Suffering Of The Righteous

[ELF1024]

Appreciate the view. But it burns me when someone like elguante tells me that our church our moral stance produces an environemnt of rape. And yet he calls me a troll... go figure.

It's Ironic... enjoy the Irony...

It's like an Atheist talking about morality. What moral grounds do Atheists stand on? none! There is no hope, there is no reason to be better, there is no future, there is no sin, there is no soul. We are just worm food, waiting to take our last breath and return to the ground from which we came. There is no incentive to be better, or do better, as nothing matters. So it is beyond comical when an Atheist gets up and tells us we are without morals.

"God is dead" - Nietzsche

"Nietzsche is dead" - God

[Rob Bowman]

nackhadlow,

I am sorry to hear about your wife.

Please help me understand your view. I hope this question does not seem insensitive. Do you think (a) God knew your wife would get cancer but could not prevent it and cannot do anything to heal her of it now that she has it, or (b) God did not know your wife would get cancer and cannot do anything to heal her of it?

There are other possible views, but your comments seem to limit you to the above options.

No God worth worshipping would do such a thing.

My wife, who is better than me in every possible way, was recently diagnosed with a very rare form of uterine cancer, that will most likely result in a hysterectomy if we want to avoid the possibility of it spreading and killing her. It is one of the greatest desires of her heart to have more children.

God did not give that to her because she was righteous. God did not give that to her because she was wicked. God did not give that to her, period. It just is. And it sucks.

Suffering happens. But I refuse to believe in and worship a God who would torture his children in order to give them growing experiences. That's not a Father.

If I were to send my daughter off to a boarding school, with full knowledge that she would be raped and tortured, and allow it just so she could more fully appreciate coming back home to me - knowing I had the power to help her avoid those circumstances and didn't - I'd be viewed as a Monster. And yet many try to explain that this is exactly what God does.

Sorry. Not buying it.

I believe in God, but not that God.

[Nemesis]

Elguantepoco

You know, if everyone thinks you smell, except you, then maybe you need to change your deoderant.

We can do without the name calling.

Nemesis

[Jeff K.]

I seem to be tripping over myself these days.

[ELF1024]

I seem to be tripping over myself these days.

Well now that Elguanoteloko has taken a vacation, perhaps we can get back to the OP.

[Jeff K.]

He stopped posting? I didn't know.

[ELF1024]

He stopped posting? I didn't know.

Post #73

May I request that you not use the most sacred name of my Savior in such a manner? (Nathair)

He has been suspended for 3 days.

Nemesis

[David T]

nackhadlow,

I am sorry to hear about your wife.

Please help me understand your view. I hope this question does not seeminsensitive. Do you think (a) God knew your wife would get cancer but could notprevent it and cannot do anything to heal her of it now that she has it, or (b)God did not know your wife would get cancer and cannot do anything to heal her of it?

There are other possible views, but your comments seem to limit you to the aboveoptions.

Frankly and extremely honestly, I'm still in the process of working it all out.I'm working more from a process of elimination here.

Also, I have not at this point removed the possibility of a complete miraculous non-doctor-mediated healing in the future, and do appreciate prayers to that end. However, although it is a great hope and desire, I do not realistically view this as the most likely option to actually occur. Our prayers do not include that as the only option, but also include petitions for inspired wisdom and ability to be at play within the doctors as they seek to understand the condition and seek for the best possible options at medically curing the condition in the best possible way.

What I am discussing, at this point, is the act of my wife being ‘allowed’ to have contracted cancer in the first place.

1. I do not believe God would individually and personally decide that my wife needs cancer, and manipulate biology and genetics in such a way that the right combination of cells would combine at the right time, at the right place, to intentionally form a tumor specifically in my wife.

1a. I do not believe God actively inflicts diseases on the Righteous to test them.

1b. I do not believe God actively inflicts diseases on the Wicked to punish them.

2. I do assume that God has a full understanding of Genetics and Biology as a system. I assume that He would know that the exact circumstances of cells occurring at a particular moment of apparent conception would lead to the development of a tumor in her uterus.

3. I do believe that if God had wanted to avoid the possibility of my wife developing this Cancer, he could have will an inspired signal or intervention (such as an indication that we should not behaving unprotected intercourse at that specific time), A refusal to give a signal would be passive allowance of the cancer, and not an active giving of the cancer.

Which leads to a few options:

3a. God did give a signal, and at least one of us ignored it.

3b. God did give a signal or act of intervention, and we didn't hear it, or it was otherwise inherently ineffective.

3c. God did not give any signals or acts of intervention.

If 3a, then it is definitely either my wife's inaction, or my own inaction, that led to the development of the cancer.

