Blaming God or Religion or is it Both?

[digdug75]

the concept of "bad things happen to people because of free will" seems like a cop out. A newborn who suffers great pain form a health condition, a child abused by a parent, a person killed by a drunk driver, a senior who loses their life savings to a con artist swindler who steals their identity and cleans out their bank account, a guy killed by lightning while working in his field...how are any of these caused by "free will", yet they suffer and are punished for the sins someone supposedly committed thousands of years ago? If this is true, then god is not following his own words and forgiving. In fact, it could be said that he is holding one heck of a grudge.

 

"A newborn suffers great pain from health condition". What health condition? Free will is parents conceiving child. Free will is abuse given by parents to child. Free will is how a child responds to such abuse. Free will is the driver choosing to drive drunk. Depending on the circumstance of person getting killed free will can be applied there also. Not to say result of death was desired upon acting with free will. Free will of senior is also present along with the con artists free will. Mostly likely not the desired outcome of the senior using his/her free will. Guy killed by lightening uses free will to go out in his field while signs of storm are present. Sorry you don't see how free will(choice) applies to these things.

 

With out the knowledge of the existence of a spirit or the knowledge that we choose to come to this earth. I can see how a non-believer would come to such conclusions. I am not sure I completely understand your logic of God not being forgiving based on your examples. Are you saying because people have the freedom to choose God is not forgiving?

 

Lets say that suffering never existed on earth. Would children exist, if so what would be the cause for a man and women to conceive a child? Would there be any gain of knowledge? Is there a purpose to gaining knowledge, if so what would that purpose be? What purpose would life serve? Does life have purpose? If so what is it?(I have my answer to this question)

 

As for the bible being a historical document, I don't believe that much either. It's been interpreted and charged too many times. It could have been something as innocent as a monk being tired, sick, or cold while working in poor lighting conditions who misread a word while transcribing it, to someone who purposely changed it when translating it from latin because they wanted to shift the balance of power, how can I accept that any of it is accurate?

 

How can you accept that any thing of the bible is correct you ask. The same way you would anything else. research and maybe apply what is taught! For the bible prayer is required. If you have the time read Galatians chapter 5: preferable verses 16-26. Bible teaches about prayer. If you desire the answer to your questions of bible this would be the way. If you want or have time read these verses! This is a promise by God, James 1:5. These are about prayer, Matthew 6:7 and 21:22 (Mark 11:24), James 1:6 and 4:3, Proverbs 15:29, Jeremiah 29:13. These pertain to the Holy Ghost, John 14:26 and 16:13, 1 Corinthians 12:3

 

 

to my way of thinking, it's more like Aesops Fables. It does have some good words of wisdom, but to accept that it's the word of god or a true historical account taken at a time when very few could read or write is really hard to accept.

 

Is it your question that Noah existed? Several religion account of a man like Noah if not all main religions. Here are few things to look into. Book of Jubilees, Genesis Apocryphon, Epic of Gilgamesh text, or maybe look into names such as Utnapishtim, Deucalion, Chinese Hei Miao, Hawaiian story Nu'u and Vishnu. Evidence is all around.

 

This isn't based on hatred but rather logic. As I have said before, if someone uses their religion, whatever it may be, to do good in the world, then that's fine. The problem is that too many use it for an excuse to do horrible things.

 

Which then brings things back to how is religion or God to blame, due to the misuse of individual, or group of individuals?

 

The oldest text written is suggested to be dated around 5000 B.C. on a piece of wood called the Dispilio tablet. Because we know wars have occurred in history. Logic would show that a lot of writings have been destroyed or lost. The oldest biblical text is dated around 3000 B.C. . Have you looked into Archeology, Geology, which shows evidence?

