If you are a theist how do you explain the suffering of animals and babies?

Suffering of animals and bibes in what way?
>humans hurting them
thats humanities evilness, not God's fault.
>got cancer or some kind of illness
God is allowing it to happen to strengthen the character of the parents. Suffering brings maturity and wisdom, those who have never suffered tend to be the most delicate of snowflakes.

In that situation, what is your point of view on when an animal or person or plant dies? What happens to the soul?

Ok, then let's say a serial rapist and torturer kidnapped the baby and the parents, tortured and killed the baby, raped the wife, and killed both the wife and husband, again after torturing them. How would God be strengthening their character?

>that was the fault of the human. not of God.
I said that when it is not a human-committed action, then it is one which God allows to happen to strengthen character.

please read more carefully.

Again, I have to ask: How would that experience strengthen their character?

i just showed a distinction.
how are you not registering that?

the example you gave was of huamnity commiting evil against humanity, not God attempting to strengthen the victim's character.

Oh crap, my bad. That flew right over my head. That's what I get for multitasking.

So why would God not interfere with the evil human's attempt to do to one another? Using my example, why would God let it happen and not stop the rapist/torturer?

>So why would God not interfere with the evil human's attempt to do to one another? Using my example, why would God let it happen and not stop the rapist/torturer?
Good question.

I think because doing so would interfere with their free will.
If not that then i don't know why.

Predestiny. Only good people like my family are perfect and live in grace.

God is cruel.

So wouldn't God then care more about the rapists/torturer's free will than the safety of his victims? I've also heard the argument that God would be ignoring the victims free will if he did nothing, but I'm not sure if that logically checks out.

Honestly i don't know why God allows evil sometimes. If i could ask for a straight answer i would, but i can't. I just trust there is a reason for it, like that ultimately the suffering leads to goodness of some variety, or that God ultimately punished the criminal for his actions, or something like that. I'm not God though so i honestly can't say for sure what his reasons are.

>Only good people like my family are perfect and live in grace.
there are no perfect people.
Everyone is shit in one way or another and falls short of God's grace.

Adam sinned

That brings up another interesting argument: Why would God not reveal himself and allow at least some form of two way communication? Why rely on old scripture that is logically questionable and occasionally inconsistent?

Suffering is a natural imperative, like pain. You feel like you are suffering because you think you are in a situation which you can't survive in.

This is Dr Ravi Zacharias. He is an expert on the subject. You can probably use his logical structures to other situations.
youtube.com/watch?v=grWycEu-SPc

because when God reveals himself it only repels people from him.

Assuming the OT is reliable in its narrative, God made it explicitly clear to his people that he exists and is the one true God. They then proceeded to sin even harder than if God had not.
The pharasees saw jesus do cool shit, then proceeded ot harden their hearts against God.
Finally, if atheists knew for 100% certainty that God existed, then their faith would lack just that, faith. It would no longer be genuine, and they would HAVE to beleive since there would be no alternative. They might in that scenario just also deny the very fact of his existence despite being shown.

These are all reasons why God probably leaves most of this up to faith, because otherwise things go shittier than before. Satan knows that God exists, and still strives against him.

>God made it explicitly clear to his people that he exists and is the one true God. They then proceeded to sin even harder than if God had not.
This makes zero fucking sense and only a primitive desert goat fucker would think people behave like that.

That's like saying crime goes up when a strong and effective police force is around. It's only 'right' when you make the intellectually dishonest argument that without police there is no crime because no one is getting arrested.

>then their faith would lack just that, faith. It would no longer be genuine
Why does 'faith' matter? If entity proves itself to be powerful enough and claims to be the Christian god, it doesn't matter if you actually believe it's the christian god, you're still going to act as if it is so you don't get plunged into (maybe not actually)Hell.
I fucking hate the faith argument
>Please believe in me! I'll send you to hell if you don't! Oh, your belief in me is no longer valuable because I have proven myself to be worthy of that belief to you.

with police there is a phycical presence that directly punishes you if you are around.
God gave his people laws, and they kept breaking it

why all the rage btw?
are you the other guy i was discussing with?
If so then why did you suddenly stop being such a chill and cool guy?

