TO JUSTIFY GOD BELIEF, BELIEVERS GO INTO DENIAL ABOUT HOW TERRIBLE SUFFERING IS

Faithful people have no right to ask us to think they don't care enough about evil which allows them to think it reconciles with God's love.  The dark side of human nature always gets an outlet.  Believers can work hard for suffering people.  They will not be able to help them all.  Caring about those who you can help and downgrading the suffering of others just because you cannot help them is ugly.  Belief in God whether you realise it or not is in fact showing you do not care enough about those you cannot help simply because to get evil to fit a loving God you have to go into denial about how bad it is.

EVEN THE GOD IDEA INFERS BELIEVERS CONDONE

God is infinite meaning everything about him is, not a number too great for us to imagine, but literally numberless.  Infinite is that which is great without end or limit. Christians use this doctrine to argue that as God is good it means he is unlimitedly good thus evil is his complete opposite.  The distance between God and evil is infinite.  This calls us to be like God and to oppose and hate evil as much as we can.

This tells us that we cannot ever understand how far from God and good evil is.  Any view of evil we have will be watered down.  It may not feel that way but it is.  We cannot care the way God cares.  Our caring for another no matter how deep is idolatrous for it is a mere imitation of how God cares.

CONDONING
 
If you condone evil you cannot admit it. You pretend to be good and to love goodness.
 
You cannot ask to be considered innocent until proven guilty if the evil is great. Asking is evil.  And what bigger evil is there than what happens in the universe under God's watch? This is about you not God - are you the kind of person that wants your terrible irresponsible view to be respected? Are you the person who if given a choice would decree, "Let this evil happen for it is God's will. Let those babies die terribly" though you could be wrong? How dare you if you are!

TESTABLE OR NON-TESTABLE?

The person may condone evil in a testable way. For example, if you say John stole the money to feed his children you can be proven wrong.
 
The sneakiest hypocrite will condone evil in a NON-TESTABLE way.
 
The hypocrite tries to avoid being proven to be a fake.

The hypocrite encourages evil with a pious smile - his evil looks good.
 
There is more condoning and stronger condoning involved when evil is condoned and protected from anything that exposes its true nature.
 
If something could be an example of condoning, it has to be treated as condoning. Making any exceptions jettisons the principle, "Oppose evil and work against it and be aware of its subtlety".
 
People naturally find it easier to believe that when others suffer it is part of a plan. They don't find it as easy when it is themselves or their loved ones who suffer. When they suffer or the latter suffer, instead of the plan being about the greater good, the plan suddenly becomes one where God has something amazing planned for the sufferers. He is letting them be hurt because he has some lovely surprise that makes it all worth putting up with.
 
A baby suffers now. To say God has a plan is saying that God is right to do nothing right now as long as he acts later. That is an appalling outlook. It is the now that matters. The present moment should take priority over everything else. If God is not helping now how can you say he will help later? How can you say he should?  It is no answer to say that it is God looking after the person not you thus you cannot be blamed for agreeing nothing is done now right away.  It is human and right to care about the right now.  Denying that instinct for a belief is self-abuse and degrading to the victim.  God cannot ask you to do it.  And what about the risk that you are telling yourself the future for the person will take care of itself because you don't really truly care?

To say, "God, your will and nobody else's be done" is saying, "I believe the suffering should happen if it happens." But that is too serious for mere belief. It risks being the kind of person who would let that suffering happen if you could and all in the name of faith and faith could be wrong. Faith is no justification for such extremism. Faith is self-destructive and will lead to emotional problems and addictions if it is taken that far.

RETROSPECT

Many are who say that something terrible or potentially terrible happened in their lives.  They say that now it does not bother them and they see them as being among the best things that happened to them or at least good and fine are betraying those who now suffer abominably.  It can only water down how terrible their experience is and how it should not be happening.  They are giving them a reason to feel ashamed of how angry and hurt and distressed they feel in response to their troubles.  They deny they do this and that is rubbing salt into the wounds.  And their buzz now is about them trying to compensate themselves with warm nice appreciative feelings so they deny their memories of the horrors or dilute them to make it seem worth what they have now.

CONDONING AS A COMMUNITY

Individuals condone.  Even more people condone being part of communities and religions and societies that enable evil to happen or make it possible. For example, if Muslims all became Quakers that would be the end of Islamic terrorism. But they wouldn't do that. People feel disconnected to evil that is not directly done by them. But they are indirectly connected and making it possible and they worry not about it. A high and mighty person can run an abattoir where animals are cruelly slaughtered and feel okay about it as long as he is not doing the slaughtering. Yet making evil possible is worse than doing it directly. You have less control over evil you make possible at a distance than the evil you do directly.

ASSUMING IS CONDONING UNDER ANOTHER NAME

God would give clear evidence that he is at work through evil. You need evidence and there is none. You just need a few clear examples and God would need to open his mouth and talk us through it. God should be explaining instead of letting man explain for him for it is not man's place. John's explanation of what I do means nothing for only I can explain. It is insulting and arrogant of him to try to explain. If I am hurting people and he is trying to explain that I mean well but am mistaken or something he insults the victims. The arrogance and stupidity of those who say they know what God is doing is staggering. For example, some say the crucifixion of Christ made his glorious resurrection to eternal life possible and shows God's plan. But it is absurd to say that Christ needed to be crucified.

It is about evidence not assuming. It is too serious of a matter to guess about. Condoning always involves assumptions and a lack of regard for evidence. 

Religion says we should worship God though he has made terrible viruses and diseases. But there is no should about it. We have the right to refuse.  The terribleness of these things overrides any right God has to expect us to believe he is doing right. The should lies behind all attempts to reconcile God with evil and it is bad in itself thus no reconciliation can work.  Religion wants to influence people and it cannot do that if it starts to say, "You MAY worship God."  It is too weak and turns religion into something as unimportant as what you may have for breakfast. All God's defenders do is show themselves to be spiritually bankrupt.

THE "IT COULD BE WORSE" METHOD OF CONDONING

The view that we should not be too annoyed when things go wrong for there are people being tortured and slaughtered in the world is common. That something worse exists does not make a bad thing less bad. It may make you feel less bad about it.  You are using the suffering of others to benefit yourself.  And the godly do it as much as the ungodly.