"the God I Believe In Wouldn't Do That"

[JLHPROF]

Every so often on this board someone will make a statement something along the lines of "The God I worship wouldn't cause innocents to suffer".

Recently someone said this about the plagues in Egypt killing children had to be myth.

Today's thread on the OT called God vengeful.

The OW thread has featured people saying "God wouldn't discrimate" against women.

Recently there was even a thread implying that God was cruel to make Jesus suffer and die for our sins.

 

In fact, people make this statement about a lot of things that they just can't accept God as doing.  Anything that is seen as unfair, unequal, cruel, vengeful etc. we like to say that "God wouldn't do that" and of course atheists always claim that natural disasters prove there is no loving God.

 

So, how do we justify putting our own ideas about right and wrong onto God? 

And where do we get the notion that to be a loving God He has to not directly cause suffering?

Prophecy would indicate that many more vengeful and deadly acts are in the near future as Gods judgements are poured out.  Many cities will be destroyed (including innocents presumably).  We are told Jackson County will be "wiped clean", that New York, Albany & Boston may be destroyed, that there will numerous natural disasters.  The scriptures record God ordering many deaths.

 

Do these things cause those who think "God wouldn't do that to the innocent" to lose faith?

I am not looking for a "why does God allow these things" answer.  I am looking for a "how do we deal with these things and have faith in such a being" answer.

Edited March 25, 2014 by JLHPROF

[pogi]

 I am looking for a "how do we deal with these things and have faith in such a being" answer.

 

The best way that I have found to deal with these things is to keep an eternal perspective while believing in God's perfect balance of justice and mercy.  When our understanding and perspective is limited to mortality with beginnings and endings of liife, we have difficulty understanding such dealings with man.  Gods mercy is not lost in these events, and neither is life.  The only thing that is lost is mortality.

Edited March 25, 2014 by pogi

[Mystery Meat]

The best way that I have found to deal with these things is to keep an eternal perspective while believing in God's perfect balance of justice and mercy.  When our understanding and perspective is limited to mortality with beginnings and endings of liife, we have difficulty understanding such dealings with man.  Gods mercy is not lost in these events, and neither is life.  The only thing that is lost is mortality.

 

This. When I read the Old Testament I can't but notice how harsh God's actions seem to be. Imagine a world wide flood and how many people that would have killed? I maintain the God has an eternal perspective one that we don't have. Anything we perceive as an injustice or cruel with out limited understanding is just that,  limited. When I think about it that way, I am sure that anything that seems harsh, prejudiced, or vengeful is actually loving, or at least it would take a whole lot to see how those actions could be sourced in infinite love.

[The Nehor]

The God I believe in has done all of that and more.

The usual defense is that God allows bad things to happen but is that any better really? Would we think better of a parent that had the opportunity to save a child but wouldn't over a parent that put the child in mortal danger in the first place?

C.S. Lewis said that, based on the world we live in, God is either a surgeon performing a painful operation or a violent butcher. I think he is a surgeon. The surgery still hurts. God directly inflicts much of the hurt.

As much as I hate suffering I am beginning to see the value of it. I am also see death as more and more of a blessing. Who could endure this world forever? Escape is something I look forward to.

[ksfisher]

“If we come to God with moral demands placed upon Him as a condition to trust Him, then we encounter not God but our presuppositions of ultimate moral values. If God must conform to our moral judgments, if He must fit within our moral framework, then we never encounter God”

“Only when we are willing to let go of all of our moral schemata, only when we do not judge before we encounter, can we truly encounter God as He is—as He reveals Himself.”

Excerpt From: Blake T. Ostler. “Fire on the Horizon: A Meditation on the Endowment and Love of Atonement.” iBooks.

This material may be protected by copyright.

Check out this book on the iBooks Store: https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewBook?id=652869962

Edited March 25, 2014 by ksfisher

[JLHPROF]

Great responses so far.

So what of those faithful Church members who have posted on this board that the God they believe in would never allow innocents to suffer or discriminate in his actions?  Are they just wrong?

[Mystery Meat]

Yes. They are wrong.

[strappinglad]

Here's a book on the topic.http://deseretbook.com/All-These-Things-Shall-Give-Thee-Experience-Neal-Maxwell/i/2257016

[Kenngo1969]

If I saw the world the way my brothers and sisters who disagree with me see it, I would agree with them.  I thank God that any judgment of them doesn't rest with me.  When it comes right down to it, though, the only thing I have left to surrender to God that He didn't give me in the first place is my will.  Either He's all-knowing, all-powerful, merciful, kind, just, and wise, or He's not.  Having said that, Dan Peterson once said that we in the 21st century have lost our respect for the Divine, coming to think of God, instead, as everyone's ever-loving, always-forgiving, nonjudgmental pal.  

 

If God really is my friend, then He's going to tell me what I need to hear, not always what I want to hear.  Either I believe He possesses the characteristics I describe above, or I don't.  Either I believe "[God's] thoughts are not [my] thoughts, neither are [His] ways [my] ways" (see Isaiah 55:8-9), or I don't; either I believe that God "loveth His children," even if I do not know "the meaning of all things" (1 Nephi 11:17), or I do not; either I want His friendship ("ye are my friends if ye do what I say," John 15:14) or I do not.  Either I trust Him even if everybody else in the world thinks He's a terrible sociologist or political scientist or I do not.  Either I trust him even if everybody else in the world thinks He's sexist, or racist, or homophobic, or politically incorrect, or I do not.  

[cdowis]

 

I am not looking for a "why does God allow these things" answer.  I am looking for a "how do we deal with these things and have faith in such a being" answer.

 

I'm pretty blunt.  "Are you giving God advice on how to do things?"  Basically he is telling his Creator what He should and should not do.

