Christianity's Biggest Problem Yet?

[POI]

Below is a 20 minute video. For the ones who opt not to watch, I'll start with the following question? (Which may then lead to many others, as this is a fairly new concept of thought for me)....

Why does YHWH allow for so much animal suffering? Before you Christians answer, I trust you are already aware of this guy's counter points?

[Shem Yoshi]

Why do animals have to feel pleasure? Why would God do that? (i amuse this question because you amuse suffering can be good).

If we will amuse that suffering is good, why does this pose a problem at all?

Your argument really only more-so substantiates a godless environment. As the video states... What we see, in the wild, is what you might expect to see, if no god is present at all. Humans included, quite frankly.

The Christian god is the god of love, right? If you believe god created animals, what would be the point of them experiencing 'suffering', only to die and that's it?

Because suffering is good.

To be honest there can be a lot of thought, and probably a variety of answers, but:

1) if God is loving and good
2) if suffering is good
then
3) God is loving and good to allow suffering

Okay, why does god allow human suffering? Simply saying "suffering is good", is too vague. Why is human suffering good? And once you apply those reason(s), as to why human suffering is good, then just compare it to why animal suffering is good?

Well I think suffering is good because it makes us who we are, and we are stronger for it. But even if we couldn't give a explanation for why suffering is good, there would have to be an explanation for why suffering is evil to establish that a good God wouldnt allow it. I fail to see how it is we connect suffering with evil. Even you yourself used "good suffering" and "bad suffering"... Therefor suffering itself is not dependent on whether it is "good" or "bad", but other things would have to be considered that you would call it good or bad. It seems to me that suffering itself is a bit irrelevant to the question.

Though I myself believe suffering is good, and even nature in the idea of evolution says survival of the fittest. You make a case that suffering is good under natural process.

Your justification does not work for the animal kingdom. It would not matter whether or not an animal became stronger, unless you wish to merely argue longer survival. This would have nothing to do with the topic of Christianity however, as it pertains to the topic of theodicy. What you appear to be arguing, is that all 'suffering' is justified. Okay. Why is animal suffering 'justified' however? Survival means nothing here. They are still going to die, and that's it. This is (apples and oranges), as it is compared to humans apparently.

Why is there something rather then nothing? Why is life here at all? I ask these questions because this is where this discussion is going. When we are debating about why a 'good' God would allow suffering, but cant establish that suffering is 'not good', then asking 'why is animal suffering justified?' is as good as asking 'why is there life?', 'why do living things experience anything at all?'

[POI]

Why do animals have to feel pleasure? Why would God do that? (i amuse this question because you amuse suffering can be good).

If we will amuse that suffering is good, why does this pose a problem at all?

Your argument really only more-so substantiates a godless environment. As the video states... What we see, in the wild, is what you might expect to see, if no god is present at all. Humans included, quite frankly.

The Christian god is the god of love, right? If you believe god created animals, what would be the point of them experiencing 'suffering', only to die and that's it?

Because suffering is good.

To be honest there can be a lot of thought, and probably a variety of answers, but:

1) if God is loving and good
2) if suffering is good
then
3) God is loving and good to allow suffering

Okay, why does god allow human suffering? Simply saying "suffering is good", is too vague. Why is human suffering good? And once you apply those reason(s), as to why human suffering is good, then just compare it to why animal suffering is good?

Well I think suffering is good because it makes us who we are, and we are stronger for it. But even if we couldn't give a explanation for why suffering is good, there would have to be an explanation for why suffering is evil to establish that a good God wouldnt allow it. I fail to see how it is we connect suffering with evil. Even you yourself used "good suffering" and "bad suffering"... Therefor suffering itself is not dependent on whether it is "good" or "bad", but other things would have to be considered that you would call it good or bad. It seems to me that suffering itself is a bit irrelevant to the question.

Though I myself believe suffering is good, and even nature in the idea of evolution says survival of the fittest. You make a case that suffering is good under natural process.

Your justification does not work for the animal kingdom. It would not matter whether or not an animal became stronger, unless you wish to merely argue longer survival. This would have nothing to do with the topic of Christianity however, as it pertains to the topic of theodicy. What you appear to be arguing, is that all 'suffering' is justified. Okay. Why is animal suffering 'justified' however? Survival means nothing here. They are still going to die, and that's it. This is (apples and oranges), as it is compared to humans apparently.

