The problem of evil

[TAO]

Thank you.

No problem =).

Hmmm. . .I hadn't thought of it that way. Fascinating point. So, if that is, indeed, the case, at some point some entity or influence or "force" practiced some form of discrimination--possibly unwittingly--in the process of "organizing" matter.

I tend to think that in organizing (referring to the rest of the matter other than spirits), God has expert control, but for the 'birth of spirits' (although it is not given as such, I think they are born in a way like on Earth), he doesn't really have control over that. But as said, if that's not the way spirits are created, than it's useless speculation, but if spirits are created that way, there wouldn't be a way to discriminate, I think.

The doctrine that we have always existed doesn't supercede the argument that some spirit children were subsequently more highly endowed than others. In that context, this statement by Elder McConkie is relevant: "That he [Christ] was aided in the creation of this earth by 'many of the noble and great' spirit children of the Father is evident in Abraham's writings. Unto those superior spirits [emphasis added] Christ said. . . " (Mormon Doctrine, p. 169).

I think we were given part our agency at the moment of our spiritual birth, actually. In such, we were able to make choices, were able to exert a will, and the like. I have nothing supporting this, but I think that this might be one of the reasons Satan was capable of falling... sinning of his own choice, out of agency. If it is the case (which it might not be), the 'superior spirits' might be referring to those with a more willing heart.

I think that statement is probably correct. Nice insight!

Thanks, it was great discussing =D.

[CV75]

If agency was not "created or made," how do you explain D&C 101:78: ". . .every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment" [emphasis added]. Here, God not only states that he personally gave man his agency, but he explains the rationale for so doing.

You do not believe, then, that the spiritual gift to work miracles is a greater gift than, say, the gift to believe on the testimony of others. I suppose we will have to agree to disagree about that. Note, too, that some individuals receive all the gifts, which--it seems obvious to me--indicates additional inequality in the bestowal of spiritual gifts.

You make a tacit admission here (so it seems to me) that 1) some intelligences made wiser choices than other intelligences, and 2) those lesser intelligences will have an opportunity to play "catch up." Given the existence of 1) and 2), it becomes apparent that (as I have probably said too often) some intelligences were blessed--had the "will"--to make advantageous choices. Inequality, for reasons known only to God, was/is a reality. The fact that it can be corrected, presumably in mortality, does not change the fact of its existence.

As I

[paulpatter]

This seems to assume that there are not opportunities for all to succeed, that God being a loving father still could not create a mortality where everyone could succeed given enough time and opportunities if they so chose to do so.

You make a valid point. I should have written "excel" rather than "succeed." Not all will gain exhaltation.

: OTOH, if one assumes that each individual given his particular abilities and mortal situation and postmortal situation could succeed and the only reason why he doesn't is because of his own personal choices, then one would tend to look to the unique internal eternal individual personality or construct of intelligence for the answer to why that individual chose to 'fail' (I prefer to state it as 'refusing to take full advantage of one's positive opportunities while taking too much advantage of one's negative opportunities'; the individual hasn't "failed" because he is doing exactly what he wants to do and is thus successful by his own standard....except he may see a distinct difference in the consequences he would prefer and those that he gets based on eternal laws).

The question, though, is why is he "doing exactly what he wants to do". . .why is he "engineered" to make personal choices that are sub-standard and will be detrimental to him, whereas others are seemingly "engineered" to make choices that will benefit them? I realize there probably isn't an answer to these questions. My reason for asking them, however, is to point out that inequality exists among intelligences. Consequently, when some members feel they don't measure up to certain other members, they need to realize that those "other members" got a head start. The good news is, as you note above, that "everyone [can] succeed given enough time and opportunities if they [choose] to do so."

: The term "commission" suggests something that is imposed from the outside rather than arising from the fundamental nature of the being.

I could have chosen a better word, but the fact is something is imposed "from the outside" and it constitutes "the fundamental nature of the being."

: We don't like the term "destined" as LDS because it is often used in terms of a fate imposed on us from some external source.

But, in my view, that is precisely what takes place. Even a cursory reading of Abraham, for example, makes that clear. He, and certain others, were singled out. What, in their "fundamental nature," caused them to excel?

****I have the same issue with "programming" in regards to the idea of spiritual gifts given, programming implying a set course of action as opposed to a variety of actions that someone with the gift can undertake that are not available to those without the gift.

Again, probably an unwise word choice on my part. I don't have D&C 46 in front of me, but I think the Lord states that all have received spiritual gifts. I didn't mean to imply that implementing one's spiritual gift(s) necessarily involves a set course of action or is in some way mandatory. I have said that the gifts vary in value, such as having the gift to perform miracles as contrasted with having the gift to believe on another's words.

