Professor John Lennox discusses the Problem of Suffering

John Dickson interviews Professor John Lennox about the problem of suffering.

[@razorpayne13]

John Lenox is my HERO!!!!.... and William Lane Craig...

[@yakimabarreravaldes7145]

razorpayne13 mine too :)

[@beemer2869]

He is a truly gifted servant of our God.

[@goranmilic442]

​@@beemer2869 I take Christian claims about problem of evil and suffering and respond to them by changing general "evil" into particular sort of evil, for example "child rape". So, when someone says "evil and suffering exist so that we could appreciate good times", I translate that to "child rape exists so that children can appreciate times when they are not raped". "Evil exists because God respects free Will"="child rape exists because God respects free will of the rapist". "Evil exist so that we could be tested and closer to God"="Child rape exists so that children could be tested and closer to God".

[@barendse1]

@@goranmilic442 ok....are you trying to make a point against Christianity or point out a specific issue with the answer you've been given from some who claim to be Christians?

[@goranmilic442]

@@barendse1 I am making a point against a claim that there is a god that is both all-powerful and all-good.

[@dresib]

Thank you very much for that insightful analysis of the argument :)

[@Jurassic56]

The only answer I can give is the one I already gave at the start - when God created the world it was good and the sin of man cursed the earth and everything that's ugly came after that. If that's not enough, Then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[@glenview8]

Amen.

[@bushfingers]

It's about time you conceded a bloody point :-) I believe inquiries into the nature of justice and hope are always relevant, whether expressed in a theistic or atheistic context. Many people of religions other than my own have quite different hopes to those that I have, but I would only very rarely (and in exceptional circumstances) try to take that hope away from them. Would I want Christianity (or any other religion) to ever be lost to humanity? Not at all. And the same goes for atheism.

[@ericday4505]

Brilliantly stated John, that silence you hear is atheists who are trying to come up with an answer, they have none they never have, they just look to tell someone they are wrong.

[@onsenguy]

that's because there is no answer. religious people like to fabricate one that's totally implausible but that makes them feel warm and cozy.

[@instrumentofdivinejustice4570]

@@onsenguy I’d feel a lot more cosy if I was convinced that I will not be held accountable for my actions, which is the atheist world view. I could go about stealing, killing, and committing evil acts because the only thing that I have to look forward to is death. If you are an atheist, you are incapable of condemning evil with your ideology. Simple as.

[@onsenguy]

@@instrumentofdivinejustice4570 as a freethinker myself, I don't believe there's a celestial policeman watching over me, yet I do not commit evil acts and I don't harm anyone, steal, or kill. I consider myself more open-minded, respectful, and considerate to others than most people. I imagine that must be difficult to digest for someone who was taught that we can only be good if we're superstitious or believe in the supernatural.

[@MrChris4251]

@@onsenguy I understand where you’re coming from, but how do you know you’re not committing evil acts? What reference do you use for the line between good and evil? If there is no celestial policeman, it seems to me that poses a problem for the existence of morality or truth in the first place. What do you think?

[@onsenguy]

@@MrChris4251 this is a common fallacy among religious thinkers. the reality is that the moral precepts of religion, such as "thou shalt not kill" or "thou shalt not steal" have been around long before christianity or any of the major world religions. a society where theft and murder are common is inconvenient to everyone. also, if you look at the regions in the world that have the lowest amount of religious belief, such as the scandanavian countries, new zealand, australia, and canada, these areas have a lower rate of theft and murder than most other countries. this simple example shows there is no link between religious belief and abstaining from theft or murder. the prisons are NOT filled with atheists and freethinkers.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

The foundation on which all science builds is faith. Faith that the universe is rational, faith that our minds are rational, and faith that the rationality of our minds mirrors the rationality of the universe. The worst thing about atheism is that its apposed to rationality; it gives no justification for believing science.

[@farvision]

The extremely likely truth is that there are no gods. So do what you do and if it fails then so be it. If it succeeds, then so be it. If you are drowning, struggle to survive until all is lost or you win. That is 'hope'.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

To think like you I would have to believe that, nothing produces everything, non life produces life, randomness produces information, unconsciousness produces consciousness and non-reason produces reason. I would have to believe in existence with a creator, order without intelligence , laws without a legislator and design with out a designer.This wouldrequire a blind leap of Faith that I am not willing take.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

So where did we get this other capacity to figure out not only what helps our genes to make it into the nest generation, but also to understand what is going on in the world? To put it another way what is the survival value of truth itself?

[@nickallah]

youre welcome. Im glad someone found it truthful and funny.

[@Cardnim]

Stunning.

[@sentientist]

"death is not the end" this doesn't solve the problem of evil because it doesn't take animal suffering into account....unless he believes all animals have an afterlife.

[@instrumentofdivinejustice4570]

Isaiah chapter 11 depicts animals, both predator and prey, living in peace in Heaven. He likely does believe in animals having an after life.

