Why Do Bad Things Happen To Good People?

[Forever Atlas]

Every religion and the denominations therein have different answers for this seemingly simple question: Why Do Bad Things Happen To Good People?

For Example: Some religions teach that it's because of something that was done in a past life. Others teach that it is God punishing you for something you have done - and even though you think you are good, you must be really doing something bad. Or, if someone dies, it's because God wanted them to be with him in heaven.

There are so many different teachings and beliefs on this subject. So I'm curious, for those of you with somewhat spiritual or religious backgrounds, what is the answer for you? Do you have an answer? Does your religion or set of beliefs offer an answer?

This topic is from an article of the same name. That article also asks the following questions:

• Why do bad things happen to good people?
• Is God to blame for such things?
• Are calamities random occurrences, or are they man-made?
• Could it be Karma, that is, the result of one’s actions in a past life, that causes personal suffering?
• If there is an almighty God, why does he not protect good people from harm?
• Will life ever be free of evil and suffering?

So there are six questions there. What is your (or your religion's) answer or belief regarding each question?

 

[BlackSeven]

Coming from someone thats not religious at all I can only answer a couple of these questions.

Why do bad things happen to good people?

Because generally "good people" are pushovers who let people steamroll them without saying anything. If we're talking about violence wise, I guess because their easy victims?

Are calamities random occurrences, or are they man-made?

Why can't they be both?

If there is an almighty God, why does he not protect good people from harm?

If there was one, why would he care about 8,000,000,000 ants.

Will life ever be free of evil and suffering?

Not until life is completely devoid of desiring things, materialistic or otherwise. The root of most evil stems from greediness and jealousy imo, but a life devoid of wanting things sounds like a boring one.

 

[Nyangoro]

Why do bad things happen to good people?

Because bad things occur in this world and are ignorant to how supposedly deserving any given unfortunate recipient is. Now, it's possible that we take more interest in it do to a cultural concept of karma, along with a general desire to see good things happen to a good person. If something bad happens to a bad person, we generally look the other way. A good person? That gets our attention, so we probably have a bias for recognizing the "bad things happen to good people" situation.

Is God to blame for such things?

Supposing the existence of such a being, it would depend on the degree to which it interacts with the world and its temperament. From there, you can put as much blame on or take as much off as you so choose.

Are calamities random occurrences, or are they man-made?

Both are conceivable. A twister ravaging the Midwest could be thought of as a random occurrence, while a terrorist attack is man-made. Of course, you could go deeper into the idea by looking at man's influence on their environment, thus increasing and/or decreasing the likelihood of certain, otherwise random incidents. Not sure if that's within the scope of this topic though.

Could it be Karma, that is, the result of one’s actions in a past life, that causes personal suffering?

To the extent that one is burdened by their familial and other environmental connections. If your father was a notorious bank robber, you may find it difficult to get employment at a bank. If you're referring to some universal proclivity towards balancing out fortunate and unfortunate incidents, I would doubt it.

If there is an almighty God, why does he not protect good people from harm?

Again, that would go back to those earlier two questions that one needs to ask themselves regarding a deity's supposed impact on the world. Looking at the adjective you've placed there, it seems that the first question is answered; which leads us to the second, one of temperament. This could be many things. Perhaps it has bound itself to certain rules by which it may or may not interfere with the world. Perhaps it randomly selects who it will protect at any given moment. Perhaps it doesn't care at all. I imagine there are any number of justifications for an almighty deity's perceived apathy towards human suffering.

Will life ever be free of evil and suffering?

Supposing that evil consists of actions that disagree with an individual or society's generally mutable and relative concept of morality, and supposing that suffering is situations, incidents, circumstances, etc. that run contrary to an individual or society's concept of a happy life, it seems unlikely. Differences inherent in human individuals and collectives beget both of these, after all.

 

[Cosmic+Amarna]

Why do bad things happen to good people?

Because we live in a universe in which things affect one another. There is both good and bad in our world and no natural force that distinguishes and disallows one from happening to the other and vice versa. Nature is beautiful and nurturing, but it can also be ugly and cruel. The universe permits and allows for such things, so because it can happen it does happen. There is no real, satiable answer for this question I feel. Unfortunately, I'd expect it from time to time

Are calamities random occurrences, or are they man-made?

Both.

Could it be Karma, that is, the result of one’s actions in a past life, that causes personal suffering?

