Eleonore Stump is a brilliant theologian trying her best to make sense of the mystery of existence. What scares me are many of the empty-headed comments posted here. So many of these people blather on, as if they could sit down and say something that would have some value to others. It is so easy to be cynical, denagrading anyone who attempts an answer to the mystery of existence, but I'm quite certain that most, if not all these people, would be completely clueless in talking about such issues, were Dr. Kuhn to ask them some of these same questions.
This is the most thoughtful and beautiful answer to this question. Eleonore reminds us that when academics consider this question they cannot act like it's a casual point of debate - there are real people attached to the problem. And she clearly believes that in the long run, suffering will be a blip on the radar leading to the ultimate rest of humankind - perfect union with God and each other.
If a hospital could costlessly think your tumor out of existence (or better, think it so tumors never grow to begin with), we would consider it criminal to put you under the knife or into chemo. By definition, the "Ground of Being" would not be stuck with constraints or have to work from default states in manifesting reality.
She seems to be putting forth the soul-growth theodicy (i.e. suffering is beneficial for growth). She brings up post-traumatic growth to support her argument but conveniently leaves out all the people that kill themselves due to post-traumatic stress disorder. Prisons are filled with people that have suffered a great deal in life. Studies show that suffering in childhood is a predictor for addiction, criminality, and mental illness. Her argument has an old and simple refutation: the observation that suffering causes many people to become worse-off in life instead of better.
@@cheshirekershaw It is not just correlation because there is a large body of research that shows how abuse causes the brain to develop differently. Abuse is a kind of extreme stressor, and scientists can study the physiological responses and lasting structural changes that occur when a developing brain is routinely subjected to this stressor. There are entire sub-fields withing psychology (e.g. developmental psychopathology) dedicated to explicating this phenomenon. If we know how A causes the changes that result in outcome B, then it isn't the case that A is merely correlated with outcome B.
@@cheshirekershaw I wasn't referring to "triggers" for behavior but instead brought up stressors that lead to long-term brain changes if they occur at critical periods of development. Brain imaging studies have shown that child abuse leads to long-term structural changes in the neural circuits responsible for threat detection, emotional regulation, and reward anticipation. There are no studies of twins reared apart that show that these kinds of long-term brain changes still occur if one twin is raised in an environment with such a stressor while another twin is raised in an environment without it. There are also no genetic studies that show that there exist genes that cause these kinds of changes during development in the absence of a stressor. Given that we have imaging studies that show how experiencing abuse during sensitive periods of development alters the brain (and also have other studies that offer an explanation for how this happens at a molecular level) and no genetic or twin studies that demonstrate anything remotely similar, I see no good reason why it is more sensible to assume that heritability takes precedence over experience.
@@cheshirekershaw There are studies that show that these brain changes lead to increased fear and aggression, impulse control, and mental health disorders. More importantly, there are further studies that explain HOW increased fear and aggression, impulse control, and mental health disorders can lead to criminality. There are no genetic studies that demonstrate that genes determine impulsivity, there are merely association studies. Worse still, these association studies merely imply there might be protective or risk factors that are hereditary and may mediate the extent to which these brain changes occur in response to stressors (and even these are highly flawed because they don't actually control for upbringing and other key situational factors). The current scientific consensus seems to be that a larger proportion of the variance in outcomes like addiction and criminality is explained by situational factors (e.g. abuse that leads to developmental abnormalities, accidents that cause brain damage, being born into a social environment where there is a lot of criminality, etc...) rather than genetic factors. On top of that, there are now studies that demonstrate that situational factors (like child abuse) can alter what genes are expressed via the epigenome.
@@cheshirekershaw I've already explained multiple times that it isn't merely associations because we have further studies that explain the mechanisms (i.e. studies that explain how the child abuse causes the brain changes and further studies that explain how the brain changes cause differences in outcomes). I'm not talking about one category of study but of a massive body of research from developmental psychopathology, behavioral neuroscience, behavioral endocrinology, and abnormal psychology. So, for instance, this body of research shows the causal chain between child abuse and decreased hippocampus size is: child abuse routinely activates HPA axis--> the activation of the HPA axis dumps stress hormones like cortisol into the blood stream-->long-term effects of elevated stress hormones in blood damages the hippocampus and decrease its size-->decreased hippocampus size leads to cognitive decline and the development of depression. So, that is a causal chain leading from child abuse to a mental health outcome. And there are causal chains like that have been demonstrated by the large body of research for all the various developmental brain changes I previously mentioned that result due to child abuse. Like I said at the start, if one can actually show how A causes the changes that lead to outcome B, then it isn't the case that A is merely correlated with B.
