The Narrow Path Ministries

In the past ten years I have studied the scriptures several seasons-of-time in the effort to understand the issue of human suffering. My perspective has been from the point of view of the sufferer and/or wondering why God allows others to suffer the unfairness of their painful circumstances. For example: the financially burdened family who follows the LORD, but is inundated with joblessness and a malformed, diseased newborn. Or a more severe example: the Christian family in Africa whose little ones die from rape or torture. This last example is an extreme case, but it has happened all too often!

In the middle of the night last night, I woke with a different perspective to wonder about. The thought was.... what if God put poor people on the earth FOR "rich" people!

Does anyone know of any scriptures that teach us that perhaps God designed the overall circumstances so "independent" people would be faced with other people's dependence-lack-suffering?

Maybe I should ask the question this way, do you think God wants some people to be the suffering-sick-poor-homeless?

Did God design it this way, perhaps to challenge the "haves" to give to the "have nots?" What other benefits might the Bible say those who "have" gain by helping those who "have not?"

Are there verses where God says HE wants some people suffering-sick-poor-homeless and others comfortable-healthy-rich-established?

I know this is redundant questioning of sorts, but I'm trying to formulate the question for clarity. Hopefully, one of these questions makes sense to you and conveys what I am trying to learn. Anyway, what do you think about my train of thought? Is it Biblical or just a random midnight musing....?

God bless you today!
selah*

I don't think God WANTS anyone to be in material poverty or to be physically sick, BUT I do think God is willing to allow such things because of the reasons you stated (and others). The alternative would be to turn the world more and more into a cosmic puppet show.

I always ask myself--

"Would Jesus put a horrible sickness on a child? Would Jesus stand by and allow a child to be raped? Would Jesus maim somebody to teach them a lesson? Would Jesus cause someone to live in abject poverty and squalor in order to teach rich people to share?"

I believe the answer is a resounding "No!" So neither do I believe that the Father would do such a thing:

"The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word." Heb. 1:3

TK

God wants no one to be poor, sick, or defenseless. He has given the rest of us the means to relieve such people of their misery. Let us faithfully do just that!

Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked." Psalms 82:3,4

Just to throw a slight wrench in here, I think it is not safe to say that God does not stand by and watch cruel crimes take place. If we were to accept this view, then the victims of crimes would have to conclude that God was either not around, or at least, refusing to watch them when they needed Him most, at the time of their victimization. What is the alternative? It seems that the only biblical option is for such victims to believe that God was present, capable of intervening, but willing to let the crime occur anyway! This last option is the one most modern people (including modern Christians) find intolerable. They would even suggest that such a view would turn a victim bitter against God.

However, this was the view of Joseph (Genesis 50:20), and it was the only thing (in my judgment) that prevented him from being bitter—either against God or against his human tormentors. It is certainly the only thing that helped me endure with grace the death of my wife at the hands of a careless driver. I can not be bitter at God for doing His good will at my expense, if I have already gladly surrendered my life and will to be sacrificed on behalf of His wise purposes (is there any other way to be a true Christian than this?). On the other hand, if I were to endure a crisis, and then to conclude that God had not been around at the time (when He has promised to be with me in all such circumstances*), I would have occasion to view Him as a promise-breaker.

If I took the option that God was aware of the danger, but was powerless to prevent it, then I would have to conclude that there may be precious little that He can deliver me from, and I would have to live in insecurity, despite His many promises to take care of everything that would otherwise concern me.

I'll stick with Joseph's view—since it was also the (correct) view of Job (Job 1:20-22), the psalmists (Psalm 119:71, 75), Jesus (John 18:11; 19:11), Paul (2 Cor.12:7-10), and Peter (1 Pet.1:6-7).



* e.g. Deut.33:27; Joshua 1:9/ 1 Sam.2:9/ 2 Chron.16:9 /Ps.34:7; 61:3; 84:11; 91:1-16/ Isa. 41:10; 43:2; 54:16-17/ Matt.28:20/ 1 Pet.3:12-13

(I'm afraid that I don't know how to hyperlink these references to online Bible verses—and I don't object to someone else doing that here. However, I find there is still great blessing in actually opening the Bible and looking up verses)

Steve, I sincerely hope you are saying that God is able to bring good, or fulfillment of a deeper purpose, out of man's cruelty, and not that He restrains His hand in order to bring forth that good, or that deeper purpose. If the latter were the case, then it is no wonder that people become bitter and blame God for their suffering.

I strongly suggest that those who are struggling with the problem of evil and suffering in the world, read Gregory Boyd's book Is God to blame?

If you don't have time to read the book, please read the INTRODUCTION Why Did God Do This?, a description of Melanie's experience. Melanie was a "fired-up" Christian, with whom the author spoke, after experiences which left her "feeling dead". She had been told by a Bible teacher whom she respected that "God has a reason for everything" and "There are no accidents in God's providence." She believed it, and thus was kept in her depression until Greg led her to see her suffering in a different light, and not as a result of God's doing.

You can look inside the book at Amazon, and read this introduction:

Melanie's Story

Okay, I just checked out my own link, and it doesn't take you directly to the introduction, but under "Book Sections" you will see "First Pages". Just click that, and you will get to Melanie's Story.

Hi Paidion,

As you know, you and I debated this same question on two previous threads. I could only locate one of them (http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &sk=t&sd=a), but could not find the other one. Perhaps someone else knows where it was. Anyway, there is no use going over the same points endlessly, since anyone can go back to those old discussions and see everything that we have to say on the subject.

I read a book not to long ago that expressed the premise that when the bible says that God gave man dominion over the earth, that is exactly what He meant. Unfortunately man blew it, but God had already spoken. Man still has dominion but unfortunately Satan has usurped and perverted our ability to exercise this dominion properly.