Sure, it could be, but I highly doubt it. I used to entertain the idea of Karma but I eventually came to the conclusion that the concept is kinda nonsense. In a simple sense we can see how the idea in concept is valid. If you do good things it is more likely that good things will typically happen to you and if you do bad things it is more likely that bad things will happen to you because of that. I mean, that is true for the most part- if you steal, lie, inflict physical/emotional pain upon others it is more likely that you will experience unpleasant things in your life because you cause shitty situations for yourself and those around you.

But if we want to get into past lives and how one's positive and negative actions/intentions ultimately affects their current life and their future life, I must digress. One would drive themselves mad trying to truly contemplate and consider all of their actions- positive, negative, and neutral. This determination would be subjective and relative, so what real value would that determination even have/hold. There are many things that we all do everyday that we aren't even aware of that affect the lives of others in either a positive or negative way. Simply put, things are way too complex to ever be considered 'as simple as that'.

If there is an almighty God, why does he not protect good people from harm?

That's a really good question! (a very old one!) I think that there are only two plausible answers for this based off of the assumption that God is real: Either the deity does not want to help or can not help because it is unable to do so.

Will life ever be free of evil and suffering?

Unfortunately, I do not think so.

Is God to blame for such things?

To an extent, yes. If God is real, perfect, and almighty, uh yeah I kinda have some pretty high expectations for It then.

 

[Deleted member 36435]

everyone is shit
good ppl aren't real

 

[Hidden]

Every religion and the denominations therein have different answers for this seemingly simple question: Why Do Bad Things Happen To Good People?

I like this discussion because of what you point out above, that every religion and worldview has to find some way to account for the fact that "Bad Things Happen" outside of our control. I don't have a particular religious view to espouse, but I would like to comment on the original article you linked.

I agree with some of the beliefs the writers express. The idea of a God that allows suffering, even if for reasons that may not be immediately clear to us, is still more palatable to me than a God that creates suffering, however "righteous" the cause. That said, I should point out the double-standard that Nyangoro also references: the article specifically asks "why do bad things happen to good people?" It is mostly silent on the question of why bad things happen to bad people,* perhaps following the assumption that they deserve it. (*The passage in Luke is not really an exception: the message I read there is that all people suffer because all are guilty of sin, therefore we must repent; not that suffering is arbitrary.) I'm not really sure what the writers think about bad things happening to bad people, or whether God punishes us on this Earth for our sins.

Some of the reasons the article gives for why God allows suffering are surprising to me. Specifically, the reason that preventing suffering would require foreknowledge of suffering, i.e. knowledge of the future. The article says that God can know the future, but he uses this power with discretion, presumably so as not to compromise human beings' free will. I do not subscribe to the article's views on omniscience and free will, so that part of the argument isn't terribly convincing to me. I also can think of many ways for God to intercede in the world to mitigate suffering without using His omniscience and potentially negating free will.

I can however appreciate the article's (or God's) reluctance to compromise free will in any way, and this brings me to what I suppose could be my own 'religious' take on the question. In Raymond Smullyan's Is God a Taoist (as long-time readers know, no Intel post is complete until I reference this essay!), a mortal demands to know why God gifted (or cursed) humanity with free will. After testing and rejecting many hypotheses, they come to this one--that with free will, people will tend to hurt each other -and themselves- less than without free will. This is the opposite of much of Christian thought (including, it seems, the article's), which says that free will is one of the causes of suffering. But I prefer this answer. Like many other posters here, I think suffering is simply a natural part of our existence in the world (why? because the universe wasn't specially-made for us, and we just have to get by as best we can). But maybe 'free will', that is our awareness of our actions and their consequences, does mitigate the damage we do to ourselves and to others. I don't know that it does, and I'm not sure how anyone could test that, but it is what I would like to believe.

Finally, I am surprised that the article does not bring up the Book of Job, one of my favorite books of the Bible and one which seems to speak to this problem directly! I am curious how the writers of the article interpret God's answer to Job, which is in fact a refusal to answer: "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand." I have always understood it to be a reminder that Divine Will (read: fate) is separate from human will, and not subject to human notions of 'justice' or 'righteousness' or even 'right and wrong.' God's will is inscrutable to humans, and we just have to live with that.

 

[Nutari]

A better question: why do good things happen to bad people?

