I'll takes my shots where I can gets them.

there are several biblical stories of "righteous" people suffering and God allowing it for various reasons. im sure you are aware of the story of Job. what purpose was there in his anguish? likewise, im sure you are familiar with the crucifixion of Jesus - the ultimate innocent. what purpose was there in his suffering?

sometimes we can find instances where suffering occurs b/c of our own wrongdoing (a drunk driver paralyzes himself). other times suffering occurs b/c of our own rightdoing (we defend our children against a wild bear and get our arm torn off in the process). at times suffering occurs b/c of someone else's wrongdoing (we get raped by a psychopath). and at times suffering occurs b/c of the laws of nature (we get frostbite in a blizzard).

suffering is a part of the world that we live in. not even God (Jesus) nor his servants are immune. however, it was not always that way. struggle, strife, suffering and pain and ultimately death (physical death) are all a part of the curse that God placed on mankind. read Gen. 3.

it was/is a punishment. but it is not one without hope and it is not an eternal one. it is a story of paradise lost, but we can regain it with faith, love and obedience - the opposite of what lost it for us in the first place.

is this temporary condition of suffering compatible with the existence of an omnipotent, loving God? i don't see why not, especially when you look at it as a matter of scale. what is a few years of suffering on earth in comparison to an eternity of pleasure and love in heaven? is that unfair?

we suffer b/c of the curse that God placed on mankind in response to Adam and Eve's sin. but there will come a time when there is no more curse (Rev. 22:3).

John was blessed to receive a vision of this heaven:

"Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them, and He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer be any death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away." - Rev. 21:1-4

I love the variation in human spiritual development here...anybody read M. Scott Peck's Stages of Spiritual Grown (based on Fowler)? here's an abridged link:

http://www.hsuyun.org/Dharma/zbohy/L...ualGrowth.html

For me, I think we first have to shed our anthropomorphized view of "god"...then we can get started

kiva

You honestly don't see some kind of contradiction in an all loving God throwing such a hissyfit that he sees fit to punish the 1*10^umpteenth generation for someone daring to seek knowledge? I wish I had your logic, the world would be so simple.

Also, what if, for some crazy reason, you see all this suffering in the world and go "An all loving God wouldn't let this happen," lose faith, and then God says to you (after a life of suffering), "Woops! Looks like you had a pretty harsh deal in life, and lost faith. To hell with you." Yeah, that's fair.

This really is illogical, but typical. Why is the choice between a benevolent god and no god at all?

If observation indicates that you god is not benevolent, then just drop the loving everyone bit.

Well, the choice is between a benevolent god or no god, as Christianity dictates.

Nowhere in the op did it mention christianity. There are thousands of religions and an infinite number of theoretical forms of god.

How do you reconcile god with the suffering of innocents?

I don't even try and there's no reason why I should when there's a divine being who that job belongs to.

The way you framed the question makes it sound like an accounting function and they keep the Book of Life in heaven as far as I know. Well out of range of mortal hands that can barely balance a checkbook.

I believe that generally describes Christianity's God. Even if it hadn't, it would hardly matter, as it asked how you reconcile a benevolent God with the suffering of innocents. Of course, the answer could be, "get rid of the benevolent bit', but that seems a bit of a cop out,