: However, this discussion appears to me to hinge on the assumption that the choice of 'fail or succeed' rests in the eternal nature of the individual based on our current understanding of human motivation, thought process, etc. which makes us determinists, something that I have found most LDS don't like to be labeled as for some reason. It is possible that assumption is fundamentally wrong and that there is something truly redemptive in God's power that would allow us to overcome even that eternal nature that leads us to choose another path besides the one God offers us beside himself and we are simply unaware of it.

I agree: The redemptive power of the Savior is available to everyone.

[CV75]

when some members feel they don't measure up to certain other members, they need to realize that those "other members" got a head start.

On the contrary--this is most antithetical to the Gospel of Christ. They need to realize that they need to come unto Christ, not compare themselves or "measure up" to other members at all (and especially not accept a specious excuse for whatever their point of personal dissatisfaction might be).

[changed]

If one considers, thinks through, the mainstream concept of God (He who is self-existent, knows all things, created all things out of nothing, or His own conception) then it must be concluded, if the logical steps are followed, that God is the very source of evil. Let's think of it this way too...

the month old "create..." threadis still going if anyone remembers how it was started...

So I think most agree with me that LDS do not believe in ex-Nihilo creation:

(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 93:29)

Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

that "create" as used in the scriptures should be defined as - transform, mold, refine, purify, shape etc. etc. and not poof- make something out of nothing.

A few others agree...

example: http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/5_creator.html

"The English word "create" is an abstract word and a foriegn concept to the Hebrews."

another example: http://www.dailyglobal.com/2009/10/god-is-not-the-creator-claims-academic/

For the oft asked question: "Why did God create evil?"

7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.(Old Testament | Isaiah 45:7)

I always answer that God did not create evil, he transforms it - that 'bara' is better translated as transform, not create:

7 I form the light, and transform darkness: I make peace, and transform evil: I the LORD do all these things.(Old Testament | Isaiah 45:7)

That God is cleaning up a mess He did not create..... (our problems are not God's fault, we were not "created" imperfectly, as we were not created at all, so nothing bad can be blamed on God, because He did not create it)

Anyhoo, I was thinking about how the word create is prob not the greatest translation, and was thinking of the beginning chapts of Gen.

(Old Testament | Genesis 1:1)

1 IN the abeginning God transformed the heaven and the earth.

for the "creative" days, what if instead of creating the birds/bees/animals/plants etc. etc. God "transformed" what was already there? Just a thought.

the issue of evil, seems to always be a thread or 2 on it on most relig boards.

[paulpatter]

On the contrary--this is most antithetical to the Gospel of Christ. They need to realize that they need to come unto Christ, not compare themselves or "measure up" to other members at all (and especially not accept a specious excuse for whatever their point of personal dissatisfaction might be).

I didn't defend the tendency of some members to "measure up" to other members; I simply stated it as a fact--and a problem--I have observed during my long lifetime as a Latter-day Saint. To your credit, you didn't accuse me of personally doing that.

You don't address the nucleus of my argument; i.e., some spirit children are more gifted than others, and thus they enter mortality in an advantageous position. As I note in Post 149, Elder McConkie states that Christ "was aided in the creation of this earth by 'many of the noble and great' spirit children of the Father." What matters here, however, is that Elder McConkie described those spirit children as "superior spirits" (Mormon Doctrine, p. 169). Do you suppose that Elder McConkie was making a "specious" distinction?

It's difficult for me to understand how one can believe in the principle of eternal progression while dismissing my argument. Referring to that principle, Elder McConkie (yes, I often read his writings/speeches), states: "Endowed with agency and subject to eternal laws, man began his progression and advancement in pre-existence. . . . During his earth life he gains a mortal body, receives experience in earthly things, and prepares for a future eternity. . .when he will continue to gain knowledge and intelligence. This gradually unfolding course of advancement and experience--a course that began in past eternity and will continue in ages future--is referred to as. . .eternal progression." Then, we read the following: "In the full sense, eternal progression is enjoyed only by those who receive exaltation. Exalted persons gain the fullness of the Father; they have all power, all knowledge, and all wisdom. . . . All other persons are assigned lesser places in the mansions that are prepared, and their progression is not eternal and unlimited but in a specified sphere. There will be truths such persons never learn, powers they never possess. They are 'ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more. . .eternal weight of glory,' and they so continue 'to all eternity, and. . .forever and ever'" (Mormon Doctrine, pp. 238-39 and D&C 132:16-17).

Hence, for whatever reason, some spirit children perform proactively and positively in the pre-existence and others do not.