 

Science has its destructive nature also. Just a few examples: Allen savory considered to be a great ecologist kills 40,000 elephants in the name of science. Mansato creates agent orange amongst other harmful things. The manipulation of food producing crops to make things more hardy ect.... Science on lobotomies, medications, manipulation of bees(killer bees), science concerning hormones to be used on cows, chickens, people , ect... Science involved in Chemo therapy suggesting it is the only hope. Don't get me wrong I like science but just pointing out that fault is by the people and choices made by what is understood by those people or individual. Just my opinion and thoughts! nothing more. Not trying to convert you or any such thing. Just providing my belief and thoughts, which some thoughts and beliefs will change as I learn more.

 

Thanks for your replies! Trying the best I can to show gratitude for you sharing your opinion. If I insulted you in any way let me know. Its hard to tell just by looking at words. Hard to know what is found insulting to who!

Edited June 8, 2015 by digdug75

[digdug75]

Other religions have truths based on faith/hope.... Buddhism is the only Religion that bases its truth on researchable, verifiable facts in which one can have total confidence.

 

I would add that this isn't supposed to be provocative or a pi$$ing contest.

It's simply that Buddhism achieves Truth without the presence of an Eternal Deity/Creator-God.

 

The statement is simply fact.

 

 

LOL sorry if this seems like a pi$$ing contest. Just pointing out similarities with my belief.

 

 

Bible is researchable the principles taught are researchable. Not trying to be sarcastic or patronizing. I genuinely want to know! Not sure how your belief is able to show Buddha's enlightenment as fact, researchable, or verifiable. Nor am I sure how the writing's of Buddha can be considered a stand alone idea or way of life developed without any influence of believers in God. From my point of view everything Buddha knew was based on his upbringing of 28 years in a form of Hinduism. Religion is where he first gained his understanding of right and wrong and from there dispersed and formed his owned views of Hinduism. the 4 noble truths doesn't seem to be something that wasn't taught preceding Buddha, and doesn't seem as something that isn't taught now by other religions. If Buddha was just a man who was born in the woods with no spiritual upbringing i could better understand the denouncing of Gods involvement. Just doesn't seem to be the case. I am sure it is just, because I am to uneducated in this area. This would be ignorance on my part, because I do not understand the justification that God was not involved. Not trying to insult your belief.

 

 

To suggest that God doesn't exist isn't based on fact but ignorance. Ignorance that is easily resolved through a righteous prayer.

 

At any rate! You have been quite helpful and patient towards me, I feel. I am grateful. I apologizes for my lack of understanding and for things that I have written that cause distress or conflict. Not my intentions. I guess I lack positive communication skills. Thank you!

[TaraMaiden2]

LOL sorry if this seems like a pi$$ing contest. Just pointing out similarities with my belief.

No, I was stating that I wasn't trying to use my statement in a superior way. It's just a fact.

 

 

Bible is researchable

Only up to a point. MUch hinges on people being able to suspend opinion...

 

the principles taught are researchable.

The principles taught were already being taught elsewhere before the Bible took shape...

 

Not trying to be sarcastic or patronizing. I genuinely want to know!

WHat precisely do you want to know?

 

Not sure how your belief is able to show Buddha's enlightenment as fact, researchable, or verifiable.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

There is debate even among Buddhists as to whether accounts of the Buddha's historicity are accurate. What is beyond doubt is that what he teaches WORKS.

Reliance of verification hinges on the person's own ability to follow the suggestions found within the texts, but to research and test everything first.

Take nothing at face value, take nothing on faith, take nothing on belief.

TEST everything. Put it under the microscope.

A Theistic religion will at one point demand that its followers suspend examination and simply have faith, or believe that what they are being taught, is true.

Buddhism never asks this of any follower.

In fact, Buddhism strongly advises against it.

 

Nor am I sure how the writing's of Buddha can be considered a stand alone idea or way of life developed without any influence of believers in God.

Why not? Who says that something of deep worth MUST have a deity to support it?

Buddhism has existed for nearly 3000 years without a god.... Whereas the Bible has undergone countless changes in less time....

 

From my point of view everything Buddha knew was based on his upbringing of 28 years in a form of Hinduism. Religion is where he first gained his understanding of right and wrong and from there dispersed and formed his owned views of Hinduism.

 

Your point of View is mistaken.