If God has proven himself to exist there is a literal OMNIPOTENT, OMBIPRESENT, OMNISCIENT BEING THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO HIDE FROM AND THERE -WILL- BE CONSEQUENCES unlike police who are not.
That's worse than an argument, you're actively supporting my own argument.
That was my first post in the thread.
Because I particularly hate faith based argument as it will never ever makes sense to me. I'm alright with Christianity, otherwise.
There is no type of faith, other than ignorant faith, that requires you to not have any proof at all to work.
I have faith my car will work tomorrow despite being able to derive proof that it will likely work tomorrow by inspecting it. This doesn't make the faith any less than if I had faith the car would work tomorrow and had no means to tell if it would really work tomorrow.

OK i understand.
yu dont like ignorant faith based arguments.

To be honest, i dont have all the answers.
All i know is that what the israelites did happened. God showed them mercy and freed them from egypt. then made a covenant with them, which they then broke, and then he made another, and they broke that too, etc. God is a God o wrath, but also a God of mercy, so for some reason he kept sparing them and decided to forbear their sins and send a messiah to fullfill the covenent for them. that much i know. I dont really understand the why, all i know is that it did happen.
This is what the narrative in the OT shows. It seems to hold true with police too.

People only break the law when they think they can get away with it, when they SEE a policeman they are reminded that an immediate repurcussion will come because of their actions. With God he is like a cop that is always watching but never physically present to remind them of the consequences, nor are the consequences immediate.

this is the best explanation i got.

Sorry, went out for a little, but now I'm back.

Are you saying that the more evidence we have of God, the less likely we are to believe in him? The pharisees and OT people might have shunned God even with clear evidence, but I'm telling you right now, if God came down and told me everything, I would be changed and believe. And I think most rational people would do the same.
I would have a lot of questions, like: Why did you commit and authorize so many autocracies against innocent people, and why did you flood the world, killing innocent animals and children, or rewrite the ten commandments, or lead distraught and scared people through a desert for 40 years, or curse all of humanity for 1 sin committed because Adam and Eve lacked understanding?

But seriously, you really think that if God came down and presented himself in front of all humanity that they would turn away and shun him? Even with all of his supposed glory? Even with the truth shown to us all? And that it's better that he only communicates through ancient texts?

Here, this is an overview of the book of Job. It covers this exact subject.
youtube.com/watch?v=xQwnH8th_fs

Simple. Worldly suffering, just like worldly pleasure, is utterly trival compared to eternal suffering in Hell, or eternal bliss in the Kingdom of God.

I watched the video (I used to love The Bible Project channel) and from what I understand, (not just from the video but from previous studies into the book of Job) is that the book of Job is trying to say is that God is in control and humans can't possibly understand why he does what he does. So if he punishes Job for something, even though he was sinless, there are justified reasons. The universe is too complex for us to comprehend, but God can and rules justly.

I call bullshit.

That's an easy way of explaining away any deity's actions. "We couldn't possibly know why he/it does what it does!" Most religions try to use that argument, but I find it not just morally disgraceful, but quite horrific. Not only is God not telling Job what he did wrong, but throughout the book we come to realize that Job did NOTHING wrong! And that because of his devotion and love of God he lost his children, his wealth, his health, and his own mental stability to a bet between God and the satan! I would never want to serve this deity that seems to punish good morals and kind behavior!

It is far more likely that the people that wrote the book of Job were attempting to reason with their faith, and find a solution to pain and suffering in accordance with perfect actions and faith being showed towards God. But failed to realize that in probable reality no kind and loving god exists.

if I were an atheist, I would have severe cognitive dissonance about all people being created equal and evolution not applying to humans--when they so clearly aren't and it so clearly does

Constantly making every thing right in the world is a chore

It makes me angry if I want to believe that i have a direct line to God or something, but from a purely objective perspective there doesn't have to be any correlation between the existence of God and bad things happening. Maybe he's doing the best he can and sometimes shit slips by him?

Also this

>dude why dosnt god just do everything for us and make us live forever, why doesnt god grant all my wishes, dude god should just make every one a billionare and super handsome and beautiful and have the perfect life, dude why dosnt god conform to my simplistic self centered view of him, guess he dosnt exist check mate theists

>be christian God, god of love
>real love, not shallow human "love" that is actually oversized tolerance, but the love of a parent whipping a son's ass when the son does some retarded shit and an ass-whooping is the only way to fix this
>Since God is love, above everything else, he wants us to grow as individuals and a species
>Free will is the tool by which we are allowed to learn and grow, but as all tools, evil can be derived from it, this duality being the whole fucking point
>hurrrr why doesn't God stop murderers
really, christian theology is basic as fuck, I don't even understand you noob atheists

>all athiests are sjw tier leftists
and all christians are frog worshipping KKK members, right?

