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?

[Paul of Tarsus]

If you're saying that God cannot prevent tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes and other natural disasters, then I agree. God makes much more sense if we see him as limited and imperfect.

God makes even more sense if we view him as nonexistent other than in the imagination of humans. That explains why he can't do anything about tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes, other natural disasters or anything at all.

Yes. That's another plausible explanation for tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes and other natural disasters.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Man messed the world up (for himself and for his offspring). That shouldn't be too hard to grasp, since men have continued messing things up (such as that pollution I mentioned, which can indeed cause cancer and other ailments).

Again, any harm done to the world by people doesn't explain the suffering that has nothing to do with what people have done.

You quoted only part of what I said. If the world (and the life in the world) got messed up from one man - the man who had been given the world to govern - then all suffering does have something to do with what people have done.

Besides, people don't deliberately spew pollution and other environmental contaminants because people are evil; we do so as an unfortunate byproduct of our efforts to survive.

You don't think corporations and other entities cut corners for profit? Overlook (or simply not care about) the harm being caused to the environment (or to people) for the sake of profit? Man commits evil and intentional acts against his fellow man all the time; man exploits his fellow man all the time; yet you don't think there are men who spew pollution (and other harms) for the sake of personal profit/power?

If we want energy to keep from freezing in the winter, for example, then we must pollute the air at least until we can find clean alternative means of producing useful energy to heat our homes.

This might be necessary for some, or more convenient, but don't confuse something that many people use out of personal need, with something that others do (even knowing it can cause harm) for profit or power.

So the "evil people made the world bad" is an argument that has little basis in reality.

I said man messed up the world. I don't know how you can argue with that. You can turn from natural disasters and take a look at war, slavery, and yes also pollution, etc, if you like. Man causes suffering in his fellow man. That is reality.

If it could not be "better" (re: without cancer or other ailments as you mention in your OP), then why would the promise be for things to be made anew, for there to be no more mourning, tears, suffering, etc?

Tam, in the OP I mentioned that it was the philosopher Gottfried Leibniz who said that this is the best of all possible worlds. I never said I agree with him. The world I think could be much better which I have argued since the OP.

I never said you agreed with him; you and I both agreed, remember? I just responded to your comment that 'you and I' (not divine beings) can see that the world could be better (aka, without cancer and other things that cause suffering). But that was never a secret to begin with.

The Bible writers no doubt realized the conflict between the real world and the God they made up, and to try to smooth things over they promised people that that God would some day solve the world's problems, at least for the few people who believed them. Of course, they never offered to explain why we must wait or how long we must wait.

I'm quite certain that was not a 'no doubt' kind of statement.

But if you have been referring to the God and Father of Christ all along, then you already know the answer as to how sin (error) and death (and so cancer and other ailments and suffering) entered into the world (and into people). So all those cancer cells you were talking about with JW earlier, no, God did not create cancer cells. Cancer would be more like a rot TO creation, TO the flesh.

The alternative to things that come from a living and moving world might be that no life could be sustained.

Then that would be a limitation of God's. He cannot create and sustain life without killing much of it off from time to time.

You seem to be forgetting that this is not the promised world to come (new heavens; new earth). Christ has not taken His authority and begun to reign in this world as of yet. And if you recall from some of the testimonial accounts, Christ did stop the wind and the rains during a storm, having received power and authority from God. Not that He was worried anything would happen to Him or His disciples, but because His disciples were afraid. So those things won't be an issue. No more 'disasters' even if the natural phenomenon still occurs. The only reason for us to call them 'disasters' is loss (of life).

That happens in this world.

Unless acting - or acting too soon - would cause even more harm (as stated above), even cause the loss of one of your own children. Especially if you know that you have a plan and a means for people to be healed, for the world and the life in the world to be healed. Perhaps acting too soon would cost lives that would otherwise be saved. You know, the whole - let the wheat and the weeds grow together until the harvest, lest you pull up some of the wheat as well (Matt 13:28-30)? Unless you can see everything (from the beginning to the "end"), unless you know all the players (including enemies and how to defeat them without harming the 'wheat'), you cannot know the full scope of what is being done in order to bring about that new earth with no suffering, mourning, tears or even death.

So what harm would result from curing cancer right now do to the world? Are the hardworking doctors who try to find cures for cancers (that's not a typo; there are many cancers) going against God's plan? If we do anything at all to alleviate the suffering in the world, are we actually harming the world?

Our job IS to do those things, to show love toward our fellow man, to take care of our fellow man, to alleviate suffering wherever we can. That - love - is the outstanding debt that we owe one another.

