|
Edited on Mon Dec-27-04 10:23 PM by Stunster
I say problem of suffering, rather than problem of evil, because the tsunami is not guilty of moral evil. It can perhaps be called a natural evil. But in reality it's really just a natural event--a disaster to be sure--that causes great suffering.
We Catholics believe that God is perfectly loving and good, so how could God allow this to happen---and indeed, all the other natural disasters that occur? And what about illness, pain, and horrifying diseases?
I suspect that this is *the* major reason why people don't believe in God. They hear all this talk about God's goodness and love for humanity, and they see what happens to innocent people by the millions--not to mention innocent animals---all around the world, in every age and place.
I don't think it does any good to just avoid the question.
The traditional Catholic answer---the one that I grew up with---is that 'it is a mystery'. True, but tell me something I don't know, for pete's sake!
At any rate, I was thinking about this tsunami disaster, and I had the following thoughts...
1. If I was a member of a superior race of space aliens, who lived in a paradise of a solar system, where life was wonderfully long and pain-free, where there was no moral evil, and where every good and beautiful thing was available via computer-controlled means; and I had the opportunity to take human beings away from this 'vale of tears' we call the Earth, with all its toil and strife of life, wouldn't I do so, even at the cost of some transitory pain and suffering? Well, maybe not right away---I'd want those humans to fulfil a good portion of their potential---but yes, eventually, I think I would do so. I'd look at those poor fishermen, those poor sewing women, those children who are struggling just to eat, and I'd say to myself, "Let me reconfigure their bodies using the inter-galactic bio-transporter---yes, I know it's painful---and bring them here, to this wonderful solar system of ours. Those poor folks--they deserve a better life than the one they've got." Well, maybe God thinks, "Let me bring those folks to heaven, and away from that vale of tears. Let this tsunami/earthquake/flood/cancer/plane crash/car accident be their final, very last suffering. They've endured enough." What looks like sadism to us may actually be an act of great compassion.
2. From a scientific point of view, the tsunami was caused ultimately by the laws of physics. Yes, those very same laws of physics that allow us to exist and enjoy anything in the first place! Without them, there'd be no human life at all.
3. The laws of physics have to be practically universal in order for there to be rational agents. If events were not governed by law-like regularity, rational expectations would not be possible. So, if God wishes to create not only all the orders of angelic beings, but also rational agents who are physical beings, then God has to instantiate laws that operate with almost universal force. Why doesn't God step in to miraculously save lives? Because if God did so frequently, or quite commonly, rational expectations with regard to the physical world would be impossible, and hence rational agency itself would be impossible. Miracles, by definition, must be rare events. 'Common miracles', at least in any physical sense, is a contradiction in terms.
4. Most people, despite all the suffering of the world, are glad that they exist. Suicide, or even a desire for non-being, is a rarity. The vast majority of the human race is glad, upon reflection, that they exist, even knowing all the suffering and tragedy to which human flesh is heir. Why, many people even procreate, knowing what potential suffering there may be for their offspring. Do we, most of us, think that procreation is a cruel, sadistic act? I don't think so. Most of us think that procreating and parenting are very loving things to do, even though we know our children are going to experience some suffering.
5. It's not as if God kept aloof from all of this. No, what Christmas means, what Christianity means, is that God decided that he would not spare his own divine nature from being united with human nature, to the point of death----death by crucifixion.
6. What is the atheistic alternative? It says that in a fundamental ontological sense, this tsunami is no different in essence from, say, a meteor striking a moon of Jupiter. It's just a bunch of atoms moving about--matter in motion. But who really thinks this describes the reality and truth of this tsunami disaster? No, we see it as different from the meteor that strikes the moon of Jupiter precisely because it's not just matter in motion. It is that, but it's also how it affects many possessors of rational consciousness, a fact that immediately suggests that materialism must be wrong in some basic and key way, because there's this pesky additional fact, beyond mere matter in motion, of rational consciousness being subject to a dramatic impact. We are consequently moved to pity by the suffering---we experience compassion. We feel a moral duty to alleviate the suffering. Compassion and moral duty---experiences which are poorly accounted for on the terms of atheistic materialism. I mean, if we are essentially just the same stuff that the rest of the material universe is, how could such things as compassion and moral duty even arise? So if the tsunami disaster raises questions about belief in a loving God, its immediate emotional and moral consequences raise even even more difficult questions for atheistic materialism.
8. Was it the tsunami's fault that so many people died? In an important sense, I don't think so. If the Indian Ocean had a tsunami warning system as does the Pacific Ocean, the death toll would have been vastly smaller. Indeed, it may be that no-one would have been killed, had such a system been in place. Human laziness and neglect contributed greatly to this disaster, as did poverty and social injustice. Had the tsunami been heading for, say, Los Angeles, the early warning system used in the Pacific, the superior stability of Californian building structures, and perhaps a greater sense of caring and respect for the value of our citizens' life than was shown by some Asian governments, would probably have resulted in far fewer, if any fatalities. In an important sense, this colossal death toll was caused by human carelessness.
9. Is it God's fault if you die because you went for a space-walk but forgot to put your space-helmet on, or if you put your head inside the jaws of a shark or a crocodile, or if you try to take a corner while speeding at 125mph? God gives us intelligence so that we can deal compassionately and cleverly with the challenges nature will throw at us. God has given us the freedom and autonomy to use that intelligence, as best we can, in every age and place. We have become better, and have grown mightily---intellectually, morally, and spiritually---precisely because we've been given those challenges. But if we don't learn from our mistakes, then shame on us, not God.
10. Eventually, no matter how well we cope with physical challenges, we will all succumb to nature and die, because we are finite, physical beings, and our intelligence is limited. But that is no reason to blame God, if there awaits us an even greater paradise than the one to which a space alien might compassionately wish to bring us, even at the cost of some transitory suffering. If Christianity is true, then leaving this vale of tears, however that happens, may be the most loving 'act of God' there is.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(984 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