So God is not powerless to intervene, but rather since he gave man dominion, he must intervene through men, similar to what Paidion wrote above. It's not that God cannot intervene, but he is rather simply abiding by the word he had already spoken, i.e "Let them have dominion..." God always uses human beings to get things done on earth.

Anyways, this way of thinking has helped me to come to grips with the problem being discussed.

TK

TK wrote:I read a book not to long ago that expressed the premise that when the bible says that God gave man dominion over the earth, that is exactly what He meant. Unfortunately man blew it, but God had already spoken. Man still has dominion but unfortunately Satan has usurped and perverted our ability to exercise this dominion properly.

So God is not powerless to intervene, but rather since he gave man dominion, he must intervene through men, similar to what Paidion wrote above. It's not that God cannot intervene, but he is rather simply abiding by the word he had already spoken, i.e "Let them have dominion..." God always uses human beings to get things done on earth.

Anyways, this way of thinking has helped me to come to grips with the problem being discussed.

TK

Paidion wrote:

Steve, I sincerely hope you are saying that God is able to bring good, or fulfillment of a deeper purpose, out of man's cruelty, and not that He restrains His hand in order to bring forth that good, or that deeper purpose. If the latter were the case, then it is no wonder that people become bitter and blame God for their suffering.

I read all of the Biblical texts that have been submitted to this thread and when I can, will go to the other thread where Steve and Paidion debated this subject. Paidion's bolded phrase "in order to" raises the thought that I am trying to understand but I have to admit, I'm struggling to be able to articulate my question! Let me share what I believe based on what I've studied in the past and then, at the bottom of this post, I think you will see where I am going with this.

I agree with TK that God gave dominion to man so HE expects man to do as Paidion mentioned,

He has given the rest of us the means to relieve such people of their misery.

I also agree with TK that God can intervene through miracles, but usually chooses to do so through man. (thus, the scriptural instructions quoted below)

Further, I believe there are several overarching reasons why suffering takes place in the first place. Sometimes as in the case of Job, God steps back and allows satan to cause it (but God expected good to result from it). Sometimes God uses satan's-initiated-evil-accomplished-through-man, as in the case of Joseph (or torture/rape as in my African family example found in my introductory post) to bring about good. And sometime, as Hebrews 12: 5-11 states, the Lord HIMSELF chastens, inflicts, and chastizes--even scourges his sons and daughters. Perhaps I misunderstand the scriptures, but since all of these scenerios are illustrated and discussed within the Bible, then I am challenged to accept that at least one of these reasons is at work in any given circumstance.

By listening to TNP teachings, I learned that we must conclude that if we suffer, or when another person suffers, we must recognize that God in His sovereignty allowed or caused the suffering. I have heard it said that the promises of God are true unless the LORD deems it best to pull back HIS hand in a given circumstance. Thus, one may pray in faith that the promise (pick any promise of God) will be true in his life unless the Soveriegn Lord sees a better end-result. Thats why we pray HIS will be done. I'm certainly open to understanding this more clearly!

However, the heart of my questioning is found in the lives of Christians who have the means to help. The suffering one is a secondary issue, I guess. What about the one with the means or the challenge to help the suffering one? WHY are non-suffering Christians instructed by scriptures like (Hebrews 12:12) "Therefore strengthen the hands which hang down, and the feeble knees," (or James 1:27a) "Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble..." (or Romans 15:1, 2) "We then who are strong ought to bear with the scruples of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, leading to edification."

Did God know that the way Christians would learn family unity, selflessness and compassion would be through helping the weak, the suffering, and the orphans and widows? so for this purpose, He sometimes allows or sometimes wants the weak, suffering orphans and widows in our midst?

I don't have a fully outlined set of texts to support my supposition but I will say that it seems to me that Christlikenss comes as a result of entering into the sufferings of mankind and helping to relieve others suffering. Although I don't have Biblical texts to back me up, my inclination is to believe that God wants some people to suffer so the rest of us will be moved to compassion. For a local example, look around your church family and consider those you have close relationship with. When someone you care about is inflicted, you are suddenly thrust into compassion for them. This "close" experience makes it easier (if led by the Holy Spirit) to empathize with the "stranger outside your gates," i.e. suffering around the world. What do you think? What scriptures could shed light on God's purposes for suffering?

Although I don't have Biblical texts to back me up, my inclination is to believe that God wants some people to suffer so the rest of us will be moved to compassion.

Sue Ann, God certainly wants the rest of us to be moved to compassion. But do you really think He wants some people to suffer for that reason? I had an aunt who suffered excruciatingly in the last stages of cancer. She lost a lot of weight and begged me to pray for her. I did, and God didn't heal her. So though I had compassion, I felt helpless, and so did other people who cared about her.

I think as TK does, that people are suffering from each other as a result of their fallen nature, and they suffer from disease and natural calamities because nature fell along with man. God does sometimes intervene, and heals disease as well as saves people from the ravages of natural phenomena --- but this is rare.

I think God seldom intervenes for two reasons:

1. He respects the free will He has given man, perhaps the chief way in which man was created in His image, and thus He doesn't usually prevent man's inhumanity to man. He seldom intervenes in wars, for example.

2. God seldom saves people from illness, disease germs and bacteria, or from natural disasters such as floods and earthquakes.

We read in the Bible of God's intervention in all of the above, and it seems there are quite a few cases recorded. But we must remember that Bible history spans many centuries and extends to many countries. There was a tendency for the writers to have recorded the cases in which God did intervene. There must have been thousands of times as many cases in which He did not intervene. But these were usually ignored by the writers. And so it is in our day. We hear Christians report God's marvelous intervention to deliver His people, but few tell of the many times they have prayed for God to do something, and He seemingly did nothing.