Could God do better?

[Paul of Tarsus]

The philosopher Gottfried Leibniz argued that this is "the best of all possible worlds" to free God from blame for the world's troubles. In other words, this world, warts and all, is the best God could have done. I'm left wondering, though, why this world is the best possible. It seems likely to me that the world would be better off without cancer, for example, and therefore it's really not the best possible world. Wouldn't the world actually be better without cancer, and if it would be better without cancer, then why is God failing to do the best he presumably could do? If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?

[JehovahsWitness]

If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?

I cannot see how sickness and suffering could be part of the original purpose of a loving God.

Wouldn't the world actually be better without cancer, and if it would be better without cancer, then why is God failing to do the best he presumably could do?

Biblically God is not "failing" to do His best he is PREPARING us to enjoy His best.

2 PETER 3:9 - Berean Study Bible

The Lord is not slow in keeping His promise as some understand slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish but everyone to come to repentance.

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SATAN , HUMAN SUFFERING and .... THE ISSUE OF UNIVERSAL SOVEREIGNTY

[Paul of Tarsus]

If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer?

I cannot see how sickness and suffering could be part of the original purpose of a loving God.

If the world is the best possible world, then how does the presence of cancer make it better than a world without cancer? The obvious answer to this simple question is that the world would be a much better place without cancer. The world we live in is apparently not the best possible world. If God exists, then he has failed to create the best of all possible worlds.

[Paul of Tarsus]

Biblically God is not "failing" to do His best he is PREPARING us to enjoy His best.

Is cancer a part of that preparation? If it is, then I'm left wondering what God is preparing us for if his preparation involves a painful, debilitating, and deadly disease.

[JehovahsWitness]

Biblically God is not "failing" to do His best he is PREPARING us to enjoy His best.

Is cancer a part of that preparation?

No, cancer and human suffering are a consequence of the natural conditions in which where we find ourselves. I believe we are prepared for God's best by learning to put faith in His son Jesus.



JW

[Paul of Tarsus]

Biblically God is not "failing" to do His best he is PREPARING us to enjoy His best.

Is cancer a part of that preparation?

No, cancer and human suffering are a consequence of the natural conditions in which where we find ourselves. I believe we are prepared for God's best by learning to put faith in His son Jesus.

I'd rather trust somebody who is currently demonstrating goodness by disallowing cancer to harm people. If God can't handle that now, then it seems foolish to believe that he'll ever do it.

[Purple Knight]

The philosopher Gottfried Leibniz argued that this is "the best of all possible worlds" to free God from blame for the world's troubles. In other words, this world, warts and all, is the best God could have done. I'm left wondering, though, why this world is the best possible.

A decent answer is that this world is a testing ground and it needs horrible things in order to test people properly. Cancer is horrible because we make it horrible. We fight and we struggle and we do anything and everything to preserve our lives, even kill ourselves to death with heavy metals and radiation. If we're really not dead and disappeared upon death, we just brought all that on ourselves for probably little or no reason.

I have a topic on this.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38226

If it's all just a nightmare, then are there any evils in the world? Real evils? Well... We hear the argument from evil all the time, in a hundred different forms, buuuuut.... There's no one complaining that hard that God lets them have nightmares.

Being the person in the nightmare, I have a different idea. But do I wake up, feel relief, and at that point it seems to me not such a big deal? If I do, maybe that's what's artificial. If I feel relief that it never really happened and that's basically all I feel, I dispute that. I think I might have been drugged or my consciousness messed with. Why? It's my suffering, and I've suffered just as much even if it turns out not to be real. It was real while I was in it.

[Tcg]

A decent answer is that this world is a testing ground and it needs horrible things in order to test people properly.

A testing ground for what? Eventual nonexistence. How much practice does one need for that?

Yes, you qualify. You've achieved what all living beings eventually achieve. Nothingness. Here's your brass ring.


Tcg

[brunumb]

A decent answer is that this world is a testing ground and it needs horrible things in order to test people properly. Cancer is horrible because we make it horrible.

That might have a smidgen of merit if it was based on a level playing field for everyone. But it isn't. Why test an infant by giving it some incurable and painful disease? Why do some people live long healthy and happy lives with no apparent test at all? The reality is that there are no gods and no tests. Diseases are an unfortunate by-product of the evolution of living things. And cancer is horrible because it is horrible.

[Paul of Tarsus]

The philosopher Gottfried Leibniz argued that this is "the best of all possible worlds" to free God from blame for the world's troubles. In other words, this world, warts and all, is the best God could have done. I'm left wondering, though, why this world is the best possible.

A decent answer is that this world is a testing ground and it needs horrible things in order to test people properly. Cancer is horrible because we make it horrible. We fight and we struggle and we do anything and everything to preserve our lives, even kill ourselves to death with heavy metals and radiation. If we're really not dead and disappeared upon death, we just brought all that on ourselves for probably little or no reason.

Then your answers to the questions I posted in the OP is that yes, the world would be better without cancer, and therefore God could have created a better, cancer-free world. God has failed to make the world better because we humans, part of what he created, messed it all up. God's plan went awry because we fouled up his plan--which to me is a strange consequence considering that God is perfect and all-mighty.

I see some other obvious problems with this viewpoint of yours. I don't see how we puny little people could cause trouble for God. And as far as cancer is concerned, many of us do indeed act in ways that can cause us to get cancer, but many cancer victims did nothing at all to bring on the disease. Regardless of our habits, though, none of us created cancer. If God created the world, then he created cancer.

My response is that God cannot create a world better than this one because he is limited, or he didn't make human welfare his top priority. As Woody Allen quipped:

If it turns out that there is a God...the worst that you can say about him is that basically he's an underachiever.