Suffering teaches lessons to animals and humans, including babies. God has us endure pain because he knows it will make us better in the long run

>*dies from cancer*

You had me until the second sentence. As far as I've been led to believe, it's more like this:

All gods ever worshiped by humanity throughout history do exist, however they aren't actually gods, and are more like spiritual entities given a special status. Instead of humanity being born by their actions, they are born from humanity's belief in them. This includes Yahweh (the Christian god), Allah, Zeus, Thor, Ra, Vishnu, and so on. Where I disagree with what you say is this notion that non-sentient beings have souls. While the spiritual essence (AKA Vis) of beings like animals and plants can be compared to souls, their essence is nowhere near complex enough to allow for such phenomena as intelligence, self-awareness, and consciousness, which are all the criteria needed for a being to be considered sentient, and therefore have an actual soul.

I believe Pantheism has merit due to the possibility that the Supreme Creator AKA the One True God either IS the Universe, or that the Universe exists as a simulation or 'thought experiment' within Its mind. As the Universe is simply a thought experiment, there is no goal that the Supreme Creator has for Its creations except to gain knowledge regarding what is happening within the Universe. This means the Supreme Creator is not concerned with the presence of evil or suffering that any being, sentient or not, may experience as part of their existence. There is the possibility that when the Supreme Creators finally learns and knows everything there is to know about the Universe, the Universe will reset and everything that existed before will cease to do so, including pain, evil, and suffering. Of course, it could also end up like pic related.

Theist does not mean a deity is benevolent. Maybe some god in the far out mists created humans or allowed them to evolve but doesn't give a fuck. This foolishness to believe god cares is Abrahamic, maybe whatever deity out there literally just doesn't care about humans or animals. Maybe it just wants to see existence.

This

If there is less evil in the world, would you believe?

*dies of malaria*

Don't see the problem myself. God desires our being, not the avoidance of human suffering per se, let alone animal suffering. God allows suffering for the sake of the goods it brings about. Sure, he could have made a different world where nothing and no one suffers, but that world would realise different goods and different beings than this one. God is under no obligation to create one rather than another.

That said, suffering, because it is a privation of reality, is not the final word- Christ makes that clear.

*is born to a mother with Zika and doomed to microcephaly from the moment of birth*

*shrieks in agony as chronic migraines since childhood make life into nonstop pain, oh and by the way suicide is a grave sin, but don't worry, just endure 50-70 more years of this nonstop pain and you'll definitely get into heaven ;)*

I don't see the point here. Chronic migraines are terrible, yes, but pain is to be avoided for the good which results. Suicide, being the deliberate privation of all bodily goods, is incompatible the very reason why pain ought to be avoided. Suicide is a sin because it is simply categorically irrational, and therefore immoral.

Indeed, the best solace in bearing with suffering is knowing that it is all for a rational end, and the best thing to do with it is to use it as an opportunity to cultivate one's reliance on and relationship with one's Creator. In that way, even in the midst of suffering one can taste beatitude. This is not even theoretical, since it has been the experience of two thousand years of Christian spiritual practice.

>Suicide is irrational
t. normie

>Indeed, the best solace in bearing with suffering is knowing that it is all for a rational end

t. Josef Mengele
t. Hideki Joshi, Unit 731 doctor
t. professional vivisector
t. serial murderer
t. God(?)

Yes, it is irrational, as I showed. Adopting an irrational opinion to avoid being a 'normie' is just intellectual cuckery.

A perverse application of a principle doesn't entail that it is false. To say that there is no such end, is to say that a life of suffering is worthless. This leads not to compassion or love for the sufferer, but contempt and exploitation.

The only hope for humans who suffer is that there is a good reason to bear with it, that we are created in God's image, with the dignity that entails.

If murder hastens a person's fate toward heaven, then clearly it is ethical to murder as many people as possible so that they can be reunited with God.

>To say that there is no such end, is to say that a life of suffering is worthless. This leads not to compassion or love for the sufferer, but contempt and exploitation.

Now you're just making stuff up.

Murdered people may go to heaven, but that doesn't make the murder itself a permissible act, for despite what God may do to bring good out of evil, the act itself deprives people of their due lives on earth.

And of course I'm not making it up. The idea that some people live such wretched lives of squalor that the strong and vital are justified in removing or euthanising them is behind many evils, like the eugenics movement, the push for euthanasia, and some of the reasons for abortion. This is precisely a consequence of denying a transcendent ground of human dignity (and thus an indefeasible reason for affirming human life).

and yet again you can somehow spin this to be the mother's fault (for not moving out from a Zika infested region or some shit), or one of God's mysterious ways of testing human faith and willforce
As I said, christian theology is babby tier, not even interesting discussing about

I would definitely by more inclined to believe. But there would have to be a logical and justified reason for any evil at all.