If 3b, then it might be my wife or my own inaction for not being prepared to recognize the signal, or it's God's fault for not making the signal or act of intervention clearer or more potent.

If 3c, then we are not at fault, but it leaves us wondering why God did not give any signals or acts of intervention.

The options as I see it from3c are:

3c1. God was unable to give us a signal or act of intervention

3c2. God was able to give us a signal or act of intervention, but chose not to, but rather, for some reasons, has a greater desire that my wife develops cancer than that it be prevented.

This leads me to 3 possible conclusions concerning such situations, assuming the knowledge of God, where a series of events can potentially be averted to stop the Cancer from forming:

#1. God gave sufficient intervention to avert the suffering, but it was ignored, or not heard because of a fault on one of our parts. We are to blame for not heeding the signal.

#2. God was unable to give a significant intervention to avert our actions. There is no fault, because in this particular instance, God was impotent.

#3. God was able to give an act of intervention that He knew we wouldhear and acknowledge, but for some reason unknown to us, and not dependent onour degree of righteousness, desired more in this situation, at that very moment, that my wife have the cancer than that she did not have the cancer.

What this does not suggest is that my wife receiving Cancer was an original part of a Big Plan that was inevitable from before (or since) the Creation of the World. It does suggest that it all came down to a moment, and what occurred in that moment.

#3 would be substantially different than the circumstance presented in my analogy of sending my daughter off to boarding school with a full consenting knowledge that doing so would lead to her rape and torture as a ‘character building’ exercise to better appreciate a life of Perfection. In that scenario, the Father actively pushes his daughter towards that inevitable desired end, and actively takes pains to see that it does occur.

In the circumstance (#3)God did not actively plan to arrange the elements in a way that would have thepurpose or desired end result of the Bad Action happening. It was not an initial part of a plan or purpose, it was an event that happened in-time, and it was not actively stopped, but permitted to occur, and not with the planned desireto eternally benefit our personal individual growth or development from theexperience. It could perhaps be the choice or allowance of a lesser of twoevils, and God himself views the event (having the Cancer) as being somethingbad, but not worse than what would be an otherwise unavoidable alternative(which would be another discussion as to why something else would beunavoidable).

These are the only options that really seem to fit - right now - with the reality of my experience, observation,and present understanding when it comes to acknowledging the existence of a Worship-worthy, Loving, Parental God’s role (or lackthereof) in disasters, violence, and suffering.

[ELF1024]

This leads me to 1 of 3 conclusions concerning such situations, assuming the knowledge of God, where a series of events can potentially be averted to stop the Cancer from forming:

#1. God gave sufficient intervention to avert the suffering, but it was ignored, or not heard because of a fault on one of our parts. We are to blame for not heeding the signal.

#2. God was unable to give a significant intervention to avert our actions. There is no fault, because in this particular instance, God was impotent.

#3. God was able to give an act of intervention that He knew we would hear and acknowledge, but for some reason unknown to us, and not dependent on our degree of righteousness, desired more in this situation that my wife have the cancer than that she did not have the cancer.

I would say that sometimes bad things just happen due to a roll in the dice. God allows random events to happen.

For example the nuclear testing in Nevada was scheduled in such a way where the wind was never blowing towards California. As a result, Southern Utah has a higher incidents of some Cancers, and Northern Utah has a higher percentage of thyroid issues.

Did God cause this? No I would say that the Electoral College and the government caused this. However, I would say that God allowed the testing. Did God cause each and every one of those people to contract the medical issue? No. However God didn't stop it either.

I may have been born with a genetic makeup that gives me a higher likelihood that I will contract cancer. I could have been born with a pre-disposition towards ALS. My wife's family has a hereditary ataxia in her genetics. She was blessed not to inherit it, or she would be in a wheelchair or dead by now.

Did God cause specific people to have these specific maladies? No. However God does allow them.

I have a son who is severely developmentally disabled; without a good medical diagnosis for why. (not for lack of trying) Did God cause him to be the way he is? No. Is it some how his fault? No. Is it my fault, or his mother's fault? No, I don't believe so... even though I usually joke that he is the result of praying for patience (be careful what you pray for, you might get it).

Sometimes the dice just come up snake eyes and you wind up with a "blessing" you didn't expect.

[Rob Bowman]

nackhadlow,

You wrote:

Frankly and extremely honestly, I'm still in the process of working it all out.

And I can see that you are struggling with the issue. Dealing with various afflictions in my family, some of them chronic, I sympathize from personal experience with the sorts of questions you are asking. Not being LDS, I wouldn't expect you to consider my perspective very seriously, but I'll share it for what it may be worth to you.