[@youtubestudiosucks978]

​@@instrumentofdivinejustice4570define what you mean with "peace" when a "loving" god can drown innocent babies, infants, children, pregnant women, elderly, handicapped people and lets not forget every other animal over a small village of people in the desert exersizing their freewill which he supposedly gave to them knowing beforehand how they would act. I dont think you know what peace is nor loving.

[@Limbsy]

true

[@bobmeoff1137]

Only God is perfect, Creation is not God, : Creation is imperfect.

[@Peace-wm7vc]

Well put 🙌🏽👏🏽

[@BGfromGB]

@kgouws asks if John Lennox did not address the issue of God protecting the innocent from suffering. Well, maybe he did. He could have addressed this issue in any one of this other debates and /or books. Be that as it may, the Bible relates to stories where he did just that. The story of the leper comes to mind. There were numerous others. The question you may ask why them and not others? That's a question I cannot answer. But it does tell me how powewrful he is

[@cperez1000]

@TYLERJB777, Per his statements Dawkins does not hate religious people, he hates religion as he considers them evil. Interesting you bring the word "afraid" as ironically it's mentioned is the Bible that you have to fear God. Atheist don't believe in N gods. Christians are atheists too in a way, since they don't believe in N-1 gods, in which N is a very large number composed by all gods of the present, the past, the future, from other planets, and the rest that are unknown.

[@sukruoosten]

we all make mistakes end assumptions !!!! im sorry its just 99% of those comments are made by people who dont want a debate/argue about the subject but rather try to make religious people look weak you dont have to get angry god bless

[@beemer2869]

Well said. With all the evidence in the world, some people will still turn away from Him. They can't see beyond the here and now, they don't have vision or hope, instead pride stands in the way. Sadly, you can lead a horse to the water, but you can't make it drink.

[@Johnshaw111]

John Lennox discusses the problem of being insufferably pompous. What a lovely humble Christian.

[@Rawk4Life]

If you don't believe in a God, then you contradict yourself in saying "God bless you." Adding "if there is one" to your statement doesn't make it any less confusing.

[@kitas7]

@TYLERJB777 If there's no positive evidence to support your claim then I have no reason at all to believe its valid. I'm very curious what is your evidence (more like excuse) to sustain your assertion...

[@ivansanabria6633]

His answer for everything else s the resurrection of Jesus, a man that most likely didn't exist.

[@Englishdosser86]

You really belive that the infintudes of time and space including all the natural laws that hold them together, all the failed stars, planets, galaxies and cosmoses (of which humans inhabit only the most infitesimal portion of), all the trillions of organisms living now and those that are now extinct were created specifically with US in mind?

[@MrCostiZz]

The unjustifiable blind suffering we see in the world is more evidence on the absent of God. The bible God very conveniently seems to has no intention to manifest in reality other to illiterate Jewess once upon a time. Christians apologetics is nothing more than excuses on absence of God like a mother will always think her son innocent no matter the evidence on the contrary. But in some point we must understand when you don't see nothing then is nothing there to see not name it invisible.

[@randomperson-gp8ph]

Why dont you respond to the arguments theologians have made for the last 2000 years on suffering. With regards to "manifest in reality" there continues to be miracles. What evidence would you accept?

[@smitty1647]

@@randomperson-gp8ph there are no miracles, just unsubstantiated claims. christians have nothing but stories and assertions, no evidence

[@msmd3295]

Lennox is assuming naturalism eliminates “all” hope when it does Not. One can actually have hope in “statistics” because we’re all subject to the natural laws of the universe. And the things in nature are in a constant state of change. Meaning one person’s predicament is “bound” to change merely from a statistical viewpoint. That change may not be to our liking (such as aging) but it’s still “change” and could be bad or good. In fact that’s the “true” basis of hope. That the odds might work in our favor. One doesn’t need to believe in a god for hope. One problem though is hoping for realistic results based upon what’s known about the “real” world and Not the supernatural of which no one can know.

[@BGfromGB]

@kgouws asks why a god of power not use that power to protect the innocent? OK as I.m neither scholar nor psychoanalyst, I'll answer it the way I personally see it. If God does not use his powers to protect the innocent, then equally one might ask why God does not use his powers to stop perpetrators from harming innocent people? If he did use his powers as you ask, then we may well consider ourselves as being in paradise! No police, no crime, no prisons, no courts, just pure blissful paradise!!

[@nickallah]

cant hate natural forces for being mindless and indifferent. but you can hate god for being mindful and indifferent.

[@gaagsl]

Evil and suffering does not prove that God doesn't exist. It proves that god is evil. Nature is cruel and merciless and so is the god of the Bible.

[@Jcremo]

The words you use, evil and merciful indicate you have a moral standard. You can’t have one outside of God’s ordered universe. You’re just a blob of cells. I am too. In a world where God doesn’t exist we should be completely apathetic towards the sufferings around us, but yet we’re not. We see injustice and suffering and have righteous indignation over it, because we were made in the image of a loving creator.

