Loading...I continue now with the amazing and disturbing chapter “Rebellion” from the Brothers Karamazov, which significantly affected my view of suffering. If you did not read yesterday’s post, you will probably want to do so before launching into this one.
******************************
Ivan’s stories are not just about wartime atrocities. They involve the everyday. And what is frightening is that they ring true to real life experiences. He is obsessed with the torture of young children, even among well educated “civilized” people living in Europe:
They have a great love of torturing children, they even love children in that sense. It is precisely the defenselessness of these creatures that tempts the torturers, the angelic trustfulness of the child, who has nowhere to turn and no one to turn to – that is what enflames the vile blood of the torturer.
He tells then the story of a five-year-old girl who was tormented by her parents and severely punished for wetting her bed (this is a story that Dostoevsky based on an actual court case):
“These educated parents subjected the poor five-year-old girl to every possible torture. They beat her, flogged her, kicked her, not knowing why themselves, until her whole body was nothing but bruises; finally they attained the height of finesse: in the freezing cold, they locked her all night in the outhouse, because she wouldn’t ask to get up and go in the middle of the nights (as if a five-year-old child sleeping its sound angelic sleep could have learned to ask by that age) – for that they smeared her face with her excrement and made her eat the excrement, and it was her mother, her mother who made her!” (P. 242)
Ivan notes that some people have claimed that evil is necessary, so that we as humans can recognize what is good. With the five-year-old girl with excrement on her face in mind, he rejects this view. With some verve he asks Alyosha: “Can you understand such nonsense [i.e., such evil acts], my friend and my brother, my godly and humble novice, can you understand why this nonsense is needed and created? Without it, they say, man could not even have lived on earth, for he would not have known good and evil. Who wants to know this damned good and evil at such a price?” (P. 242).
For Ivan, the price is too high. He rejects the idea that…
This is an incredibly thought-provoking passage in one of the great pieces of literature in the world. Want to read more about it, and its implications? Joining the blog is easy and inexpensive, and gives you access to five posts a week on important topics. Why not give it a try?
I think these blogs on suffering get to the essence of faith, and I think you’re correct, no “answer” exists. 1 Cor 15:22 (I’d like more to see more of your thoughts on this passage sometime) may work for some: in the end, everyone gets in for eternity, and that more than balances the scales on all suffering. Hmmm. . . If some blasphemy can be allowed for a moment, I actually find Tolstoy and Dostoevsky trite. For all their pathos, everything usually turns out “right.” Anna Karenina and Raskolnikov get their just rewards, and Alyosha, the most boring brother in my view, is the ultimate hero. Nietzsche may get it best: we have no free will, and the best we can do is valorize pain in a heroic attempt to “overcome” life. That’s too easy. He may have had a life full of suffering due to bad health, but he had the best education a person could buy that gave him tools to think about his beloved “free spirits.” Nietzsche’s ideas don’t do anything for the poor kids in Bangladesh who don’t get an education via the Gymnasium whom we’re destroying every time we start our cars.
Thanks for the good posts on suffering. So I guess if one uses suffering as a reason not to believe in the Christian God, then what is suffering to an atheists? A mystery?
I suppose it’s differnet things for different people. For me it’s not much of a mystery. It’s a sad reality, the problem of living in a natural world that doesn’t care about living creatures, let alone the smart ones.
Dostoevsky’s inner battle is one we can all relate to. Believing in a God whose love knows no bounds and who will one day restore everything that’s broken in the universe can be empowering and inspirational. But, when faced with the meaningless suffering in the world, we ask the question “how can it be?” Why can’t God take back some of the freedom He gave to humans so that these atrocities never happen in the first place. I for one would gladly give up my free will to end the torturing and killing of innocent babies. I suppose Jesus would too.
Without free will there can be no love right? God wanted a true relationship so there had to be the option to not love god. But everything is complicated by a archenemy. I will have to search the blog for Satan. He is conspicuously missing….
Oh..Bart said “MOst of the NT also maintains that suffering is caused by demonic powers in the world (the Devil and his minions); I don’t believe that. ”
of course it takes faith to believe in satan..
