Cancer, War and the God Question: why so much suffering? Prof Richard Norman vs Sara Stevenson hosted by Andy Kind
May 2, 2025
auto_awesome
Richard Norman, an Emeritus Professor of Moral Philosophy, debates Sara Stevenson, a Christian thinker with expertise in religious studies. They tackle the tough questions surrounding suffering and divine violence, especially in the context of the Old Testament. Is suffering a product of free will or a challenge to the existence of a loving God? The discussion probes deep philosophical and emotional responses to pain, emphasizing empathy and the complex interplay of faith and morality in addressing human suffering.
The discussion addresses why a good God allows suffering, emphasizing free will as a necessary condition for genuine love and autonomy.
Both speakers explore how suffering challenges Christian theology while highlighting the importance of empathy and compassionate responses to pain.
The interpretation of divine violence in the Old Testament invites a contextual analysis that argues for moral complexity rather than arbitrary brutality.
Deep dives
The Problem of Suffering and Free Will
The discussion opens with the exploration of suffering, centering on the question of why a good God allows it. One perspective considers suffering a necessary condition of free will, suggesting that the ability to choose also includes the potential to turn away from God. This view posits that God's respect for human autonomy is a form of love, allowing individuals to either approach or distance themselves from Him. This aspect of vulnerability is significant, as it aligns with the idea that suffering can lead one to seek a relationship with God, despite the harrowing experiences associated with pain.
Christianity and the Problem of Evil
A poignant point raised is that the problem of suffering is particularly challenging for Christian theology, which emphasizes the existence of a loving, omnipotent God. Conversations contrast secular perspectives that see suffering as a part of existence without deeper purpose against the Christian viewpoint that offers theodicies to explain why a benevolent God would permit suffering. One argument is that the reality of suffering signals a need for a loving God who will ultimately restore and rectify situations of pain. This dialogue invites deeper reflection on the implications of suffering on faith, challenging both Christian and non-Christian worldviews.
Empathy and Human Connection
The necessity for empathy when addressing human suffering is articulated, advocating for human compassion as a vital response. Both sides acknowledge the emotional weight of suffering and agree that engaging with those who are hurting is essential, transcending mere intellectual discourse. There’s a shared recognition that responses to suffering should prioritize genuine connection and support, emphasizing solidarity in experiences of pain. This humanistic approach not only fosters understanding but also reinforces the universal need for compassion in moments of crisis, regardless of one's beliefs.
Divinely Mandated Violence in Context
The topic of divine violence in the Old Testament raises critical questions about morality and the nature of God. The argument is made that biblical narratives must be understood contextually, considering cultural and historical nuances, particularly regarding accounts of warfare. Proponents suggest that these stories reflect judgments against systemic evils prevalent at the time, rather than wholesale genocide as understood in modern terms. By interpreting these divine commands as strategic interventions against oppression, one can argue that they are not arbitrary acts of violence but rather complex moral decisions shaped by the surrounding context.
The Role of Resurrection and Hope
Central to the Christian narrative is the resurrection of Jesus, which is presented as a harbinger of hope amidst suffering. It positions the crucifixion not as a concluding point of despair but as an essential demonstration of compassion and suffering on behalf of humanity. This belief in resurrection supports the idea that suffering has purpose and is not in vain, providing a framework through which individuals can find meaning. The Christian perspective frames suffering within a larger narrative of redemption and restoration, suggesting that suffering, while painful, can lead to profound growth and transformation.
Why does a good God allow violence and suffering — even in the Bible?
In this episode of Premier Unbelievable?, Andy Kind hosts a thought-provoking debate between humanist philosopher Richard Norman and Christian thinker Sara Stevenson. Together, they explore whether divine violence in the Old Testament undermines the credibility of Christianity, and whether humanists can offer a satisfying response to the reality of suffering.
Is suffering ultimately arbitrary in a godless universe? Or does the biblical story offer a deeper hope in the face of pain and injustice?
Join us for a challenging and honest conversation on faith, morality, meaning, and the problem of evil.
Subscribe to Premier Unbelievable? for more debates and discussions at the intersection of faith and culture.
SOCIAL LINKS
Twitter: https://twitter.com/unbelievablefe
Facebook: / https://facebook.com/premierunbelievable
Instagram: / https://instagram.com/premierunbelievable
Tik Tok: / https://tiktok.com/@premier.unbelievable
👉 Get bonus content, updates, fascinating articles, and early access to new episodes—absolutely free! Join now at www.premierunbelievable.com 🎉📢
• Subscribe to the Unbelievable? podcast: https://pod.link/267142101
• More shows, free eBook & newsletter: https://premierunbelievable.com
• For live events: http://www.unbelievable.live
• For online learning: https://www.premierunbelievable.com/training
• Support us in the USA: http://www.premierinsight.org/unbelievableshow
• Support us in the rest of the world: https://www.premierunbelievable.com/donate
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