How would a different world where no suffering takes place make us worship a different god than the one that gives us the gifts of no pain and sufficient knowledge? I don't see that happening.
And if for some reason we did rebel, than why did God choose to do it that way in the first place? Why not make it a perfect design? Why not give us sufficient knowledge and know exactly what would happen if we choose to sin, then give us the option of living with or without him?

But ok, let me give an example against the "-suffering for the sake of the goods it brings about." argument.

What if a mentally ill serial rapist and murderer kidnapped a homeless 9 year old girl, raped, tortured and murdered her, and killed himself right afterwards. What possible glory or good does that bring around? I get that suffering may help others to see the need for God (horrifically, since it's God that allowed the suffering to take place) but how would this example help anybody in any way? Wouldn't it just cause pain and misery?

Can You please Elaborate in detail about people and babies suffering? please...

Stillbirths alone prove that life is never due.

>indefeasible
You mean unfalsifiable? It's awfully nice of you to save us the trouble of invalidating your claims.

Damn, religious belief is really for simpletons, huh?

>God is allowing it to happen to strengthen the character of the parents. Suffering brings maturity and wisdom, those who have never suffered tend to be the most delicate of snowflakes.
This is the most disgustingly evil rationalization ever. Yes, your child suffered and died to teach YOU a lesson.

You are disgusting subhuman animal and you have never been worth love at any point in your life if you truly believe this. Kill yourself. Every atom of this universe would be better off for your absence.

That is a stupid argument, free will isn't the equivalent of a whipping, not only this, but if free will leads to sin and evil why does God give us the chance of having it, instead of protecting us in his benevolent daddy embrace?

So whats the line in which if crossed there would be no god?

God hates sin cause sin ain't fair. Some jackass does it and everyone suffers. But free will means nothing if there's no impact, and he cares about that even more.

If God told you to rape, torture, and murder a thousand people because according to you their suffering would be nothing compared to the glories of heaven, would you do it?

If you mean no all loving, caring, and just god, than I would set the line at death and suffering for the innocent. If death and suffering for animals and children took place supposedly under a god with the description above, than I would say it's more likely that god does not exist. But if you mean any god whatsoever, than (leaving science out of the argument) there could be thousands of the horrific and brutal gods based on what a lot of less civilized people believe in.

There could still be free will without the suffering of an innocent. The perpetrator could be instantly punished the second he attempts to commit a sin. But if you insist that god cares more about the free will of the criminal than the safety (and possibly free will) of the victim, than I would say that god is a horrific and morally corrupt god. Either way the criminal's free will will end in punishment, but one way will stop the criminal's actions before they hurt someone.

What part of being in a cursed planet ruled by a demon and populated by his sons mostly with minimal pressence of actual sons of God doesnt enter your thick skull?
I mean, we could argue how the bible has been reversed in shitty ways, which it has, but thinking that evil is not to be expected in a cursed world of darkness populated by demons has some gall.

>What part of being in a cursed planet ruled by a demon and populated by his sons mostly with minimal pressence of actual sons of God doesnt enter your thick skull?

Poe's Law in full effect.

>Stillbirths alone prove that life is never due.

Gonna need more premises there, champ. Unfortunate privations of what we are due happen all the time, and stillbirth is an unhappy instance of the same.

>You mean unfalsifiable? It's awfully nice of you to save us the trouble of invalidating your claims.

I meant indefeasible, in the sense that no other value can trump them. Also, lol at the falsifiability criterion as a criterion for reasonableness as opposed to a solution to the demarcation problem. Popper himself never used it in this way, because he was smart enough to realise that the falsifiability criterion cannot be falsified.

I don't think it would make us worship a different God if God created a different world. But such a world would have different people, and different good things in it. God seems to be well within his rights to create the world for the sake of the good things which exist in this world, rather than the good things which exist in a world free of suffering.

>What if a mentally ill serial rapist and murderer kidnapped a homeless 9 year old girl, raped, tortured and murdered her, and killed himself right afterwards. What possible glory or good does that bring around?

Among other things, the good of the existence of the girl, of the rapist himself, and of the countless multitudes which would not be if God had chosen to create a different sort of world and intervene in a different way. A different world with different rules and a different rate or pattern of divine intervention would have a very different history, and therefore very different beings.