[@onsenguy]

my goodness..what a glib, specious, unctuous rationalization of suffering.

[@bushfingers]

Epicurus' thoughts are superficial here. "Atheists don't believe in justice?" Where exactly does he say this? To imply that he says this is dishonest and misleading.

[@BGfromGB]

@kgouws If he created the universe then he must be all powerful. But what I understand from scriptures He even created Heaven where I believe there will be no pain or suffering. He gave us a free will and has put us to the test by provide us with a moral set of rules & principles. If we live within those parameters, which I have no problem with, then there is no reason why we will not be rewarded with alife without sin or Satan. Shouls one despise him for that? No I don't think so.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

I'm an agnostic as far as the pink unicorns. I dont think you understand what I mean by God. I mean a unique, personal, plural, spiritual, eternally self-existent, transcendent, immanent, omniscient, immutable, holy, loving being, the creator and ruler of the entire universe and the judge of all mankind. The God I believe in is over and above all things, outside of time and space, completely distinct from the universe, and not to be confused with anything in it.

[@Mathenaut]

If you honestly don't have the determination or will to find strength outside of your mental cage, then by all means, stay inside of it. Don't claim that there is no hope outside of God. Plenty without God have hope, dreams, and aspirations. Then again, your only definition of 'hope' is that you'll have your greed for immortality sated, and all of the people who disagree with you will burn, right? Please, show me wrong. Many don't see hope in your god for many reasons.

[@sukruoosten]

so many prophesy came true en much good info about creation of the universe en how it functions en much more info about life it self its incredible but scientist just now are catching up to GOD who is all knowing please people bee a little open-minded you really think everything came here by chance ??? now that takes FAITH trust fear en praise HIM for bad people will get punished like Hitler en bin laden en good faithful people will get mercy en grace AMEN i cant wait for THE LORD TO RETURN

[@BGfromGB]

@kgouws From the tone of your post I get the impression that you are trying to make God out as if he is some sort of normal human being just like you and me. I may be wrong, But if you want to hate God on the basis of human suffering he supposedly causes then I cant take issue with that. But then if you are atheist then you ought to hate nature for the misery it has caused us.

[@tedgrant2]

I suppose God is like the square root of minus one. Neither exist, but they are very handy nonetheless.

[@nonseans]

@TYLERJB777 But you won't reveal a single of it, ofcourse...

[@AggravatedAstronomer]

I'm quite disgusted by the euphamistic reference to the suffering in the world as 'ragged ends', and to say that it's somehow justice to 'compensate' for suffering after the fact in an afterlife. Compensation is only the answer when you COULDN'T prevent the suffering. I doubt the daughter locked in a basement and raped by her father for years thinks much of your God's justice. All the other arguments boiled down "it'd be nice if it were true" and "atheism doesn't make all these nice promises".

[@Mathenaut]

Was this a cheap prod to cull my interest? Or are you honestly out of ammo, figuratively?

[@AtamMardes]

If religious fairy tales can fool Dr. John Lennox, imagine what it could do to ordinary folks.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Jim Wiley explains why John Lennox can't see the contradiction between suffering and a kind and loving god who can create any kind of world he chooses. John is a cult member.

[@sithispadomay492]

Lol so screw what's actually true, just choose Christianity because it spins lovely tales of life after death?

[@MathewSteeleAtheology]

That's it in a nutshell, yep.

[@switzerlandful]

Sithis Padomay lol, this is just a short clip of him giving a short answer on a basic question. If ur looking for a real challenge, there are longer more comprehensive videos out there on Christianity and why its , according to certain people, supposedly superior or unique to other faiths or viewpoints. kinda lazy to just pick on this one as the only defense for christianity.

[@sithispadomay492]

dave tony I know, apart from wishful thinking, there are also arguments from ignorance, arguments that beg the question, arguments from authority and other fallacies galore!

[@jakkuhl6223]

1.618 Dave A degree of intellectual rigor that can only be described as lackadaisical is a hallmark of modern atheism. Don't act surprised by the OP's conduct.

[@sithispadomay492]

Jak Kuhl I'll have you know I often watch debates, discussions and other videos on the matter. I will, however, admit to the occasional trolling.

[@BelieveNoGod]

john lennox are just a simple lier.

[@monkeybrain1968]

Atheists have no hope...

[@freezingka3730]

...and the reason is?

[@ddll23]

Bc atheists have not absolute moral... but subjective morality. ... if i.e. hurting others makes you happy,, then me I cannot prove that what you're doing is wrong. Who judges what is good or bad...

[@ddll23]

Did you know. Atheist dictators killed the most in past centuries .. look it up

[@AntQuick1102]

Amen

[@madenew000]

awesome, john!

