I'm going to prove it to you."

This is why Job is suffering, his friends think hes suffering for sins because of his severe punishment so they go into the big dialog of "hey Job you need to repent"
"but I haven't done anything wrong"
etc.

But don't forget that in chapter 40 verse 4 he calls himself "vile," showing that even the most excelent man is like a vile creature before God.

On the other hand, you might say that if you look at the end of the book that is written in prose, God acts in every way like a fair judge! He rewards Job for his good work, and punishes the friends.

Yes.

2) Another idea that is given, is that God might simply be unfair. Job starts crying this out loud, but immediately God comes out of the air with booming voice, telling him to chill out.
Apparently this view isn't correct either.

Correct, God is always fair. You must remember that (as Paul uses the analogy) he is the Potter and we are the clay. The Potter has power over the clay to fashion a vessel as he wills (either a good pot or a bad pot) simply because he is the Creator. God is just and good, of course, but as I said earlier, man is sinful so he deserves nothing from God. So really, we should all have a life far worse than Job's and it is only by the free mecy of God that we do not suffer so.

3) The last clue that is offered in the book of Job, is in the answer of God himself. For those unfamiliar, it comes down to this: God tells Job to stfu, and starts bragging about all the stuff he has already done ("Can you make the lightning go away, Job? Huh? Can ya?" "Does the rain obey you? Huh?" "Did you create the universe?").
Job seems to be satisfied with this answer, since he gives up ans tells God that he's right.
So what reason does God give? None! The only thing he seems to be saying is that he's the big boss and he can do whatever the **** he wants to, if it pleases him.
But again, this does not answer the problem of innocent suffering, since there is a lot of suffering that is simply pointless, and could be taken away without affecting anything else on Earth.
Unless the idea is that God is some kind of ass who does everything he wants, not a positive image either.

He gives a very good reason. He says in essence, "Look Job, I am God and you are a vile man; did you create the universe? Can you cause it to rain? Can you order the lightining? Consider the creatures I have made...etc. I gave you everything you had and I took it away. I am the sovereign God of the universe; why do you speak against me? I am the Potter, you are the clay; is it not my right to do as I will with my creatures?*"

He humbles Job, who confesses that God is right.

*(note, I am NOT saying that God is evil, so don't misunderstand me)

On top of that, at the end of the book God gives Job everything he needs, so at that point he did feel good enough about intervening with the harmony on Earth.
Contradictions once again.

This goes back to the first chapter. God was proving to Satan that Job wouldn't curse him; once he was finished he gave Job back what he had, but not only that, double what he had.

4) Another idea could be that God is trying to 'teach' Job something, but since Job is old and has led a good life, what is there to learn?
This view is not at all propagated in the book of Job

Corect, you will only hear Baptists saying this


I would love to discuss this further as Job is one of the most interesting books of the Bible for many reasons, but I'm not on here much, so I apologize if I don't get back to you.

[The Big Red 1]

Errr, no. I think you are misunderstanding it. Job wasn't suffering for his sins per se (not that people don't) as is explained in chapter 1:

"8And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? 9Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 10Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. 11But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. 12And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD."

So basically Satan says, "Job only fears you because you protect him; let me at him and he will curse your face" and God says basically "Nope, Job is gonna stick with me no matter what and I'm going to prove it to you."

This is why Job is suffering, his friends think hes suffering for sins because of his severe punishment so they go into the big dialog of "hey Job you need to repent"
"but I haven't done anything wrong"
etc.

But don't forget that in chapter 40 verse 4 he calls himself "vile," showing that even the most excelent man is like a vile creature before God.


Yes.



Correct, God is always fair. You must remember that (as Paul uses the analogy) he is the Potter and we are the clay. The Potter has power over the clay to fashion a vessel as he wills (either a good pot or a bad pot) simply because he is the Creator. God is just and good, of course, but as I said earlier, man is sinful so he deserves nothing from God. So really, we should all have a life far worse than Job's and it is only by the free mecy of God that we do not suffer so.


He gives a very good reason. He says in essence, "Look Job, I am God and you are a vile man; did you create the universe? Can you cause it to rain? Can you order the lightining? Consider the creatures I have made...etc. I gave you everything you had and I took it away. I am the sovereign God of the universe; why do you speak against me? I am the Potter, you are the clay; is it not my right to do as I will with my creatures?*"

He humbles Job, who confesses that God is right.