Sure, God could have made such a world, but God chooses to love this world, and this world's beings, and it doesn't seem like it should give us, as beings who receive that love, cause to complain about it. This is not to say that the horrible murder of the innocent is the last word on the matter, of course- a just God will give everyone their due, in the end, and turn even grievous evil toward the good, such that one day no one will be able to justly say 'it wasn't worth it.'

>I'm guessing you mean there is no god, just that suffering exists for natural reasons?

The two are not mutually exclusive.

God is generally but not perfectly good.

Does a deist count? Because I think God is very impersonal and abstract, so He might understand the suffering but would have a totally different understanding of it to us.

I never said free will is the equivalent of ass whipping. That's going to hell. The equivalent of free will is not wrapping your son in bubble wrap and allow him to hit his dumb head against shit so he learns not to do that. As I said, "benevolent embrace" is not the shallow "I'll never let anything bad happen to you" but "I'll let you take your choices and hopefully you learn from them". That is the thing that allows for the maximum human potential to develop, and allowing that is the true divine love

That seems like a reasonable compromise, God is content to sit back and let the natural world work itself out, pretty much exactly like how everything would go if there was no God at all. The best love is a neglectful, absentee father. But not to worry, he trusted some long lost uncles to come up with his rules on his behalf. Just fallow those and be a good boy so you won't get a whipping when daddy gets back from the store, one of these days...

Pastafarianism is essentially the faith that you do not generally believe in any god and are in complete control of all your actions both future and past without and otherworldly consequences. As an interesting side note if you pay $50 you will receive a certificate making you a pastafarian minister and allows you to perform pastafarian weddings.

It's a parody of organized religion as a way to point out the absurdity of mandating Biblical Creationism be taught in public schools.

>hurr why isn't God the way I want him to be

Why do these threads attract the most obnoxious atheists?

The first 5 replies are always ironic fedora shitposts.

>facts should not be taught in schools
>instead we should indoctrinate them with evolutionism

You're a horrible person.

Evil and suffering exists due to the Fall.

>It's another "Atheists get BTFO" episode

>Worst Objection to Theism: Who Created God?
youtube.com/watch?v=kKKIvmcO5LQ

>Digital Physics Argument for God's Existence
youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas

>The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument
youtube.com/watch?v=s2ULF5WixMM

>Quantum Physics Debunks Materialism
youtube.com/watch?v=4C5pq7W5yRM

>The Introspective Argument
youtube.com/watch?v=4l1lQMCOguw

>The Teleological Argument
youtube.com/watch?v=3Yt7hvgFuNg

>What Atheists Confuse
Part 1 youtube.com/watch?v=XbLJtxn_OCo
Part 2 youtube.com/watch?v=bj0lekx-NiQ

do you never get tired of losing all the time?

>Is Atheism a Delusion?
Part 1 youtube.com/watch?v=_Ii-bsrHB0o
Part 2 youtube.com/watch?v=xnBTJDje5xk

>Atheists Don't Exist
youtube.com/watch?v=qDX6F_O5XB0

Was it autism?

We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. (Romans 8:22)

>You are disgusting subhuman animal and you have never been worth love at any point in your life if you truly believe this. Kill yourself. Every atom of this universe would be better off for your absence.
my point: proven

>Are you saying that the more evidence we have of God, the less likely we are to believe in him?
yes. History (if the OT is to be beleived) shows that with more proof of God, people beleive in God less.

>I'm telling you right now, if God came down and told me everything, I would be changed and believe.
>And I think most rational people would do the same.
thats the problem though. Just because someone reveals that they exist and are wathing does not stop people from doing sin or disobeying God. Look at the cain and abel story. God was right there and gave abel wisdom to control his sin before it ruins him, then abel kills his brother.

>I would have a lot of questions, like: Why did you commit and authorize so many autocracies against innocent people, and why did you flood the world, killing innocent animals and children, or rewrite the ten commandments, or lead distraught and scared people through a desert for 40 years, or curse all of humanity for 1 sin committed because Adam and Eve lacked understanding?
i'm going to try to answer these but very briefly. Honestly i would ask God a lot of question too, like: why did you create me? What is my purpose in life? What would be a 1 word answer to convince all non-beleivers to beleive? etc.

>Why did you commit and authorize so many autocracies against innocent people
I neither commited nor authorized evil, but i will judge those who do evil (either in my name or not) and refuse to be good to their brothers and sisters. (A parent is happy when their children are loving to one another. A parent is unhappy when the contrary happens. Both the sinner and the innocent are God's children so he reserves judgement for the afterlife or brings judgement upon them in this life).

to be continued...

