Like Button

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Advantages of Suffering

Okay, here's what we know. We know that there is a God who is both good and loving. We know also that He is omnipotent. All of that together suggests that God could have created a world where His creation was comfortable, good, undisturbed. No one suffers. No one dies. A happy, pleasant world. Indeed, it is the world we anticipate once this life is over for those who believe. So it must be possible.

The skeptic, of course, will point and say, "See? Your God could do it but didn't, so if He exists, He's evil." This, of course, is a logical leap. First, a universe without a God cannot have anything defined as "evil" to start with, so it's a circular failure. Second, it makes assumptions not supported. The primary assumption is that it's always bad for anyone (apparently any creature at all) to suffer. And I think this is a problem.

Is it possible that pain and suffering could have positive values? We would, of course -- all of us -- balk at that. But is it possible? I would suggest that it is. For such a possibility to exist, the first thing that would be required would be pain and suffering administered by a good, loving, omnipotent being so that it is the right pain and suffering. That has to be a given. Unplanned, unaimed, uncontrolled pain and suffering isn't good. Random pain and suffering is random. But it is possible that, planned and controlled, it can serve a good purpose. That requires a Being that can control what we creatures cannot.

The Bible has more than a little to say on the subject. What does the Bible suggest about suffering?

1. In a general sense we are told "that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose" (Rom 8:28). In that claim, "all things" would include suffering. In a specific example of brothers who sought to kill and then to enslave their brother, Joseph told them, "You meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result" (Gen 50:20). That is, the evil was real and intended, but God intended for it to produce a good result ... and it did. God, therefore, intends suffering to produce good results.

2. Paul says, "If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation" (2 Cor 1:6). Why? Paul says that God "comforts us in all our affliction so that we will be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God" (2 Cor 1:4). Suffering, then, equips us to help others deal with suffering.

3. In 2 Corinthians 12, Paul writes about his famous "thorn in the flesh", a "messenger of Satan to torment me" (2 Cor 12:7). Paul repeatedly begs God to remove it and God does not. The result is interesting. God told Paul, "My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness" (2 Cor 12:9). Paul's response is not a heavy sigh and the certainty that God just doesn't understand and isn't fair. No, his response is, "I will rather boast about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me" (2 Cor 12:9). True strength is found in our weaknesses met by God's strength (2 Cor 12:10).

4. James, perhaps on the edge of lunacy, tells his readers, "Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials" (James 1:2). Ummm, yeah, Jim. Thanks. Now, perhaps you need to see a doctor. No, he explains further. Why should we count it all joy when we suffer? Because when we suffer and rejoice we do so "knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance. And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing" (James 1:3-4). Suffering, guided by God, produces completion in the believer. Ultimately, there is great reward -- the Crown of Life -- to those who persevere in suffering (James 1:12).

5. The Book of Hebrews has a somewhat startling statement on suffering. About Jesus, the author says, "Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered" (Heb 5:8). Now, Jesus was God incarnate. But Hebrews says He "learned obedience from the things which He suffered". That is, Christ learned what it meant to suffer, what it meant to represent us. He experienced our pain and our temptations without succumbing to either. We, too, learn obedience from suffering.

6. Part of suffering is "striving against sin". Scripture says, "Do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, nor be weary when reproved by Him" (Heb 12:5). Indeed, "The Lord disciplines the one He loves and chastises every son whom He receives" (Heb 12:6). Sure, "for the moment all discipline seems painful," "but it later yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness for those who have been trained by it" (Heb 12:11).

No, we don't like suffering. We don't like pain. Death is unpleasant. But simply because we don't like something doesn't mean that it's bad, and simply because we don't currently see the value in something doesn't mean it has no value. The Bible says the reverse is true. Suffering is to our benefit when administered and controlled by a loving God who intends it for good. Instead of something to complain about and worry over, it is a gift granted by God (Phil 1:29) to those whom He loves. It isn't merely a worldly concept -- "no pain, no gain." And in the hands of the Almighty, the gain is great.

17 comments:

starflyer said...

Great post Stan...very timely too!

Stan said...

Suffer much? (Rhetorical question.)

Anonymous said...

Modern Christians may turn to artificial pain relievers to shorten the period of suffering. Modern medicine uses anesthetics for surgery. Do you believe people are thwarting God’s will when they rely on such things? If God uses the flu as a tool to get you to suffer for four days, and you are able to artificially shorten your suffering to three days, are you circumventing His wishes for you?