God does give gifts and blessings and faith and hope and love - and even His own Son - but a life free of suffering in this world is not the promise given to us. In fact, if we belong to Christ, we are told that we WILL have suffering in this world. The promise for no more tears, mourning, suffering, death is not for here and now in this world, but instead in the one to come. Some will have faith in God and in His Son, and know these things will come to pass (and also have peace here and now in Christ, suffering or no suffering). And some will not.

I wonder if the person in your quote meant that this is the best of all possible fallen worlds... or the best of all possible worlds in the here and now (not counting the world that is promised to come)? That would make more sense. Of course that would imply that they understood the earth would be made anew (healed) at some point in our future. *shrugs* I'm just wondering 'aloud'.


Peace again to you.

[William]

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?

The way I approached this conundrum was to put myself in the shoes of The Creator [so to speak] by imagining that I was the one who created this universe and therefore, what reason would I have for doing so, as to the nature of pain, suffering, and death?

I have a few [related] theories.

Essentially - why I created the thread "Sorry. It Was Me. I Did It." was to present a type of dialog where - in The Creators shoes - I could help answer that question.

The underlying [foundational] idea which cements logic into moving toward answering the question has to do with one's self identity as in "one's experience as a human being suffering inside said creation".

Until one understands that they are not 'the created' but 'The Creator' [particles of Creator-Consciousness temporarily contained within human [in this instance] form] one cannot move successfully through this and accept the answer to the question.

Even non-theists argue that "IF there is a creator THEN [he] must be evil" due to the fact of pain and suffering.

So - in that - it is a very human question to be asking and it is not an unreasonable quest to undertake to look for the answer...for apparently The Creator remains otherwise silent, perhaps preferring that we work it out through our human capacity to do so. We can - indeed - be that ornery when we shuck off fear.

One enormous stumbling-block has to do with the predominant Middle Eastern idea of The Creator which has infested itself into our domain - perhaps - in an attempt to keep that knowledge [the answer to the question] hidden from our understanding.

So did I The Creator create this universe and place human beings into it to suffer because I am an uncaring callous individual?

From the information I have gathered, my answer is a firm "No I AM Not."

The problem is that we humans have this inferiority complex drummed into us by one another. We can also bounce to the other extreme as it suits, but overall this is clearly a sign of a disturbed creature unable to see the wood for the trees.

WE are trained to observe our place in the universe as some kind of punishment, if indeed theism has had anything to say about it.
Non- theists can just accept it as nothing more than a fleeting senseless accident of nature which will end [for the individual] eventually.

Bringing the idea of this universe being a creation of a Creator, automatically brings in the question of the problem of evil and what easy answer is there to that?

As long as the individual theist [and humans in general whom practice this] insists upon perceiving this current existence as punishment they are doomed to repeat history.

The story of the Garden of Eden is deplorable - but only if it is taken literally. It makes The Creator character out to be a manipulator who is above reproach and the other main characters to being guilty and rightly punished.
And as a story it has been peddled so expertly as to lock a great portion of the collective human psyche into unrighteous servitude through a combination of self loathing and fearfulness.

Believing what The Accuser say's is the truth - and all the truth - is never a good idea.

[William]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #28]

So God makes people dream they are in a horrible world. We may actually be fallen angels, and this dream what we have been condemned to.

I wrote a song years ago and actually called it .

"Dreams of a Fallen Angel"

With an iron fist around the heart of the Earth
With a bitter twist in the minds of men
With a frightening list of every human birth
With a flick of the wrist it could be over by then

From the poison words off a bitter tongue
To the voice unheard upon a crowded street
Strong and absurd "Thy Will Be Done"
What has occurred to the throne at your feet?

From the softly said to the soulful sigh
Of the voice in the head of a sovereign lord
From the broken bread to the question why
As the answer bleed from the wound of the sword

From the satisfied looks to the expression of panic
All the time that it took was a blink of an eye
In consulting the book on how to capture a planet
You just find a good hook and then take up the cry

And if I held my breath for eternity
If I chose to rest - would it matter to you?
If I took that test, would I cease to be?
I can only guess - but what would that prove?

With my feet in the mud and my thoughts on the Earth
For the sake of a hug - would you break my heart?
For this flesh and this blood and this pain and this birth
Could you show me your love - or would it tear me apart?