Everything the Buddha knew was a diversion and modification of everything he had learnt, because Hindusim did not fit with Right View.

He may have been influenced by Hinduism, but he realised there was too much there left to a faith in the Divine, and a tacit and implied acceptance of life being predestined... which is not the case.

the 4 noble truths doesn't seem to be something that wasn't taught preceding Buddha, and doesn't seem as something that isn't taught now by other religions.

 

Could you give me an example of the 4 Noble Truths appearing prior to the Buddha's time? And an example of it being taught within other religions?

Thanks...

 

If Buddha was just a man who was born in the woods with no spiritual upbringing i could better understand the denouncing of Gods involvement. Just doesn't seem to be the case. I am sure it is just, because I am to uneducated in this area.

You're not getting it.

The Buddha was exposed to the teaching and insistence of a Creator God: Brahma. He came to eventually reject the existence, or more precisely, the importance or relevance of a God.

 

This would be ignorance on my part, because I do not understand the justification that God was not involved. Not trying to insult your belief.

We do not need to justify it. A 3000-year-old Religion tells us we don't need a God.

 

 

To suggest that God doesn't exist isn't based on fact but ignorance. Ignorance that is easily resolved through a righteous prayer.

 

Well, having lived a closely-nurtured life as a Roman Catholic for 40 years, (I even once considered ordaining as a nun) I can tell you weighing up my own current position and the one I previously adopted, I know without any shadow of a doubt that I WAS ignorant, but am better informed now.

 

At any rate! You have been quite helpful and patient towards me, I feel. I am grateful. I apologizes for my lack of understanding and for things that I have written that cause distress or conflict. Not my intentions. I guess I lack positive communication skills. Thank you!

Veiling accusations of ignorance due to a lack of diligent prayer, as being due to a lack of understanding, is indeed unskilful and somewhat presumptuous.

It doesn't sit well to tell people that their lack of belief is due to ignorance, when you have no proof to lay before them to the contrary...

 

As already stated, the existence of God is totally unprovable.

 

Me? I really don't care one way or the other, but for others, this is the main bone of contention...

[wizer]

I do not understand why people that don't believe in God blame God for negative things of the world.

 

It seems impossible at times, to try explaining, to a person that doesn't believe in God that asks why God allows such bad things in the world to happen. Do they not understand the concept of freedom?

 

The person that doesn't believe in God who is making the point that "if there was a God why would all these terrible things happen in the world" is not blaming God, they're making a valid point that you fail to understand.

 

The point is that belief in God makes zero sense.

 

That's pretty much what it all comes down to.

[autumnnight]

The point is that belief in God makes zero sense.

 

Makes zero sense TO YOU.

 

Are others allowed to disagree?

[TaraMaiden2]

Makes zero sense TO YOU.

 

Are others allowed to disagree?

 

I personally would think it essential; we're not automatons, after all.

Providing discussion is respectful, it may also be a blessed thing to agree - to DISagree...

 

My discussion with digdug75 was focusing primarily on his contention that a religion cannot be a religion without some kind of Omniscient, omnipotent, all-powerful deity's influence at some point or another.

 

I think.

I hope I'm reading his opinion correctly, I honestly do not want to put words into the mouth of another....

 

My response was in keeping with what I have learnt and examined with regard to what Buddhism teaches, and also the instructions from the Buddha himself:

 

There are many who contend that Siddhartha Gautama, the man otherwise known as the Buddha, was an atheist. Others are of the school of thought that he was an agnostic, neither avowing or disavowing such ideas, and resting instead in the simple, trans-personal state of “not knowing”. And, while the Buddhist tradition itself is exceptionally diverse, known for it’s inability to conform to the clear-cut dogma of many of the other major religions, one thing it does have is the Kalama Sutta. Known as the Buddha’s “charter of free inquiry”, the Kalama Sutta is a set of instructions provided by Gautama for a mode of investigation “exempt from fanaticism, bigotry, dogmatism, and intolerance” (Soma Thera).