[Calm]

The question, though, is why is he "doing exactly what he wants to do". . .why is he "engineered" to make personal choices that are sub-standard and will be detrimental to him, whereas others are seemingly "engineered" to make choices that will benefit them? I realize there probably isn't an answer to these questions. My reason for asking them, however, is to point out that inequality exists among intelligences.

I would say he wasn't engineered to make choices, but rather that which is eternally existing in him is what is the first cause. He is engineered to possibly understand and express those choices, definitely to follow through on his choices IOW, not however given the motivations or values that lead him to make a particular choice, the core of motivation has always existed within him (though expanded and likely refined by prior choices).

God only adds to us the ability to act on those choices in various ways. I look on the primary intelligent entity as the fundamental uncreated unit of humanity, it is the differences inherent in them---for whatever reason they exist, it is not in my view because some outside force (God or something else) acted upon them....they exist and have always existed in their similarities and differences, they are uncreated, unorganized (by an outside force) and unique.

I think the key to these types of discussion is identifying how someone view the composition of the original, primordial uncreated intelligence---whether it is already formed into an individual or the primordial intelligence is a collection of some form of very refined 'intelligent' matter waiting for someone's hand to assume any distinct form.

the fact is something is imposed "from the outside" and it constitutes "the fundamental nature of the being."

Not to my view of intelligence, I don't see God dipping in a ladle into a primordial mass of unorganized intelligent matter and coming up with a spoonful of 'stuff' that he then forms into an individual intelligent. Rather that the intelligences that later became spirits, etc. have always been in existence as individuals, though it may have been in a form which was too unorganized to be anything but potentially sentient. Think of legos, is the primordial intelligence at the stage of the factory where the designer picks out what is necessary for that particular construction that is then boxed up and shipped out or does the primordial intelligence come preboxed so that while there is no discernible pattern to it, the potential of what it can be is limited by what attributes are already in the mix or does it come at the stage---my current POV ---where it is already assembled and ready to play with so to speak.....thus we have three possibilities for what is meant by "intelligence" and I am aware of supporters of all possibilities among LDS believers, the implications of each with regard to agency and motivations of mankind can be significantly different.

What God has 'imposed' on us is in my view is not our 'self' but a vehicle (spirit and then later body and later who knows) for acting and expressing that fundamental nature that we always were. We then bond---not only through experiences and learning situations that God provides us but lastly with the Atonement that somehow 'seals' the bond between intelligence and spirit and then spirit and body and then ????---with that 'vehicle' in such a way as it becomes inseparable from our original self (along with other attributes we've picked up along the way due to our choices), thus resulting in an augmented being that then has the opportunity to choose to follow God's plan to receive another vehicle that if used properly will augment us to the point that we may progress onward and upward toward all that God is and wants us to be---the core that we once were still being there, just intertwined with all that has been added.

He, and certain others, were singled out. What, in their "fundamental nature," caused them to excel?

Whatever it was, it always existed within them or rather that which motivated them to achieve that state where they were singled out has always existed within men and not been imposed upon them by God or a colliding asteroid or a self appointed sentient being who was just plain bored with no one else to talk to.

I agree: The redemptive power of the Savior is available to everyone.

Yes, but just how far can that redemptive power alter us if we want it to, can it change our fundamental always existent eternal nature, IOW dump part of the core original intelligence in favour of some other attribute that we've decided we rather have....would we allow it to if it could? I think a lot depends on just how simple or complex that original core being was....the simpler, the less likely we will want to change the core rather than instead merely adopting another way of more effective or beneficial expression of that core quality/attribute. I can see a very complex being choosing to perhaps 'delete' something in its makeup that inhibits its growth toward the general goal, that deletion will change it but not so significantly as to lose what made itself its "Self" so to speak....

Makes sense?

[paulpatter]

I would say he wasn't engineered to make choices, but rather that which is eternally existing in him is what is the first cause.

I confess that you express the principal idea better than I do.

: He is engineered to possibly understand and express those choices, definitely to follow through on his choices IOW, not however given the motivations or values that lead him to make a particular choice, the core of motivation has always existed within him (though expanded and likely refined by prior choices).

I'm not so sure. It seems to me that which "eternally [exists] in him" and is the "first cause" is paramount; it drives everything else, including the choices he makes. He cannot distance himself from it.

: God only adds to us the ability to act on those choices in various ways. I look on the primary intelligent entity as the fundamental uncreated unit of humanity, it is the differences inherent in them---for whatever reason they exist, it is not in my view because some outside force (God or something else) acted upon them....they exist and have always existed in their similarities and differences, they are uncreated, unorganized (by an outside force) and unique.