By the Angel Knights and the Waiting Ladies
The Dragons sight was thus restored
In the crimson light - no more hidden dangers
As the wrong and the right were both ignored

And on that coming day which ended that world
How the fearful prayed while the peaceful slept
Know the price was paid for that most valuable pearl
Shared by all who forgive...no regrets

[Paul of Tarsus]

Peace to you...

I prefer to fight the good fight for freedom and truth.

Again, any harm done to the world by people doesn't explain the suffering that has nothing to do with what people have done.

You quoted only part of what I said. If the world (and the life in the world) got messed up from one man - the man who had been given the world to govern - then all suffering does have something to do with what people have done.

It doesn't matter what I quoted. One man is not all people. I don't know about you, but I never was stupid enough to let a snake talk me into eating some deadly fruit. If I was in Eden at that time, I would have done everything I could have done to stop dumbo Eve from doing what she did, but I wasn't there--none of us were there. It's ridiculous to blame people for something they could not have stopped.

Besides, the whole story is a work of fiction.

Besides, people don't deliberately spew pollution and other environmental contaminants because people are evil; we do so as an unfortunate byproduct of our efforts to survive.

You don't think corporations and other entities cut corners for profit? Overlook (or simply not care about) the harm being caused to the environment (or to people) for the sake of profit? Man commits evil and intentional acts against his fellow man all the time; man exploits his fellow man all the time; yet you don't think there are men who spew pollution (and other harms) for the sake of personal profit/power?

Yes. Of course some people's greed and callousness can result in harm to others. But the large majority of people oppose harming the environment. The people who do harm the environment aren't trying to destroy it but are simply reckless and shortsighted; they're not really what I would call evil. If the world was a better place, then people would feel no need to put profits above environmental concerns. So whatever wrong people do very often has its roots in factors beyond their control, factors that a good God would eliminate if he could.

I said man messed up the world. I don't know how you can argue with that. You can turn from natural disasters and take a look at war, slavery, and yes also pollution, etc, if you like. Man causes suffering in his fellow man. That is reality.

Actually, people have done an amazing and wonderful job of creating a civilization that benefits us greatly. Most people are good most of the time. We owe a great debt to all the hardworking people who strive every day to make the world a better place. Yes, people have done some evil things and still do evil, but like I pointed out earlier, human evil very often has its roots in the difficult circumstances which we must endure. If I may borrow your example of slavery, it resulted from the difficulty of attaining cheap labor to get important work done. If we lived in a better world, then nobody would have ever needed to enslave another person.

...all those cancer cells you were talking about with JW earlier, no, God did not create cancer cells. Cancer would be more like a rot TO creation, TO the flesh.

If God didn't create cancer cells, then we don't need God as an explanation for any cell, and the creationist argument that God designed cells fails. Please explain this fact to JW.

Of course, if God created the world, then he's responsible for its condition. There's no sensible way to blame people for its imperfections. You seem to think that we pose a threat to God and his intentions which is illogical if God is all-powerful and perfect.

Then that would be a limitation of God's. He cannot create and sustain life without killing much of it off from time to time.

You seem to be forgetting that this is not the promised world to come (new heavens; new earth). Christ has not taken His authority and begun to reign in this world as of yet. And if you recall from some of the testimonial accounts, Christ did stop the wind and the rains during a storm, having received power and authority from God. Not that He was worried anything would happen to Him or His disciples, but because His disciples were afraid. So those things won't be an issue. No more 'disasters' even if the natural phenomenon still occurs. The only reason for us to call them 'disasters' is loss (of life).

That happens in this world.

That's an interesting sermon, but none of it proves me wrong that the God you believe in is impotent.

So what harm would result from curing cancer right now do to the world? Are the hardworking doctors who try to find cures for cancers (that's not a typo; there are many cancers) going against God's plan? If we do anything at all to alleviate the suffering in the world, are we actually harming the world?

Our job IS to do those things...

You're not answering my questions. What harm would result from curing cancer right now do to the world? Are the hardworking doctors who try to find cures for cancers (that's not a typo; there are many cancers) going against God's plan? If we do anything at all to alleviate the suffering in the world, are we actually harming the world?

[Diagoras]

If God didn't create cancer cells, then we don't need God as an explanation for any cell, and the creationist argument that God designed cells fails.

An alternative is that God designed cells so that some would become cancerous - possibly to be ‘triggered’ by sin or lack of faith. No doubt some would find this explanation satisfactory, but thankfully modern medicine isn’t faith-based.

[tam]

Again, any harm done to the world by people doesn't explain the suffering that has nothing to do with what people have done.

