(31 votes, average: 4.71 out of 5)
Loading...It is very difficult to be a sentient human being just now and not wonder occasionally or, well, obsessively: “Why is this happening to us?” I’m not speaking of the scientific questions of how Covid began and spread, how it is like and unlike other viruses, how it works, how it spreads, how… well, there are a million scientific questions and we read about them every day. I don’t mean those, but the more existential question. How do we make sense of it all?
It is is less of a problem for naturalists, who do not believe that there is anything beyond the physical universe (in any sense), any non-material superior being, for example, or any non-material thing at all, that has any dealings with it. For hardcore naturalists, the universe and everything in it, living or not, is all particles; sometimes the particles line up in ways that are not conducive for us to survive, let alone thrive. And so the existential “why” something happens, for many naturalists, is a pointless question. It’s only a scientific question to be answered in terms of natural law and probability.
The “why” questions are much deeper and debatable for those who are not absolute naturalists, deeper because they go beyond scientific demonstration – even among supernaturalists who absolutely subscribe to science in every way – and more debatable because … well, for the same reason. They go beyond scientific demonstration. Even today, the vast majority of Americans are still in this category; around the world, apart from parts of Western Europe, it is even more so.
The major “why” question has been well known for thousands of years, and has never been answered to everyone’s satisfaction. It is the standard question of “theodicy” – how does one explain suffering if there is a God (or gods), a loving divine being in the world. If he (let’s call him a he, since most people do) is loving, then he wants the absolute best for people; if he is all powerful he is able to provide the best for people; but people suffer in horrible, horrible ways. Why is that? Three obvious solutions: he is not in fact all-loving; or he is not all powerful; or there is no suffering. People take all three positions. But most people who believe in God accept the premises and try to explain.
Members of the blog and people who contact me from other social media and just random folk who write me emails out of the blue regularly want me to know “the answer.” Especially now, during the pandemic. Almost always they genuinely don’t seem to understand why I find their answers completely unsatisfying. Often these notes begin with “Have you ever thought that maybe….?” But almost never, ever do I hear an answer that hasn’t been batted about roughly forever.
Recently I had a back and forth with someone who wanted to convince me that Covid-19 was a “test” from God. God wanted to see if ….
The rest of this post is for blog members only. You too can be among this elite corps of interesting and interested people. Join! It is a very small membership fee, you get tons for your money, and every penny goes to help those in need…
Yeah, but when is that zombie apocalypse coming?
Very soon, it seems.
God’s passivity to suffering pales in comparison to his evil deeds. Everybody loves the story of the Exodus from Egypt. Jewish practitioners celebrate the Passover with a Sader. (which are wonderful events) Jesus celebrated Passover at the last supper. However they seem to forget that God kills the first born male children of the nation of Egypt. That’s right, murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent children! Apparently God couldn’t find a better way to free his chosen people from servitude. He also appears unable to identify his chosen people without lamb’s blood sprinkled on their doors. This is insane, and religious people have a hard time explaining it. It’s either, God is vengeful and pharaoh should have released the Jews, or it’s a mystery.
There is no reason for suffering. Its just a part of life. Of course suffering can be caused by our own actions or carelessness such as getting drunk and having an accident. Or as the case with a friend,who was recently terribly injured by a drunk driver for no fault of her own, will suffer for the rest of her life. it was random event of being at the wrong place at the wrong time. My cousin, a wonderful christian husband and father, has a failing heart and needs a transplant or he will die. Just a random chance of genetics not God testing his dear young children’s faith. Christian relatives keep saying “God is in control”. What does that mean???? Just accept your fate? Don’t complain??
If there is a God, he seems disinterested in most of the suffering that I see in my friends and family.
….. let’s see if their minds are changed when they get the disease…..
I’ve struggled with this mightily myself and never came up with an answer that wasn’t some weak “ineffable divine mystery” masking piles of narcissism and hubris. I don’t have a problem accepting that there is no grand design, but I absolutely believe there is something we can do about *some* of the misery. Good on you, this must be a lot of extra work for you and we get an awful lot out of it along the way.
Eastern religions tell of us creating our own misery, for everything in our makeup results from past thoughts and actions.
The non canonical Gospel of Mary includes this line indicating same:
“Then [Jesus] continued. He said, ‘This is why you get sick and die: because you love what deceives you.'”
The idea is that we attach ourselves to the things of the world that are temporal. The instruction is to focus the mind on that which won’t die. This would be the inner person, focus on the inner being. By dropping attachment to things of a temporal nature we’ll end suffering and live eternally. This is the message underlying all the religions.
A co-worker who is an Evangelical Christian, claims the purpose of suffering is so those who have been saved will have an opportunity to teach those living in sin the error of their ways. I’ve never said so to her, but I’ve always thought that makes “God” come across like a terrorist.
I remember the Catholic archbishop of New York around 50 years ago making the observation that Jews had a special gift of suffering to give the world, and his being honestly astonished the fury his statement evoked. It was especially infuriating in that Jewish suffering was not the result of some natural disaster, but of persecution largely led by the institution of which he was a representative.
I am not, God knows, a believer in God. Suffering is neither a gift from God nor a test by God. It exists because nature doesn’t care and all too often people don’t care. The closest thing I can come to a “simple” answer is that suffering is a challenge – not to endure it, but to end it.
an excellent letter, and i wholeheartedly agree with your position, as a long time non-believer i frequently struggle to understand the beliefs in all religions when it seems so black and white(pardon the comparison these days) if one only thinks for themselves and looks at the evidence. just the simple fact of the culture(geography) you are born into defines most peoples beliefs. they need to believe in a good and loving god yet reading the bible reveals that absurdity, the christian god is a malicious killer. even something like abortion which almost all christians strongly are against, what is a miscarriage if not a naturally aborted fetus. i wonder how they would accept an updated exodus story. god returns and tells the nation of mexico you are now my chosen people, and i will give them the means and ability to take the promised land(the usa) and kill everyone there(and their puppies and livestock, which was highly logical in canaaan??) and run their grandchildren through with the sword and dash them on the rocks. great story, huh? No, i definitely do not think we are being tested by god by this virus, but our credulity/ gullibility is tested daily
“But I find most religious answers offensive against God, even when I don’t believe in God! …”
Ironically, for medievals such as Thomas Aquinas, it was the very simplicity of God that preserved the ultimate mystery that the human mind could not penetrate. God’s simplicity meant he could not be defined as a species within a genus, ie, could not be defined. Being fooled by the pseudoepigraphy of pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, Thomas quoted him more than any other thinker. At least that seems to be one good use of pseudoepigraphy. I wish more religious people would just admit they don’t have a clue what they’re talking about. As pseudo-Dionysius would say, it is more true to say that God does not exist.
It’s ultimately the atheists, agnostics, and other apophatic theologians that are the best defenders of God’s goodness, regardless of whether or not he exists.