We live in a broken world. Plain and simple. God does not walk around punishing people by causing evil to happen. If he allows something evil to happen, it's to have an end result that works out for good. As my theologian friend said this morning: "It's good that evil exists, but evil is not good." In that evil in the end results in the glorifying of God. However, he was never the author of evil- so we can't point to God and say "hey, you jerk! Thanks for all this pain and hurt!" I mean, we can, but it's counter intuitive.

 

[Hidden]

A better question: why do good things happen to bad people?

Why not ask: why do good things happen to good people, and why do bad things happen to bad people? Do we assume to know the answer to these?

We live in a broken world. Plain and simple. God does not walk around punishing people by causing evil to happen. If he allows something evil to happen, it's to have an end result that works out for good. As my theologian friend said this morning: "It's good that evil exists, but evil is not good." In that evil in the end results in the glorifying of God. However, he was never the author of evil- so we can't point to God and say "hey, you jerk! Thanks for all this pain and hurt!" I mean, we can, but it's counter intuitive.

I've heard this argument in many different contexts: Milton proclaims it at the end of Paradise Lost where he manages to cast our expulsion from Eden as a hopeful event for humankind; this movie invokes it as an argument that horrible events such as the Holocaust are not punishments, but a sort of 'refining fire' through which God brings greater good upon the world; a certain essay that I like to reference says that what we think of as evil is simply the inevitably long time it takes to reach enlightenment, and when we understand this fully (i.e. are enlightened) we will not see it as an evil but the very essence of attaining enlightenment. And one of my favorite, inspiring renditions of the argument comes from The Lord of the Rings!

But this argument (and it is an argument) relies so heavily on faith; not strictly religious faith, but just the faith that good trumps bad, that there is a larger benevolence or at least balance at work in the world, and that it will give "good people" (there's that phrase again) a brighter future in the cosmic scheme of things. And while I want with all my heart to believe this (I really love Sam's speech at the end of Two Towers), I'm not sure I can all the time, and I am even less sure that I can expect other people to believe it. It's more convincing for someone to say "It gets better" from the other side; the problem being there is no "other side" to suffering and evil in the world. None that we've reached at any rate. So I don't know that I can accept the argument that all evil and suffering ultimately serves a greater good. That requires a lot of faith.

Referencing a link I posted above, the movie God on Trial is an absolutely amazing study of many of these questions about God and suffering. I've finally found a good quality, full length version on Youtube, and I strongly recommend it to any who are interested.
[video=youtube;5caAug5n8Zk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5caAug5n8Zk[/video]

 

[The Conquerer]

Why do bad things happen to good people?

No particular reason most of the time. Often, it's just what's not in the cards. Wrong place wrong time or something to that effect.

Is God to blame for such things?

Nope, then again, I'm a bit of an atheist.

Are calamities random occurrences, or are they man-made?

Can be both.

Could it be Karma, that is, the result of one’s actions in a past life, that causes personal suffering?

I don't believe in Karma but the world isn't so that one can escape all of their problems without facing them head on.

If there is an almighty God, why does he not protect good people from harm?

Well there needs to be a level of consciousness reached by a mass to prevent most harm to any and everything on this planet. May not be the answer you're looking for, but that's what I feel is required.

Will life ever be free of evil and suffering?

Perhaps being at peace with the notion that nothing will ever be perfect and suffering lowered to a tolerable enough level is the idea.

 

[Nayru's Love]

• Why do bad things happen to good people?

The same reason why a child is on equal footing with an old man in a game of cards; the wheel of fortune ultimately doesn't give a shit who you are. It won't tell you why there are good and bad times, but that both exist in life.

• Is God to blame for such things?

You could blame God, depending on your understanding of him and his role in the universe.

• Are calamities random occurrences, or are they man-made?

As said by everyone else, both.

• Could it be Karma, that is, the result of one’s actions in a past life, that causes personal suffering?

I don't think so; that implies too much that all suffering can be avoided by having complete control of life, which I find to be downright impossible.

• If there is an almighty God, why does he not protect good people from harm?

In a way similar to the parent-child relationship, I think it'd be a matter of teaching survival. At some point or another, the child must let go of the parent's hand in order to become strong and independent themselves. If God kept on intervening in our destinies, how would we grow in the same way?

• Will life ever be free of evil and suffering?

No, I don't think so. Much like the vices of a significant other, evil and suffering are to be endured in the relationship that we each have with the world around us.