It is unclear from your response whether you believe that God knew ahead of time that your wife would get cancer. I would suggest to you that he definitely did. God is all-knowing. In that knowledge comes assurance that whatever happens to us does not catch God by surprise and does not mean that he has lost control of the universe. It isn't necessary to believe that God predetermines everything that happens in some mechanistic or fatalistic sense to recognize the value of knowing that God knows what will happen and is always able to handle it, even if we can't (and frankly, sometimes things are just beyond our capacity to manage).

Normally, so far as I can see from the Bible, God does not send us "signals" to warn us of impending dangers or bad things about to happen. He doesn't typically provide some sort of clue or signal that we should take a different way home to avoid an accident that would otherwise occur. He isn't likely to alert us ahead of time that a particular sandwich contains food poisoning. There is no reason to think that God signaled to you or your wife that she was about to contract cancer and that you missed the signal. There is therefore no reason to beat yourself up over the possibility that God was telling you something and you missed it.

Since God knows the future and is certainly capable of providing a message to anyone about an impending danger and how to avoid it, we must come to terms with the fact that he could do so but normally does not. We live in a cursed world as a result of the fall and bad things happen. Were God to prevent all bad things from happening or telegraph instructions to avoid all accidents or missteps, the curse of the fall would not have its natural consequences. At the same time, the fact that God could spare us from specific bad things (either by preventing them or telling us how to avoid them) but does not normally do so is an indication that God knows that some greater good is served by running the universe in this way. I don't mean that God necessarily has some specific greater good to bring about as a result of each unfortunate occurrence, such as your wife's cancer, but that at the very least there is a greater good served by allowing such things to happen in general. It may also be that in some situations God uses specific bad things that happen to bring about a greater good, as he did with Joseph (Gen. 50:20). Paul tells us that God promises to work all things together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose (Rom. 8:28). It is obviously very important, then, that we know God truly and have responded faithfully to his redeeming call.

It would be foolish to claim that these comments come close to exhausting the matter or even that they are a fully adequate treatment. I share them with you in the hope they are somewhat helpful.

[ELF1024]

My wife's former Baptist preacher used to get very upset with is congregation when there were members who were having hardships. In essence he blamed them for their own hardships, saying that they must not be living the word of God or they would not have the trouble they were having.

That is a very alien point of view to me. I don't believe that as a Church or a people that we believe that God causes suffering when you aren't living the way you should.

I grew up in the deep South (Tennessee, Alabama) and as a raised Southerner we love our stories. Here is one I feel is appropriate for the discussion:

Parable of the Dead Duck:

There once was a rich man, and his gardener. One early morning the rich man decides to go out duck hunting with his friend, the gardener. As they make their way to the duck blind, the rich man turns to the gardener and says:

"Your a Christian, right?" asks the rich man.

"Yes, you know I am"

"And you life hasn't been particularly easy and your not particularly well off."

"No, things haven't always been easy, and I'm not rich like you." answers the gardener.

"You know I haven't been to church in a dog's age. I'm well off, my kids are well off. I've got land, I've got money, I have things. My life has been pretty easy. Why do you think that is?"

About the moment they reach the duck blind and settle in. The gardener thinks about this life, and how it hasn't been easy, and how his kids never had all of the things the rich man's had enjoyed.

Suddenly two ducks take flight out of the reeds, and both men fire their shotguns. Both ducks drop into the water, one trashing, the other dead.

"Go get those two ducks," the rich man says, "but make sure you get the trashing duck first."

As the gardener returns with the two ducks, he turns to the rich man and says; "I think you just answered your own question."

"How so?"

"We're both like those ducks we just shot. I'm a Christian and I'm trashing for all I'm worth trying to keep from Satan, and your the dead duck. Satan keeps coming after me, because he knows he can always come back for you later."

Hardships aren't always bad things. However, they never are enjoyable at the time they happen.

As Book of Mormon Truth signature says "Hell is moved only when things move Heavenward." Elder Neal A. Maxwell

[David T]

Elf and Rob,

I may be missing something, but while appearing to be critical of options #1 and #2, neither of your statements seem particularly incompatible with my #3 as I expressed above:

#3. God was able to give an act of intervention that He knew we would hear and acknowledge, but for some reason unknown to us, and not dependent onour degree of righteousness, desired more in this situation, at that very moment, that my wife have the cancer than that she did not have the cancer.

What this does not suggest is that my wife receiving Cancer was an original part of a Big Plan that was inevitable from before (or since) the Creation of the World. It does suggest that it all came down to a moment, and what occurred in that moment.

#3 would be substantially different than the circumstance presented in my analogy of sending my daughter off to boarding school with a full consenting knowledge that doing so would lead to her rape and torture as a ‘character building’ exercise to better appreciate a life of Perfection. In that scenario, the Father actively pushes his daughter towards that inevitable desired end, and actively takes pains to see that it does occur.