Love the sinner, hate the sin? Maybe it has to do with fear, upbringing… I guess ultimately, we individually are all responsible for our actions or reactions. This is a horrific example and I know it’s not unusual. I know this comment may be considered lame. I’ve never read this book, and when I tried to read Crime and Punishment I grew so sick of hearing the guy who killed his landlady whine and moan about it, I quit reading and put down the book…shades of Edgar Allen Poe.
Unfortunately, communities, societies and cultures become desynthesized by accepting wrong behavior ( taboos. evil, criminal activities ect … ) to eventually be acceptable and ok.
Where were the extended family, friend, neighbors, the law of this young girl? ( blame them and their community for accepting such behavior, not God)
You mention drought and famine. Saudi Arabia turned desert into lavishing land and gardens by making water accessible. Human decisions ( with lots of capital ) were made to evolve a desert into gardens not God.
Again, what you consider suffering may not be.
Suffering is real; absolutely. The less fortunate are tested, but more importantly the fortunate have a heavier test and burden in what and how they handle and stop current and foreseeable suffering.
We will all be questioned. There is a day of reckoning, a day of judgement. It is mentioned in the NT ( Mathew) OT ( Isiah) and the Quran. Heaven and Hell are also mentioned in the NT ( Mathew ) ( Revelation ) and OT ( Daniel) and the Quran. What have we prepared for it? Why else would there be a Judgement day?
‘the fortunate have a heavier test and burden in what and how they handle and stop current and foreseeable suffering’ – I find this kind of thought baffling. I don’t know anything about you or your situation of course, but from my own personal perspective (relative comfort in my life) I would never trade my ‘burden’ of being aware/caring about other humans suffering for the horrific reality of being the victim of it! As burdens go, mine barely registers on the scales of human suffering!
There is the perspective that the worlds poor are of course far more ethical than me, so they at least ‘win’ in moral worthiness. Well, yes but you can’t eat moral worth can you. I don’t see any significant evidence of the rich trading their comfort for the ‘halo’ of the poor, are human beings even capable of that sort of sacrifice?
I apologise that this is all rather negative and down-beat, it is obviously still clearly very important and good that so many of us do *something* rather than nothing from our position of comfort (even this blog itself for example!)
“I think that if in fact God Almighty appeared to me and gave me an explanation that could make sense even of the torture, dismemberment, and slaughter of innocent children, and the explanation was so overpowering that I actually could understand, that I’d be the first to fall on my knees in humble submission and admiration. On the other hand, I don’t think that’s going to happen.”
This is the crux of the problem of evil. How could a human being know there is no explanation?
Does the degree of suffering make it unlikely? What if the children were merely scratched and scraped instead of impaled on bayonets? What if the suffering was only experienced by adults?
Would that change whether we think there could be an explanation from God? Would that make it more likely God has a divine plan? Does that change our human ability to predict whether there is a good, end result among all the chaos?
Hey Bart,
As a UNC professor, are you at all supportive of your school’s Sports teams? Like, say Basketball or Football?
Thanks
I have season tickets for both. Well, not so much this year….
The problem of suffering may not be at odds with the teaching of the NT.
“I myself will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.””
Acts 9:16 NRSV That’s what JC himself claims is coming for Paul.
“Indeed, all who want to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.”
2 Timothy 3:12 NRSV
Dr. E., you know these verses very well. Are there any verses in the NT that explicitly teach that anyone is exempt?
It’s not that the NT is wrong, perhaps the NT is right?
Exempt from suffering? Definitely not. One of the major points of the NT is that the followers of Jesus in particular *will* suffer.
Yes, so then I’m not sure I understand… why throw away the baby with the bath water (no baptism pun intended)… the NT doesn’t represent God as the protector nor intercessor on behalf of humankind from all manner of suffering, so why do we demand he should be?