[@simonbrown1486]

Because Jesus Christ rose from the dead we can grasp hold of it with all of our mind and soul and strength! Praise be to God!

[@joewright9879]

Yes! The crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ of Nazareth is at the very center of Christianity. Praise His holy name.

[@chaplainpaulvescio1417]

The evidence is in the millions and millions of lives that have been transformed into good for the glory of God and the Love and Power with in each them to endure great hardship and suffering with REAL HOPE Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. ( We do not see Abba Father, The Holy Spirit or Christ Yeshua in the flesh but we can clearly see the evidence of their handy work all around us each day..... John 14:27

[@Jurassic56]

Like all weather they regulate temperature. That's why life exists on earth and not on other planets in the solar system, which are either too hot or too cold. Please, do some research and stop blaming God for everything that's wrong in life!

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

Darwinist philosopher Michael Ruse writes this, Why should a bunch of atoms have thinking ability? Why should I, even as I write now, be able to reflect on what I am doing and why should you even as you read now, be able to ponder my points, agreeing or disagreeing, with pleasure or pain, deciding to refute me or deciding that I am just not worth the effort? No one, certainly not the Darwinian as such, seems to have any answer to this.The point is that there is no scientific answer.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

You say I'm not interested in anything but rationalizing what can not be rationalized. Please give me an example. I think its irrational to think that non rationality can produce rationality. You are telling me not to believe you, in fact it would be irrational for me to believe you. You have giving me no reason to trust what your saying is rational thought.

[@Jurassic56]

Well, the Bible says that when God created the world it was good. It was the sin of mankind that created disease and suffering. We abused the gift of free will, basically.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

The Christian world view tells us the reason we can do science. The reason we can understand the exterior universe with our interior minds, is because ultimately by what ever processes go back to rationality on God.

[@zytigon]

For the truth about religion try Robert M. Price, ' The reason driven life ' or John W. Loftus or Victor J. Stenger, ' God, the failed hypothesis' . Also interesting to have a look at the 1500BCE papyrus of Ani, with its god Osiris who weighs the heart to decide who can pass to the land of the living.[ The need to know the names of the gods & the negative confession & other magic texts to get there]. James Frazer's 'The Golden Bough' and C.S. Lewis, 'Mere Christianity'

[@polymath7]

bushfingers, please tell me you don't actually admire this Lennox guy?! His arguments are almost unbelievably stupid.

[@Mathenaut]

No God = No Rhyme and Reason? Oh come on, not even 15 seconds into the video! On the 'problem' of suffering, I present Epicurus: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - Epicurus Atheists don't believe in justice? Be thankful that I don't have enough space to keep ranting.

[@sukruoosten]

1 english is not my mother language (learned it only by watching TV not even at school) 2 i bet you understood what i all meant 3 dont like my spelling NO PROBLEM but let not my bad spelling question you about god !!! for in the end even your SUPERIOR spelling will not save you en we can even make a deal here if i promise to improve my spelling by reading English books will you sometimes read of the bible ??

[@johnsmithbsc]

He didn't answer that very well. All that talk about hope just reinforces the atheist delusion that religion is just a crutch to help people emotionally. The simple answer to his question (even without going into the Bible's answer to the question of suffering, which Lennox didn't really put across either) is that no, the universe isn't the way we would expect it without God - without God we would expect the non-existence of life.

[@BGfromGB]

@kgouws challenge me that pain & suffering proves nothing. But at least you acknowledge it is a fact of life for which there is nothing to prove. You say God loses power and control when we die. It's not a valid statement. Why? Because in your deluded mind that is YOUR assumption which you expect all and sundry to accept as fact. Whether all questions are valid depends on whether one has an open mind and is prepared to listen to reason. I believe John Lennox has set out to do just that

[@3Duga]

@kgouws God did not create sin, sin originated from Lucifer's desire. Then again by Adam and Eve disobeying God's law. In both these cases sin originated from free will and desire. God allowed both the angel Lucifer and Adam & Eve to choose to either obey Him or not. God provided His son as a sacrifice because the wage of sin is too high for us to purchase. That's beyond being fair since no man deserves or can gain Gods grace.

[@Mathenaut]

You know...I'll actually concede this point. Maybe you were just playing DA, maybe you actually believe the stuff...but yes, I jumped the gun as a consequence of the stance you are defending. I owe you an apology for that. I'll say this, though. Hope existed before christianity, and will exist after it is gone. Justice existed before christianity, and justice will continue to exist after it is gone.

[@bushfingers]

Look Mathenaut, I don't want to get into protracted arguments with you. The problem is that you are making endless assumptions about me and my beliefs. For example, you wrote "you're wanting the 'burn forever in hellfire' response that you think is 'just' for someone you are using as a scapegoat to target ideals unrelated to his." How do you know this? How do you know that I believe hell, or that I would think it just if people spent eternity there? How do you even know that I believe in God???