In the circumstance (#3)God did not actively plan to arrange the elements in a way that would have thepurpose or desired end result of the Bad Action happening. It was not an initial part of a plan or purpose, it was an event that happened in-time, and it was not actively stopped, but permitted to occur, and not with the planned desire to eternally benefit our personal individual growth or development from the specific experience. It could perhaps be the choice or allowance of a lesser of two evils, and God himself views the event (having the Cancer) as being something bad, but not worse than what would be an otherwise unavoidable alternative.

Is there something there that you would need to take substantial issue with?

[ELF1024]

Elf and Rob,

I may be missing something, but while appearing to be critical of options #1 and #2, neither of your statements seem particularly incompatible with my #3 as I expressed above:

Is there something there that you would need to take substantial issue with?

#3. God was able to give an act of intervention that He knew we would hear and acknowledge, but for some reason unknown to us, and not dependent on our degree of righteousness, desired more in this situation, at that very moment, that my wife have the cancer than that she did not have the cancer.

I guess the only part of the statement that I would take issue with is the word desired. I am not sure that the Lord desired it more; so much as just allowed it to happen. Passive or Neutral on the subject as apposed to being actively engaged in causing it. I'm not sure if that makes sense.

[David T]

I guess the only part of the statement that I would take issue with is the word desired. I am not sure that the Lord desired it more; so much as just allowed it to happen. Passive or Neutral on the subject as apposed to being actively engaged in causing it. I'm not sure if that makes sense.

The thought in using "desired" was to express the assumption that if God could do otherwise, his desire would be manifest in his action or lack thereof. If God had the power to cause something to occur, and did not do it, then it would be evidence that He in fact desired something different more than the occurrence that He did not do. It was intended to be a little uncomfortable.

[Palerider]

Frankly and extremely honestly, I'm still in the process of working it all out.I'm working more from a process of elimination here.

Also, I have not at this point removed the possibility of a complete miraculous non-doctor-mediated healing in the future, and do appreciate prayers to that end. However, although it is a great hope and desire, I do not realistically view this as the most likely option to actually occur. Our prayers do not include that as the only option, but also include petitions for inspired wisdom and ability to be at play within the doctors as they seek to understand the condition and seek for the best possible options at medically curing the condition in the best possible way.

What I am discussing, at this point, is the act of my wife being ‘allowed’ to have contracted cancer in the first place.

1. I do not believe God would individually and personally decide that my wife needs cancer, and manipulate biology and genetics in such a way that the right combination of cells would combine at the right time, at the right place, to intentionally form a tumor specifically in my wife.

1a. I do not believe God actively inflicts diseases on the Righteous to test them.

1b. I do not believe God actively inflicts diseases on the Wicked to punish them.

2. I do assume that God has a full understanding of Genetics and Biology as a system. I assume that He would know that the exact circumstances of cells occurring at a particular moment of apparent conception would lead to the development of a tumor in her uterus.

3. I do believe that if God had wanted to avoid the possibility of my wife developing this Cancer, he could have will an inspired signal or intervention (such as an indication that we should not behaving unprotected intercourse at that specific time), A refusal to give a signal would be passive allowance of the cancer, and not an active giving of the cancer.

Which leads to a few options:

3a. God did give a signal, and at least one of us ignored it.

3b. God did give a signal or act of intervention, and we didn't hear it, or it was otherwise inherently ineffective.

3c. God did not give any signals or acts of intervention.

If 3a, then it is definitely either my wife's inaction, or my own inaction, that led to the development of the cancer.

If 3b, then it might be my wife or my own inaction for not being prepared to recognize the signal, or it's God's fault for not making the signal or act of intervention clearer or more potent.

If 3c, then we are not at fault, but it leaves us wondering why God did not give any signals or acts of intervention.

The options as I see it from3c are:

3c1. God was unable to give us a signal or act of intervention

3c2. God was able to give us a signal or act of intervention, but chose not to, but rather, for some reasons, has a greater desire that my wife develops cancer than that it be prevented.

Certainly don't want to put words in your mouth, especially in view of the circumstances, but I would have to word this this way for my own perspective:

"3c2. God was able to give us a signal or act of intervention, but chose not to, but rather, in view of the original reasons for coming to this life, decided to let the "earth experience" take it's natural course."

This leads me to 3 possible conclusions concerning such situations, assuming the knowledge of God, where a series of events can potentially be averted to stop the Cancer from forming:

#1. God gave sufficient intervention to avert the suffering, but it was ignored, or not heard because of a fault on one of our parts. We are to blame for not heeding the signal.