The simple answer to whether God exists is:
“I exist, therefore God exists” -Me.
If you can’t truthfully answer what you’re made from, where you came from, and what existed before you did, then you cannot make claim to the title of God, and thus a greater being than you certainly does exist (that’s really the question, isn’t it?).
But we need to define term “exist” in advance. God is the unknown and surely is awareness because you are awareness, and (also) by our dictionary definition God is everything that exists.
But what does “exist” mean? Can “God doesn’t exist” mean something also? I think Buddhists would agree to that. What is existence? The Buddhist answer may be: God exists and doesn’t exist, and so God truly “is” and “is not”. When we’re speaking of formless entities, which we are, the definition of existence is unclear.
Final answering, if we agree God both exists and doesn’t exist then our conclusion must be “God exists”, because we’re speaking in the same sense that “you” exist.
If you were to argue that you don’t exist then I think it is fair to argue that God doesn’t exist, otherwise, no.
God exists.
I enjoyed reading this post. It reminded me of an experience I will never forget about nine years ago when I was in high school. Me and three of my friends were in a van on our way to a local restaurant when suddenly an SUV hit us from the side, and the car flipped over. I don’t remember much after that because I blacked out. What I do remember is waking up in the hospital and discovering that all my friends were killed in the accident. I was devastated. I was in the hospital for a few days, and as my family began showing up at the hospital over and over again, I heard, “thank God, you are ok.” At one point, I erupted in tears saying, “What about my friends? What is their family suppose to thank God as well?” From this moment on, I was no longer satisfied with the answers for suffering in this world religious people gave.
Wow. I’m so sorry to hear about this. How horrible. I hope you’re finding some ways of healing.
My view isn’t to ask the “why” of suffering. It’s unanswerable. But it’s why in the midst of suffering do so many, millions and millions, become more faithful? the human experience during times of suffering runs exactly contrary to the logical conclusion. It is argued If there is suffering there is no God. but when people suffer faith increases. Is it a test? Is God good? Is God moral? is God just?
Removing God,or a sense of purpose, or hope from the equation does not solve the problem. You’re simply hopeless in a vast eternity. Whereas in some simple way keeping God present can give some hope, meaning and value to the circumstance. As illogical as it may seem.
Ultimately, suffering exist whether a divine realm exists or not. But losing faith means you’ve suffered now more, both from this world and the loss of the divine.
It’s easy for us now, as humans, to hold “God” accountable. “if there’s suffering there is no God”. But for generations past it’s exactly the opposite. If there’s suffering there must be God.
Whether God exists or not, the suffering is the same. But without God the suffering increases.
Very well said ddorner! That is exactly the tack I take when preaching on the subject, but I must say that your comment here is both eloquent and the best apology for God on the question of suffering that I’ve seen in the posts.
It just shows that intelligent people have very different views. My sense is that many people suffer *worse* when they wonder why, if God loves them, they are in such unbearable pain.
I think everyone that suffers such pain asks themselves that question. I also think that the first order of business for us as fellow human beings is to do all we can to alleviate the cause of such pain where possible. I also REALLY believe that many Christian platitudes offered in such conditions are both, insulting, and cause further pain. However, the fact remains that such pain does and will exist, despite our best efforts. It has been my experience that those in that painful situation have multiple choices of perspectives to adopt, but that the one I have observed being most healthful for said individuals is to have trust in God in spite of the inexplicable situation. It is the difference of having hope or not.
Appalling things happen, very sadly, to many undeserving people. Pretending that there is some underlying reason without good evidence delays coming to terms with the situation and moving on if that’s possible. You’re just prolonging the pain.
“Whether God exists or not, the suffering is the same. But without God the suffering increases.” You might want to analyze that sentence. The suffering is the same either way, but increases without god? That’s a contradiction in the same sentence.
As for why millions become more faithful in the face of suffering is because it becomes a security blanket that the mind needs to survive the trauma, regardless of it’s validity. The same can be said for a pet dog or cat that provides comfort in bad times. Love has always originated in the mind. The same is with suffering.
Natural selection has no ‘feelings’. We may have chosen religion as a means to help survive suffering, perhaps even as a evolutionary trait in our DNA, but that is hardly evidence of it being valid. It’s simply a psychological crutch that seems to fill a void like a dopamine rush. Some would say if it works then what harm can there be? I would prefer to live in reality regardless of the consequences & the harm is long term & in so many ways.
Thanks Bart, it was an interesting article.
As long as life exists, suffering will too. The points you make are good and we all have to confront them seriously.
The Christian does have an advantage compared to secular people to deal with suffering however. As Paul gloried in his thorn that God let Satan deliver to him (lest Paul get puffed up in the pride of his flesh), Christians can realize that “[God’s] strength is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12:9). The flesh is weakened so that the spirit can be strong. Fleeing from suffering at all costs should not be the main goal of Christians, as Christendom usually treats it as.
Furthermore, if a believer were zapped in to heaven immediately after believing the gospel, they’d have not developed any patience or longsuffering from their tribulations, both of which are qualities God needs of his saints.
This can only apply to the man of faith of course. Suffering’s main benefit to the unbeliever is to ultimately let him recognize his sin nature and look for a solution, which for man resides in the gospel.
Yeah, like you, I have to wonder about people who can give simplistic answers as to why God allows things like pandemics, and actually expect others to say “oh wow! I had never thought of it that way before – that totally makes sense to me now!” The only thing I can think is that these people have never experienced real suffering in their lives. No one has the answers, of course, but as I get older and look back on my life, I often get a strange feeling that there were many times where what I thought were random occurrences or random encounters at the time turned out later to have been meaningfully connected, sometimes deeply so, forming some sort of larger “psychic tapestry” of my life (for want of a better phrase).
The great psychologist Carl Jung believed in a sort of world consciousness – what he called the “collective unconscious” or “world soul”. In this scheme, we aren’t just isolated islands of consciousness – we’re all part of a bigger picture. Who is to say? But it does make me wonder.
I am an advocate of Jung. I wrote a screenplay called Jesus In the Air that can be read at script revolution.com , the conclusion of the central character is that collectively we are God.
There is a forth answer: We create our own suffering.
This comes from the Jane Roberts/Seth material. This foundation premise applies:
“You make your own reality, there is no other rule.”
What seems a deadly new virus is a mutation of a virus that normally inhabits a person and contributes to the overall health of the body. The mutation happens when the mind goes into fear, depression, hopelessness; it is the state of mind going negative that weakens the immune system and creates the sickness.
I wrote an article published by OM Times summarizing the Seth material. It is a summation of Seth’s books but does touch on pandemics about two-thirds down in the short article here:
https://omtimes.com/2017/02/jane-roberts-seth-books/
….So you’re saying when I contracted Covid-19 3 months ago, it was my own fault. lol Thank you for the laugh – I’m glad I was lucky enough to shake it off to read your thoughtful illumination of my reality. Okay, buddy. Thanks for playing, though.