Why is there something rather then nothing? Why is life here at all? I ask these questions because this is where this discussion is going. When we are debating about why a 'good' God would allow suffering, but cant establish that suffering is 'not good', then asking 'why is animal suffering justified?' is as good as asking 'why is there life?', 'why do living things experience anything at all?'

Seems you have aborted the debate. Maybe it is one of Christianity's biggest problems.

[Shem Yoshi]

Though I myself believe suffering is good, and even in nature like the theory of evolution says survival of the fittest. A case could be made that suffering is good for natural processes.

Evolution is not about survival of the fittest individuals. You are confusing physical/mental fitness with some inherited advantage that allows one to survive and reproduce a little better in a particular environment. A different meaning of fitness. That said I would like to hear your case that suffering is good for natural processes.

The case suffering is good does not need to be made here (even though I believe it). The fact of the matter is, the debate would crumble if suffering itself was irrelevant to 'good' and 'bad'... The debate here is dependent on suffering being evil, though that case is not established. It could well be that suffering is nether good nor bad, and this debate would collapse

[brunumb]

Well I think suffering is good because it makes us who we are, and we are stronger for it. But even if we couldn't give a explanation for why suffering is good, there would have to be an explanation for why suffering is evil to even begin to establish that a good God wouldnt allow it. I fail to see how it is we connect suffering with evil.

Perhaps we should divide suffering into different categories such as 'necessary' suffering and 'unnecessary' suffering. The former could involve enduring voluntary pain such as we would in exercising for fitness or completing tasks which give personal satisfaction. The latter could involve enduring involuntary pain such as that being inflicted on others without their consent or consideration for their welfare. The latter is what would be experienced by animals in the wild. There is no evil involved, but it is hard to see how it is actually good. Take gods out of the picture and it is just a part of the web of life that evolved where most animals must kill and eat others in order to live themselves. Pain in an indicator of personal injury and it acts as a warning to do something or possibly perish. Thus pain and suffering are linked, but while pain may be considered as having a good component, I don't see how the same can be said of suffering. Put gods back into the picture and I feel that there should be better alternatives.

[brunumb]

Why is there something rather then nothing? Why is life here at all? I ask these questions because this is where this discussion is going.

Not at all. Perhaps you are finding it difficult to make your case. You can address the other issues in a new thread.

[Shem Yoshi]

Well I think suffering is good because it makes us who we are, and we are stronger for it. But even if we couldn't give a explanation for why suffering is good, there would have to be an explanation for why suffering is evil to even begin to establish that a good God wouldnt allow it. I fail to see how it is we connect suffering with evil.

Perhaps we should divide suffering into different categories such as 'necessary' suffering and 'unnecessary' suffering. The former could involve enduring voluntary pain such as we would in exercising for fitness or completing tasks which give personal satisfaction. The latter could involve enduring involuntary pain such as that being inflicted on others without their consent or consideration for their welfare. The latter is what would be experienced by animals in the wild. There is no evil involved, but it is hard to see how it is actually good.

emphasis is mine.

if there is no evil involved here, the debate is over. This debate is dependent on evil being aloud by a good God.

I do note however this "unnecessary" and "necessary" suffering as you have categorized them. I do not believe that can establish suffering as evil, and apparently you dont either.

[AquinasForGod]

If animals actually suffer, there could be some greater good that comes from it, such as animals learn via their limited suffering how to be the best they can be so they are ready for a heavenly life as animals.

Thank you for the lesson. I shall now endeavor to kick any dog I see while on my daily walks for their greater good.

But you will not actually do that because you are not insane.

[POI]

The debate here is dependent on suffering being evil, though that case is not established. It could well be that suffering is nether good nor bad, and this debate would collapse

No, the bigger picture, is why do animals "suffer"? Through the countless arguments made by theists, we now "KNOW" why humans "suffer". But why do animals "suffer"? Do they go to heaven too?

[brunumb]

If animals actually suffer, there could be some greater good that comes from it, such as animals learn via their limited suffering how to be the best they can be so they are ready for a heavenly life as animals.

Thank you for the lesson. I shall now endeavor to kick any dog I see while on my daily walks for their greater good.

But you will not actually do that because you are not insane.

Does that mean I am insane if I accept your argument?

[brunumb]

if there is no evil involved here, the debate is over. This debate is dependent on evil being aloud by a good God.

I would regard God as being evil if he allows unnecessary suffering.