@@cheshirekershaw Also, I never said "failures as a person" and don't agree with that characterization of my position. A person that has addiction or a mental disorder is not a "failure as a person." My claim was that suffering can make many people worse-off. Also, what is even the point of this hereditary argument? Even those scientists that believe that the majority of the variation seen in outcomes can be explained by genetics would agree that child abuse renders most people worse-off than if they had grown up in an environment where they were not abused. Are we getting into the weeds on a pedantic objection that has very little to do with the substance of my initial point? How does this heredity argument even counter the objection to the soul-growth theodicy?
The "physical world/universe" exists, in large part, due to duality and the interaction and balance of these opposing forces. Light - Dark; North - South, Positive - Negative; Right - Wrong, On - Off, Yin - Yang, 1 - 0, Day - Night, Order - Disorder, Good - Evil, Up - Down, True - False, Male - Female, Hot - Cold, Wave - Particle, etc. is observed to be interwoven within the fabric of the "physical world/universe". Thus, the existence of Good would of necessity require the existence of Evil in the physical universe, and vice versa. Moreover, the scientifically confirmed property of duality in the physical world/universe does not preclude the existence of a Prime Observer/Cause.
A little bit of suffering might, too much of it breaks and kills a person. We know this intuitively, we try to get our children to struggle a bit to be strong but we try to make them avoid suffering as much as possible. One can say, that maybe the suffering that is imposed from the outside is different because it results in some good at times. I would say that most ppl who are born handicapped or who lost limbs in war or suffer debilitating depression don’t go on to do TED talks and write books that inspire millions. Most ppl that suffer, just suffer quietly and then pass away. Of course the last move is to say that it was a test and that it will be rewarded in the afterlife, or that it was karma for past actions and I admit this may be true but its near impossible to prove. Id love to believe it and I hope something like that is true.
Evil is a human construct; suffering (or: the causes of suffering) is what's caused by god. That in my is view the largest deficiency in the theistic argument: theists bizarrely fail to acknowledge or even comprehend that their omnipotent god is necessarily therefore a mechanism of causing human (and animal) suffering. Suffering, as we know, is literally built into the fabric of existence. It's impossible to have a human or animal life and not suffer at some point, even if only at death (which again, is built in). So... who created that? The most obvious example we have currently is the coronavirus and the massive pain, loss, sickness, death, grief, etc. that is being caused by it (caused by what god created). God creates suffering, and humans try to resolve the causes of suffering that (from the theistic pov) god has created. God therefore is the enemy of humanity, not the benefactor.
To hear this woman explain it, the reason for the pain, loss, sickness, death, and grief of the corona virus is so that we can have joy and love in that shared second personal experience. Ain't it great?
@@darioinfini A lot of these people are so brainwashed and lost in their cultural conditioning that they have to go to great lengths and contortions to try to make sense of the religious b.s. they've been indoctrinated with practically since birth. The cognitive dissonance is too great for them otherwise. They don't seem to have the strength of mind to stand up against nonsense and call it for what it is. The culture says there is "god," who allegedly has all kinds of "good" qualities, and so without ever having seen, heard, touched, experienced it in any way - and without any of it even making any sense according to their logical reasoning - they nevertheless choose to side with the improbable and then have to come up with all kinds of fantastical explanations to excuse the demonstrated reality of it. The level of superstition is really sad to behold in 2020 (or 5780, or whatever calendar you want to use).
You need to read the Bible, man cause suffering. And if God does exist you really don't want to consider him an enemy considering he can just destroy everything in existence, it's his world don't forget he owns everyone not a wise move you can't beat an omnipotent being lol. Take responsibility for your own actions instead of blaming God
@@Deathlock61 So when a huge earthquake and tsunami hits and millions of people are hurt and killed, that's human's doing? Lol, no. You're a little confused.
Imagine if God took human suffering so seriously that He sent His only Son into the world to be born to humble family people and die 33 yrs later a cruel cruel messy death on a cross and 3 days later rise again so all people be given the choice to be saved from this "vale of tears" and live as His sons & daughters in the eternal life which follows this nasty, short hard life. Imagine ! Now that would be a real answer to suffering, would'nt it. Think of all the love, hope and faith that would enter people who said Yes. I want that !!! His Name is Jesus Christ.