Again, I humbly suggest that we let God live up to the expectations the NT sets forth for him. Paul is purported to have said he embraced the time of his departure which was at hand, and was ready for it, believing that the one whom he knew was able to keep his end of the deal… allegedly said thus and such. A realization of the injustices of the world just shouldn’t come as a great surprise, unless of course it was predicated with the false premise of thinking that God would always deliver his people from such things. He didn’t then. He doesn’t now.
Our 3 friends in Daniel weren’t quite sure if the God they served even could deliver them from unjust and excruciating death or not. Yet they’d walk across hot coals for him.
should we now cry unfair to the God of the Bible, as if suffering were breaking news?
The NT insists that God does answer prayer, regularly and unfailingly, and I don’t think that’s right. It also affirms repeatedly that he will soon (in that generation) bring the evil world to an end and bring in his kingdom. That didn’t happen either. MOst of the NT also maintains that suffering is caused by demonic powers in the world (the Devil and his minions); I don’t believe that. So I have lots of reasons for not agreeing with the NT views of suffering. I’m not saying that suffering is unfair and we should blame God. I’m saying that I don’t believe there is a God.
Humbly, recognizing my limitations, may I suggest 1 “regularly and unfailingly” may yet again a false premise. 2 Cor. 12:7ff. In an undisputed letter of Paul, the NT claims Paul’s answer from God was “no.” I don’t know why, had I been God I’d have granted his request, but for whatever reason he didn’t. NT James 4 also claims they asked alright, but again they did not receive, asking wrongly. 2 Preterism. Luke/Acts presents the immanent cataclysm as the coming of the church. Acts 2:16ff Peter claims the culmination is happening right in front of their eyes. It’s the church. I know, you believe the historical Jesus would have diasagreed, but let the writers present the case. Let go of your preconceived and conditioned prejudice that Jesus taught of an earthly davidic style kingdom. The NT doesn’t teach that, only the premilinealist and revisionist do. False premise. 3 Your faith or lack of faith in demonic forces is your own derivative and prerogative as is your faith in a God. It’s not a New Testament problem. Revisit the premises. The kingdom is the church. I can substantiate my position on this if you like ?
you said
“The NT insists that God does answer prayer, regularly and unfailingly, and I don’t think that’s right.”
In your decades as a xn you must have had a journal full of answered prayers. How did you mentally dispose of those?
I had a lot more unanswered, as everyone does. Praying for a parking space and then getting one isn’t exactly evidence of divine intervention, if you see what I mean…
Hi Bart you said “The NT insists that God does answer prayer, regularly and unfailingly, and I don’t think that’s right.”
(when you had faith) Other people experienced suffering(not you) and you blamed God for lack of involvement.. Other people have answered prayer (not you) and you don’t give God credit for his involvement.
1. Do you think when you had faith you used a double standard when you applied life experience to your faith?
2. Does the NT teach “God answers prayer” and “you will suffer” ?
3. We know the suffering part is true….If God did answer prayer how would these 2 ideas be compatible?
No, I never blamed God.
1. No. 2. Yes 3. That’s the problem of theodicy; as you know, there are many answers that people give. It’s the subject of my book God’s Problem.
I asked if answered prayer and suffering are compatible teachings in the NT and you said
” That’s the problem of theodicy; as you know, there are many answers that people give. It’s the subject of my book God’s Problem.”
I was going to send my testimony when it occurred to me you’ve probably received hundreds over the years given your publicness… So perhaps there are 2 parts to a testimony 1. what happened 2. what we think of what happened.
I haven’t read “Gods problem” and I just checked “theodicy” on wikipedia so I may ask this wrong..
1. if you could group the actual events of testimonies you’ve received would the events as described fall under a particular theodic idea? Not sure i asked that right..
2. If you could group the thoughts of the individuals and their own testimonies would they tend toward a particular theodic idea? e.g. Agustinian vs Irenaean
3. Oh!!! God chastises those he loves—is that in someones theodicy?
dang..way too much thinking here…i don’t get paid to do this…you do!
Do you mean testimonies of miracles that a person had experienced? I used ot have a bunch of those too. But no, they would not help explain why there is suffering in the world. but yes, love requires punishment is indeed a very common theodicy.