JonW-
“Ignorance” not “fault” is the cause, something we’re born into until we can shake it off. As Eastern religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism) already know, the foundation of this world is consciousness, there is no solid fixed world, it is illusion, we are essentially dreaming.
Everything in our experience is created by mind; your mind, my mind, collective mind. Sickness is an indicator of something wrong with our thoughts, and a higher consciousness will seek to correct it, illness being a method.
There were some very serious things wrong in this world when the pandemic hit, primarily at the level of politics with a polerizaton like I’ve never before seen (happened during Reagan era, but more in pockets like Berkeley where I was living). At that time I felt waves of great fear washing like giant waves through my mind. It is probably far worse today, although I’ve not felt it myself (I’m of sounder mind now in my old age). It is this kind of fear at such large scale along with hopelessness and apathy that causes people to not want to live that brings the higher mind to make automatic correction.
Glad you are still with us. Could you share your symptoms?
I agree in so far as my ignorance that the virus was starting to run rampant at the facility I work at in early March was definitely the reason for me catching the virus. That I’ve zero doubt over. And I’m not attempting to be glib when I say that. I understand where you are coming from to a degree regarding the mind’s eye, higher planes of consciousness and the slipperiness of the limited perception we have of our universe; however, where the aforementioned becomes dangerously akin to the error of magical thinking is to think that we can create our own reality solely using the power of one’s mind and believing we can negate our and other’s suffering in life by denying that there are, in fact, things in our existence way beyond our control.
Using your postulate, I could say your ignorance/”great fear” you mentioned is responsible for creating the ecocide that big companies like Exxon Mobil and many others have perpetrated that are causing the beginning of the next wave of impending (if we as humans do nothing to stop it) planetary extinction. I don’t believe that’s genuine.
If there is a greater good that comes out of suffering it’s a shame the Bible couldn’t have added an extra dozen or so pages to it’s already large number to explain what that greater good is.
I bet the people who write you with explanations never consider it’s not their god but rather the god of a different religion who is punishing us – such as this interview with a guy from ISIL saying God is using Corona to punish enemies of the Islamic state:
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/we-are-pleased-isil-broadcast-says-god-sent-covid-19-to-punish-its-foes
I’ve heard some evangelical Christians claim that the reason for all the suffering and death in the world is that Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Just wondering Bart: would you have subscribed to that explanation when you were a believer?
Yup. strongly.
Thanks Dr Ehrman. Firstly I agree with every syllable of your post above. Secondly- just to be mischievous for a second – I think the people who got it (almost) right were the Gnostics. After all, they posited an incompetent god or demiurge in charge of our universe, which makes sense, and a proper God so remote that he/she only occasionally takes any interest in us. Finally, I think the Deists of the Enlightenment era may have suggested a god who created the universe and then just abandoned it to it’s own devices. I can sort of get that having abandoned a few projects myself in the past.
I’m not a theistic person. But someone showed me this quote from Aeschylus (as trans. by Bobby Kennedy) recently, and it’s been on my mind a lot as I’ve been wrestling with my own existential crises. It doesn’t explain the suffering, and it’s certainly no apologia for God, but its very meaningful for me somehow.
“In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our despair, against our will, comes wisdom by the awful grace of God.”
I can’t find where this was, but I remember seeing a film where the protagonist says to another, “I envy you the simplicity of your faith.” There are people close to me who find great comfort and direction from their simple faith. I do envy them but, unfortunately, I believe in your assessment of the presumed Almighty.
Some will tell you their intelligence won’t allow them to believe the conundrum of a god that permits suffering. Now instead of one dilemma they have created two:
1 – the universe must have created itself before it existed
2 – the universe, and ourselves, are here for no reason whatsoever.
If they are happy to live with two new conundrums (or more likely, can’t grasp them) then maybe they weren’t really concerned about conundrums at all: Maybe they were just looking to justify themselves.
I’m interested in your input on John 9:1-4. It is most often translated to make it sound as if God had the blind man born that way so that His glory would be revealed when Jesus healed him. I don’t agree, and have used it to to make the point that Jesus was basically telling his disciples they were asking the wrong question and that the real issue was helping people in need when we have the opportunity. I translate the salient words as “…neither this man nor his parents sinned, but in order that the work of God may be revealed, I must to the work of Him who sent me while it is day; night is coming when no one can work.” How do you see that passage in light of your deeper knowledge?
Are you saying that you translated it that way from the Greek, or that you think it is what it must mean? Two very different things! Often words simply don’t mean what they want them to. (At least for me!) How would you explain your translation based on the Greek text itself?
I don’t read Greek. I did read an explanation that based on how one places punctuation into an English translation from Greek, this scripture could be interpreted either way. I wanted to see if you agreed or if you read it and it says something clearer to you than the explanation I received. I liked the explanation as it allowed me to use the verse in way I considered more humane, but I don’t want to use it wrongly either, so I wanted your feedback.
Ah, I see. So the explanation think s that a full stop (a period) does not come at the end of v.3 but instead after “his parents” in that verse. Right — I see what s/he is saying. Tat would create a grammatical situation that I don’t recall ever seeing before, but I’ve never really been on the lookout for it. How do I explain this? The way this person is suggesting the sentence be punctuated means the that “result clause” (“But so that the works of God can be manifest”) *PRECEDE* that statement of which it is the result (“we must do the works of the one who sent me”). That would be weird and at the least highly unusual in Greek. I don’t know if it’s technically *possible* or not; but this kind of result clause occurs all of the place inthe NT, and in John, and so far as I know it aways comes *after* the thing that is leading to the result. Maybe someone else can correct me on that. (Not that it *virtually* always does — since it virtually always does — but whether it *literally* always does.
Yes. That is exactly what i was looking for. Thank you. I wish the evidence had leaned in the other direction, but I always want to know the facts.
Isn’t it interesting how seldom people ask themselves this question, “Why Is This Happening To Us?” when good things occur?
Allow me to recommend writer Shirley Jackson’s short story, “One Ordinary Day, with Peanuts”. She addresses this mystery in a droll and subtle way.
They are predicting a bad hurricane season this year as well. I love the Lord but don’t even try to figure out what’s going on. Pain, suffering, abuse, and discrimination is everywhere and always has been — it now has a bigger platform. I’m embarrassed that our great country is doing so poorly with not only this this virus, but with sex abuse and racism. This unprecedented time in our country/world has been a huge eye-opener on so many levels. We have a lot of work to do to turn this ship around.
Thank you for addressing this. This is brilliant and helpful. I agree with your approach. Acknowledge the reality of what is going on, admit that we don’t have the answer and be present to help those in need where we can.