 

Below is a summary of its main, salient and most pertinent points. The link given above is to the Sutta in its (translated) entirety, with additional commentary by Thanissaro Bikkhu, an extremely renowned and much respected expert in the understanding and interpretation of the Pali Canon. He is fluent in Pali, and has translated most, if not all of the Pali Canon into English...

 

 

 

Kalama Sutta

 

The people of Kalama asked the Buddha who to believe out of all the ascetics, sages, venerables, and holy ones who, like himself, passed through their town. They complained that they were confused by the many contradictions they discovered in what they heard. The Kalama Sutta is the Buddha’s reply.

 

 

• Do not believe anything on mere hearsay.
   
   
  
• Do not believe in traditions merely because they are old and have been handed down for many generations and in many places.
   
   
  
• Do not believe anything on account of rumors or because people talk a a great deal about it.
   
   
  
• Do not believe anything because you are shown the written testimony of some ancient sage.
   
   
  
• Do not believe in what you have fancied, thinking that, because it is extraordinary, it must have been inspired by a god or other wonderful being.
   
   
  
• Do not believe anything merely because presumption is in its favor, or because the custom of many years inclines you to take it as true.
   
   
  
• Do not believe anything merely on the authority of your teachers and priests.
   
   
  
• But, whatever, after thorough investigation and reflection, you find to agree with reason and experience, as conducive to the good and benefit of one and all and of the world at large, accept only that as true, and shape your life in accordance with it.
   
   
  
• Do not accept any doctrine from reverence, but first try it as gold is tried by fire.

 

The same text, said the Buddha, must be applied to his own teachings.

[digdug75]

Only up to a point. MUch hinges on people being able to suspend opinion...

 

The principles taught were already being taught elsewhere before the Bible took shape...

 

 

What do you mean by suspend opinion? do you have an example of suspended opinion?

 

 

I am not sure what you mean before the bible took shape. Do you mean before the bible was put together in one book? Many biblical text pre-date Constantine's era. Oldest discovered thus far date around 3000 B.C.E. according to current accuracy of carbon dating. Then you have the Dead Sea Scroll writings(130-100B.C.E) well before other writings.

 

 

I just see the bible differently then most I guess. I see the bible as handed down documentation of religious events. Compiled as events happened. Meaning you are not going to find anything about new testament pre-dating the existence of Jesus Christ. Yet the coming of Jesus Christ is known by Isaiah, and a few other references in old testament.

 

 

[QOUTE]There is debate even among Buddhists as to whether accounts of the Buddha's historicity are accurate. What is beyond doubt is that what he teaches WORKS.

 

 

No doubt teachings that know of that is taught by Buddha do work to those that continually apply them. If we are just talking about 4 noble truths and eight fold noble path. Others I am unaware of so I cannot say from my point of view.

 

 

Reliance of verification hinges on the person's own ability to follow the suggestions found within the texts, but to research and test everything first.

Take nothing at face value, take nothing on faith, take nothing on belief.

TEST everything. Put it under the microscope.

A Theistic religion will at one point demand that its followers suspend examination and simply have faith, or believe that what they are being taught, is true.

Buddhism never asks this of any follower.

In fact, Buddhism strongly advises against it.

 

 

[QOUTE]Why not? Who says that something of deep worth MUST have a deity to support it?

Buddhism has existed for nearly 3000 years without a god.... Whereas the Bible has undergone countless changes in less time....

 

 

Many, many, changes in Buddhism from its original state in other countries. Many differences in opinions on text. few versions of text though. Possible addition added to texts(although I think it is speculation). Even question if Buddha's full teachings have been written down. 400 years of verbal teaching give or take a few years should cause question of accuracy.

 

 

My point of showing that Buddha was influenced was to show that with out the religion of Hinduism(belief of God which provided the truth in which Buddha uses) he would have never known of such things. This is why I tried giving an example of Him with family. Having absolutely no understanding of God or religion. Living in an Isolated state.