Stan said...

Interesting. You read "The Advantages of Suffering" and understand me to mean, "The best thing that any of us can do is suffer. Do not, at any cost, avoid suffering. If you suffer, do what you can to get out of it."

Not the point. Not the point at all.

Anonymous said...

They said that "life is unfair" but it's not. Problems that we encountered its just a test if you can pass or fail.Find ways to handle it.The best way to handle it is to seek God first. It is written in the Bible that Seek first the kingdom of God and all this things will given unto you..How great is our God. We must let God hold us and let Him drive the way to success.The above ideas is great.Hope everybody will come and see this blog..


domains

Anonymous said...

“Suffering is to our benefit when administered and controlled by a loving God who intends it for good.”

Would these be examples of controlled suffering?
A bout of the flu.
Frostbite leading to the loss of toes.
Pancreatic cancer.
A separated shoulder.
Arthritis in the hands.
A birth defect in the legs requiring amputation of the legs.
A torn ACL.

Do you assert any of the following?
1. God fine-tunes Stan’s suffering to maximize the goodness in Stan’s life.
2. God fine-tunes all Christians’ suffering to maximize the goodness in Christians’ lives.
3. God fine-tunes all humans’ suffering to maximize the goodness in humans’ lives.

Stan said...

No, of course not! Those would be examples of uncontrolled suffering.

I am, of course, being painfully sarcastic, given my view that God is in charge. Given that view, your question is pointless. Nor can I figure out the aim of the "fine-tune" questions. If I believe that "God works all things together for good to those who love Him", is that an answer? Seriously, I'm trying to figure out what you're getting at.

Look, everyone suffers. Everyone. For a believer, there is comfort in the fact that we suffer because there is purpose. We don't aim to stew in it. We try to alleviate it. We are commanded to comfort and help people who suffer. But for us there is comfort in knowing that even when suffering cannot be fixed, it isn't random, out of control, or pointless.

You, on the other hand, have no such thing. "Stuff happens. Too bad. There is no point. Pain ... no gain. That's just the way it is. Get over it."

Trying to contrast my view with the existence of pain misses the point. Trying to contrast my view with yours is the point.

Anonymous said...

“For a believer, there is comfort in the fact that we suffer because there is purpase."

Stan is right that a huge difference between believers and nonbelievers is the way they look at suffering. This is such a crucial issue that I think it is worth looking at another example.

I was reading the other day about a volcano that sprang up 23 million years ago. It happened to be on the San Andreas Fault where the Pacific Plate slides against the North American plate. The fault slippage sheared the volcano in two, such that the west part of it is now near Monterey, California and the east part of it is 195 miles southeast near Lancaster. The movement along a strike-slip fault is not smooth. Stress builds up for decades or centuries, and then in a matter of seconds there is a ripping of subterranean rock, and the land around the slippage ripples in an earthquake. There will be many large earthquakes along that fault in the future. They happened before there were humans living in North America. They will continue happening after humans are extinct. When the next really big one comes, on a par with the 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake, there will be a huge amount of human suffering: injuries, deaths, economic loss.

If it happens in Stan’s lifetime, Stan will view it as something his God did to give people a chance to pitch in and help the surviving victims.

The nonbeliever looks at the believer and says, ”Whoa, hold on there, partner. You are making the human race way too important in the scheme of things. Earth’s continental plates are not sliding against one another because humans need to have some drama in their lives. They have been doing their thing for billions of years, and they will do so for billions of years after the human race has vanished.”

Seismometers left on the moon have detected small tremors. On Mars there are large tectonic faults, and presumably they have some pretty large Marsquakes associated with them. Do believers see earthquakes on our planet as occurring with timing and locations that carry out God’s will, but also at the same time see Marsquakes as just some non-teleological phenomenon of nature that carries no theological significance?

Stan said...

The huge difference between the way believers (can) look at suffering and the way unbelievers must is that believers can find comfort in the suggestion that there is higher purpose in it and unbelievers can only find randomness and pain without purpose or comfort.

Note, by the way, that you do not actually understand my perspective or worldview, so suggesting that "Stan will view it as something his God did to give people a chance to pitch in and help the surviving victims" is really iffy ... since it is only a guess on your part from someone who doesn't actually believe or even much understand how I actually view things. No insult or complaint intended here. Just education.