How can you have Sheep and Goats (Matt 25: 31-46) without suffering? I don’t see anywhere in the Gospels that Jesus promised to eliminate suffering prior to a second coming. Suffering is part of the natural world and the Sheep and Goats story tells us that we will be judged based on how we respond to it. We ignore it at our own peril.
This then leads to more of a God at the periphery of our physical world, mostly observing and perhaps working at the margins of our existence….if we let Him. Is that a God worth worshipping? Is it too arbitrary and unfair? Personally the whole logic of original sin and God sacrificing himself to himself poses a more fundamental obstacle to belief for me. Maybe the deists are right.God put it all in motion and wants us to be good to one another. Us wanting a Mr-fix-it God might just be humans dealing with our own nature and our own wants. Why does God HAVE TO BE Mr. fix it?
Not sure why this comment hasn’t been posted?
Uh, I thought it was posted. Aren’t you quoting it here from its posted form?
I would say he doesn’t have to be. I would also say that saying so doesn’t salve the problem.
So, God can only be loving or powerful if he makes our lives easy and not complicated by disease, war, accidents, natural disasters, or loss? I thought that simplification was the whole point of the second coming and kingdom. A world without suffering (and by extension evil as well) would somewhat negate the purpose of free will, as nothing we could decide could ever cause suffering for our neighbor. Humans would not have to innovate because nothing would ever harm us – there’s no disease, privation, or conflict. But the argument is that God does want us to decide, no? He wants us to commune with Him and be good to one another. And the randomness of the natural world provides lots of those opportunities. There’s not much need for courage, compassion, and selflessness if God is simply fixing the game. We grow by battling our afflictions and challenges. Others grow by helping us — thus Goats and Sheep. Plus, the reward is supposedly after death, where the last will be first. God is no more a psychopath than we are when we let our children go off and make their own choices…
I don’t think anyone is expecting God to make life easy. People going through the agony of dying of starvation over a period of months would just like some food.
When I got in touch with my friend, he said: “Hope COVID would take my neighbor and their neckless horrible children!”
Well, being in Lombardia they had their fair chance.
Everybody’s neighbor is a pagan!
To some extent invoking God to wipe all them off is just an act of mercy. I mean if they had to leave this earth they would not be suffering!
And since we talk history why do not remember Arnaud Amaury, the Papal Legate, in the crusade against Cathars, who said: “The city of Béziers was conquered and[…] almost twenty thousand men died of the sword. So we made a huge massacre of men, the city was sacked and burned: in this way, the wonderful divine punishment was upon them!”
When Arnaud Amaury was asked by a soldier how to distinguish heretics from others in action he said: “Kill them all, God will recognize his!”.
In reality, the phrase would sound more like this: “God knows those who are his” (Tim. 2, 19).
Milarepa’s last statement before dying: “Having meditated on love and compassion, I forgot the difference between myself and others.”
So, the answer to these people: “Ok, dude, You have might being on the wrong drug (religion)!”
It seems best to see it all as a mystery. All the other explanations don’t work for me. Yes, the terrible suffering we see is horrific and can make one doubt or disbelieve in God. But the staggering beauty we see in the world,the countless acts of mercy and goodness, the moments of great love and sacrifice, the beauty of a newborn infant–all this and more can also open up the possibility of the divine. I guess it’s a matter of choosing sides.
This is not an “answer” just a description of how I understand it since I have been puzzled by many of the same questions as you have been.
I think God creates us a free, sentient beings. He loves us as other. Simply like that.
The good and bad around us give us the opportunities to act and to be….whatever we choose to do.
What we call heaven is being in communion, relationship with God. Hell is not having that relationship. Some believe it ends at our death, some believe it is eternal. But that relationship with God is what determines our heaven or hell that begins when the relationship with him begins.
God is God. We have to be able to be in communion with God by being a being God can be in communion with. Fire cannot be one with gasoline, God cannot be one with evil. So we choose to become a being God can become one with.
So when blessings or sufferings come, God gets involved at OUR request but not in a way that would inhibit that oneness with us or others. We may not understand but should accept it.
And continue to seek oneness with God at all times.
From my Sunday School days I remember a Jesus saying
“If it offends your brother to eat meat, don’t eat meat.”
First, did he really say this, and did he mean it? I have found many “answers” to the big existential one, but as I age and try out a few more philosophies, I just might be willing to change again.
It is not something jesus is recorded as saying but is in Paul’s letter to the Romans 14:21. He definitely meant it. You should not do something that is OK in and of itself but that might cause offense to another. The issue is obviously non-kosher meat being eatcn by Xns.
A bit gloomy, Bart. I am with Pinker, Ridley and the late Hans Rosling: we live now in the best times humanity has ever known. Of course there is suffering and, alas, there always will be: no system is perfect because they have been designed by human beings. On any objective measure these are all at historic lows in absolute terms: disease; violence, including wars; crime; malnutrition; poverty. We have, by happy accident, arrived at a time when progress in all these areas is rapid but gloomy doomsters will always be with us, alas.
What has been the cause of this beneficence? Here is a very simplified go at a cause and effect. Christianity changed our moral outlook. Without Christianity, no Reformation. No Reformation, no Age of Reason; no Age of Reason, no Enlightenment. No Enlightenment, no scientific enquiry. No science, no industrial revolution. Etc. The enabler, I would argue, is the nation state, which gave us our liberal, capitalist, democracies. So, if I had to put it down to anything other than good fortune, I would say: Christianity and the emergence of the nation state. I speak, btw, as a lifelong agnostic and no friend of organised religion.
I probably agree, actually. Compared with, say 200 years ago, 2000 years ago, 20,000 years ago, it’s SO much better. And yet millioins and millions of people are in deep and hopeless pain and misery, starving to death, rotting away from disease, and …. and and and. More peole are doing far better than ever, and the percentage of suffering is definitely down, as are wars and so on. And yet still….
1. If you look at the immense universe objectively the concern about what happens to the beings on our little rock orbiting an obscure star is meaningless. Get over it, people. 2. God is a jerk and we should not attribute our ideas of love and goodness to him or her or it? 3. We have grandchildren, and they will suffer hardship in life, but we will NOT sit back and let them endure suffering that we can prevent, in the name of some ill-defined future benefit. We would not let a neighbor molest them with the idea that it will somehow work out for the better in the long term (think of Satan?). Yes, we would submit them to chemotherapy to cure leukemia, but we would explain it very thoroughly to them and be right there with them, not just leave them a book of contradictory explanations.. We would not offer bland platitudes that it will all be better in the end. Odd that humans seem to have a more thorough concept of love than the gods of the major religions.
This is now my favorite post. It is practical, sane, thought provoking and fits my current narrative about living in this world. I understand that evolution has resulted in a species (us) that demands answers to the “deep” questions. But sometimes those answers are not to be; sometimes those questions are meaningless. Things just are. Thanks, Bart.
Bart
Why is this happening to us?