#2. God was unable to give a significant intervention to avert our actions. There is no fault, because in this particular instance, God was impotent.

#3. God was able to give an act of intervention that He knew we wouldhear and acknowledge, but for some reason unknown to us, and not dependent onour degree of righteousness, desired more in this situation, at that very moment, that my wife have the cancer than that she did not have the cancer.

Again:

#3. God was able to give an act of intervention that He knew we would hear and acknowledge, but for some reason, not dependent on our degree of righteousness, desired more in this situation, at that very moment, that my wife have the life experience for which this imperfect world was created.

What this does not suggest is that my wife receiving Cancer was an original part of a Big Plan that was inevitable from before (or since) the Creation of the World. It does suggest that it all came down to a moment, and what occurred in that moment.

#3 would be substantially different than the circumstance presented in my analogy of sending my daughter off to boarding school with a full consenting knowledge that doing so would lead to her rape and torture as a ‘character building’ exercise to better appreciate a life of Perfection. In that scenario, the Father actively pushes his daughter towards that inevitable desired end, and actively takes pains to see that it does occur.

In the circumstance (#3)God did not actively plan to arrange the elements in a way that would have thepurpose or desired end result of the Bad Action happening. It was not an initial part of a plan or purpose, it was an event that happened in-time, and it was not actively stopped, but permitted to occur, and not with the planned desireto eternally benefit our personal individual growth or development from theexperience. It could perhaps be the choice or allowance of a lesser of twoevils, and God himself views the event (having the Cancer) as being somethingbad, but not worse than what would be an otherwise unavoidable alternative(which would be another discussion as to why something else would beunavoidable).

These are the only options that really seem to fit - right now - with the reality of my experience, observation,and present understanding when it comes to acknowledging the existence of a Worship-worthy, Loving, Parental God’s role (or lackthereof) in disasters, violence, and suffering.

How does one come to appreciate perfect order without the experience of random chaos? A perfect, glorified body without the experience of one subject to illness, disease, and wounding?

I don't believe Heavenly Father sends us here with the intent that we should rape or be raped, but I know He knows those things will occur because of the respect He has for the overarching and undergirding principle of the universe which is free agency.

That agency is what allows for a perfect judgement to come upon all at the appropriate time.

Our responsibility is to attempt to overcome those situations and the damage they inflict and whatever we are unable to address in this life He will heal through his divine grace and power in the next.

[ELF1024]

The thought in using desired was to express the assumption that if God could do otherwise, his desire would be manifest in his action or lack thereof. If God had the power to cause something to occur, and did not do it, then it would be evidence that He in fact desired something different more than the occurrence that He did not do.

It is my belief that God created the natural laws so that he didn't have to take action to keep things working. That the laws keep things orderly and running without intervention on God's behalf. God could run off and take a 3000 year nap, and things would still be moving along; people would still have babies, the moon would still orbit the planet, and mankind would still be a hateful race of savages bent on killing each other.

That being said, if a child is conceived with the genetic disorder known as Down Syndrome, it didn't take any will on God's part to happen. It was a roll of the genetic dice, and it came up in a fashion we wished it would not have. However, it didn't required any effort on God's part to happen. It just is. It didn't happen or be caused to happen because of an action on God's part, but because of the natural laws of genetics.

Now, if that same child who was conceived with Down Syndrome, is born without it; then that would be a miracle, and it would have required an action on God's part.

My aunt didn't need to have her Thyroid removed because of God action; she had to have her thyroid removed because of the natural laws related to nuclear testing, radioactive iodine and the laws of biology in relationship to being exposed to radioactive materials. If my aunt had not had to have had her thyroid removed; it would have been an action on God's part.

I'm not sure if I've explained it well enough...

[David T]

It is my belief that God created the natural laws so that he didn't have to take action to keep things working. That the laws keep things orderly and running without intervention on God's behalf. God could run off and take a 3000 year nap, and things would still be moving along; people would still have babies, the moon would still orbit the planet, and mankind would still be a hateful race of savages bent on killing each other.

That being said, if a child is conceived with the genetic disorder known as Down Syndrome, it didn't take any will on God's part to happen. It was a roll of the genetic dice, and it came up in a fashion we wished it would not have. However, it didn't required any effort on God's part to happen. It just is. It didn't happen or be caused to happen because of an action on God's part, but because of the natural laws of genetics.

Now, if that same child who was conceived with Down Syndrome, is born without it; then that would be a miracle, and it would have required an action on God's part.

My aunt didn't need to have her Thyroid removed because of God action; she had to have her thyroid removed because of the natural laws related to nuclear testing, radioactive iodine and the laws of biology in relationship to being exposed to radioactive materials. If my aunt had not had to have had her thyroid removed; it would have been an action on God's part.