But, using your (somewhat bizarre and far-fetched) example, Stan would think there was purpose to it and you would conclude that humans don't matter and stuff happens and, well, too bad for everyone, but, hey, people are no more valuable than anyone or anything else, so just deal with it. No, there is no comfort. No, there is no purpose. No, there is no hope. Too bad. And for some reason, the idea that I would find purpose and, therefore, comfort in it is offensive to you and your complete lack of purpose and comfort is superior.

I can't answer for all believers, but since it is my belief that God works all things after the counsel of His will, then an earthquake on Mars would fall under "all things". I wouldn't even begin to guess at purpose. That's not my job.

Anonymous said...

“… and you would conclude that humans don't matter and stuff happens…”

It might surprise you that I (Lee) have done my bit to alleviate suffering in others, including donating money to the American Cancer Society. But no, I don’t pray for those who are suffering, and I do not tell them to be of good cheer for their suffering has a godly purpose.

If technology defeats cancer, do you believe that God will find a new method to induce purposeful suffering that He formerly would have induced through the mechanism of cancer?

(By the way, the Anonymous who posted hours ago on your sovereignty topic is not I.)

Stan said...

Oh, I thought for sure that the Anonymous posting those questions was the same Anonymous (Lee) who has always posted the same questions. Thanks for the clarification.

I should point out that I do not believe that atheists "conclude that humans don't matter". I do not believe that atheists are necessarily more immoral than anyone else because of their beliefs. I am simply pointing out that they believe in the dignity and worth of humans without logical basis and act in moral ways without a foundation for a moral code.

(And, as to your question, is it really your idea that technology will be able to defeat suffering? Seems like we keep coming up with more suffering rather than less.)

Anonymous said...

“… without a foundation for a moral code."

I have pointed out in the past that you ignore parts of your foundation, though you always tell me that this is not true. I recently came across Luke 19:27, where Jesus commands you to kill those who are not serving Him. You are a better person for not acting on that instruction.

Stan said...

Anonymous, may make a suggestion? Hopefully it's a helpful suggestion. If you don't understand that with which you disagree, you are going to have a really hard time arguing against it. And it doesn't work well in arguing against something when you abuse ideas like you just did.

For those reading, Luke 19:27 is not a command to kill those not serving Christ. Not even close. Actually, it's part of Jesus's famous parable of the talents and doesn't include a command at all.

Anonymous, you may have pointed out in the past that I ignore parts of my foundation. Two points. First, again, it's simply not true. Not purposely. Not that I'm aware of. I obviously don't keep it perfectly, but I don't ignore or discard it. In fact, I work really hard at getting it right.

Second, your response is what is classically known as the "tu quoque" error. It's a standard ad hominem (read "logical fallacy"). Here's the example from the Philosophical Society's website on logical fallacies:
"Smith: 'If someone hits you, you should turn the other cheek. Violence only begets violence, and violence in and of itself is wrong.'
Jones: 'That's a joke. You used to hit people when they picked a fight with you.'"

Your response does nothing to defend your lack of foundation for any moral code or to indicate that the rest of my argument is faulty. Even if it was true that I ignore parts of my foundation, your argument is a logical failure.

All of this not to disagree or argue, but to offer you helpful notions on how to better approach arguments and people with whom you disagree, because this one failed in every aspect.

Anonymous said...

Ah, so Luke 19:27 is “just a parable. No biggie.”

I am reminded that after the Tate killings by Charles Manson’s followers, Manson said that he didn’t instruct the followers directly to kill anyone. “Take some knives with you, go to this house, and do what your love tells you to do,” is what he claimed he said to them that day. The jury found Manson guilty of murder nonetheless.

Stan said...

You're really going to make no attempt, are you? Not even the slightest effort. I'm wondering how that would work if the situation was reversed. You write a letter to someone who makes no attempt at all to understand what you mean by it, rips out pieces out of context, and proceeds to twist your words to mean something you never meant. Nice.

Just for reference, a "parable" is not "a command". A "poem" is not a "narrative". A physics class is not a literature class. Oh, I don't know, it all seems so simple. You'd think that a seemingly intelligent anti-theist would be able to tell the difference. A parable tells a story. A command tells you to do something. These are not the same thing.

Acting or responding stupidly doesn't aid your cause.

starflyer said...

Wow...how did Manson get brought into this?

Stan said...

Yeah, clearly not the same "Anonymous".