 

 

How can a person influenced by teachings provided by God state that God is not needed. What differences do you see between Hinduism and Buddhism? If Buddha had his own epiphany on life then why so many similarities to Hinduism?

 

Your point of View is mistaken.

Everything the Buddha knew was a diversion and modification of everything he had learnt, because Hindusim did not fit with Right View.

He may have been influenced by Hinduism, but he realised there was too much there left to a faith in the Divine, and a tacit and implied acceptance of life being predestined... which is not the case.

 

I think you hit the nail right on the head! A modification!

 

 

Could you give me an example of the 4 Noble Truths appearing prior to the Buddha's time? And an example of it being taught within other religions?

Thanks...

 

 

Sure can! The 4 noble truths are basically 1. suffering exists 2. there is an origin of suffering 3. putting an end to cause of suffering, will result in no more suffering 4. liberate suffering by following the eightfold noble path

Eight fold path 1. Right view 2. Right intention 3. Right speech 4. Right action 5. Right livelihood 6. Right effort 7. Right mindfulness 8. Right concentration.

 

 

Any religion predating written text of pali canon. (28 B.C.E. - 1 C.E. exact time of written text unknown or not agreed upon) Judaism, Zoroastrianism, and Hinduism just to name a few. All 3 teach suffering exist, all 3 teach an origin of suffering, all 3 teach end of cause of suffering nor more suffering, and all 3 have similar ways in obtaining freedom the freedom or liberation of suffering.

 

You're not getting it.

The Buddha was exposed to the teaching and insistence of a Creator God: Brahma. He came to eventually reject the existence, or more precisely, the importance or relevance of a God.

We do not need to justify it. A 3000-year-old Religion tells us we don't need a God.[/QOUTE]

 

[QOUTE]Well, having lived a closely-nurtured life as a Roman Catholic for 40 years, (I even once considered ordaining as a nun) I can tell you weighing up my own current position and the one I previously adopted, I know without any shadow of a doubt that I WAS ignorant, but am better informed now.

Veiling accusations of ignorance due to a lack of diligent prayer, as being due to a lack of understanding, is indeed unskilful and somewhat presumptuous.

It doesn't sit well to tell people that their lack of belief is due to ignorance, when you have no proof to lay before them to the contrary...

 

 

A person having knowledge of an existing God and a person says there is no existence of God or proof there of would be based on ignorance. According to the person who has received proof. Though I didn't weigh in on the fact that a person did receive confirmation there is a God but chose do deny His existence. The only way to receive proof of God on a personal level is through pray(As far as feeling and seeing) I do not know your experience of Catholicism. My experience growing up wasn't very impressive. I was never taught to pray. I was never encouraged to read scripture. never taught the importance of charity. Many things I was not taught in that religion. Maybe the fault was mine for not asking the right questions or knowing what to ask. I didn't receive any real answers to questions. So no wonder I have seen a lot of atheist who had some form of Catholic background.

 

 

Point being many have received an answer from God through prayer. Promise is in scriptures.

 

 

"Reliance of verification hinges on the person's own ability to follow the suggestions found within the texts".

 

As already stated, the existence of God is totally un-provable.

 

 

Really? How is it then that Buddha according to pali canon is able to describe levels of hell and heaven? How is Buddha able to come to the knowledge that Gods exist but not a God who creates? How is it possible when Buddha had received enlightenment was able to go and teach the Gods and come back and teach others? The existence of God is provable, as I had mentioned earlier. If the form of righteous prayer is applied according to text. (Biblical Text) That is just one way to prove existence of a creator, yet the only way to prove on a personal level to some extent.

 

 

Me? I really don't care one way or the other, but for others, this is the main bone of contention...

 

 

 

 

Ok! Well I think this thread has reached it limit. Thanks for reply. I have learned so much more of the Buddhist teachings. I have found many similarities with my own belief. Grateful that your replies cause me to ask my self questions! I have learned so much though this thread. Thanks for participating. Best regards to you and your search for nirvana and enlightenment.

[TaraMaiden2]

What do you mean by suspend opinion? do you have an example of suspended opinion?