So you believe that gods are literally just Super Spooks? Literally spooked into reality.

Continued

>why did you flood the world
around that time the world was full of sin. Imagine every possible evil man could commit, a place more depraved than 8/b/ and you have hell on earth, that was the earth at the time, and God regretted creating us. Imagine how shitty we have to be to make a compassionate creator regret having made us. (bestiality, pedophilia, etc was probably rampant. So there were NO INNOCENTS, Moses was the closest to pure and even he was corrupt).

>why did you flood the world
i dont think god rewrote anything

>lead distraught and scared people through a desert for 40 years
God freed them from slavery and oppression in Egypt, and was leading them to the promised land on a short trek (like a field trip), but the people kept wining and God go really pissed about this. Wouldn't you be too if just moments after you freed your people from slavery with miracles,they immediately start acting up? Eventually God gets so sick of the people disobeying him (especially when they are to be his representatives on earth) that he decides that the next generation will be the ones who enter the promised land.

>curse all of humanity for 1 sin committed because Adam and Eve lacked understanding?
Adam and eve story may be a myth (a story containing truths) to explain the human condition and why humanity can be shit sometimes.

>If murder hastens a person's fate toward heaven, then clearly it is ethical to murder as many people as possible so that they can be reunited with God.
This is assuming the murderer is capable of knowing ahead of time that his victims will go to heaven, which he isn't. The consequence of which is that he will invariably cause people to die before they can repent for their sins, damning them to Hell.

Which i'm sure we both agree would be immoral correct?

>But seriously, you really think that if God came down and presented himself in front of all humanity that they would turn away and shun him?
Yes. From what i understand most anyone would turn away from God, even if he showed his full glory. The Pharasees saw God in human form (Jesus) and still denied and rebuked him, even after all the goodness he had done.
>Even with all of his supposed glory?
Yes. God's people knew him first-hand and still turned away from him.
>Even with the truth shown to us all?
Many people daily see the truth and rebuke/deny it, even though they know of it's validity.

Point to end all points: satan. Satan knew God first-hand, was in his presence constantly, etc. and Yet Satan denies God at every turn and tries to mislead others because he refuses to repent.

>And that it's better that he only communicates through ancient texts?
Ancient texts are the window into seeing who God is and what he is for. It is a brochure or business card of God. It is the best way for God to communicate with us and not have the problem of us moving further away from him.

tl;dr - In essence, God revealing himself directly to non-beleivers has shown that we are reppeled to God, because though he is a loving and compassionate God, he is also scary in his judgement (and the fact that we sin before him knowingly consantly doesnt improve our situation). I know first-hand because i firmly beleive in God and yet i still sin in spite of that fact.

Well if God is an omnibenevolent being then then damning people to Hell can't be immoral.

Wrong.
A). the murderer is not God
B). even if hypothetically the murderer the was granted same moral authority as God to judge the dead and dole out damnation, the murderer is not damning his victims, he is denying them the chance to be saved, which is not the same thing.

It's the difference between a person walking off a cliff on their own and a person walking off a cliff because you pushed them.

>But such a world would have different people, and different good things in it.

Are you saying that if the people who live in this reality would be different in a none-suffering reality, or that the reality would have a completely separate group of people? And in either situation, why would it be worse for God to have done it in a more beneficial way for man kind?

>God seems to be well within his rights to create the world for the sake of the good things which exist in this world, rather than the good things which exist in a world free of suffering.

God would be well within his rights, if he had not said that he is an all loving and all powerful god. Surely an all powerful, all loving, and all knowing god could come up with a better plan that does not involve such horrid suffering observed in this world. And any god that desires the plan to be this corrupt, even though he/she/it could have made it perfectly painless and joyous, is no god that I would ever want to worship or believe in.

>A different world with different rules and a different rate or pattern of divine intervention would have a very different history, and therefore very different beings.

Yes, but those beings, rules, and patterns and divine intervention would be glorious and painless if it was an all good, all loving, all knowing and all powerful god, instead of this corrupt world we have today.

For you last paragraph: Why involve murder, rape, pain and suffering at all? Can't God come up with a better plan? Why have misinformation, lies, lack of knowledge, death, pain, stupidity, retardation, disease, and infinite torture (for some people) become prevalent? Again, if God is all loving, powerful, and good, why not make a perfectly good and perfectly designed world? It's surely within his capabilities.