Steefen
It is happening to us because some people want to gain power and money from it.
You wrote about Heaven and Hell but did not write about Evil as a risk of seeking power and money?
It is happening to us and those who can prevent it from happening stand down.
Here’s a video about what this happening has done for start-ups
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4iWz2_CyQ4&t=1181s
Let’s stand-down our reasoning capabilities. Instead of counting cases as 1 case equals 1 case, let’s count cases as 1 case equals 15 cases and use that to gain power to pull something over people. Let’s not talk about Vitamin D, Vitamin K, or asthma medicine, that will not make us enough controlled profit. We will create vaccine companies, we will create start-ups, so we can control a new stream of income.
I’m living in Texas.
Here is how my county government is following the rules to inflate the number of cases by 15 times.
https://banned.video/watch?id=5efab695672706002f367a0a
Here is the asthma medicine that takes away the grab for power and money.
https://banned.video/watch?id=5f06524a672706002f481047
In conclusion, why should it be more than criminal activity for power and money, Bart?
Yes, I wasn’t so much talking about power-grabbing and completely inept administrators, though I constantly wonder about that as well, but about the human suffering caused by what is *outside* of human control. But yes, I get far more aggravated about the former. But I will not be talking poitics here!
Amen!
Good post. I vote for more posts of this kind.
Talk about something that makes no sense from a physician’s viewpoint: We had the daily U.S. record of cases yesterday, but “Open up the schools” and do It in person in classes and if you don’t do it in person in classes, then we are not going to give you any money or we are going to deport you. Talk about crazy. There it is !!!!
Thanks for writing this up. Helps to have someone verbalize some of the stuff kicking around in my head. I had an epiphany recently related to our innate desire to explain. I was having a passing conversion with a long time friend, who is one of the smartest people I’ve come across. I was talking about the idea of how some things written in the new testament may not have happened historically. He responded by trying to counter the idea, but what I found amusing is that he’s not even a Christian. It’s like we have this thing as humans where we have an uncontrollable urge to explain everything.
I don’t know that the suffering is getting worse, though. Life was *much* rougher 200 years ago. Yes, COVID has hit us hard, but we’ll survive this. I remember people saying that 2016 was the “worst year ever” and I had to gently remind them that a hundred years earlier 3 million people were killed in largely pointless offensive in a war that among the more idiotic once we’ve fought. Or you can look at the Black Death, or the Spanish Flu or the Justinian plague… we’ll bounce back from this.
Some people believe that the “all-knowing” God doesn’t know if we’ll remain faithful unless he tests us.
Others believe that the “all-powerful, all-loving” God is dependent on horrifying evils for there to be good or for us to recognize goodness.
I understand how badly many people want to believe in God. I used to be one of them.
Amen.
Several times in the past few months, I’ve heard people compare Covid and other recent calamities (like near-anarchy in the streets of America) to biblical plagues. I’m therefore surprised that I have yet to hear any pro-Trump Christians voice the obvious conclusion that their God is judging and punishing them for selling their souls to the Antichrist. Oh well, I guess the Wrath of God is always something that gets inflicted upon the other guys.
Rant much? Haha! I thought I was reading a modern Ecclesiastes “meaningless, meaningless … a chasing after the wind” except there was no “fear God and keep his commandments for this is the whole duty of man” at the end. I like your ending much better!!! Peace.
Ah! I don’t think it’s meaningless — and either does Ecclesiastes. But meaning, for me, is not where it is placed by traditional monotheistic religions.
I note that the only reason we are able to contemplate this issue of suffering and try to alleviate it, is that we have the benefits of civilization and science. It appears that no other creatures have that — not even other great apes, our closest cousins, nor dolphins, nor any other highly intelligent animals, which means our distant ancestors didn’t either. They had the capacity to enjoy and to suffer, but not to understand how to influence that. Further, there is actually a meaning to particles, forces, etc. Those are concepts that exist in our minds and discourse and help us to understand the universe and create technological advances that help us live better lives. (Yes, there are negative consequences that come along with it and there is the never ending struggle to try to increase the good and eliminate or at least limit evils, as best as we can.) The fact that we can contemplate all this really is quite miraculous and worth celebrating. In spite of all we know, consciousness and how it emerges seems to still be a great mystery.
There was a post going around facebook “Would Jesus wear a mask”! I replied NO as Jesus preached purity laws need not be followed. Nobody got it! Those who wrote the verses didn’t need God to tell them that being unclean caused illness and death and that water worked well along with a sacrifice for the priests. Many don’t seem to notice the just plain Wisdom in the texts?
Yeah, in times like these subtlety doesn’t always play….
Where did the believers ever get the idea we have a loving God. Self defined? Slow to anger, but boy-how-dee, did the Jews pay.
God was invented by Empires, namely the Persian and Roman Empires
Nature is complex but can be ultimately understood
We have the information but wrong interpretation of the scriptures, and who (or what) God is. Just like the original Greek manuscripts, we’ve lost the original meanings. I agree with your post and glad to see others with the same feelings. I left the Baptist church because I wasn’t buying the interpretations anymore.
Have you ever asked someone who believes God wants to find out if we will be faithful, “If God is omniscient, doesn’t he already know?”
My personal view is that if there is a God (definition debatable), he is probably limited in some sense. Perhaps it simply isn’t possible to create a universe with no suffering or, if it is possible, the creator isn’t quite that capable. Still, I agree there is an excessive amount of suffering in the world and that contributing to it’s reduction is better than explaining it away.
“Have you ever asked someone who believes God wants to find out if we will be faithful, “If God is omniscient, doesn’t he already know?””
If God is omniscient, why would he create Satan? For that matter, why would he decide to make this creation, where ⅓ of his created divine beings would rebel against him, where his created humans would sin, and he would end up condemning the vast majority of them to eternal damnation?
Yet, does God blame himself? No, he blames Satan, and he blames us.
I was a computer programmer before I retired, so in a sense, I “created” things. When the program I wrote did not do what I expected or wanted, I did not blame the program. I only blamed myself, because I was responsible for how the program behaved. How is it that I have more personal responsibility than God?
You’ve discussed several reasons people provide in an attempt to explain suffering and indicated why you find them all unconvincing. Do you think that cumulatively, the combination of reasons might make a stronger case? The argument from free will might address suffering caused by humans (still has its soft spots) but doesn’t explain Tsunamis. The possibility that God isn’t perfect allows natural disasters and even God choosing not to intervene (although most believers probably wouldn’t make this case). I don’t like the “his ways are higher than ours” argument, because it seems like an excuse to right off anything, yet I think it’s true that it’s impossible to predict how a supreme being might think and feel. Combining reasons certainly has the potential to cover more ground. And why does there have to be one reason? It’s common for many variables to contribute to a problem.
Yes, definitely. One would have to say that different kinds of suffering result from different ones of the explanations. My view is that none of the explanations thought adequately explains the horrible gut wrenching agony so many millions of innocent people endure.