*(note, I am NOT saying that God is evil, so don't misunderstand me)


This goes back to the first chapter. God was proving to Satan that Job wouldn't curse him; once he was finished he gave Job back what he had, but not only that, double what he had.


Corect, you will only hear Baptists saying this


I would love to discuss this further as Job is one of the most interesting books of the Bible for many reasons, but I'm not on here much, so I apologize if I don't get back to you.

I wish I knew enough about the bible to put threw points like this. Good work + rep.

Also i like the Islamic view on this + rep for that.

[Tankbuster]

Errr, no. I think you are misunderstanding it. Job wasn't suffering for his sins per se (not that people don't) as is explained in chapter 1:

"8And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? 9Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 10Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. 11But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. 12And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD."

So basically Satan says, "Job only fears you because you protect him; let me at him and he will curse your face" and God says basically "Nope, Job is gonna stick with me no matter what and I'm going to prove it to you."

This is why Job is suffering, his friends think hes suffering for sins because of his severe punishment so they go into the big dialog of "hey Job you need to repent"
"but I haven't done anything wrong"
etc.

But don't forget that in chapter 40 verse 4 he calls himself "vile," showing that even the most excelent man is like a vile creature before God.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, God doesn't punish Job for his sins, it's actually because he wants to show off with all his good disciples.

But fact remains: Elifaz and the friends defend the image of God as the fair judge, and in the end they are punished for giving a bad view of God ("because they have spoken bad things about my name", so that basically means that they give a bad image).

Not to mention that God is acting in a very immoral and arrogant way.

Correct, God is always fair. You must remember that (as Paul uses the analogy) he is the Potter and we are the clay. The Potter has power over the clay to fashion a vessel as he wills (either a good pot or a bad pot) simply because he is the Creator. God is just and good, of course, but as I said earlier, man is sinful so he deserves nothing from God. So really, we should all have a life far worse than Job's and it is only by the free mecy of God that we do not suffer so.

God created man, so if man goes to sin, then apparently the design of god wasn't strong and good enough.
It's more like this: God is a potter who puts a pot in the rain, and then blames the pot for getting wet.
First of all, it's immoral. Second of all, he's not acting fair since he has, apparently, way more mercy on some than others.

He gives a very good reason. He says in essence, "Look Job, I am God and you are a vile man; did you create the universe? Can you cause it to rain? Can you order the lightining? Consider the creatures I have made...etc. I gave you everything you had and I took it away. I am the sovereign God of the universe; why do you speak against me? I am the Potter, you are the clay; is it not my right to do as I will with my creatures?*"

He humbles Job, who confesses that God is right.

*(note, I am NOT saying that God is evil, so don't misunderstand me)

Indeed, he humbles Job. He does not, however, give a reason why he

Then again, the image of the loving God gets hit by a truck again ("is it nog my right to do as I will with my creatures" ==> I can do whatever I want and still get away with it. I torture, burn and kill, but it doesn't matter because you guys are nothing but clay anyway.
I agree that God is not evil, but he certainly isn't good either.

This goes back to the first chapter. God was proving to Satan that Job wouldn't curse him; once he was finished he gave Job back what he had, but not only that, double what he had.

Indeed. Fair judge again. He killed all Job's children, but then blessed him with more children.
The way he swiftly handles all these matters is once again a bit scary.

The problem, however, is in the analogy with real life. In the story, God apparently wants to settle everything in this life and doesn't let Job suffer for a long time.
This is in strong contrast with real life, since here we have people live an entire life full of suffering.
The happy end in the book of Job is ridiculous when we look at reality.

I would love to discuss this further as Job is one of the most interesting books of the Bible for many reasons, but I'm not on here much, so I apologize if I don't get back to you.

No problem I just got back here after many weeks of absence (exams and stuff).

I wish I knew enough about the bible to put threw points like this. Good work + rep.

Why don't you read it for yourself instead of blindly believing the first christian perspective you meet?

The entirety of Life is a test, my friend. Just because someone else is suffering and you are not, it doesn't mean it is not a test for you. And as I've quoted from the Quran, Allah/God test us in 2 forms. In both evil AND good. A person with good health is actually being tested by Allah/God but it is one of the most hardest test of all, because most people do not realise that they were being tested in the first place.

