Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Why does God allow suffering?
I can't count the number of times I've been asked this question, and the number of times I've tried unsuccessfully to answer it. It would be easy to say that our human understanding is painfully limited and therefore several answers remain out of our grasp but that hardly satisfies anyone, myself included.
When I look at the question again, I seem to note several assumptions. Firstly, the subject used is God - which implies the presumption that God does exist. Secondly, the use of the word "allow" suggests that this subject - God - is omnipotent, all-powerful, and in absolute control of the universe. Thirdly, this subject must be good and kind for suffering is something evil that surely a being who is good all through will not condone. Then I get confused, because suffering has many definitions, and while the general impression is one of utter negativity and embodies pain, suffering does have a tendency to result in lessons.
There's the argument that God allows suffering because we ultimately learn lessons from it. Then some will argue "What about meaningless suffering?" Is our puny human mind too narrow-minded and short-lived to be able to comprehend God's ultimate purpose? Or in some cases, are we too caught up in the pain and devastation caused by the suffering that we fail to be enlightened as to the bigger meaning and purpose behind it all?
This leads to the question "Is God unfair that he allows only some to suffer?" Is suffering measurable? Is there an extent of misery and despair that an individual goes through? Such things can never be put on a scale, it is simply absurd, yet everyone has very different definitions of the word, based on past experiences and exposure to the real world. I don't think there exists someone who can or will say that they have never suffered in life. But then why are we judging God's impartiality by human standards? I find it intriguing that the human mind persistently tries to fit God in a box, and blatantly ignore the fact that the box is our minds. Another futile attempt at defining God in human terms.
Another argument would be that "God allows suffering because of our own sins." It is true that in the Bible because of the first sin, God allowed pain of childbirth to enter the world, and cursed the land. Following that logic, I think we would more than deserve the amount of suffering in this world. I think's there's truth and false in this question, maybe because of the way it's phrased, but I wonder why people seldom scrutinise their own lives for the answer.
How much of our suffering is brought on by our own human hands? When I read about the bloody Holocaust, the World Wars, the genocides, acts of terrorism, nuclear devastation, the question "Why does God allow suffering" seems to me oddly ironic; Is humankind trying to blame suffering on a divine entity?
On a not-so-related-note though, I think it is sad when the number of deaths or wounded reported becomes nothing more than a statistic to feel shock over, bemoan for about a minute, then recorded to be part of nothing more than a human event. Sometimes when I hear about such things over the news or read about them, I try to remember that every one of these people had a father, mother, just like I do, and that they used to sleep, live, breathe in the same air that I do everyday. The term "Man-made suffering" is not new. If we were to really argue to the nitty-gritty, I think we would find that very little suffering in this world is not linked by some way or another to human action.
Why then does God not just wave His hand and destroy all suffering? Examine that. If He did that, would He not be destroying free will as well? Everytime He tries to prevent evil, He would be taking away freedom, our freedom to choose between good and evil. The eventual outcome might be good, but then we would just be puppets in this world. (All the world's a stage? Haha)
Why do people ask this question? Are they too fixated by the image that they have of God in their own minds - a good, kindly God who will save them from their troubles? Is the question merely a helpless plea? Are they trying to disprove God? Are they disillusioned with their own lives? Maybe some questions hold different answers for everyone.
There are too many facets to this issue. But I found that Lee Strobel in "The Case for Faith" included something interesting. Prominent British pastor John R. W. Scott:
"I could never myself believe in God, if it were not for the cross... In the real world of pain, how could one worship a God who was immune to it? I have entered many Buddhist temples in different Asian countries and stood respectfully before the statue of Buddha, his legs crossed, arms folded, eyes closed, the ghost of a smile playing round his mouth, a remote look on his face, detached from the agonies of the world. But each time after a while I have had to turn away. And in imagination I have turned instead to that lonely, twisted, tortured figure on the cross, nails through hands and feet, back lacerated, limbs wrenched, brow bleeding from thorn-pricks, mouth dry and intolerably thirsty, plunged in God-forsaken darkness. That is the God for me! He laid aside his immunity to pain. He entered our world of flesh and blood, tears and death. He suffered for us. Our sufferings become more manageable in light of his. There is still a question mark against human suffering, but over it we boldly stamp another mark, the cross which symbolizes divine suffering. The cross of Christ... is God's only(?) self-justification in such a world as ours."
6:06 PM