First of all, I have to say I believe this time of suffering is from God. It is only through suffering that change occurs in order to get relief from the suffering and God has decided the whole world has to change. It is not surprising that this virus originated in China for China openly worships the dragon which is the same as devil worshipping. Having said that, I am probably next on the list to be extradited to Hong Kong and from there to China but I will put my faith in God.
This is far from over for the powers that be haven’t even started to ask the right questions let alone be prepared to here answers they don’t want to hear let alone change in ways they don’t want to change. Ken
This part of your essay is telling: And I get especially upset when people like me who have it good and are actually getting along well in life during the crisis put forward (unlike people like me) simplistic answers to complicated existential questions, answers that in the end embrace suffering instead of opposing it.
It has always seemed to me that those who extol that they are “blessed” implicitly accept that suffering is around the corner but their higher power has elected them not to!
• They tend to victim blame: they’re doing something wrong hence their state.
• They adhere to charity as an ameliorative to suffering.
• They tend to pontificate about change others should do, not themselves.
It’s nauseating and just as you put it, offensive!
I for one am interested in insights that consider God as an energy force, not anthropomorphized. To me this approach seems to better capture the existence of suffering because it concludes that suffering is primarily the outcome of human – not divine – causes.
Great Post Dr Ehrman.
My brother unexpectedly lost his beautiful 18 year old son last summer. This after losing his wife just 14 years earlier. He’s now left with his daughter. Half his family dead. His daughter Dare not leave the house in case she catches covid silently or otherwise and ends up infecting her father. We are all still living in a surreal state quite numb and wandering through life with heavy hearts.
Why am I even bothering to mention this? Ironically I was coming back to faith early last year. Albeit adopting a Liberal Christian worldview, influenced to some extent by yourself and John shelby spong. Then the tragedy happened. When it hits you I can tell you that it knocks whatever pillars of faith one manages to construct. Turning to the Bible proved hugely anti climatic. Job is a cliché in such circumstances. Simply doesn’t resonate. Whilst the mystery of the cross leaves me ruminating, the wider philosophical question of why -as you’ve posed is one which i am no closer to even beginning to find an answer to.0
I don’t think that God is directly responsible for our suffering, that comes from the evil one and our continuously being deceived by his temptations and the choices we make. Something like the game of Snakes and Ladders but without the dice.
God’s jealous but faithful love endures forever. It is we that are unfaithful and pay the price with suffering. God can intervene and relieve the suffering if and when He chooses but that requires a lot of repentance and change of behaviour on our part.
“I don’t think that God is directly responsible for our suffering, that comes from the evil one and our continuously being deceived by his temptations and the choices we make.”
Where did the “evil one” come from? I was taught that nothing evil comes from God. Yet, God created Lucifer, did he not? Did he not know that Lucifer would rebel and cause sin and evil to spread into the world? Unless God is not omniscient, then he is the author of evil, and knowingly created it.
When you say that “Really, sometimes I wonder why I even bother writing about such things,” I’d say, follow your instincts. With all due respect, this post really feels like you’re beating a dead horse (and for the umpteenth time). But I suppose that, if the comments are any indication, people seem to have an unquenchable yearning to attempt to answer the unanswerable. Maybe it’s just human nature. Evidently it fills some deeply felt need. I personally don’t understand it.
Yup, the comments tell all.
From my perspective I enjoy the comments, even if they try to answer the unanswerable questions. It feels like a place of intellectual solitude. I hope it doesn’t change. It’s an opportunity to engage in lively debate and a free exchange of ideas. Everyone here simply wants to engage with one of the leading scholars while contributing to a worthwhile cause. I appreciate it very much!
JonA, I respectfully disagree with you. I appreciate Bart’s willingness to readdress this subject/these issues.
Leave God out of it and we’re still failing the simplest “test” we could face: keep the world economies running and the gold moving at any cost in blood, or prioritize human life and safety instead of desperately, lethally clawing at a “normal” that’s already gone and wasn’t working for most people anyway. It’s actually not a stretch at all for me to envision a divine ultimatum between gold and God: if you think your economies, bars, amenities, and your “normal” are worth dying for, have at it. God isn’t forcing you out to get the germ, but the things we really worship—work, money, perverse social rules—can give it your number. I work for a public university and it has been the fight of my career to work 100% remotely though I’m non-essential in person. Their reasons: “Everyone showing up shows support to the university” and “It’s solidarity.” When God is patient, they say he’s dead. When he’s been patient long enough and allows us to feel the consequences of what we’ve insisted on, they say he’s evil or weak. We’re the ones who keep touching the electric fence to see just how much we can keep getting away with.
High-level teacher Gilbert Guiterez for the Buddhist Darma Drum Mountain Monastery, in the US, drums into his students this message:
“Cause and conditions never fail.”
The wind and even the Crown Virus harken to our voice. “We make our own reality, there is no other rule.” -Seth/Jane Roberts
“You get out what you put in.” -Me
Here’s an approach, not likely to be original, based on what seems to be a fundamental principle: Logical Consistency. LC for short. Everything and anything that exists must have the property LC. That is binding even on gods, or a God. So we look at the universe as it is, and we must assume, no matter what its properties are, that, since it exists, it must be LC. And here we are, part of that consistent structure. Whether a god created it is an open question. But if a god did create it, there was no alternative. And we are in no position to know whether an afterlife of some sort, a higher order of being is LC, and therefore possible. We could hope for that. But in any case, we are not dealing with something omnipotent or all-powerful, if a god exists. The ruling principle is Logical Consistency. Not much consolation is it? Time to cry in my beer.
Faith in the midst of suffering or just being aware of the detractions from it is hard work. To find or keep faith you have to badly want it, otherwise forget about it. Humans need God or they wouldn’t keep making him up. As a scientist, God is at the heart of science for me. If you want God you can find a path, but it’s a high maintenance endeavor????
Dr. Ehrman,
I want to thank you for revisiting this topic. I am a therapist at a custodial, inpatient psychiatric hospital, and have found your exploration into suffering an integral part of my work, as I bear witness and sit with patients who are in crisis and greatly suffering. The very fact that you not only wrestle with the problem of suffering, but are also able to articulate that process in such a simple, meaningful way, means a lot to me at this stage of my life.
Thanks. My hat is off to you and everyone actually dealing with the problems of suffering head on, all the time.
Thank you, as well. I struggle often, but I’m there and I persevere.
faith that is born of senseless suffering or that is increased by it comes from a desire to make sense of the irrational and a need to feel that there is ‘someone’ in control. This brings meaning to life’s trials. One can then feel that we have some control or someone else who does. This removes the terror of helplessness just as little children are comforted by the thought that there is a parent or other parent figure who is looking out for them. Paul, in another context, counseled his readers at Corinth to put away childish things. let us just accept that horrible things happen in nature and we don’t need god to explain them. It isn’t fair to ask god, for he does not have a good answer.