I'm not sure if I've explained it well enough...

Which I think it what was, essentially, what I said. I do not believe God actively causes such diseases. The question, essentially, was in terms of

a) The ability of God to circumvent or prevent unnecessary other-wise natural events from happening

b) The desire (or lack thereof) of God to circumvent or prevent unnecessary other-wise natural events from happening.

In other words, the question as I explored it isn't, "Why does God cause these natural painful disasters", as much as "Does he actively choose not to prevent them, and if so, why?,"

The proposed amendment to #3 says, essentially, "God desires more for natural law to continue uninterrupted in all things than for allowing exceptions for individuals' otherwise natural suffering to be relieved."

[mercyngrace]

nack,

I'm sorry your family is going through such a difficult trial. One thing that I have found true in my life is that adversity and suffering are often invitations into God's presence, if we will receive them as such. Take, for example, the words recorded in Matthew.

Matthew records the Lord saying, Blessed are they that mourn; for they shall be comforted.

The Greek for comforted here has a much richer meaning that simply to be given succor.

παρακαλέω

parakaleō

Thayer Definition:

1) to call to one’s side, call for, summon

2) to address, speak to, (call to, call upon), which may be done in the way of exhortation, entreaty, comfort, instruction, etc.

2a) to admonish, exhort

2b) to beg, entreat, beseech

2b1) to strive to appease by entreaty

2c) to console, to encourage and strengthen by consolation, to comfort

2c1) to receive consolation, be comforted

2d) to encourage, strengthen

2e) exhorting and comforting and encouraging

2f) to instruct, teach

To be comforted means to be invited to draw near. In other words, when we mourn, we are beng invited to draw near unto God. We may be consoled, encouraged, or admonished but we are also likely to be summoned to the presence of God for instruction.

As indicated in the last General Conference by Elder Richards of the Seventy, the Savior learned by all that He suffered (Heb. 5:8 ) and "Perhaps we also need to experience the depths of mortality in order to understand Him and our eternal purposes."

The comfort we receive, if we respond to the summons, comes in the form of a visitation by either the first or second comforter. The name "comforter" obviously comes from the same root as "comforted" as used in the Beatitudes.

From the Bible Dictionary:

Paraclete

Paraclete. The word does not occur in the KJV. It is an English form of the Greek parakletos, a name applied by the Lord (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7) to the Holy Spirit, and which may be translated Comforter, Advocate, or Helper. The same name is applied by John (1 John 2:1) to the Lord himself. Advocate is probably the English word that most nearly represents the meaning of the Greek.

παράκλητος

paraklētos

1) summoned, called to one’s side, especially called to one’s aid

1a) one who pleads another’s cause before a judge, a pleader, counsel for defense, legal assistant, an advocate

1b) one who pleads another’s cause with one, an intercessor

1b1) of Christ in his exaltation at God’s right hand, pleading with God the Father for the pardon of our sins

1c) in the widest sense, a helper, succourer, aider, assistant

1c1) of the Holy Spirit destined to take the place of Christ with the apostles (after his ascension to the Father), to lead them to a deeper knowledge of the gospel truth, and give them divine strength needed to enable them to undergo trials and persecutions on behalf of the divine kingdom

Some posit that suffering or mourning has no purpose after this life, that little children suffer in vain or that the suffering of the dying is useless, however spiritual maturity, instruction from the comforters, and wisdom rise with us and are still acquired in the next world. Just as in the temple, we pass symbolically from one world and our instruction continues in the next until we are prepared with all the light and knowledge we need to pass through the veil, so the knowledge we acquire through our suffering rises with us and, if we endure it well - which may mean simply humbling ourselves and letting the comforter and the experience lead us to a deeper knowledge of gospel truth - it grants us all the more advantage in the next world. As we come to understand Christ through our adversities and suffering, our very natures change.

I hope that doesn't sound like meaningless platitudes. My own experiences with adversity, suffering, and mourning are a testament to these truths.

[ELF1024]

Which I think it what was, essentially, what I said. I do not believe God actively causes such diseases. The question, essentially, was in terms of

a) The ability of God to circumvent or prevent unnecessary other-wise natural events from happening

b) The desire (or lack thereof) of God to circumvent or prevent unnecessary other-wise natural events from happening.

In other words, the question as I explored it isn't, "Why does God cause these natural painful disasters", as much as "Does he actively choose not to prevent them, and if so, why?,"

The proposed amendment to #3 says, essentially, "God desires more for natural law to continue uninterrupted in all things than for allowing exceptions for individuals' otherwise natural suffering to be relieved."