When I was a Christian I read the Brothers K, Les Mis, A Christmas Carol, and other books that I found to be more “spiritual” than the Bible. Looking back I should have realized that was a clue to the very human, cultural and superstitious origins of the Bible. Why do we think people living 1000, 2000, even 3000 years ago had better insight into the world and humanity than we have now?
My view is that they probably don’t have *better* insights, but they often have important ones that I haven’t thought of. Just finished reading Diogenes Laertius’s account of Epicurus. Fantastic. (Diogenes wrote a multi-volume work on the LIves of Eminent Philosophers, the source for many of the stories one hears about famous ones…)
“Here’s the most obvious: it is true we have free will and that much of our suffering comes from what people do who exercise it. But free will does not cause drought…” [True…]
I don’t want to hijack this discourse, but. (I hate commencing thus!) I’m one of several amateur and professional philosophers who have concluded that “free will” is neither definable nor plausible. Perhaps you could comment on that sometime. Now back to your regularly scheduled program… 🙂
Actually, I’m no longer a believer in free will either. But I don’t understand why I just now decided to type these words. (I mean both statements completely seriously)
Hallett, MW Physiology of Free Will Ann Neurol 2016; 80(1): 5-12
Some rain here and there would have prevented lots of suffering.
And think of all those people praying for it….
I maintain that most of the bible is about people relating to other people (the well being of the tribe?). While God is given credit for coming up with the rules, its up to the people to follow them to make them work and immortal punishment is only later defined. In the NT things are more complicated and so many human issues of the times brought forward that its easier to just read the God parts? Later we see Francis of Assisi and others promote Love Thy Neighbor….. and other verses of the early gospels?
I guess my previous question was answered in this post. For me they are not ” natural evils”, but natural disasters. There are many differing statistics on human losses. In general, it’s documented that around 40 to 50 million people(including children) die each year for whatever causes. In turn, there are approx. 120 million births each year worldwide. So our world is increasing by approx. 70 million every year. At this rate, our world population would be 11 billion approx. by the year 2100. Interestingly, the top ten causes of death accounted for 55% of the 55.4 million deaths in 2019. According to W.H.O., the top ten in all categories are health illnesses, with Ischaemic heart disease leading the way overall. Ironically, heart disease is the undisputed leader in upper to high income countries. When you look at low income countries, neonatal conditions is the leader by far. Infants being born with all kinds of health problems and very little medicine at their disposal, with lower respiratory infections second. Strikingly, countries with upper and high incomes, neonatal conditions does not even list in the top ten reasons for deaths. Natural disasters on the contrary……
For me, suffering isn’t the best argument against the existence of God. It does not eliminate a personal creator of the universe who simply isn’t very interested in human suffering. Nor does it eliminate a God who is perhaps omniscient and omnipresent but for some reason is now powerless to stop suffering. (One could argue these aren’t really God, but [too-long-of-an-aside redacted due to 200 word limit])
Nor indeed does it eliminate the God of the Christian apologists. As you pointed out recently, a grasshopper has no more ability to understand human activities than would humans have the ability to understand an infinite God who transcends time and space.
For me, a more fundamental reason to reject God is science and history. Science simply does not allow for a supernatural being. And history gives very good explanations for how the ideas of and about God developed over time.
I reject the existence of God because it simply is unnecessary, is not supported by evidence or logic, would violate well established science, and has an elegant historical explanation. In other words, I never arrive at believing in the existence of a God that thereafter must be rejected on grounds like suffering.
I actually don’t use suffering to argue against the existence of God, strictly speaking. I think suffering shows that the arguments *for* the existence of God are flawed. In my mind those are slightly different.
I think we must acknowledge that there will never be a justifiable, logical answer to the question of why there is suffering. The problem simply isn’t amenable to rational thought. There are things that will probably never make sense, no matter how evolved we become. Indeed, as our brains have gotten bigger over millions of years, they have certainly not made us more moral creatures – quite the opposite in fact.