Well Bart, you have made it clear on multiple occasions that the problem of suffering was your primary reason for rejecting Christianity and even belief in God. The traditional Christian teaching is that, as a result of the fall, sin and chaos and suffering entered the entire creation. This will continue until Christ’s return and the establishment of a new and perfect kingdom, a view that you and I no longer subscribe to. But there is another view that I have been entertaining for a couple of decades, and that is that, in the beginning, there was God. And there was nothing but God. Because there was nothing that God was not, God could not know himself (itself) in it’s own experience. You cannot know that you are light, when there is no darkness to contrast with. There can be no up if there is no down, no here if there is no there. And so God (not a grey haired “man” siting on a throne somewhere) brought into creation that which he was not in order to “know” he was in his own experience. to be continued…
Yes, I would say that is precisely not traditional Christian teaching about God in the beginning!
When God created us (and all living creatures both here and throughout the universe), he did so out of himself, implying that, in some way, we are part of God, with the caveat that we do not remember who and what we are (there are exceptions, as I’ll point out). This is part of the “game.” God wanted to “experience” anything and everything, from every conceivable angle, and he (it) does this in, as, and through us. As such, God experiences everything we do, and God knows that nothing is ever lost or ultimately “suffers” because he (it) is us and we are him. This view holds that eventually, everything will return to God and he (it) will once again be the all in all. And then what? The whole process will begin again, in unfathomable different forms and conditions. And the cycles will continue throughout all eternity. What we experience, God experiences, the good, the bad and the ugly. I know 3 people personally who have had profound near death experiences (NDEs). In all 3 cases, while on the “other side”, (to be continued…)
In all 3 cases, while on the “other side,” they claimed that their consciousness was expanded to almost infinity. As one very close friend of mine stated, “while in the light, I understood everything…about everything! I knew the answer to every question I ever had, and it was all so simple.” The understanding of all 3 was that “of course it’s like that! How could I have forgotten?” These sentiments are echoed by millions of NDE experiencers worldwide. With all that smoke, there may indeed be a fire.
In sum, what I’m proposing is that our view of “God” is skewed. This thing we call God may very well be infinitely beyond our comprehension while in physical form. The traditional God of the Abrahamic religions just doesn’t cut it. As to the problem of suffering, there may be far, far more going on than we can begin to understand. Just some thoughts.
Sorry for the long post. But then, I haven’t posted in a long time, so I’m making up for it LOL. Thanks for all the great stuff you contribute here, Bart. I’ve learned much!
The man spearheading the current effort to find a vaccine and treatment for our current crisis, happens to wake up at 5am every morning and spend time in God’s word and relationship with the historical Jesus. Sorry to post links, but there’s an array of good topics addressed by Dr. Francis Collins, the director at NIH, a born again Christian. This would be worth everyone’s time and hopefully move people more toward the center. I find it extremely arrogant to be extremely left or extremely right. https://youtu.be/vKmZRuJpjU0
I’m not sure why you’re thinking that if a few very smart people agree with your views you are therefore right? Shouldn’t there be some other criteria? If there aren’t, and it can be shown that the vast majority of scientists in the world have completely different views (which, by the way, they do, which is why you are naming a few individuals), I would think you would have painted yourself into a corner!
Are you oblivious to the fact that your legion of followers are exactly as you just described? “The Bible is a fraud, check out Bart Erhman, he’s really smart, ya da ya da ya da”. Francis Collins estimates 30/40% of scientists are theists. Sorry to crush your narrative Dr. Erhman.
I am just thankful that the top U.S. scientist happens to follow Jesus. I’m sure that bothers you Dr. Ehrman. My point is that extremely smart scientists have faith in God. God is Spirit, you can’t use the scientific method to prove/disprove the existence of God. There’s no mechanism for that.
So 60-70% of scientists are non-theists? And of those who are, many are of non-evangelical persuasion? Why do you take comfort in the idea that the vast majority of scientists think you are wrong? Shouldn’t the truth be something you subscribe to because you personally think it’s true rather than because you have some people who agree with you?
You’re right, I don’t believe people because they’re “scientists”. Scientists are hardly ever unanimous in their conclusions. It’s impossible for science to say anything about God. Furthermore, I’m an air traffic controller. I don’t think scientists are any smarter than the people I work with. They happened to go to school for a different subject. That’s all. They have no more intellect than we do. My point is that you can’t use scientists as a source of disproving anything about the Bible or God. Many believe. On a serious note. Do you ever sit up at night and worry that perhaps these 1st century “peasants” (as you call them), didn’t offer up their lives for something they knew was a lie? They knew firsthand whether Jesus was a fraud or not. That everyone lied about numerous miracles? From the calling of Andrew, Simon, John and James on that historic day they thought was just a fishing trip, to Paul? Every miracle in Acts was a lie? The odds are remarkably against you. Have you considered the consequences for denying the what you consciously know is the truth? The Bible deeply reflects humanity and its need for a Savior.
Of course we do know of many, many people who have been willing to die for a lie, from history. But no, I don’t think the followers of Jesus were lying or that they thought Jesus was a fraud. But it’s kind of strange that you think that is what I think. Have you never actually read any of my work?
Bart,
I’ve read most of Triumph and I am laboring through Peter Paul and Mary right now. Listened to your debate with the best Apologist in the Church, Dr. James White. My favorite. You should probably do another debate with him, without asking for $25k and control of the tapes. When you debate people like Craig and others, you lose the attention of serious Christians. Reading about Constantine in Triumph was actually moving to me, seeing God’s hand in the advancement of the Gospel. What a great time to be alive back then. Today public discussion revolves around masks, climate change, immigration. Theology was the topics of society. As a Bishop of Constantinople said, if you asked someone for change in the marketplace, he would ask you about whether the Son was begotten or not. It’s fascinating to see how much religious unity was the foundation for political unity in the Roman Empire. Which is why Constantine convened a general council at Nicaea. I don’t think it gets discussed enough how much theological debate dominated society in those times. Most people assume it was only for the religious. It was really more significant than we think.
$25k????
Yes. $25k. Word around town, is that Alpha and Omega Ministries reaches out to you for another formal debate and your people demanded $25,000 and control of the tapes. I’m not saying that it’s true or not. I’ll send you proof if needed. If you could do more debates with White, that would be great. You’ll get the attention of serious Bible believing Christians and people much more in love with Apologetics/Textual Criticism. You’re wasting your time debating other people. You want to get the attention of people like me, that actually believes in the doctrine of inerrancy.
Wow. I wonder where that came from? White himself? That would be bad. I wonder who “my people” are? And “control of the tapes”? What does that even mean? That I get to edit them to make myself look better?? Good god….
As you probably know, he is not trained as a scholar, let alone a textual critic.