I believe that God allows room for Miracles to happen. Sometimes we have to have bad things happen in order for miracles to happen.

"God allows natural law to continue uninterrupted, with occasional exceptions where he chooses for natural suffering to be relieved."

[David T]

I appreciate all those who are attempting to express their understanding through struggles through experience.

I recognize growth comes from working out such issues for oneself, in a way that does not come from accepting pat answers that do not make any sense. In some cases, such explorations come full circle, and an initially unacceptable premise may have, in time, through struggle, and through additional experience, gain true personal meaning. But sometimes, I recognize that this meaning can't be understood without struggle.

I do not look fondly on pat answers that are repeated authoritatively without individual thought, just because it's "The correct answer" listed in some manual somewhere that hasn't been actively thought about or experienced by the spouter of it. There are many pat answers that make perfect sense until one is placed in a position where it is no longer theory, but is rather something being made actual. (Which I believe is a key aspect of true Atonement).

Job's friends tried to explain the philosophical/theoretical/doctrinal pat answer explanation for his suffering. But it was revealed that they were all full of crap, and instead annoyed him far more than helped him.

I was mostly frustrated when I heard something my wife's Uncle said. His son, who has had some rough drug and marriage problems, was devastated when he found out about my wife's problem. "She didn't deserve that, " he said. "That should have happened to me." His father replied, "You've brought your own problems upon yourself. These trials are being given to her by God." - while his intentions were good, that answer as trying to explain my wife's suffering revolted me. I didn't believe it at all. Hence my emotional response to the OP.

[ELF1024]

I appreciate all those who are attempting to express their understanding through struggles through experience.

For What It's Worth;

I'm sorry that you and your dear wife are having to go through this. My wife and I will keep you in our prayers, and we wish you the best.

ELF

[LeSellers]

Not exactly on topic, but this has always been helpful to me when I face trying circumstances.

You sometimes wonder whether the Lord really knows what He ought to do with you. You sometimes wonder if you know better than He does about what you ought to do and ought to become. I am wondering if I may tell you a story. It has to do with an incident in my life when God showed me that He knew best.

I was living up in Canada. I had purchased a farm. It was run-down. I went out one morning and saw a currant bush. It had grown up over six feet high. It was going all to wood. There were no blossoms and no currants. I was raised on a fruit farm in Salt Lake before we went to Canada, and I knew what ought to happen to that currant bush. So I got some pruning shears and clipped it back until there was nothing left but stumps. It was just coming daylight, and I thought I saw on top of each of these little stumps what appeared to be a tear, and I thought the currant bush was crying. I was kind of simpleminded (and I haven’t entirely gotten over it), and I looked at it and smiled and said, “What are you crying about?” You know, I thought I heard that currant bush say this:

“How could you do this to me? I was making such wonderful growth. I was almost as big as the shade tree and the fruit tree that are inside the fence, and now you have cut me down. Every plant in the garden will look down on me because I didn’t make what I should have made. How could you do this to me? I thought you were the gardener here.”

That’s what I thought I heard the currant bush say, and I thought it so much that I answered. I said, “Look, little currant bush, I am the gardener here, and I know what I want you to be. I didn’t intend you to be a fruit tree or a shade tree. I want you to be a currant bush, and someday, little currant bush, when you are laden with fruit, you are going to say, ‘Thank you, Mr. Gardener, for loving me enough to cut me down. Thank you, Mr. Gardener.’ ”

Years passed, and I found myself in England. I was in command of a cavalry unit in the Canadian Army. I held the rank of field officer in the British Canadian Army. I was proud of my position. And there was an opportunity for me to become a general. I had taken all the examinations. I had the seniority. The one man between me and the office of general in the British Army became a casualty, and I received a telegram from London. It said: “Be in my office tomorrow morning at 10:00,” signed by General Turner.

I went up to London. I walked smartly into the office of the general, and I saluted him smartly, and he gave me the same kind of a salute a senior officer usually gives—a sort of “Get out of the way, worm!” He said, “Sit down, Brown.” Then he said, “I’m sorry I cannot make the appointment. You are entitled to it. You have passed all the examinations. You have the seniority. You’ve been a good officer, but I can’t make the appointment. You are to return to Canada and become a training officer and a transport officer.” That for which I had been hoping and praying for 10 years suddenly slipped out of my fingers.

Then he went into the other room to answer the telephone, and on his desk, I saw my personal history sheet. Right across the bottom of it was written, “THIS MAN IS A MORMON.” We were not very well liked in those days. When I saw that, I knew why I had not been appointed. He came back and said, “That’s all, Brown.” I saluted him again, but not quite as smartly, and went out.

