Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2015 6:57 pm
by Bob Wilson

You appear to argue "suffering" is incompatible with a God who desires our good (which you call our "flourishing"). Since I'm not seeing why suffering would be more legitimate now than post-mortem, this sounds like the classic problem of evil, which argues that a good God cannot exist. Most philosophers agree that it's not a proof, because it doesn't show that God could bring the most good without suffering. But since there is no consensus on what would make suffering worthwhile, it remains a potent argument for atheism. Is this the conclusion your reasoning supports? Or are you arguing that suffering shows that the God who exists does not value our flourishing. Or are you implying another alternative that I am missing?