Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Some years ago I had the time to waste so let a door knocker entertain me for awhile.
We ended up sparring in a friendly enough manner until I presented her with a question that I said, if she could answer, I would listen to her furthur.
Knowing that pain and suffering of man is excused with several reasons, I asked why God would allow/cause some innocent animal , unknown to and unseen by humans, to have, for instance, a tree fall on it,not kill it right away and lay, perhaps for minutes,hours or even days, in agony.
After several visits and after using up and casting off 'original sin' and 'sins of the father',she was stymied so passed it off to another fellow she declared better versed.
(I was finally given an explanation I have to admit couldn't factually counter. ...it was a stretch but not arguable)
Can any of you believers give even the thinnest palatable reason for this?
I don't know if anyone has given this answer quite yet as I have only skimmed the thread. This question was once put to me (and the class) during a philosophy course but in a different way. It concerned free-will and different types of "evil." God gave Man free will but if there were no evil in the world Man would have no need or opportunity to exercise free will and distinguish themselves as evil or good thus God allows these sorts of bad things such as natural disasters and such (natural evil) to happen so that Man can exercise his free will and choose to be good and live according to God or not be good and ignore the suffering of animals and fellow people caused by this "natural evil"
That's a surprise. With your claims of being a military veteran and a history of charitable missionary work, I imagined a grizzled guy in his fifties. Though I must say that explains the outbursts or uncontrolled rage and the screams of 'Lies' a bit better.
I am obliged to say that my memory was at fault there. He never actually claimed to have done military service. I apologised for that (sorta ) but I don't apologise for twitting him for never giving a decent answer to discussions.
The premise was that animals only suffer when in the presence of man so that man is 'punished' by having to witness it and be discomfitted....(for whatever reason is that sinful man needs to be punished)
The existence of sadistic animal abusers who enjoy watching animals suffer shoots this concept down I think.
Some years ago I had the time to waste so let a door knocker entertain me for awhile.
We ended up sparring in a friendly enough manner until I presented her with a question that I said, if she could answer, I would listen to her furthur.
Knowing that pain and suffering of man is excused with several reasons, I asked why God would allow/cause some innocent animal , unknown to and unseen by humans, to have, for instance, a tree fall on it,not kill it right away and lay, perhaps for minutes,hours or even days, in agony.
After several visits and after using up and casting off 'original sin' and 'sins of the father',she was stymied so passed it off to another fellow she declared better versed.
(I was finally given an explanation I have to admit couldn't factually counter. ...it was a stretch but not arguable)
Can any of you believers give even the thinnest palatable reason for this?
old_cold, am I correct that you do not believe in God? I ask because I find it helpful to know just a little bit about a person's beliefs before trying to respond to a question such as yours. I generally don't bother to try to explain to someone why a God he doesn't believe in does anything at all.
My desire to know is only because I like learning why people think the way they do.
I do not enjoy knowing people suffer but know that much of the time, they are or are partly responsible for their own suffering.
I cannot comprehend any reasoning ( or the excuse) for letting innocent creatures suffer.
'My' JW at least gave an answer that did not have them do so for no good purpose.
I am no longer a believer so the rest is up to you
My desire to know is only because I like learning why people think the way they do.
I do not enjoy knowing people suffer but know that much of the time, they are or are partly responsible for their own suffering.
I cannot comprehend any reasoning ( or the excuse) for letting innocent creatures suffer.
'My' JW at least gave an answer that did not have them do so for no good purpose.
I am no longer a believer so the rest is up to you
Okay, well, I won't spend a lot of time on it (and I haven't read all of the other posts, so I may be repeating what someone else has already said). But, for what it's worth...
I do believe in God. I believe He created a world which is quite simply not perfect. I'm not aware of anywhere in scripture that we're told otherwise, either. With respect to natural disasters, they happen. (I would include the idea of a tree falling on and trapping an innocent animal as a natural disaster -- just not a large scale one.) I don't see that as being inconsistent with the existance of a Higher Power, but I'm thinking you probably do. All life has to end at some point. No plant or animal or human being is going to live forever. Thank God. I guess I just don't know why anyone thinks that life should be perfect for any living thing, and that if it isn't, there's either no God or only a God unworthy of our worship.
Incidentally, you and I seem to share a love for animals. It just about kills me to hear of a suffering animal. For the most part, I like them better than people.
Okay, well, I won't spend a lot of time on it (and I haven't read all of the other posts, so I may be repeating what someone else has already said). But, for what it's worth...
I do believe in God. I believe He created a world which is quite simply not perfect. I'm not aware of anywhere in scripture that we're told otherwise, either. With respect to natural disasters, they happen. (I would include the idea of a tree falling on and trapping an innocent animal as a natural disaster -- just not a large scale one.) I don't see that as being inconsistent with the existance of a Higher Power, but I'm thinking you probably do. All life has to end at some point. No plant or animal or human being is going to live forever. Thank God. I guess I just don't know why anyone thinks that life should be perfect for any living thing, and that if it isn't, there's either no God or only a God unworthy of our worship.
Incidentally, you and I seem to share a love for animals. It just about kills me to hear of a suffering animal. For the most part, I like them better than people.
It should be obvious that I don't need a reason for whatever befalls us or any other animal.SH** happens.
However, when a kind and loving god is being promoted, not just death, but, if you read my OP, a prolonged suffering (of a supposedly sinless animal)is what I see as inconsistant with such a god
I have spent decades trying to reconcile this issue old_cold. There is no acceptable answer to me. I know that there is a big difference between human "suffering" and just physical pain . . . so animals do not "suffer" (in the way that we do). But the physical pain itself (even though it ameliorates eventually) is still unacceptable to me. I am unable to defend it on any grounds . . . other than that WE have been given Dominion over the earth and all creatures on it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) but I don't apologise for twitting him for never giving a decent answer to discussions.
"Red in tooth and claw"
