I’m not so much interested in the hackneyed Problem of Evil as an argument against God. I stewed on the article. It’s a matter of pushing things to logical conclusions. The existence of infants infected with a disease spread through touch reflects back on Christians and the character of the God they worship.
What do Christians put forward against the Problem Of Evil? All of the attempts and strategies for avoiding this conundrum boil down to comforting nonsense. God is Love. God loves us all in aggregate and as individuals. God has a plan for suffering humanity. God moves in mysterious ways. And one not often heard anymore: all of existence serves the Glory of God.
Any Plan for humanity that includes helpless infants dying of a horrific disease unable even to be touched to be comforted is horrific. Such things mean that none of us can expect any better from the God of Love. Hardly a day goes by without outbursts by His self-appointed spokesmen about how America will be punished for Same Sex Marriage, Pre-Marital Sex, Divorce, Desegregation, Allowing Interracial Marriage yada yada yada by The God of The Old Testament. Or that some natural disaster occurred because of the sinfulness of the inhabitants of the city. Katrina was quite the inspiration for these self-appointed spokesmen for the divine. Was everyone in New Orleans sinful? Even the regular churchgoers baptized in the Spirit? Do they really mean that the God of Love punished the innocent with the sinful? Is this all just some half-baked Calvinism about how we are all condemned to eternal punishment and it is only by Divine Grace that some fraction of humanity is “saved”? Then we come back to the infant with Ebola. It boggles the mind to consider that an infant could have “sinned” and is therefore worthy of suffering and punishment.
A one month old infant with Ebola means that none of us, no not one, can expect any better from the God of Love. Thanks are given for His Many Blessings, but really, doesn’t that mean “Thank You God for Not Killing Us Today.” That is not love. Arbitrary visitations of sufferings upon the good and the evil alike as proof of His Infinite Love is monstrous. It is behavior appropriate to a Monster at war with humankind. Attributing His Actions to His Love is propaganda in His war against humanity. Weaseling out of this conundrum with “it passes the understanding of Man” is acquiescence to evil. It is standing by while another is bullied. It is ignoring truth because it’s to much trouble. But really, any one who professes to worship and follow such a monster is an enemy of humanity more concerned with obedience whether to God, government officials [“ Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates (Romans 3:1)], morality, bankrupt politics, to their leaders concealing their pedophilia, and so on. Do not forget Paul liked to refer to himself as servant, slave, ect of his Lord & Master. This makes a fetish out of obedience and cowardly worship of power. If God exists He is the enemy of humanity and His worshipers despise and hate humanity. Everything good in human beings is used to justify worship to this Monster. To speak Lovecraftian, Yahweh and His Son are Old Ones.
* * *
It's bothered me for years why the Romans believed that Christians hated humanity. Now I understand.