I sent you a link in the comment and inquiry section, to his discussion concerning these things. Yes control over the distribution of the debate tape. I think Dr. White is the best Apologist in Christianity. He teaches Greek and Church history as well. Which is crucial
to Apologetics. I don’t like that term scholar very much. It’s always used to give credibility to someone with bad ideas, theories, and assertions about the Christian Faith. I whole heartedly think that someone who goes to university to study the Christian Faith and doesn’t believe, is wasting their life. What a complete waste of time, energy, and money. What good are you doing for the world by being hyper critical about a religious faith and it’s history. Utterly useless. The moment you decided that the Bible was not true and there was no God, you should’ve used your brain for something better for the world. Than writing hyper critical theorized assertions about the Christian Faith.
I’ve never thought of a “scholar” as someone who attacks Christianity. Scholars are those who have developed an academic expertise in one area or another.
More important, I have never attacked the Christian faith. At all. I have attacked Christian fundamentalism. That is not at all the same thing, and anyone who claims they are is precisely part of the problem.
Why do I keep teaching what I do? Because I think truth matters.
I understand what you’re saying, but most of the time people use scholars for giving credibility to things that are not true.
The problem is that your work is mainly opinions based on circumstantial evidence. You’re teaching people your opinion. Not necessarily objectives truths. At least in your books. It’s what you do with the facts is the problem. Why didn’t Metzger come away with the same conclusions? You both had the same set of facts about Christianity. My problem is that people assume because a so called scholar says something, that it’s Gospel truth. Lots of scholars have lots of different opinions about the same matters. Scholars can’t be used to define what is true or not. It’s the same as what you do with the text of the Bible. You’ll ask what is the true original text? Well, what scholarly claim is the objective truth about a given matter? Because of that, scholarly opinions are not helpful. I have a serious question for you though.
Do you have a love and admiration for the historical Jesus? The actual person, his character, philosophy, etc. I don’t think anyone has asked you that. As a historical figure, how do you feel about Him? This is not a question about what you think he actually said or did historically necessarily.
You do know that committed Bible-believing Christians have very different interpretations of the Bible. Does that mean they are wrong? I don’t think you should apply a standard to people you don’t like that you do not apply to the people you do. If you think my scholarship is based on pure opinion, then I am pretty sure you haven’t actually read any of my scholarship. If you are genuinely interested, you might try either The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture (a book Metzger liked very much!) or Forgery and Counterforgery (which cites Metzger for its overarching point)
Wilco.
Still waiting for your honest opinion about how you truly feel about Jesus of Nazareth. His character, teachings, etc. Do you love Him, despise Him, or indifferent. You didn’t your whole life studying Him You should know Him well.
I’m not sure what your last sentence means. I think it is very, very difficult to know what Jesus’ message really was, but I think its overall emphasis was on the coming kingdom of God and the need to prepare for it. He was wrong, in my opinion, in thinking that the end of history was to come in his own generation. But I agree with him deeply and wholeheartedly about how one should live. Jesus did not teach the importance of doctrines, the way fundamentalists do. He taught that we should love one another, even those who are not like us, even those who are our enemies, by feeding the hungry, helping the needy, caring for the foreigner, and so on. My life is committed to those principles.
That’s great. It’s interesting that you mentioned that very substance of Jesus’ teaching, because I was pondering that exact issue today. Myself included, as conservative Christians, we spend more time running people from inside or outside our worldview through doctrinal/theological filters instead of spending more effort/energy on actually living the principles of what Jesus taught. You’re right, Jesus was less concerned about doctrinal issues, and I am sure there were many in his time. That’s a good point. I am reading Peter, Paul, and Mary right now. You assert a contradiction in Peter’s calling amongst the different Gospel’s. I am comparing your view with conservative views as well. The hardest part for asserting a contradiction, is assuming the intent of the authors to write literal and specific chronological events. My old Pastor in California was a BIOLA grad and he told me that peope didn’t write with that mindset back then. We are holding the writers to modern standards and within our modern expectation of telling an event.
Here in Australia federal and state politicians of all political persuasions got together early, and cooperatively closed things down minimizing COVID casualties to date. They listened to scientists. Many of us here in Australia look despairingly at our American brothers and sisters, at the mighty flagship of democracy, the role model we emulate and measure ourselves against in many of our institutions, the country that has led the world in so many brilliant ways for so long, and we wonder how it has found itself in this unfolding disaster. There’s clearly a widespread confusion about truth which must be laid at the foot of the leaders of the country, the politicians and the business people. Leaders lie. People die. I wish readers of this blog and their loved ones good luck in these difficult times.
We tend to ask the wrong question. The unspoken corollary to “why?” is “why not?”
As a “christian” society, we have handy solvents for the generalized suffering of others, in other places, at other times, yet labor and moan over our own misfortunes, hopeful and certain of some greater purpose. We conjure great god-lessons for incomprehensible situations. Nonsense. If suffering is ever a god-thing, then suffering is always a god-thing, otherwise said god is One Capricious Cad. Instead of asking “why me?”, I should perhaps ask “why not me?” I’m not special-er than anyone else!
Droughts happen…why not ME to starve? Viruses happen…why not ME to choke on it? I guess I’ve just been pretty damn lucky so far, but others have not, and spiritual rationalization is a grotesque solution. If ever there was a Jesus-answer, it is: treat others the way you want to be treated. Or, packed a little more tightly: be compassionate. Bart, you have a voice, a platform, and a mission of compassion. I’m on board with that!
As usual, what you write sounds like it could have come from my own brain.
As a lifelong atheist or naturalist as you call it, I do agree – there is no Why. There is a however, a How. How do we as human beings deal with the evils that happen to us? Job tells us to shoulder our misfortunes, accept that life is not always kind and to be brave in the face of disasters. Seems to be the right approach then and now.
Thank you for this post, Bart. Without being demeaning to anyone, you stated what many must think but are afraid to admit.
Someone needs to volunteer so I will step up to argue that suffering does not exist.
You mention a thirty-two year old woman who died of Covid. There is no suffering in the thirty-two pre-Covid years. There is no suffering after her death. With pain killers and anesthesia there was little pain during her last week. No suffering; no problem of suffering.
You then mention the typical starving child. Firstly, hunger is not all that painful. We all routinely experience it. The kid’s body was deteriorating toward death. We see all this totally different from the kid. He sleeps, gets up, interacts with family, does stuff, plays with siblings, etc. He is living life. His suffering is in our heads.
You might want to blame God because he only lives two years, or because the woman only lives thirty. These are just numbers. Life is only today and today is all we have, any of us. Anyone who lives today is equal to any other. Each of our days ends at the end of the day. No suffering because we can’t live tomorrow now.
Take non-existent suffering out of the equation and you are left with needing another reason for being an atheist.
I”ve known people who denied the reality of suffering until they got cancer.