Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site topaz.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!topaz!hedrick From: hedrick@topaz.ARPA (Chuck Hedrick) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: Omnipotence, justice and suffering: a very long question. Message-ID: <2506@topaz.ARPA> Date: Sun, 7-Jul-85 14:56:38 EDT Article-I.D.: topaz.2506 Posted: Sun Jul 7 14:56:38 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 8-Jul-85 01:37:15 EDT References: <1034@phs.UUCP> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 96 In article <1034@phs.UUCP>, paul@phs.UUCP (Paul C. Dolber) writes: > ... Does anyone out there know of a genuine > solution to the question posed by Kaufmann: Can God or a god be both > omnipotent and just (including good, morally perfect, and so on) and > permit the suffering we know to exist? As you might guess, the "problem of suffering" has been discussed on this list in the past. However since I haven't said anything before, I will do so now. As will be obvious, I am speaking from a Christian perspective. I would be interested to hear from people outside the Judeo-Christian tradition. The assumptions which lead to this problem seem clearest from the Biblical perspective. I would be interested to know whether those who follow other religions believe that they have a problem of suffering. I do not know of any solution that causes God to be both omnipotent and just using the definitions you have used. I think it is fairly clear that your definitions are such that this is impossible. Of the theologians I have looked at, all end up weakening (if that is the right word) one, or the other, or both. I'd like to start by taking a look at the idea that God is omnipotent. By and large in the Bible, the idea seems to be that God is more powerful than competing entities. In the early parts, the issue was that he is more powerful than competing gods. In later parts, he is more powerful than Satan. Also, he has power over nature. What he decides to do, he can do. But this is all at a fairly concrete level. The problem of evil involves a discussion that is in some sense at a meta level. The question is not whether God can carry out some specific action or create some specific thing, but whether he could have structured reality in a different way. I'm not sure that the Bible deals with this level of abstraction. To Medieval scholastics, it was obvious that God must be omnipotent at all possible levels of abstraction. To more modern theologians, this is not so obvious. The Bible gives the impression of a God who is affected by what goes on with men. It almost sounds like he is part of the process of history, and not above it. So one possible answer would be that there is some level of reality which God himself must take as given. If we claimed that some competing entity had prevented God from doing what he wanted, I think that would be un-Biblical. But I'm not sure it says he set up the laws of physics, much less whatever metalaws might govern the setting up of the laws of physics. A second possible answer (which may be indistiguishable from the first) is that there may be some deep reason why God couldn't eliminate suffering without also eliminating some other important thing. In effect it may be that people who want no suffering are asking for something that is logically impossible (given the other things God is trying to accomplish). If something is logically impossible, then God can't do it. Not because he lacks the power, but because the request has no meaning. This obviously begs the question of what great thing God wanted that required him to allow suffering. You mentioned free will. I think that is close, but not quite on the mark. Suppose we think of this life as a training ground for our final destiny. It may be that effective training requires real challenges, and even real defeats. There may be a problem of perspective here. Christianity generally deals with this issue on an individual level. It does not deal with suffering in the abstract, nor with the suffering of all mankind, but of my particular suffering. This problem is managable. Christians can generally get at least a dim vision of how suffering fits into a loving plan for them. The problem with the general problem is that we don't have this sort of understanding of other people's lives. So what is managable on an individual level appears impossible when we think of millions of starving people in XXX. However each of those people has his own story. At this point the obvious response is, "yeah, but you're not starving." I don't have any final answer to that. About all I can say is that it is not just rich people who see God working in their lives. On the idea of God being just. In the Bible there is certainly no claim that people get their just desserts immediately. Job is not alone in rejecting this idea. The Psalms also deal with good men suffering at the hands of evil men. However there seems to be confidence that God will eventually see justice done. In most of the Psalms it seems to be assumed that God will do so soon, i.e. in this lifetime. In other contexts, full justice is postponed to the Final Judgement. Indeed in both Jewish and Christian apocalyptic, the idea developed that things would get worse and worse as we approached the end, with Evil apparently becoming victorious. I realize that this is getting into sensitive ground. To many people the idea of eternal life and a final judgement sounds like a cop-out. But it is hard to see how one can avoid it and continue to be a Christian. In fact I believe that the idea of eternal life leads to a correct perspective on things. It shows us that what really matters in the world are the people. It is all too easy to get the impression that what matters are nations, or economics, or the triumph of some particular ideology. But these are all transitory. It is the people who will last, and they are what the world is all about. Actually, I think the real justice is probably going to be that people have to live eternally with what they have made of themselves. If you take this seriously, it is about the most chilling possible end for the bad guys.