Arguments against benevolence.

This is one of the biggest questions believers have dealt with over the centuries. It goes something like, "If god is so good and loving, how can he permit all of the pain and suffering we see in our world?"

Christian apologists have made a living writing books to try and give an answer (one can't help but think of C.S. Lewis' The Problem of Pain in which he attempts to justify the very thing that drove him into atheism in the first place). Most of the arguments boil down to one of two points: suffering and pain make it possible to experience love to its fullest and in some sense, prepare people for the glory awaiting them in heaven, and pain and suffering befall us because we are, by our nature, evil and have chosen to separate ourselves from god and his divine plan. On the latter point, I would say to a believer that you can talk of "free will" all you like, but what you can't do - if you're going to take the creation story without a grain of salt - is argue that god did not create Adam's nature.

I'll elaborate with a simple syllogism:

1. Anything that was a part of Adam's make up (mind, body, nature) had to have come from god who created him.
2. Adam possessed the capability to do evil.
3. The capability to do evil must have resided in god.

Of course, this whole line of argument presupposes a belief that a god actually did create everything, which I don't subscribe to. But my point is if you are going to take up that belief, then you have to accept its logical consequences, among them: god created evil. Of course, such an exercise involves questioning god (and actually using your mind), which is one of the gravest sins you can commit. What a convenient circularity of obedience.

On the point of pain and suffering preparing one for the glory of heaven, I dare say I'm not sure where to begin. First off, if heaven exists (it doesn't), then nobody on earth knows what it is like. There are several vague descriptions throughout the bible and they hardly agree with one another. All that can be said conclusively is that heaven is the dwelling place of god and apparently, it is where his faithful will go to live with him ... forever. If heaven is the single biggest promise of a life spent doing god's will, shouldn't there be a more precise description of the place? Though, how accurate of a description would you expect given that the people who wrote about it were men who had never been dead? But, as we often have to do with faith, let's suspend our questioning and just assume, blindly, that heaven is the greatest possible place you could imagine. We still have to wrestle with the concept of eternity. How can we enjoy something forever? I'm 23 years old and already becoming pretty bored with life. I shudder to think what I would do if charged with the task of living forever. Further, if our struggles and pain on earth are to prepare us for this eternal glory, for how long will that effect last? After a few billion years or so, I would assume that one would forget whatever had happened in his/her earthly life, thus rendering heaven's experiences rather banal, considering there will be nothing of lesser greatness left to compare it to.

I asked my mom once how she planned to enjoy her eternal stay in heaven whilst she knew I was burning in hell. Not before expressing the horror which such a question brought her, she replied by saying that god won't allow her to even be able to think of such a thing while she is rejoicing with him in heaven. But that's precisely the contrast that C.S. Lewis and other apologists describe as necessary in order to be able to receive the gift of heaven. If those in heaven are unaware of those burning in hell (among them, some of their loved ones), then how can they properly gauge how great heaven is? Further, people often talk about heaven as a place where we reunite with our deceased love ones. Coupling this with my mom's argument, we are to believe that a widow would recognize her husband if she met him in heaven, but would have no recollection of their life together if he was burning in hell. And what if she remarried before dying? Are there menages a trois in heaven?

How silly is all of this!?

Allow me to propose a much simpler idea. Life is full of ups and downs, highs and lows, sufferings and triumphs. And at its conclusion, you die ... and that's it. If you did anything of value or importance while you were alive, you will be remembered and loved by those who survive you. And while this may not be the most comforting of ideas, there is no reason to believe that it is not our reality. At its worst, it's discomforting (though, certainly not more discomforting than the thought of eternal torture); at best, it increases the value we must assign to life.