I realy dislike it when ppl use "analogies"" to prove their point.you might want to sound poetical that way but analogies , they simply not work that way you cannot prove your point to me. Also,i don't really agree that there is any justification for suffering. I agree that we humans are responible for a large part of worlds suffering and it's our responsability to stop it instead of waiting for some divine intervention.
God is love. ... Religion, theology, morality ... that's something else. ... The answer to "Does God truly exist?" is quite simple. When Heaven and Earth have passed away love will continue to exist. The real question is -do you believe? ... Belief is a knowing that transcends the physical universe. Pain, suffering, evil, sin, earthquakes, wars, etc., are irrelevant. What is more relevant is pleasure and sex because without these things we would not exist. The very thing religion makes evil, God made good. When you have that great orgasm what do you say? ... "Oh, GOD!" ... You who wonder about God look around you at life. Life continues to regenerate. We do too. We refer to the act as "making love". If you want to know if God truly exists then make love. When your little baby is born look into it's eyes and then you will know for sure. And, in the same way you love that little creature understand that God, who is love, also loves you. And one day, if you continue to believe, you will pass into the world of love and life. Christ proved this to the world. Celibate monks, priests and nuns have no idea what this means. They think that through the ascetic life of mortifying their flesh through pain and suffering they will attain sanctity. ... Nothing could be farther from the truth. Love is a free gift. Christ said, "In this world you will have affliction, but be cheerful, I have overcome the world."
Yes there is nothing we can do to stop the suffering. But if your pretend God existed he could. That’s the point she can’t address. If my child has died of cancer I don’t need my suffering redeemed. I need my child back. I have no use for her facile theology.
If God exists, and He is indeed truly, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, being aware of mankind’s innate emotional and cultural ignorance, He would not allow His existence to be known. Otherwise, the human race would break into religious tribes and do every imaginable wrong against the rest of mankind, “in His name”. This has been proven over and over again, down through history. One only has to read something besides the Bible, a book of stories, myth’s, and allegories; perhaps a book dealing with History or a book addressing Science, and/or both. Think about this, and then, think about it again.
It is my opinion, that our consciousness, was by our ancestors, mistakenly taken for a soul. In others words, the soul is and was manufactured idea. When we come to the end of our lives we will lose all body function along with our consciousness. We will then be in the memory and consciousness of others. The idea of the soul was created by man merely to control others.
The "physical world/universe" exists, in large part, due to duality and the interaction and balance of these opposing forces. Light - Dark; North - South, Positive - Negative; Right - Wrong, On - Off, Yin - Yang, 1 - 0, Day - Night, Order - Disorder, Good - Evil, Up - Down, True - False, Male - Female, Hot - Cold, Wave - Particle, etc. is observed to be interwoven within the fabric of the "physical world/universe". Thus, the existence of Good would of necessity require the existence of Evil in the physical universe, and vice versa. Moreover, the scientifically confirmed property of duality in the physical world/universe does not preclude the existence of a Prime Observer/Cause.
@@moses777exodus Without the burden of thought and/or reason, the Judeo-Christian-Islamic monotheistic culture describes their God as an anthropomorphic Supreme monarch, to kneel to, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent. If true, why was the human being created in the first place, to be finite and fallible? Why would an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent God create most human beings, according to religion, for planned obsolescence to be tossed away? Why were we not created as angels in the first place, and placed in Heaven, if there be such a place, to serve this God? Why would this omniscient (all knowing), omnipotent (all powerful), and omnibenevolent (all good) God allow an eternal Hell to exist, to punish a finite and fallible species of Homo living on a blue dot floating in the vastness of the universe? It does not make a lick of sense. In addition to having finite lives, Homo Sapiens are fallible, that is, they are capable of doing wrong. With the greatest intentions of doing good, they are capable of doing wrong, numerous times, in their life, with or without the intent to do so. Good and evil have numerous definitions depending upon how they are defined by the self, family, institutions, society, and/or culture. One only needs to study the concepts of Nature vs. Nurture, that is Heredity vs. Environment, and/or Free Will vs. Determinism.
@@brianw.5230 Delusional you mean. Until your god actually shows up I can say anything I want about it, until then, you have nothing to say. You should let your god speak for itself.
She actually is. She is touching on the emotional problem of evil. Brute men jump to theory which why Christian theism is the mess it’s in today. She speaks with compassion and more people like her are needed.