[@Mathenaut]

Hmm...Let me help you. ""If you honestly don't have the determination or will to find strength outside of your mental cage, then by all means, stay inside of it." That's ad hominem." No. 'You're wrong because you're stupid' is ad hominem. Learn what that fallacy is, it helps. "That's begging the question, because the whole point under consideration is the nature of 'hope' without God." So, pointing to the fact that people without god have hope is begging the question?

[@bushfingers]

Farvision, I think the fact that you and Matheraut provide such facile answers to the question of hope without God means that you have not thought deeply about this. (That is not to say that hope without God is not possible.) Also, perhaps I am wrong and you have. Your pithy responses her on the subject are in stark contrast to the thoughts of great thinkers like Sartre, Camus and Nietzsche. But maybe I'm just being absurd.

[@Mathenaut]

What form of justice was meted out to Stalin? That is pretty ignorant to ask, given the assumed perspective of justice. This is because it isn't enough for him to have died, or for the country to have collapsed; you're wanting the 'burn forever in hellfire' response that you think is 'just' for someone you are using as a scapegoat to target ideals unrelated to his. This is also ignorant of the fact that Stalin is part of the reason why we aren't speaking german now.

[@Mathenaut]

Hope in the usual sense? You mean it's not the feeling that what is wanted can be had or that events will turn out for the best? You mean to tell me that isn't possible without deferring to a god to beg at and worship? This was my claim to begin with. This is what farvision has expanded upon. Hope isn't something tangible that is given to you. It is idealistic. If that counts as ad hominem and begging the question (they don't), then...just lol.

[@samuellis]

@johnsmithbsc You agree that atheist have a delusion? What do you mean the universe isn't the way we would expect it without God? Also clearify without God we would expect the non-existence of life? Life is in existence so why would you say we expect non-existence of life, your logic isn't clear here, can you clearify?

[@BGfromGB]

@kgouws OK then, I detect you are an atheist. If that is the case, then what is your point in asking questions about suffering?Pain and suffering is but a natural part of our lives, whether you believe in a God or not, and that nis not delusional reasoning and which a child will soon find out as he grows up.

[@Mathenaut]

"Clearly, you are implying that if I were not so weak (or stupid), then I'd be able to see that you are right and I am wrong. " You're reaching to find offense, and ignoring the point that people have hope and justice outside of your particular diety. Yet, how is this explained from your end? It's all just false?

[@BGfromGB]

@kgouws is trying to reconcile with the attributes in the "book". I presume you are referring to the Bible. I don't see how you can possibly reconcile. Man doesn't need God. He needs, selfishness, greed, fame ,money etc all of which are irreconcilable to what God expects of us.

[@nonseans]

@jason5332 No. Christians hate Dawkins so much, because he appears to be quite nice guy with a peaceful appearance, instead of having a long tail, tridend and spliting around with ignited sulphur. It's hard to convince the flock that they should afraid of an older man.

[@farvision]

Obviously I reserve my careful writing for publications, not for conversations on youtube.

[@nonseans]

@TYLERJB777 "Christians don't hate people. If they do then they are posers." - If someones says: belive our faith or you will burn in hell for eternity, isn't it hatefull? Or this is just pretending? Or WHAT?

[@leonardgibney2997]

Organized religions tell us we're sinners and need to go through them to get redemption. We I'm not a sinner, mate, l obey the law and harm no man. Your threats don't scare me. You just want political power.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

How would you explain the origin of a finite universe from a timeless cause??? Please could you give me a better explanation for the incredible fine tuning of the universe to sustain intelligent life, other than a creator? Steven Hawkings says this "If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have recollapased before it reached its present size." .

[@sharonortedschempp8759]

The main "Blank" that John failed to "fill in," in this discussion on why God allows tremendous suffering revolves around three individuals two of who lived in "The Space-Time Continuum." These three individuals were Adam and Eve..... and of course Satan, who took on the form of a serpent.... in "the Space-Time Garden of Eden." This is not Green Mythology.... or any other Mythology.... but it is actual and real 'Space and real Time." When The Serpent was able to trick Eve, and then she was able to trick Adam, into disbelieving God's Reality and the Truth concerning The Tree which contained "The Fruit" (which wasn't an Apple) of the knowledge of good and evil, "Evil, Sin and Death" was unleashed into God's "Perfect World" due to Adam and Eve's disbelief and their disobedience. Consequently, that unleashing has brought these three horrific aspects into all Human Existence, and we are left with the consequences of their disobedience... which played directly into Satan's Plan. So...... God is not to blame, has never been to blame, and never will be to blame, for all of the evil, pain and suffering and death in our world...... and that is why He sent His "Only Begotten Son, Jesus" (John 3:16-17) into this world so that whosoever has surrendered to Him, and humbly acknowledged Jesus' "Payment for each person's individual sin" and also for "Mankind's General Sin," shall be saved. Here's "The Kicker:" The arrogant pride of most people simply won't accept Jesus' Sacrifice and payment for their sins..... because as John wrote in the opening lines of his Gospel of Jesus, "Men loved darkness rather than light.... they loved and still love their sin, instead of loving the light and forgiveness of God through Jesus' life, death, burial and resurrection! The Bottom Line: God has never been responsible for human suffering...... Adam and Eve... and each of us are responsible... down through the ages of human History...... Amen. Ted Schempp, Nashville

[@tomellis4750]

"Hope, Justice." Great, babies die in agony, but there's hope and justice. You are right, Atheism doesn't say your child died in agony but there's hope to see her in the afterlife, because it says there's Reality. Agony, pain, suffering is all around - that's Reality, no sticking loving gods into the equation.