For me, "unique" is the operative word. Being unique, they are unlike any other intelligence, including the ways in which they will exercise their agency. And that (repeating myself here) depends on what eternally exists within them.

: I think the key to these types of discussion is identifying how someone view the composition of the original, primordial uncreated intelligence---whether it is already formed into an individual or the primordial intelligence is a collection of some form of very refined 'intelligent' matter waiting for someone's hand to assume any distinct form.

Sorry, I have difficulty following you here.

: Not to my view of intelligence, I don't see God dipping in a ladle into a primordial mass of unorganized intelligent matter and coming up with a spoonful of 'stuff' that he then forms into an individual intelligent. Rather that the intelligences that later became spirits, etc. have always been in existence as individuals [my emphasis]. . . .

I'm quite certain we don't know who or what caused intelligences to differ from one another. We do know, however, that subsequently some spirit children were superior to other spirit children. To me, that fact is of surpassing importance.

: What God has 'imposed' on us is in my view is not our 'self' but a vehicle (spirit and then later body and later who knows) for acting and expressing that fundamental nature that we always were. We then bond---not only through experiences and learning situations that God provides us but lastly with the Atonement that somehow 'seals' the bond between intelligence and spirit and then spirit and body and then ????---with that 'vehicle' in such a way as it becomes inseparable from our original self (along with other attributes we've picked up along the way due to our choices), thus resulting in an augmented being that then has the opportunity to choose to follow God's plan to receive another vehicle that if used properly will augment us to the point that we may progress onward and upward toward all that God is and wants us to be---the core that we once were still being there, just intertwined with all that has been added.

I'm afraid you lose me here (blame it on my density).

: Whatever it was, it always existed within them or rather that which motivated them to achieve that state where they were singled out has always existed within men and not been imposed upon them by God or a colliding asteroid or a self appointed sentient being who was just plain bored with no one else to talk to.

But something caused intelligences to exist as unique entities. It would be fascinating to know what it was and the rationale for it. We do know that God spoke to Abraham about the need for leadership in this mortal state, and that is why he chose Abraham and certain other "noble and great ones."

: Yes, but just how far can that redemptive power alter us if we want it to, can it change our fundamental always existent eternal nature, IOW dump part of the core original intelligence in favour of some other attribute that we've decided we rather have....would we allow it to if it could? I think a lot depends on just how simple or complex that original core being was....the simpler, the less likely we will want to change the core rather than instead merely adopting another way of more effective or beneficial expression of that core quality/attribute. I can see a very complex being choosing to perhaps 'delete' something in its makeup that inhibits its growth toward the general goal, that deletion will change it but not so significantly as to lose what made itself its "Self" so to speak....

Makes sense?

Interesting bit of speculation. I do not believe, however, that mortals can change the eternal nature with which they were "endowed" as intelligences. The die was cast.

In any event, sincere thanks for the thought-provoking response.

[Calm]

But something caused intelligences to exist as unique entities.

Only if we assume a beginning to these intelligences at least in that form rather than a eternally preexisting status....pretty much how most traditional Christians view God, nothing caused God to be God, he is the first cause. So for my theory, our intelligences were the first cause and the differences have always existed being part of that first cause.

Got to run to a dentist appt. If I remember (and these days that is less than a 50-50 chance, sigh) I will come back and see if I can be clearer than I was before on my really speculative ideas that made no sense above.

[CV75]

Hence, for whatever reason, some spirit children perform proactively and positively in the pre-existence and others do not.

This particular point is more valid. I would rephrase it as, "Because of their individual agency, which no one else but that individual can control or account for, some of God's children perform proactively and positively in some or all areas of eternal progression and others do not, in any estate they have existed in thus far." The assertion that "God made me this way" when dissatisfied with one's spiritual condition is what I find specious and damaging to eternal progress.

[CV75]

So for my theory, our intelligences were the first cause and the differences have always existed being part of that first cause.

I lean this way myself; not sure I fully understand "first cause" but I do view agency as a property of our co-eternal nature with God, and in that way agency (and resultant differences) always existed with us independent of God's controlling it for us.

[Calm]

I lean this way myself; not sure I fully understand "first cause" but I do view agency as a property of our co-eternal nature with God, and in that way agency (and resultant differences) always existed with us independent of God's controlling it for us.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primum_movens

[Vance]

....pretty much how most traditional Christians view God, nothing caused God to be God, he is the first cause.

To me, that still doesn't address the issue.

In their view, as I understand it, God is eternal/has ALWAYS existed. It (to avoid gender identity) sat (for lack of a better way to express it/not implying any physical nature) in (for lack of a better way to express it/not implying any spatial nature) indolence for eternity, then suddenly, worked for 6 "days". What caused the change from indolence to industry?