Regardless, I believe that we innately know the difference between right and wrong. Whatever the reason, this is a trait that is inborn in us, not learned. There do exist real sociopaths, but they are, thankfully, a miniscule portion of the general population. Wehrmacht soldiers ordered to carry out the up-close killing of civilians in Eastern Europe in WWII experienced debilitating psychological trauma and could no longer carry out their task. This was in fact partly why the industrial scale methods of the Final Solution were eventually employed.
Whether God exists or not is largely irrelevant from where we stand in the universe. All we can do is to keep striving after the better angels of our nature.
……. Natural disasters on the contrary, account for only 50-60 thousand deaths per year, with some years being exceptional like the Tsunami of 2004 in Indonesia killing some 200,000 civilians. So when you make sense of all this suffering and life loss, it is not natural disaster that we should fear in misery but rather inhumane action. My view is that whether a God exists or not does not matter. Rather how much we desire,collectively, to resolve. Bart, I agree in a sense, with your thoughts, that in the backdrop of human suffering, a God existing seems implausible. But what I am laying out here is our lack of love for one another and more importantly how do we attain it ? History suggests we can’t. As Nietzsche put it, ” Ultimately, is the desire, not the desired that we love”, and likewise, ” One loves ultimately one’s desires,not the thing desired”. “The world is beautiful but has a disease called man. That which is done out of love is always beyond good and evil”.
It’s not clear that we have free will. It’s more like a postulate. Amazingly, dropping that postulate solves problems in physics. Free will really isn’t very logical anyway. How would it actually work? As far as our thoughts and self-awareness goes, it isn’t clear that they actually do anything. Maybe a kind of epiphenomenal fluff along for the ride in complex systems. What we actually do we might have done anyway, thoughts and feelings or no thoughts and feelings. If there’s any “light” at the end of the tunnel, it’s our finiteness. We die and the feelings end, whatever they were– happy or sad, joyful or painful. Some belief systems might be regarded as a kind of disease, especially if they produce fear or anxiety. Some ideas are toxic. A lot of religious ideas are definitely toxic. There. That’s a severely reductionist approach to the problem of suffering. Not very comforting is it? I think I’ll go cry in my beer! Hmmm! Beer is comforting!
Regarding the topics of suffering and cruelty as inexplicable with a loving god watching: I am reminded of a story – no idea if it’s true, but perfectly applicable – of a message scratched on the wall of a gas chamber in a Nazi concentration camp. “If there is a God, He is going to have to beg MY forgiveness.”
Life is terminal the only variable is how my death will come about. The mind is amazing–1000 people facing the same end(or whatever circumstance) have 1000 perspectives of their end. The Christian religion provides a perspective of ones end however it might come about. Read Corrie Ten Booms time in the concentration camps–perspective! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrie_ten_Boom
Hi Bart. If you haven’t seen this clip of Stephen Fry speaking to the very same issue, I recommend it. I found it very moving the first time I watched it. He captures my sentiments very well, and has a great accent to make it even more impactful! Thank you for your blog and the enlightenment you provide.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-suvkwNYSQo
Mike
Thanks!
When Leibniz called this “the best of all possible worlds,” he meant that there was no combination of laws of nature and of physics, etc., that could have produced a better world than this one – there would have been contradictions that made any other combination logically impossible. Of course, Darwin’s Theory of Evolution shot down that argument.
Your interlocutors’ argument that it’s all part of God’s plan reminds me of Augustine in City of God saying that “God can do as He pleases” and who are we, mere mortals, to question Him. I find that an abdication of our responsibility to each other as fellow human beings, an excuse to turn away from the homeless and the sick and the poor. Calvinism and Prosperity Gospel also spring from that mindset.
If we’re looking for a definition and example of evil, there would be a good place to start.
HI Bart you said:
“I think that if in fact God Almighty appeared to me and gave me an explanation …I’d be the first to fall on my knees in humble submission and admiration.”
Isn’t this exactly what happened to Job? Except Job had too much experience with God to become atheist so all he can do is curse the night of his conception and wish for death.