I can however appreciate the article's (or God's) reluctance to compromise free will in any way, and this brings me to what I suppose could be my own 'religious' take on the question. In Raymond Smullyan's Is God a Taoist (as long-time readers know, no Intel post is complete until I reference this essay!), a mortal demands to know why God gifted (or cursed) humanity with free will. After testing and rejecting many hypotheses, they come to this one--that with free will, people will tend to hurt each other -and themselves- less than without free will. This is the opposite of much of Christian thought (including, it seems, the article's), which says that free will is one of the causes of suffering. But I prefer this answer. Like many other posters here, I think suffering is simply a natural part of our existence in the world (why? because the universe wasn't specially-made for us, and we just have to get by as best we can). But maybe 'free will', that is our awareness of our actions and their consequences, does mitigate the damage we do to ourselves and to others. I don't know that it does, and I'm not sure how anyone could test that, but it is what I would like to believe.

While I do agree that free will plays an important role in human suffering, I think it has more to do with sentience. Or, in other words, our thoughts over our actions. If an animal feels threatened by something else, it'll probably act negatively/aggressively towards it. It doesn't matter whether you're a human or animal, you'll try to eradicate what you feel threatened by. However, with sentience, we can warp our perceptions of others to justify killing them off, whether it'd involve perceiving them as threats, expendable, etc. This is how genocides can happen: One group of people generally perceives another group of people as lesser than human/necessary to exterminate, and therefore they can kill them under their own sound reasoning.

Man certainly is the cruelest animal.

 

[Hidden]

While I do agree that free will plays an important role in human suffering, I think it has more to do with sentience. Or, in other words, our thoughts over our actions. If an animal feels threatened by something else, it'll probably act negatively/aggressively towards it. It doesn't matter whether you're a human or animal, you'll try to eradicate what you feel threatened by. However, with sentience, we can warp our perceptions of others to justify killing them off, whether it'd involve perceiving them as threats, expendable, etc. This is how genocides can happen: One group of people generally perceives another group of people as lesser than human/necessary to exterminate, and therefore they can kill them under their own sound reasoning.

I agree--I should have stated more clearly that what I define as "free will", most would define as sentience or consciousness (not conscience). It is what you define above as "thought over action," that there is a pause between impulse and action where thought interposes itself. That moment of reflection is the basis of free will.

The question is whether this helps or hurts our interactions with others. I can hardly deny your argument that we sometimes use our thought to justify horrendous actions, actions we might not otherwise be inclined to take. Yet I still believe thought is necessary to have even a conception of cruelty, and an aversion to it. As Simone Weil puts it in her own study of suffering, "[For the powerful man] nothing has the power to interpose, between the impulse and the act, the tiny interval that is reflection. Where there is no room for reflection, there is none either for justice or prudence" (Weil, The Iliad, or the Poem of Force). Similarly, note that in Smullyan's essay, when God offers to remove the Mortal's free will, the Mortal (reluctantly) refuses because it is possible that without his free will (read: sentience) he will commit actions that he currently, as a sentient creature, regards as sinful or hurtful to others. It is his consciousness that recoils at the thought.

But it does seem strange that the same faculty which allows us to recognize and censure cruelty can also serve to justify it. Given our propensity to rationalize hurting others (and ourselves), you could question whether free will, or sentience, really does help us in the larger picture. I like the argument "that with free will people will tend to hurt each other -and themselves- less than without free will," but I don't know that it's true.

Given that we seem to be stuck with sentience and free will, however, I suppose it's kind of a moot point--we just have to make the best of who we are and what we have.

Man certainly is the cruelest animal.

You can make that argument, but I'm not sure it's entirely fair, given that man is (to my understanding of the term) the only animal even capable of recognizing cruelty. In which case, the comparison is largely meaningless.


Back to the original question (sort of)-- I was rewatching the last two episodes of Neon Genesis Evangelion the other day (because I like them, shut up), and I realized I still connect very strongly with its observations on human suffering. We are conscious, sentient beings, but our very consciousness isolates us; because I can only ever be conscious of myself, I can't truly know what those around me think or feel. This isolation is a source of suffering and a kind of suffering in itself. And yet, in both the original series and the End of Evangelion movie (I haven't seen the Rebuild series yet), the protagonist decides that this is a suffering worth enduring, because consciousness also bears the possibility of happiness. Though I express reservations above about the faith that good will ultimately come of evil, the faith that happiness is at least possible in the face of suffering is (I think) necessary to human existence. That's why I find the arguments in Weil, Smullyan, and Evangelion so moving.