You quoted only part of what I said. If the world (and the life in the world) got messed up from one man - the man who had been given the world to govern - then all suffering does have something to do with what people have done.

It doesn't matter what I quoted. One man is not all people. I don't know about you, but I never was stupid enough to let a snake talk me into eating some deadly fruit. If I was in Eden at that time, I would have done everything I could have done to stop dumbo Eve from doing what she did, but I wasn't there--none of us were there. It's ridiculous to blame people for something they could not have stopped.

People are not blamed for what Adam did. But children can and do inherit the problems that their parents cause. And all men sin their own sins (including me, so women as well, lol).

Besides, people don't deliberately spew pollution and other environmental contaminants because people are evil; we do so as an unfortunate byproduct of our efforts to survive.

You don't think corporations and other entities cut corners for profit? Overlook (or simply not care about) the harm being caused to the environment (or to people) for the sake of profit? Man commits evil and intentional acts against his fellow man all the time; man exploits his fellow man all the time; yet you don't think there are men who spew pollution (and other harms) for the sake of personal profit/power?

Yes. Of course some people's greed and callousness can result in harm to others.

Okay and that was the point. Regardless of how many or how few.

Then that would be a limitation of God's. He cannot create and sustain life without killing much of it off from time to time.

You seem to be forgetting that this is not the promised world to come (new heavens; new earth). Christ has not taken His authority and begun to reign in this world as of yet. And if you recall from some of the testimonial accounts, Christ did stop the wind and the rains during a storm, having received power and authority from God. Not that He was worried anything would happen to Him or His disciples, but because His disciples were afraid. So those things won't be an issue. No more 'disasters' even if the natural phenomenon still occurs. The only reason for us to call them 'disasters' is loss (of life).

That happens in this world.

That's an interesting sermon, but none of it proves me wrong that the God you believe in is impotent.

You asked questions in the OP about God. I'm not sure what kind of answers you thought you might get, or perhaps you were just referring to general points. If you were just referring to general points, then I don't know how you can disprove the theory of the philosopher in the OP. But if you are referring to the God and Father of Christ, then the above things are part of the answer to the questions you asked.

And again, unless you can see everything from the beginning to the end, how all things turn out, then you can't show that God could have or should have done something different. You even agreed that the world could be worse, when I said that the world could be much worse 'without God interfering and preventing certain things from becoming worse (or from happening before their proper time)'.

So what harm would result from curing cancer right now do to the world? Are the hardworking doctors who try to find cures for cancers (that's not a typo; there are many cancers) going against God's plan? If we do anything at all to alleviate the suffering in the world, are we actually harming the world?

Our job IS to do those things...

You're not answering my questions. What harm would result from curing cancer right now do to the world? Are the hardworking doctors who try to find cures for cancers (that's not a typo; there are many cancers) going against God's plan? If we do anything at all to alleviate the suffering in the world, are we actually harming the world?

I can't answer the first question - but that is just part of this world, something this flesh is subject to, for previous reasons stated. Cancer(s) are just one form illness, and there are many others, as well as all the rest of things that cause death (including old age). God provides the cure/healing for all things that lead to death and suffering and mourning. Not just cancer.


But you can add a 'no' to my response for the subsequent two questions that you asked.


Peace again to you.

[Paul of Tarsus]

If God didn't create cancer cells, then we don't need God as an explanation for any cell, and the creationist argument that God designed cells fails.

An alternative is that God designed cells so that some would become cancerous - possibly to be ‘triggered’ by sin or lack of faith. No doubt some would find this explanation satisfactory, but thankfully modern medicine isn’t faith-based.

If you side with Tam on this issue, you need to come up with some explanation for how two idiots eating fruit in a garden caused cancer.

[Diagoras]

[Replying to Paul of Tarsus in post #69]

I certainly don’t side with any idea that a god exists or could ‘cause’ anything: cancers, floods, universes, pickled walnuts, penguins or anything else you care to mention. I was simply pointing out the kind of counter-argument you might expect from someone who believed in faith-based healing and the like.

[Diagoras]

God provides the cure/healing for all things that lead to death and suffering and mourning. Not just cancer.

You’ll have to explain what you mean more clearly. Did God provide the cure for smallpox, for example? What you wrote could be taken as meaning God is ‘behind’ every single medicine and surgery. And yet still people suffer and die from hideous diseases that He (in his ineffable wisdom and generosity) thought fitting to bestow on mankind in the first place.

Why not just click His fingers and remove amoebic dysentery, cystic fibrosis, ebola and all the rest in the first place?