Not one that I can make you understand...

 

[whole load of comments too opinionated to even bother attempting to address....]

 

Ok! Well I think this thread has reached it limit. ...I have learned so much though this thread.

Actually, no you haven't.

 

One day The Venerable Nan-in had a visit from a foreign scholar who was himself a specialist in Eastern religions. The scholar came to Nan-in to learn more about Zen Buddhism. Instead of listening to the master, however, the visiting scholar pontificated on and on about his own ideas and everything that he knew.

 

After a while of this endless talk, Nan-in decided to serve tea. He poured tea into his visitor’s cup until it was full. And then he kept on pouring. The tea began to flow over the sides of the cup, it filled the saucer, it spilled onto the man’s pants, and then it puddled all over the floor.

 

Finally the visitor spoke up and said, “Don’t you see that my cup’s full? You can’t get any more in!”

 

“Just so,” replied the Zen master, and at last he stopped pouring.

 

“And like this cup, you are filled with your own ideas. How can you expect me to give you Zen unless you offer me an empty cup?”

 

 

Thanks for participating. Best regards to you and your search for nirvana and enlightenment.

 

They're one and the same.... and yup, still plodding....

[truncated]

If once accepts that man is not perfect, that he/she can make mistakes, and that there are things beyond understanding, then how is it possible to accept the bible since it was written, changed and translated by man?

 

For example, the catholic bible used in england was translated into English from latin when henry the 8th inititaed and approved religious reforms in his country. In the anglican ( and many other protestant offshoots) this new translation was the main religious text, but it was one that was interpreted by a human being and then written down.

 

How can one know that what is contained there is the word of god, or even what he intended it to mean? If humans have free will then how does one know that the bible isn't full of inaccurate, incorrect or even misleading informtion put there by someone with their own agenda because of this free will?

 

And no, I don't believe in Noah and that the world flooded, and I don't believe that it is free will that causes people to suffer pain. For example, animals suffer the same pain in childbirth, suffer pain when they are killed or hurt, etc. Is this also because of free will?

 

and the idea that a newborn baby who is ill suffers because of the free will of his parents just doesn't sit well with me as the act of of kind and loving god who forgives.

 

It seems that god doesn't live up to the same rules of behavior he expects from his children. We are expected to forgive, yet he continues to punish for thousands of years.

[autumnnight]

If once accepts that man is not perfect, that he/she can make mistakes, and that there are things beyond understanding, then how is it possible to accept the bible since it was written, changed and translated by man?

 

For example, the catholic bible used in england was translated into English from latin when henry the 8th inititaed and approved religious reforms in his country. In the anglican ( and many other protestant offshoots) this new translation was the main religious text, but it was one that was interpreted by a human being and then written down.

 

How can one know that what is contained there is the word of god, or even what he intended it to mean? If humans have free will then how does one know that the bible isn't full of inaccurate, incorrect or even misleading informtion put there by someone with their own agenda because of this free will?

 

And no, I don't believe in Noah and that the world flooded, and I don't believe that it is free will that causes people to suffer pain. For example, animals suffer the same pain in childbirth, suffer pain when they are killed or hurt, etc. Is this also because of free will?

 

and the idea that a newborn baby who is ill suffers because of the free will of his parents just doesn't sit well with me as the act of of kind and loving god who forgives.

 

It seems that god doesn't live up to the same rules of behavior he expects from his children. We are expected to forgive, yet he continues to punish for thousands of years.

 

I can understand all of these questions and concerns. And I will be honest: I have had the same questions. Sometimes I still do. I remember going through a hard time that lasted a very very LONG time. One of my well meaning friends asked, "Don't you think God can take care of you?" I snapped back, "Oh, I have no doubt he can. I just don't know if He will!"

 

My biggest....thing that I wish God would explain is why people who seem intent on harm often get rewarded while people who truly try to do the right thing struggle. Or why when I sin all hell breaks loose but when other people are clearly deranged, they seem untouched by their crapness. (Yes, I realize that is whining).

