That Ol' Eternal Question Again: Why We Suffer

Is that still a question? I thought they finished grinding that axe down to the nub in the sixties. But people keep bringing it up like it's an issue. Oh well.

With an evident shocking lack of compassion and based on my best understanding of theology, Why We Suffer:

1. consequences of mortality: world designed as a "forge of souls" - a place in which souls (= "selves") can come into being, learn, self-determine and choose who they are in a non-coercive free will environment - but not as our final home. This life must pass for each of us, which involves psychic pain as loved ones pass.

2. consequences of nature: pain - the ability to sense damage, instilling damage-avoidance - is an indispensible survival mechanism for non-indestructible organisms.

You can get as deep into it as you like, but I've never seen an alternative plan for the universe that would eliminate suffering without compromising one or more of the following:

1. mortality. Essential to move us on from this world where we form/choose our identities, to the next world which is infinitely more significant (or at least, drags on for an eternity longer than this one).

2. a plausibly natural environment. Essential for free will. If God's existence were provable, that would present an overwhelmingly coercive element.

3. universal physical laws - fundamental, consistent, discoverable. Essential for human achievement, scientific advancement, even just simple appreciation of this amazing universe.

4. free will. Very little point to the world if God were to wire everyone's brain so that evil was not a possible choice.

If we argue that the theistic premise is incompatible with this world, we have to at least accept the tenets of the premise for the sake of making our argument - so we can demonstrate where they fail. By definition, an omnipotent God has the ability to undo any and all damage done during this brief blip of existence, no matter whether the suffering was spiritual, emotional, or physical.

Those who say God should have created a universe without suffering ought to at least venture a description of such a universe. It isn't enough to say "God could have done it" without continuing to: "but what would the consequences have been?" Because sure, if God can do anything then God could solve the problem of suffering by voiding cause and effect. By creating an irrational universe. But this is not an improvement on what we have.

Some attempts at an "improved universe" concept involve physical laws that are not universal and comprehensible but capricious, whimsical, swerving to avoid hurting babies and old people.

Other attempts involve a hyper-interventionist "cape and boots" God who miracles away all the bad stuff just in time. But a universe whose consistent, fundamental laws are constantly being divinely undermined is little different from the universe with no consistent, fundamental laws.

Others involve just creating us indestructible in the first place. Well, sure. In fact, according to the stories, this method was tried first - with mixed results. For us, it seems God wanted to try something with a little less overbearing supernatural aspect than the indestructible-spirit-beings-created-directly-to-heaven angelic approach. Something a bit more natural - a world as a temporary place in which to come into being, to live, learn and decide. And then, those precious self-determined selves (the whole point of the exercise) can be gathered in to eternity.

Hey, we can quibble on the devils in details - on who says who goes to hell and all that crap. But I say all of that is God's problem, and that we should "judge not" like it says in the book.

The way the world is set up, suffering and all, is a surpassingly beautiful and transcendent place. This life is a gift, and this universe is a masterpiece. Everything fits, seamlessly - and we fit into it. Though we sometimes get caught in its teeth, most adults - theist or atheist - can understand that such things happen in a natural world. If the revisionist anti-sufferers had the drawing board back, we'd be living in a pale and insipid padded playpen of a universe. We would be free to do anything except get hurt, learn hard lessons for ourselves, decide what we believe and what's worth fighting for - basically, we could do everything except GROW UP.

Perhaps God wants us to grow up. Perhaps that's what we are here for. To come into being, and to grow the F up - as individuals, yes, but also as a species. Perhaps God wants us to unlock everything and learn all that there is to learn. Perhaps God chose adult virtues over childish ones.

Those who disparage God on the basis of this world (and "this world" encompasses the universe) are saying "it is not valid for God to look at it from God's viewpoint. God must look at it from ours." And I can sympathize with that, being myself too much in this world.

But I can also detach a bit, and consider how God-as-advertised might look at it. Eternal God. Omnipotent God. This is a God who can heal all hurts in the end, and one who knows that eternity is probably a long enough time for us to get over our lingering resentments over the injustice of it all.

But hey, if we can come up with a better setup for the universe, I say we give it a shot. Maybe humanity can get together grass-roots style and shame God into adopting it. That will be a big point for us as a species, I believe.