1. The first is that the answer is unknowable — at least for the moment.

2. The second answer relates to our free will.

3. A third response is that experiencing suffering builds character.

4. Because the Devil chose this way, which is the opposite of God.

5. Because choosing wrong instead of right has its own inevitable, natural results.

The author seems to have omitted law and justice from his list of reasons. Perhaps he isn't addressing this cosmic aspect of the problem? Maybe he is focusing on things humans do to each other, rather than what God has caused or permitted. But the execution of justice and judgment is another reason why suffering and death happen.

The author's own answer does not resolve one of the problems he brought up - "But it [suffering builds character] does not resolve the larger questions — how much do babies drowned in the tsunami (or the Flood) actually learn? How were their characters built? While survivors may learn, what of the victims of suffering who do not?"

In citing the Flood he is implicating God. Nothing is more clearly taught in the Bible and the SOP that God is the one who took it upon Himself to punish and destroy the antediluvians who refused embarkation on the Ark. God, not the Devil or evil men and women, employed the forces of nature to destroy millions of impenitent sinners, whose thoughts were only evil continually. Listen:

God will use His enemies as instruments to punish those who have followed their own pernicious ways whereby the truth of God has been misrepresented, misjudged, and dishonored.--PC 136 (1894). {LDE 242.3}

God's love is represented in our day as being of such a character as would forbid His destroying the sinner. Men reason from their own low standard of right and justice. "Thou thoughtest that I was altogether such an one as thyself" (Ps. 50:21). They measure God by themselves. They reason as to how they would act under the circumstances and decide God would do as they imagine they would do. . . . {LDE 240.5}

In no kingdom or government is it left to the lawbreakers to say what punishment is to be executed against those who have broken the law. All we have, all the bounties of His grace which we possess, we owe to God. The aggravating character of sin against such a God cannot be estimated any more than the heavens can be measured with a span. God is a moral governor as well as a Father. He is the Lawgiver. He makes and executes His laws. Law that has no penalty is of no force. {LDE 241.1}

The plea may be made that a loving Father would not see His children suffering the punishment of God by fire while He had the power to relieve them. But God would, for the good of His subjects and for their safety, punish the transgressor. God does not work on the plan of man. He can do infinite justice that man has no right to do before his fellow man. Noah would have displeased God to have drowned one of the scoffers and mockers that harassed him, but God drowned the vast world. Lot would have had no right to inflict punishment on his sons-in-law, but God would do it in strict justice. {LDE 241.2}

Who will say God will not do what He says He will do?--12MR 207-209; 10MR 265 (1876). {LDE 241.3}

He dealt with it here:"Not as some imposed penalty by a divine dictator, but the inevitable result foreseen by a loving Creator."



Do you mean specifically natural disasters? He certainly dealt with the overall question here (last two paragraphs).

Regarding the Flood, the author wasn't discussing this, other than to say that the reason for it was not to build character.

I think you're getting distracted by looking at the forest rather than the tree. The author wasn't dealing with trees (individual incidents) but providing a general framework to answer the question as to why suffering exists. His answer is it exists because "the Devil chose this way" and "we have bought into the Devil's way." I think this is exactly right.

This answers why suffering exists, but the part you quoted does not treat the main issue the author was dealing with, which is why God allows it:

Are you suggesting he rejected it as a reason?


So, the reason why innocent babies suffer and die is because the Devil chose this way, because people have bought into his way? This doesn't answer the questions the authored posed: "But it’s THE question when it comes to God — why doesn’t he stop it? And if God is God, can’t he intervene? So what’s the answer? Is God responsible for suffering — or at least not preventing it?"

Actually, the author makes it clear that God can stop it but that He chooses not to. Which I think is wrong. I think it makes God out to be an aloof and uncaring Deity.

He said "not," so that is rejecting it as a reason.



Yes, this is what he is dealing with. He raised the very questions you are asking and answered them.



Where does he say this?



Why?

The idea that God is sitting back and allowing the Devil to wreak havoc so that it is obvious to everyone that rebelling against God's will is bad is as bad as sin itself. God is not leaving it up to Satan to orchestrate the outcome of the GC. Neither is He leaving it up to natural law. On these things we shall have to disagree.

What do you think of this, MM?

I agree with it. She is not saying God sits back and allows Satan to run amuck. Job's case informs us that God limits what Satan can and cannot do. God is in control - not Satan.

How is this any different than the other quote I cited? I don't see what you're disagreeing with.

Am I disagreeing with something?

Yes, MM.