 

I do not have the answers, and there have been times I've have said, "Okay God, call me when You decide to care enough to help me."

 

I can't explain it. I still have faith. And maybe it IS selfish. Maybe a lot of it IS about the comfort I derive, the structure, and the belief that my sins are forgiven by someone who is sinless. And maybe when I die I will cease to exist.

 

But for me, faith has been a means of purpose, centering, peace, and drive to be better and love better. So even if there's no big eternal streets of gold payoff, I still consider it a win in my life.

 

I know not everyone feels that way.

[digdug75]

Not one that I can make you understand...

 

 

Ok!

 

 

[whole load of comments too opinionated to even bother attempting to address....]

 

 

Ok! Wasn't expecting you to address them whether they be opinionated or not. Though my curiosity get the best of me of what you feel to be opinionated.

 

 

Actually, no you haven't.

 

 

ok I guess that would be your opinion.

 

 

 

ME: "Thanks for participating. Best regards to you and your search for nirvana and enlightenment."

 

They're one and the same.... and yup, still plodding....

 

 

Buddhist Enlightenment vs Nirvana by Kusala Bhikshu

[digdug75]

If once accepts that man is not perfect, that he/she can make mistakes, and that there are things beyond understanding, then how is it possible to accept the bible since it was written, changed and translated by man?

 

For example, the catholic bible used in england was translated into English from latin when henry the 8th inititaed and approved religious reforms in his country. In the anglican ( and many other protestant offshoots) this new translation was the main religious text, but it was one that was interpreted by a human being and then written down.

 

How can one know that what is contained there is the word of god, or even what he intended it to mean? If humans have free will then how does one know that the bible isn't full of inaccurate, incorrect or even misleading informtion put there by someone with their own agenda because of this free will?

 

And no, I don't believe in Noah and that the world flooded, and I don't believe that it is free will that causes people to suffer pain. For example, animals suffer the same pain in childbirth, suffer pain when they are killed or hurt, etc. Is this also because of free will?

 

and the idea that a newborn baby who is ill suffers because of the free will of his parents just doesn't sit well with me as the act of of kind and loving god who forgives.

 

It seems that god doesn't live up to the same rules of behavior he expects from his children. We are expected to forgive, yet he continues to punish for thousands of years.

 

If you truly want to understand a religious point of view I found some articles for you that may help.

 

 

1. creating futures. net has an article on suffering

2. one person's view point from a Catholic perspective. "Problem of Suffering Reconsidered, The" by Peter Kreeft

3." Why bad things happen to good people text: job 13:24- 14:2" Found on church of Christ . net website

4. From patheos . com website they have a library for Protestantism with a person named Ted Vial who wrote an article under suffering and the problem of evil.

5. On myjewishlearning . com there is an article "When bad things happen to good people" "suffering is meaningless unless you decide otherwise" by Rabbi Harold Kushner.

6. "Hinduism on Suffering" by Jayaram V found on hinduwebsite .com

7. "Adversity and The Devine Purpose of Mortality" by Ronald E. Poelman found on a Mormon website.

8. crivoice. org has not an article of suffering but explains the Methodist view on the book of Job. "The Book of Job" by Dennis Bratcher.

9. Jw. org article entitled under publications "Why does God allow Suffering" (what does the bible really teach. chapert 11)

 

 

Many articles on the subject. these are just a few. There is also articles pertaining to overcoming the suffering felt. That is if understanding is your goal.

 

 

What book on earth is Not Written by man? Translation understandable and agreeable. Principles and things taught are to be explored and questioned of there truth. Prayer can help tremendously! That's if a person established a righteous desire to find God. Which would enable results of prayer.

 

 

If you do not wish to believe a God exist that doesn't effect my progress in life. It is just hard to explain things to a person who has not the desire or has not established some kind of understanding of the nature of God and his creation. Which in explaining God from my Religious point of view has to provide physical evidence of all kinds. How can the unseen be proven? As far as God and being unseen the only knowledge that I currently have to receive proof of God is through righteous prayer.