[@copernicus99]

Unfortunately, we know that when the brain dies the person's consciousness dies too. So there is no possibility of an afterlife or reuniting with our loved ones. It's not a happy ending I know, but it's the truth.

[@danielhanna9742]

I think this is a less important topic than what is thought. It is either God exists or God does not exist. Truth should be the main concern. Not finding religion or God so one can feel personally constructed wellbeing. People should just deal with reality. And if one comes to believe God exists, then they have the individual task of ascribing their personal response. It is also intellectually dishonest to describe and focus on certain qualities in our existence such as war and disease, and then conclude that God does not exist. And it is intellectually dishonest to take the position of an atheist - meaning "God" does not exist in the absolute sense. It is a position assuming that one has all the information, and that information provides certainty, and confident that no new information will be received. But that is different to one saying the information one currently has does not not prove and convince of the existence of God. Meaning no certainty has been provided. But God may exist. But the one with the experience has not personally seen/met God. I think that would be more intellectually honest. I personally think that you have to be somewhat similar to an agnostic to be a proper Christian (That is something I don't need to extensively expand on here). You still have be in congruence with reality, exercising proper rationality. Even the biblical, and extra biblical texts do not provide absolute certainty. One instead would say this may be true, or these events may of happened. Unless an individual had a direct encounter with "God" that provides certainty about its/his existence, and subsequently provides certainty to the biblical and some extra-biblical texts. Not experiences such as tunnel lights, pleasant NDE encounters and even some figure that appears to an individual and says they are so and so such as the said appearance of Moroni to Joseph Smith (when that could be anyone or anything or nothing). There could be many possible explanations for such experiences, but the individual discards humility and arrogantly decides what is certain without certainty. If for example my brother suddenly says to me that he is the richest man in the world, will I instantly believe him? And you have the task to first define 'God'. And you have to deal with the idea 'Religion is responsible for much or all the ill in the world'. But if you focus on the individual level, then one can be more intellectually honest. Just because an individual associates with and is a member of a religion does not mean they properly represent the specific religion in question. It would be more intellectually honest to say that each individual is responsible and representative of themselves. And those specific individuals contribute to the ill in the world. And specifically with Christianity, it is made clear in the New Testament that some/many will misuse or misrepresent Christianity for many reasons, including personal gain. It does not mean the idea of Christianity is . It should be ascribed to the individual. And you have the issue of ascribing values to the different religions, since all are not the same, and some collective ideas can cause harm (based on how an individual personally defines harm). And you also have the issue of the many thousands of Christian denominations. It is an interesting situation to analyse and evaluate. One has to be right or more right or absolutely right regarding representation of original and authentic Christianity. That is not difficult to figure out with the access of the many sources of information. Lets process through some information and ask some questions first. There is a figure named Jesus who is said to be God. And it is said that his association and collective of individuals is referred to as the Church. And the Church was founded by some individuals referred to as apostles. And those apostles had a line of succession. But there are so many Churches, or denominations in other words. Which Church is the original and authentic Church said to be founded by Jesus and the apostles? Which Church has not changed or experienced little change through the passage of time? And many other questions would be asked with the unprecedented availability of information. It is not difficult. It is basically using intellectual humility to get to certainty and a truth of a matter. Could it be the Orthodox Church? And what is it regarding the different individuals from the different Christian denominations that developed and changed overtime, each claiming to represent Christianity when engaged in debates with claimed atheists and individuals representing other religions? Has Jesus who is said to be God, and the Church been misrepresented for the last hundred years, and especially the last few decades? Again it is not about believing what you want to believe. And it is not about believing something or a religious creed because of the hospitality of the individuals of that particular religion. And it is not about believing because of comfort and familiarity, like growing up in a certain religious sect. You believe what is objectively true. Period. And regarding the topic of suffering, that may indicate the internal state and preoccupation of that particular individual. Focus on themselves. And to give a simple answer to why there is suffering: Individuals have varying responses to their external and internal (body) environment, the material body is finite and fallible, individuals do stupid actions that effect other individuals, bad personal decisions/choices are selected, great self focus, and the natural world is not pleasant. I think that is a reasonable response. And to ask 'why does God allow suffering?': Maybe look for him/it and ask. Instead of constantly thinking that the spirit of the Lord is upon you at every moment ready to give you answers at a whim and attributing the goodness of the Lord because of events such as when you walked into a McDonalds and the que line quickly dispersed, and you were served your Big Mac with astounding customer service. And you enjoyed the Big Mac, and it was so pleasant, that you felt so good, and you were certain the spirit of the Lord was working through you. Overall I could be wrong about any of this. And God is the judge of each individual at the end of the day. Anyhow, I enjoy some of the arguments of Professor John Lennox. Same with listening to Richard Dawkins. Although he claims to be an atheist, he definitely has better qualities than many individuals who say they are Christian. Many of the arguments from atheists about why some (or most? or vast majority?) individuals are Christian is absolutely correct. That it is not about truth. And we should not tailor to the egocentrism of individuals through pleasant language, nicety and 'positivity' (which on its own is a manifestation of someone chiefly preoccupied with themselves).