Also, since you specifically mention babies or person(s) with malfunctioning brains, Islam regards people such as these as "sinless" / blameless. Basically, they are exempted from being called into judgement for their actions. So to speak, upon their death, they are admitted into paradise. Regardless of beliefs, IIRC.

Hahahahah, now that's funny.
So the person with good health is actually being tested hardest of all, right? I'd like to see you tell that to all those people starving in Africa.
Geez man, that's one of the most arrogant things I ever read! At least I accept that I got extremely lucky to be born in good life conditions, and I accept that other people are having a worse life than me, yet you have the conceit to think that YOU're the one being tested. You look at starving Africans and you think to yourself: "Tss, they're not even being tested half as hard as I am. I'm here playing my computer and watching TV, now that's a hard test!! Way harder than starving"

Sorry, spooksman, but that disgusts me.

P.S. So how come the 'sinless' get the malfunctioning brains? Are they the ones being tested least of all, perhaps?

So who was Allah exactly "testing" when he swept away generations of poor seaside villagers on a calm Dec 26 day in 2004?

Showing off to Poseidon, no doubt.

Good question, but don't expect an answer. I'm afraid yours is too confronting

Then don't. lol. Why should you believe anyone simply on what he or she says at face value?

What you can and should do, however, is to read and investigate about what anyone says and see if its telling the truth or not. Same with religions. But do you? I doubt so, tho.

I think what you mean is: "see if you like what you're reading and then deciding whether it's nice enough to become a follower" , since you can impossible "see" whether a text is telling the truth.
Believe me, I tried doing it with multiple-choice questions on my exams, "sensing" which answer was right. Doesn't work.

[saglam2000]

hey atheism isn't a deep abyss, it is more like a logical and reasonable path of life and you get to make fun of religious people by says "if god loved you, you wouldn't have to go to church on sunday!!!"

[Turbo]

Interesting isn't it that man creates all the suffering through sin and then blames God for not stopping the suffering..

[The Big Red 1]

Interesting isn't it that man creates all the suffering through sin and then blames God for not stopping the suffering..

Good point.

[Tom Paine]

Interesting isn't it that man creates all the suffering through sin and then blames God for not stopping the suffering..

Man doesn't create natural disasters affecting men. Such as earthquakes. Or volcanoes. Or... well... anything else like that.

[The Big Red 1]

Man doesn't create natural disasters affecting men. Such as earthquakes. Or volcanoes. Or... well... anything else like that.

Prove he doesn't.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Prove he doesn't.

Why would he?

Man is to this date unable to create large sismical disruption that causes earthquakes, and certainly he was unable to do so in the Ancient Times or the Middle Ages. If there's a God, then he would be the only one able of doing this.

Alas, Tankbuster, +rep.

[Tom Paine]

Prove he doesn't.

Since the evidence is extant of these disasters occurring before the evolution of man and certainly before the "supremacy", as it were, of man, how can we have caused them?

[Pontifex Maximus]

Interesting isn't it that man creates all the suffering through sin and then blames God for not stopping the suffering..

But God created us, right? If so, wouldn't this say that God also created evil?

Who created sin? It must have been God, since God created everything. Shouldn't God clean up his own mess?

I would never blame God for anything, because, well, it doesn't exist.

[Mythos]

It has all been explained a bazillion times! Why do theists torture themselves with this Problem of Innocent Suffering when the answers are this simple?

Because it makes their god irrelevant.

[MaximiIian]

As far as I can tell, this problem only arises in monotheism.

I don't see the Gods as omnipotent, omnibenevolent beings. I see them as powerful entities, and intertwined with nature. So, when natural disasters happen, it's not their fault we got in the way. They are nature, and nature is indifferent to human free will.

[Ummon]

Ultimately, suffering is never innocent.

[Nietzsche]

Ultimately, suffering is never innocent.

I think this answers the thread completely. While it is unsettling and for our human all too human sentimentality an outrage. Christianity is quite unique in its understanding and solution to the problems of suffering and pain.

[Farnan]

Actually Jesus answers this fairly well:

Not all bad things are because of God...