An omniscient and omnipotent god who allows all the evil and suffering in the world is not conceivable even through the sophisms of the most refined theologians. At most, an omniscient and omnipotent god could be neutral towards good and evil or not omniscient or omnipotent at all.
Another ridiculous attempt to justify the notion of a Christian God or individual God. The most cutting edge science says that we are all conciousnesses. God may be the infinite conciousness. Per quantum physics, time does not exist, and suffering requires time, so suffering does not exist. We are manifested and unmanifested. So without time, even the notion of life and death do not exist.
Dario Impini. Who knows....we aren't god. Maybe balance is a high trait of god and a universe must have it to exist in the physical dimension. Therefore, you may need positive things with the negative for biological life to exist
Let’s face it, these things will always remain a mystery as to their correctness, just as my dog could never know the abstract existence of math and it’s truth, that we use everyday of our existence. Yet, we know it does exist, so therefore numbers exist, albeit an abstract in the human mind. Hopefully, when and if we do cross over to that type of existence, then we would have ( mind at large or mind enlarged , if you will ) to grasp it all. This stuff could very well be child play in that circumstance. 😳
Funnysterste Really? Because people are and have always been afraid of being alone and want to have a higher figure they can rely on, talk to, hope to, feel to, cry to, fear, love. They are afraid of oppression, conflict, betrayal, pain, earthquakes, tsunamis, tornados, monsoons, landslides, mudslides, sinkholes, volcanos, lightening, heat, cold, flooding, disease, insects, bats, rats, snakes, sharks, lions, tigers, bears, wild dogs, alligators, crocodiles, the ocean, the desert, the mountains, the forest, asteroids, comets, starvation, tyranny, overpopulation, the devil, each other. And the idea of a god offers a being, a deity to turn to, pray to, hide under, get comfort and reassurance from, believe in....among other things.
@@philosopher0076 Ok, then I want to believe that I am a millionaire. It is good to have much money, isn't it? As long as I am not checking my bank account and I am not going to try to buy a Ferrari, I am free to believe, right?
Funnysterste. What? What kind of obtuse interpretation of my answer are you replying to? You asked why people would WANT to believe in a god. I told you many of the common reasons why people...going back to the origins of mankind, even before organized religions took hold, would WANT to believe in a god. Don't start asking me to defend people's beliefs. You asked why people would WANT to believe in a god...and I told you many of the reasons.
@@philosopher0076 You told me many reason for why people would want to believe in god. Would you consider any of those reasons as good reasons? And does wanting to believe in something make this something real?
That doesn't invalidate the existence of God, this is an argument from emotion same as a theist being amazed by a birth of a baby and coming to the conclusion that God exists to share this beauty.
@@Raydensheraj Imagine if i said the same thing about you? Still isn't an defeater of anything, i used his position inversely to show that it's not a coherent argument and i am doing the same with you right now.
@@alfonso201 It is about the theodicy. The question is: Why is there evil (suffering) in the world, if there is a good (all knowing, all powerful) god? Maybe there is a god, but then he can not have these three attributes.
Eleonore Stump is a brilliant theologian trying her best to make sense of the mystery of existence. What scares me are many of the empty-headed comments posted here. So many of these people blather on, as if they could sit down and say something that would have some value to others. It is so easy to be cynical, denagrading anyone who attempts an answer to the mystery of existence, but I'm quite certain that most, if not all these people, would be completely clueless in talking about such issues, were Dr. Kuhn to ask them some of these same questions.
This is the most thoughtful and beautiful answer to this question. Eleonore reminds us that when academics consider this question they cannot act like it's a casual point of debate - there are real people attached to the problem. And she clearly believes that in the long run, suffering will be a blip on the radar leading to the ultimate rest of humankind - perfect union with God and each other.
Yes it does. Unnecessary evil does disprove (Christian) God..
If a hospital could costlessly think your tumor out of existence (or better, think it so tumors never grow to begin with), we would consider it criminal to put you under the knife or into chemo. By definition, the "Ground of Being" would not be stuck with constraints or have to work from default states in manifesting reality.
She seems to be putting forth the soul-growth theodicy (i.e. suffering is beneficial for growth). She brings up post-traumatic growth to support her argument but conveniently leaves out all the people that kill themselves due to post-traumatic stress disorder. Prisons are filled with people that have suffered a great deal in life. Studies show that suffering in childhood is a predictor for addiction, criminality, and mental illness. Her argument has an old and simple refutation: the observation that suffering causes many people to become worse-off in life instead of better.