I got on the train and started back to my town, 120 miles away, with a broken heart, with bitterness in my soul. And every click of the wheels on the rails seemed to say, “You are a failure.” When I got to my tent, I was so bitter that I threw my cap on the cot. I clenched my fists, and I shook them at heaven. I said, “How could you do this to me, God? I have done everything I could do to measure up. There is nothing that I could have done—that I should have done—that I haven’t done. How could you do this to me?” I was as bitter as gall.

And then I heard a voice, and I recognized the tone of this voice. It was my own voice, and the voice said, “I am the gardener here. I know what I want you to do.” The bitterness went out of my soul, and I fell on my knees by the cot to ask forgiveness for my ungratefulness and my bitterness. While kneeling there I heard a song being sung in an adjoining tent. A number of Mormon boys met regularly every Tuesday night. I usually met with them. We would sit on the floor and have Mutual. As I was kneeling there, praying for forgiveness, I heard their singing:

“But if, by a still, small voice he calls

To paths that I do not know,

I’ll answer, dear Lord, with my hand in thine:

I’ll go where you want me to go.”

(Hymns, no. 270)

I arose from my knees a humble man. And now, almost 50 years later, I look up to Him and say, “Thank you, Mr. Gardener, for cutting me down, for loving me enough to hurt me.” I see now that it was wise that I should not become a general at that time, because if I had I would have been senior officer of all western Canada, with a lifelong, handsome salary, a place to live, and a pension, but I would have raised my six daughters and two sons in army barracks. They would no doubt have married out of the Church, and I think I would not have amounted to anything. I haven’t amounted to very much as it is, but I have done better than I would have done if the Lord had let me go the way I wanted to go.

Many of you are going to have very difficult experiences: disappointment, heartbreak, bereavement, defeat. You are going to be tested and tried. I just want you to know that if you don’t get what you think you ought to get, remember, God is the gardener here. He knows what He wants you to be. Submit yourselves to His will. Be worthy of His blessings, and you will get His blessings.

The Currant Bush,” New Era, Apr. 2001, 12

Enjoy,

Lehi

[Jeff K.]

I appreciate all those who are attempting to express their understanding through struggles through experience.

I recognize growth comes from working out such issues for oneself, in a way that does not come from accepting pat answers that do not make any sense. In some cases, such explorations come full circle, and an initially unacceptable premise may have, in time, through struggle, and through additional experience, gain true personal meaning. But sometimes, I recognize that this meaning can't be understood without struggle.

I do not look fondly on pat answers that are repeated authoritatively without individual thought, just because it's "The correct answer" listed in some manual somewhere that hasn't been actively thought about or experienced by the spouter of it. There are many pat answers that make perfect sense until one is placed in a position where it is no longer theory, but is rather something being made actual. (Which I believe is a key aspect of true Atonement).

Job's friends tried to explain the philosophical/theoretical/doctrinal pat answer explanation for his suffering. But it was revealed that they were all full of crap, and instead annoyed him far more than helped him.

I was mostly frustrated when I heard something my wife's Uncle said. His son, who has had some rough drug and marriage problems, was devastated when he found out about my wife's problem. "She didn't deserve that, " he said. "That should have happened to me." His father replied, "You've brought your own problems upon yourself. These trials are being given to her by God." - while his intentions were good, that answer as trying to explain my wife's suffering revolted me. I didn't believe it at all. Hence my emotional response to the OP.

Often as not the suffering we have as individuals benefits all of us as a body of saints because so many of us will read of the struggles and your responses and see the wisdoms that you learn and give to the rest of us. I am sorry you are going through what may help some of us avoid and overcome.

[mercyngrace]

There are many pat answers that make perfect sense until one is placed in a position where it is no longer theory, but is rather something being made actual. (Which I believe is a key aspect of true Atonement).

Sometimes, unless you've been there, it's hard to know when pat answers are truth. Some people spout them because they've heard the answers are true, others because they hope so, and others because they discovered them as they knelt in their own private Gethsemanes or carried their own crosses to Calvary.

I was mostly frustrated when I heard something my wife's Uncle said. His son, who has had some rough drug and marriage problems, was devastated when he found out about my wife's problem. "She didn't deserve that, " he said. "That should have happened to me." His father replied, "You've brought your own problems upon yourself. These trials are being given to her by God." - while his intentions were good, that answer as trying to explain my wife's suffering revolted me. I didn't believe it at all. Hence my emotional response to the OP.

I don't believe God gives us trials and suffering. I believe that adversity is the natural state of this world and I know that He uses it to our benefit if we are humble. And sometimes, even if we aren't.

[Vance]

"The price we paid to become acquainted with God was a privilege to pay . . ."

http://mormontrekkers.com/Martin_company.htm