[@nonseans]

Dawkins, Dawkins and Dawkins... boooring. Don't you christians have anything new to say?

[@barendse1]

What is so obviously wrong with the naturalist worldview is their intellectual blindness. Of course God could make a world that operates by itself without needing His hand to move the sun or cause rain to fall from the sky. Of course, God could make the human body adapt to it's environments and heal itself without His constant intervention. Pointing out that nature can operate on it's own "without a God" is like saying "a car can run on it's own without the manufacturer constantly needing to intervene".

[@christinedoe8192]

I'd say that's the number one go to, atheist belief about suffering, is to turn away from God, but it is interesting to me that they kinda beleive without knowing it , by turning away from what they disapprove of, God, God's ways, the allowing of suffering, they are angry at him, and I feel they are ANGRY, really angry at what they think if as a real God, cause otherwise if you don't believe in God, what are you angry about, don't waste your energy or get mad at the human with free will that's actually doing it.

[@lawrenceeason8007]

Designed suffering will always be an insurmountable problem for theism

[@AtamMardes]

Only a fool believes and considers as sacred the superstitious stories of a book just because the book claims itself to be the holy truth.

[@9Ballr]

He gave no answer to the problem of suffering, except to admit that there is none. So you are just left with faith.

[@fred-z5k]

suffering is listening to your baloney you seem to know everything about god good for you professor

[@Englishdosser86]

If a loving creator went through all that effort then it seems a waste to condemn billions of us to hell because he hasn't demonstrated beyond a doubt that he even exists. It is slightly odd that sending his Son over 2000 years ago in an obscure part of the middle East with shakey evidence is the best he could do.

[@onsenguy]

a creature powerful enough to create the laws of physics and galaxies wouldn't give a rats a** about us pathetic humans, and most certainly wouldn't care what we do while naked or what we choose to eat. obviously he didn't think much of us, considering he made us nearly identical to a chimpanzee. oh and to the evolution doubters--from comparative anatomy and dna all competent biologists worldwide would concur that we're roughly 98% chimp.

[@GodlessTrans]

So you have hope in suffering because you THINK some guy rose from the dead? We don't even know if he fully died and definitely can't prove he rose from the dead. Even if he DID rise from the dead, does not prove there is an afterlife or "hope after death."

[@Matthew24.4]

Ophelia McGraw - of course he died. Roman, Jewish and Greek historians like Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny the Younger (just to name a few) recorded it in the 1st century and they weren't Christians. There is not one professor from a credible university of ancient history, theology or biblical studies anywhere in the world that disputes that Jesus walked the earth and died. The 1st century historians also recorded that early Christians were tortured, persecuted and killed because they said that they saw Jesus after he rose from the dead. Why would someone allow themselves to killed when all that they had to say was 'I was only joking' - because they did see him rise from the dead of course! And you top it off by saying - "even if he did rise from the dead it doesn't prove that there is an afterlife" - the bible says that some people will never believe no matter how many miracles they see because their heart has been hardened and they don't want to know God and you are one of them. If he rose from the dead and said he was God chances are he is God - so when he says that there is an afterlife I'll believe him, period!

[@DunkeysLongLostSon]

This didn't answer shit!

[@bdave2049]

The problem of evil and suffering does not disprove God's existence. But it does raise serious doubts bout God's nature. It makes it very difficult to believe that there is an all-powerful and all- good God.

[@nostaldamus7773]

the humans themselves brought suffering and dead in the world as they sinned - GOD did not created it at the beginning and determinded them to live in this circle - what GOD created was a free will and the consequence of the free will is often, that a second, third, fourth, fifth person has to suffer, if person number 1 decided to to something evil. for example, if person 1 is greedy and irresponsible, than he maybe starts poisoning nature to gain resources and thousands to millions of other persons will get very ill cause of the destruction of nature. of course thats just 1 simple example. to oversee the consequences of an action of a human being is almost impossible (butterfly effect), multiply that to billions of people with billions of actions per life. plus in addition the angels also got a free will, and according to christian teaching the devil was one of them. also well created, but decided to fight against GOD, he also makes use of his free will - and uses it to live out his hatred against mankind. Limits were and are set for him, but no human being can judge from the outside where these are, only God knows.