@@cheshirekershaw It is not just correlation because there is a large body of research that shows how abuse causes the brain to develop differently. Abuse is a kind of extreme stressor, and scientists can study the physiological responses and lasting structural changes that occur when a developing brain is routinely subjected to this stressor. There are entire sub-fields withing psychology (e.g. developmental psychopathology) dedicated to explicating this phenomenon. If we know how A causes the changes that result in outcome B, then it isn't the case that A is merely correlated with outcome B.
@@cheshirekershaw I wasn't referring to "triggers" for behavior but instead brought up stressors that lead to long-term brain changes if they occur at critical periods of development. Brain imaging studies have shown that child abuse leads to long-term structural changes in the neural circuits responsible for threat detection, emotional regulation, and reward anticipation. There are no studies of twins reared apart that show that these kinds of long-term brain changes still occur if one twin is raised in an environment with such a stressor while another twin is raised in an environment without it. There are also no genetic studies that show that there exist genes that cause these kinds of changes during development in the absence of a stressor. Given that we have imaging studies that show how experiencing abuse during sensitive periods of development alters the brain (and also have other studies that offer an explanation for how this happens at a molecular level) and no genetic or twin studies that demonstrate anything remotely similar, I see no good reason why it is more sensible to assume that heritability takes precedence over experience.
@@cheshirekershaw There are studies that show that these brain changes lead to increased fear and aggression, impulse control, and mental health disorders. More importantly, there are further studies that explain HOW increased fear and aggression, impulse control, and mental health disorders can lead to criminality. There are no genetic studies that demonstrate that genes determine impulsivity, there are merely association studies. Worse still, these association studies merely imply there might be protective or risk factors that are hereditary and may mediate the extent to which these brain changes occur in response to stressors (and even these are highly flawed because they don't actually control for upbringing and other key situational factors). The current scientific consensus seems to be that a larger proportion of the variance in outcomes like addiction and criminality is explained by situational factors (e.g. abuse that leads to developmental abnormalities, accidents that cause brain damage, being born into a social environment where there is a lot of criminality, etc...) rather than genetic factors. On top of that, there are now studies that demonstrate that situational factors (like child abuse) can alter what genes are expressed via the epigenome.
@@cheshirekershaw I've already explained multiple times that it isn't merely associations because we have further studies that explain the mechanisms (i.e. studies that explain how the child abuse causes the brain changes and further studies that explain how the brain changes cause differences in outcomes). I'm not talking about one category of study but of a massive body of research from developmental psychopathology, behavioral neuroscience, behavioral endocrinology, and abnormal psychology. So, for instance, this body of research shows the causal chain between child abuse and decreased hippocampus size is: child abuse routinely activates HPA axis--> the activation of the HPA axis dumps stress hormones like cortisol into the blood stream-->long-term effects of elevated stress hormones in blood damages the hippocampus and decrease its size-->decreased hippocampus size leads to cognitive decline and the development of depression. So, that is a causal chain leading from child abuse to a mental health outcome. And there are causal chains like that have been demonstrated by the large body of research for all the various developmental brain changes I previously mentioned that result due to child abuse. Like I said at the start, if one can actually show how A causes the changes that lead to outcome B, then it isn't the case that A is merely correlated with B.
@@cheshirekershaw Also, I never said "failures as a person" and don't agree with that characterization of my position. A person that has addiction or a mental disorder is not a "failure as a person." My claim was that suffering can make many people worse-off. Also, what is even the point of this hereditary argument? Even those scientists that believe that the majority of the variation seen in outcomes can be explained by genetics would agree that child abuse renders most people worse-off than if they had grown up in an environment where they were not abused. Are we getting into the weeds on a pedantic objection that has very little to do with the substance of my initial point? How does this heredity argument even counter the objection to the soul-growth theodicy?
It was GK Chesterton who said that original sin was confirmed empirically.
The "physical world/universe" exists, in large part, due to duality and the interaction and balance of these opposing forces. Light - Dark; North - South, Positive - Negative; Right - Wrong, On - Off, Yin - Yang, 1 - 0, Day - Night, Order - Disorder, Good - Evil, Up - Down, True - False, Male - Female, Hot - Cold, Wave - Particle, etc. is observed to be interwoven within the fabric of the "physical world/universe". Thus, the existence of Good would of necessity require the existence of Evil in the physical universe, and vice versa. Moreover, the scientifically confirmed property of duality in the physical world/universe does not preclude the existence of a Prime Observer/Cause.