I think it’s safe to assume Job has the same theology as his buddies, at least prior to his tragedy, and God is going to kill his buddies for saying wrong things about Him. So Job’s wrong theology about God made life unbearable.
Oh man I love the book of Job–it’s amazing! Although at times I’m a little nervous there may be life scenarios that my theology can’t handle. Perhaps I can still fall back on Job’s line/relationship “though he slay me yet will I serve him!”
Anyway do you think it’s possible you had wrong theology?
In a way I’d say that’s the opposite of what happened with Job. God showed up and *refused* to give him an explanation.
I think it’s possible that I and everyone else on the planet has the wrong theology.
I’ve shared much of the same journey you’ve had and spoken about over the last few blogs.
If Christianity didn’t demand God be so GOOD, I could almost believe. The God of the Old Testament was actually easier to believe in – he often wasn’t good (Flood, instructed others to kill women and children, brought misery to his followers if they didn’t obey…). The New Testament God is good, and loving, and cares about everyone, and all powerful. It doesn’t explain the state of the world.
Unfortunately, it IS like believing in the Tooth Fairy (Theists HATE it when they hear this comparison, because I think they fundamentally misunderstand). Not that God is like the Tooth Fairy. But once we had enough evidence that a little flying fairy couldn’t be bringing us money and stealing our teeth, we couldn’t believe anymore -EVEN WHEN WE WANTED TO!! Once we see who is behind the curtain, there is no more OZ the Wizard. Sometimes, I still wish there were. And there is no going back…
C.S. Lewis described himself as the reluctant Christian falling to his knees unwillingly. I am the reluctant atheist standing up unwillingly.
Yeah, me too….
Same here…
And it is very very hard…
In one of your responses you mention that you don’t believe in free will. I’d love to know more about your thinking on this. Can you suggest something? Thanks.
Ah, very long story. I’ve just come to this view, based on reading in physics and anatomy — much of it recommended by a blog member. Basic line: I don’t think there is anything to us except physical properties (atoms). So where’s the room for something else?
oh…I always thought peoples problem with Job was the tragedy. I never thought God didn’t answer–that definitely makes the story worse…and explains things..
Job is definitely Ivan above even wanting to curse god to his face (at least his wife suggested it)
Even when you were a xn did you think God did not answer Job?
Absolutely not when I was an evangelical. When I moved out of that camp, though, still as a Christian, yes, I did notice that and took it to heart.
Hi Bart,
I was really interested to see the passages you have quoted from the Brothers Karamazov, as I recently reviewed Richard Holloway’s latest book, ‘Stories we tell ourselves’, for the Sea of Faith Network magazine. Holloway cites these exact passages when he talks about his own loss of faith and the problem of evil.
This book and especially the opening chapters might be of interest to readers of this blog post who find it strikes a chord, or indeed you if a copy is ever in your hands.
Thanks for all your work on the blog and wishing you a merry festive season.
Edward
Interesting.
I think Job gives perspective on how to relate to god, how to relate to this life, and how to relate to suffering/tragedy.
So at one point you thought Job’s questions were answered then decided they were not? What was the big idea or question for you that Job did not get an answer for?
Why am I suffering?
oh ya of course… his buddies tell him its because of his or his kids sins–good comes to those who do good bad to those who do bad–which is the way Job use to think but now he maintains his righteousness.
Job 13:15 Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him(Abraham with Isaac): but I will maintain mine own ways before him. He also shall be my salvation: for an hypocrite shall not come before him” My interpretation “I don’t know what god is doing, I’m doing the best I can, I know god is just.”
I never pondered the question “why” from Job’s perspective. Maybe it becomes irrelevant. God tells Job (most importantly) that he will see his kids again, that he had Job and every individual person in his mind at creation and that he really does know what he’s doing. God is reaffirmed as good in Job’s mind, trust in god is the default and suffering on earth just is……for now.
wow—what is the affect on Job’s theology now that he knows bad things happen to good people? It seems him and his buddies never use to think that.