[@RichardSavery52]

who says atheist represent the main line of reason is sadly mistaken.

[@hashmihere6379]

There is no evidence in his answer, just tales

[@KevinByrne-l4t]

What a load of cobblers.

[@hollayevladimiroff131]

Thank you!

[@beemer2869]

Astounding John. You are so gifted at representing our Christian faith, a true gift from God. Your purpose on earth is clear to see. I share your total faith. Your references to His Word through the Holy Bible, your intelligent and logical answers to difficult questions is astounding, and joy and peace at knowing and having a relationship with our Creator and Redeemer, radiates from you, and is a joy to see Nothing in the athiestic world view comes close to explaining while we are here, why we have value, and the peace and comfort this brings to believers. God is amazing, and you, Mr Lennox are serving Him wonderfully well, I am in awe of your gift from Him who made us and who loves us unconditionally. God bless you, and thank you. ❤️🙏❤️

[@bushfingers]

Cool - a very interesting subject.

[@JosueHernandez-jc1rh]

Why is there suffering in the world? because of sin.

[@timpieper5293]

Josue Hernandez then the relevant question is; why is there sin? If you say “because Adam and Eve”, then have I got some news for you; Adam and Eve didn’t exist. Evolution is a fact. "It is a fact that evolution happens; that biodiversity and complexity do increase, and that both occur naturally, only by evolutionary means. It is also a fact that alleles vary with increasing distinction in reproductive populations, and that these are accelerated in genetically isolated groups. It is a fact that natural selection, sexual selection, and genetic drift have all been proven to have predictable effect in guiding this variance. It is a fact that significant beneficial mutations do occur and are inherited by descendent groups, and that multiple independent sets of biological markers exist to trace these lineages back over many generations. It is a fact that birds are a subset of dinosaurs in the same way that humans are a subset of apes, primates, and eutherian mammals, and that both groups are subsets of vertebrate deuterostome animals. It is a fact that the collective genome of all animals has been traced to its most basal form, and that those forms are also indicated by comparative morphology, physiology, and embryological development. It is a fact that every animal on earth has definite relatives either living nearby or evident in the fossil record and indicated in phylogenetics. It is a fact that the fossil record holds hundreds of transitional species, even according to the strictest definition of that term. And it is a fact that micro evolution and macro evolution have both been directly observed." -Aron Ra Facts of evolution: kzbin.info/www/bejne/m3jQfXeBhtWSh8Um44s kzbin.info/www/bejne/a367hXV9mN6Bq8Um40s kzbin.info/www/bejne/ep6VaGp-aNSnbLsm29s kzbin.info/www/bejne/laOTq6OhZdGDfLcm41s kzbin.info/www/bejne/b2qQqI2QprSDg9km17s kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZqKmkmNjlsabZ80m58s kzbin.info/www/bejne/b2qQqI2QprSDg9km9s kzbin.info/www/bejne/p4SQoY2kiJKga5om kzbin.info/www/bejne/oIbYgmRuh72Cr8km50s kzbin.info/www/bejne/n6S5apuNjdWBoMUm47s But if you ignore this, then I’ve got some other news for you; humans don’t have freewill: kzbin.info/aero/PLkYjGll0E2OAN9pA7qAsZj-LTewqMDpro So our desire and choices to sin are not our fault. You may say “well, we may not have free will, but Adam and Eve did.” Of course, they also had the desire to disobey that they didn’t choose to possess. So where did the sin come from? Satan? Why was Satan’s power able to condemn us to sin? Why weren’t we made immune from Satan’s influence? And why was Satan made to have the desire to condemn us to sin? All roads lead back to the creator, Josue. Ultimately, if Christianity is true, then the god of Christianity is directly responsible for all sin and thus all suffering, and thus he is either not all powerful, not aware that his actions would result in this suffering, or is not all loving. Of course the simplest solution to this is that he doesn’t exist in the first place.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

The foundation on which all science builds is faith. Faith that the universe is rational, faith that our minds are rational, and faith that the rationality of our minds mirrors the rationality of the universe. The worst thing about atheism is that its apposed to rationality; it gives no justification for believing science.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

The Christian world view tells us the reason we can do science. The reason we can understand the exterior universe with our interior minds, is because ultimately by what ever processes go back to rationality on God.

[@JpAiMpEeSr]

way when the atoms inside of my skull happen for physical or chemical reasons to arrange them selfs into a certain way this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? And if I cant trust my own thinking, I cant trust the argument leading to atheism, and therefore I have no reason to be an atheist. Unless I believe in God, I cant believe in thought, so I can never use thought to disbelieve God.