She just spent a very long time to say suffering makes you a better person - I need those 8 minutes back
A little bit of suffering might, too much of it breaks and kills a person. We know this intuitively, we try to get our children to struggle a bit to be strong but we try to make them avoid suffering as much as possible.
One can say, that maybe the suffering that is imposed from the outside is different because it results in some good at times. I would say that most ppl who are born handicapped or who lost limbs in war or suffer debilitating depression don’t go on to do TED talks and write books that inspire millions. Most ppl that suffer, just suffer quietly and then pass away.
Of course the last move is to say that it was a test and that it will be rewarded in the afterlife, or that it was karma for past actions and I admit this may be true but its near impossible to prove. Id love to believe it and I hope something like that is true.
I think the quote on original sin being an empirical fact comes from G.K. Chesterton.
Time justifies evil. 80 years of suffering is like nothing compared to eternity.
Really good 👍 from Pakistan
G.K. Chesterton said that about original sin, I think.
Evil is a human construct; suffering (or: the causes of suffering) is what's caused by god. That in my is view the largest deficiency in the theistic argument: theists bizarrely fail to acknowledge or even comprehend that their omnipotent god is necessarily therefore a mechanism of causing human (and animal) suffering. Suffering, as we know, is literally built into the fabric of existence. It's impossible to have a human or animal life and not suffer at some point, even if only at death (which again, is built in). So... who created that? The most obvious example we have currently is the coronavirus and the massive pain, loss, sickness, death, grief, etc. that is being caused by it (caused by what god created). God creates suffering, and humans try to resolve the causes of suffering that (from the theistic pov) god has created. God therefore is the enemy of humanity, not the benefactor.
To hear this woman explain it, the reason for the pain, loss, sickness, death, and grief of the corona virus is so that we can have joy and love in that shared second personal experience. Ain't it great?
@@darioinfini A lot of these people are so brainwashed and lost in their cultural conditioning that they have to go to great lengths and contortions to try to make sense of the religious b.s. they've been indoctrinated with practically since birth. The cognitive dissonance is too great for them otherwise. They don't seem to have the strength of mind to stand up against nonsense and call it for what it is. The culture says there is "god," who allegedly has all kinds of "good" qualities, and so without ever having seen, heard, touched, experienced it in any way - and without any of it even making any sense according to their logical reasoning - they nevertheless choose to side with the improbable and then have to come up with all kinds of fantastical explanations to excuse the demonstrated reality of it. The level of superstition is really sad to behold in 2020 (or 5780, or whatever calendar you want to use).
You need to read the Bible, man cause suffering.
And if God does exist you really don't want to consider him an enemy considering he can just destroy everything in existence, it's his world don't forget he owns everyone not a wise move you can't beat an omnipotent being lol. Take responsibility for your own actions instead of blaming God
@@Deathlock61 So when a huge earthquake and tsunami hits and millions of people are hurt and killed, that's human's doing? Lol, no. You're a little confused.
It certainly does not disprove an evil god.
Imagine if God took human suffering so seriously that He sent His only Son into the world to be born to humble family people and die 33 yrs later a cruel cruel messy death on a cross and 3 days later rise again so all people be given the choice to be saved from this "vale of tears" and live as His sons & daughters in the eternal life which follows this nasty, short hard life.
Imagine ! Now that would be a real answer to suffering, would'nt it. Think of all the love, hope and faith that would enter people who said Yes. I want that !!! His Name is Jesus Christ.
I realy dislike it when ppl use "analogies"" to prove their point.you might want to sound poetical that way but analogies , they simply not work that way you cannot prove your point to me. Also,i don't really agree that there is any justification for suffering. I agree that we humans are responible for a large part of worlds suffering and it's our responsability to stop it instead of waiting for some divine intervention.
What did she say again? (if any)
God is love. ... Religion, theology, morality ... that's something else. ... The answer to "Does God truly exist?" is quite simple. When Heaven and Earth have passed away love will continue to exist. The real question is -do you believe? ... Belief is a knowing that transcends the physical universe. Pain, suffering, evil, sin, earthquakes, wars, etc., are irrelevant. What is more relevant is pleasure and sex because without these things we would not exist. The very thing religion makes evil, God made good. When you have that great orgasm what do you say? ... "Oh, GOD!" ... You who wonder about God look around you at life. Life continues to regenerate. We do too. We refer to the act as "making love". If you want to know if God truly exists then make love. When your little baby is born look into it's eyes and then you will know for sure. And, in the same way you love that little creature understand that God, who is love, also loves you. And one day, if you continue to believe, you will pass into the world of love and life. Christ proved this to the world. Celibate monks, priests and nuns have no idea what this means. They think that through the ascetic life of mortifying their flesh through pain and suffering they will attain sanctity. ... Nothing could be farther from the truth. Love is a free gift. Christ said, "In this world you will have affliction, but be cheerful, I have overcome the world."
Yes there is nothing we can do to stop the suffering. But if your pretend God existed he could. That’s the point she can’t address. If my child has died of cancer I don’t need my suffering redeemed. I need my child back. I have no use for her facile theology.
It doesnt disprove God, evil just says a personal or caring God is highly unlikely.
A whole lot of well-informed philosophers in the comments
If God exists, and He is indeed truly, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, being aware of mankind’s innate emotional and cultural ignorance, He would not allow His existence to be known. Otherwise, the human race would break into religious tribes and do every imaginable wrong against the rest of mankind, “in His name”. This has been proven over and over again, down through history. One only has to read something besides the Bible, a book of stories, myth’s, and allegories; perhaps a book dealing with History or a book addressing Science, and/or both.
Think about this, and then, think about it again.
It is my opinion, that our consciousness, was by our ancestors, mistakenly taken for a soul. In others words, the soul is and was manufactured idea. When we come to the end of our lives we will lose all body function along with our consciousness. We will then be in the memory and consciousness of others. The idea of the soul was created by man merely to control others.
@Jake Hoberg 1983 If we have offspring our DNA will be passed on. Just as virus needs a vehicle such as bacteria, so does our DNA need us.
@Jake Hoberg 1983 Yes, but that is only true for others. ROFLMAO
The "physical world/universe" exists, in large part, due to duality and the interaction and balance of these opposing forces. Light - Dark; North - South, Positive - Negative; Right - Wrong, On - Off, Yin - Yang, 1 - 0, Day - Night, Order - Disorder, Good - Evil, Up - Down, True - False, Male - Female, Hot - Cold, Wave - Particle, etc. is observed to be interwoven within the fabric of the "physical world/universe". Thus, the existence of Good would of necessity require the existence of Evil in the physical universe, and vice versa. Moreover, the scientifically confirmed property of duality in the physical world/universe does not preclude the existence of a Prime Observer/Cause.
@@moses777exodus Without the burden of thought and/or reason, the Judeo-Christian-Islamic monotheistic culture describes their God as an anthropomorphic Supreme monarch, to kneel to, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent. If true, why was the human being created in the first place, to be finite and fallible? Why would an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent God create most human beings, according to religion, for planned obsolescence to be tossed away? Why were we not created as angels in the first place, and placed in Heaven, if there be such a place, to serve this God? Why would this omniscient (all knowing), omnipotent (all powerful), and omnibenevolent (all good) God allow an eternal Hell to exist, to punish a finite and fallible species of Homo living on a blue dot floating in the vastness of the universe? It does not make a lick of sense.
In addition to having finite lives, Homo Sapiens are fallible, that is, they are capable of doing wrong. With the greatest intentions of doing good, they are capable of doing wrong, numerous times, in their life, with or without the intent to do so. Good and evil have numerous definitions depending upon how they are defined by the self, family, institutions, society, and/or culture. One only needs to study the concepts of Nature vs. Nurture, that is Heredity vs. Environment, and/or Free Will vs. Determinism.
I’ve never heatd this woman say anything that makes any sense. She lives in a complete fantasy world
Just the opposite.
These are the people that terrify me most.
Christians smarter than you are?
@@brianw.5230 Delusional you mean. Until your god actually shows up I can say anything I want about it, until then, you have nothing to say. You should let your god speak for itself.
You should stop making ludicrous and pointless arguments in RUclips comment sections and get a life.
@@AnonymousC-lm6tc When your god, Oludamare, tells me to stop I will.
Biggest load of trip I've heard in quite some time
I’m five mins in and she hasn’t even started answering the question....
She actually is. She is touching on the emotional problem of evil. Brute men jump to theory which why Christian theism is the mess it’s in today. She speaks with compassion and more people like her are needed.
Lol that's like asking does evil disprove good.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
The existence of evil needn't disprove God. The existence of evil strongly suggests that God is evil.
This is irrational. If the existence of evil suggests God is evil, then the existence of good would suggest God is good.
@@jordancox8294 Then perhaps God doesn't follow the simplistic caricatures of Western theology and possesses both good and evil attributes.
I love how she compares an all loving, all powerful god to a freaking hospital.
God exists, whether you like it or not
Nope he doesn't exist wheather you want believe or not😊
She’s wrong on so many levels. Worse thing is that most of what she says has got nothing to do with the question.
This women doesn’t understand what suffering from childhood does to people, she’s in her own deluded bubble.
An omniscient and omnipotent god who allows all the evil and suffering in the world is not conceivable even through the sophisms of the most refined theologians. At most, an omniscient and omnipotent god could be neutral towards good and evil or not omniscient or omnipotent at all.
Another ridiculous attempt to justify the notion of a Christian God or individual God. The most cutting edge science says that we are all conciousnesses. God may be the infinite conciousness. Per quantum physics, time does not exist, and suffering requires time, so suffering does not exist. We are manifested and unmanifested. So without time, even the notion of life and death do not exist.
Is there suffering in heaven? I'll have to assume no. So why didn't the all knowing, all present, all good God create reality like heaven?
Dario Impini. Who knows....we aren't god. Maybe balance is a high trait of god and a universe must have it to exist in the physical dimension. Therefore, you may need positive things with the negative for biological life to exist
for the lols
Let’s face it, these things will always remain a mystery as to their correctness, just as my dog could never know the abstract existence of math and it’s truth, that we use everyday of our existence. Yet, we know it does exist, so therefore numbers exist, albeit an abstract in the human mind. Hopefully, when and if we do cross over to that type of existence, then we would have ( mind at large or mind enlarged , if you will ) to grasp it all. This stuff could very well be child play in that circumstance. 😳
Why would someone want to believe in god?
Funnysterste Really? Because people are and have always been afraid of being alone and want to have a higher figure they can rely on, talk to, hope to, feel to, cry to, fear, love. They are afraid of oppression, conflict, betrayal, pain, earthquakes, tsunamis, tornados, monsoons, landslides, mudslides, sinkholes, volcanos, lightening, heat, cold, flooding, disease, insects, bats, rats, snakes, sharks, lions, tigers, bears, wild dogs, alligators, crocodiles, the ocean, the desert, the mountains, the forest, asteroids, comets, starvation, tyranny, overpopulation, the devil, each other. And the idea of a god offers a being, a deity to turn to, pray to, hide under, get comfort and reassurance from, believe in....among other things.
@@philosopher0076 Ok, then I want to believe that I am a millionaire. It is good to have much money, isn't it? As long as I am not checking my bank account and I am not going to try to buy a Ferrari, I am free to believe, right?
This "belief" may actually help you pick up lots of hot girls if you are so inclined. There is even a genetic, evolutionary component to this
Funnysterste. What? What kind of obtuse interpretation of my answer are you replying to? You asked why people would WANT to believe in a god. I told you many of the common reasons why people...going back to the origins of mankind, even before organized religions took hold, would WANT to believe in a god. Don't start asking me to defend people's beliefs. You asked why people would WANT to believe in a god...and I told you many of the reasons.
@@philosopher0076 You told me many reason for why people would want to believe in god. Would you consider any of those reasons as good reasons? And does wanting to believe in something make this something real?
"What we have to keep in mind...." Tell that a newborn baby who has bone cancer and will live for about 6 months.
That doesn't invalidate the existence of God, this is an argument from emotion same as a theist being amazed by a birth of a baby and coming to the conclusion that God exists to share this beauty.
@Homo Quantum Sapiens And then secretly raped by a Catholic Priest.
@@alfonso201 You sound ridiculous. And you know it.
@@Raydensheraj
Imagine if i said the same thing about you? Still isn't an defeater of anything, i used his position inversely to show that it's not a coherent argument and i am doing the same with you right now.
@@alfonso201 It is about the theodicy. The question is: Why is there evil (suffering) in the world, if there is a good (all knowing, all powerful) god? Maybe there is a god, but then he can not have these three attributes.
What a bunch of nonsense.
It proves god has the ability to be evil
#HorseShit