[The Nehor]

Great responses so far.

So what of those faithful Church members who have posted on this board that the God they believe in would never allow innocents to suffer or discriminate in his actions?  Are they just wrong?

 

Wrong, and in defiance of scripture. When Alma and Amulek converted a group of people and they were all thrown into the flames they suffered despite being innocent. Joseph spent years in prison for a crime he didn't commit. So did Jeremiah. Abinadi was poked with hot flames until he died. The one true innocent Jesus was allowed to suffer and die.

 

I don't know enough about discimination. God treats us all differently because he knows us perfectly. Is it still discrimination at that point?

 

 

Do these things cause those who think "God wouldn't do that to the innocent" to lose faith?

I am not looking for a "why does God allow these things" answer.  I am looking for a "how do we deal with these things and have faith in such a being" answer.

 

We deal with these things by enduring them. The only way to have faith in God is by coming to know Him. I am not sure if that is all there is to the right way. I can say that the wrong way is to just say we do not understand enough and leave it at that. Job's "friends" used that excuse and were rebuked for it.

[ERayR]

Every so often on this board someone will make a statement something along the lines of "The God I worship wouldn't cause innocents to suffer".

Recently someone said this about the plagues in Egypt killing children had to be myth.

Today's thread on the OT called God vengeful.

The OW thread has featured people saying "God wouldn't discrimate" against women.

Recently there was even a thread implying that God was cruel to make Jesus suffer and die for our sins.

 

In fact, people make this statement about a lot of things that they just can't accept God as doing.  Anything that is seen as unfair, unequal, cruel, vengeful etc. we like to say that "God wouldn't do that" and of course atheists always claim that natural disasters prove there is no loving God.

 

So, how do we justify putting our own ideas about right and wrong onto God? 

And where do we get the notion that to be a loving God He has to not directly cause suffering?

Prophecy would indicate that many more vengeful and deadly acts are in the near future as Gods judgements are poured out.  Many cities will be destroyed (including innocents presumably).  We are told Jackson County will be "wiped clean", that New York, Albany & Boston may be destroyed, that there will numerous natural disasters.  The scriptures record God ordering many deaths.

 

Do these things cause those who think "God wouldn't do that to the innocent" to lose faith?

I am not looking for a "why does God allow these things" answer.  I am looking for a "how do we deal with these things and have faith in such a being" answer.

 

To me it is making a God in their own image.  Kind of like carving an idol from wood or stone.

[ERayR]

Great responses so far.

So what of those faithful Church members who have posted on this board that the God they believe in would never allow innocents to suffer or discriminate in his actions?  Are they just wrong?

 

They are 100% right.  That is the God they believe in.  Its justthat they do not believe in the God that is.

[halconero]

Much of the Western world subscribes to a very damaging theory recognized in anthropology without even realizing it. This is the theory of unilineal evolutionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unilineal_evolution) or classical social evolution: that human morality can be arranged on scales of savage --> barbaric --> civilized. It argues that some societies are more complex, elaborate, orderly, or moral than others. The more primitive societies will eventually catch up. Numerous anthropological ethnographies have demonstrated this to be false: that all societies containing social cohesiveness, morality, order, and mores which govern them. Currently the theory is considered obsolete within the social sciences.

 

You do see its prevalence in Western societies though, where people will often consider their moral standards to be more evolved than others. I say this is damaging because it allows us to judge others by standards to which they themselves don't adhere. Although Nephi may have found the idea of killing Laban personally repugnant, he was entirely justified in doing so by contemporaneous standards.

 

When we hold God to our Western European standards of morality we confine him to a specific history, geography and social context. We somehow conceive our morality as being higher than his is. I believe this to be sacrilegious at best, blasphemous at its worst. We create an Anglo-Saxon, 18-21st century, upper class God of our own.

 

On a theological note we must consider the fact that the Saviour underwent the pains, sicknesses, judgements, deaths, and tortures of all the Father's children. Humanity aside, I consider the fact that Jesus Christ was willing to put himself through every judgement he made as the God of the Old Testament, and every punishment the Father has decreed, means that both are very judicious, aware, and serious in every mortal punishment which has been meted out to humanity. 

[teddyaware]

Every so often on this board someone will make a statement something along the lines of "The God I worship wouldn't cause innocents to suffer".

Recently someone said this about the plagues in Egypt killing children had to be myth.

Today's thread on the OT called God vengeful.

The OW thread has featured people saying "God wouldn't discrimate" against women.

Recently there was even a thread implying that God was cruel to make Jesus suffer and die for our sins.

 

In fact, people make this statement about a lot of things that they just can't accept God as doing.  Anything that is seen as unfair, unequal, cruel, vengeful etc. we like to say that "God wouldn't do that" and of course atheists always claim that natural disasters prove there is no loving God.

 

So, how do we justify putting our own ideas about right and wrong onto God? 

And where do we get the notion that to be a loving God He has to not directly cause suffering?

Prophecy would indicate that many more vengeful and deadly acts are in the near future as Gods judgements are poured out.  Many cities will be destroyed (including innocents presumably).  We are told Jackson County will be "wiped clean", that New York, Albany & Boston may be destroyed, that there will numerous natural disasters.  The scriptures record God ordering many deaths.

 

Do these things cause those who think "God wouldn't do that to the innocent" to lose faith?

I am not looking for a "why does God allow these things" answer.  I am looking for a "how do we deal with these things and have faith in such a being" answer.

I find the whole "the God I worship wouldn't cause innocents to suffer" to be evidence of spiritual immaturity, poor scriptural scholarship and illogical thought processes. God doesn't do anything except it be for the benefit of the world and by this we must conclude -- if we have real faith in the perfect goodness of God -- that great human suffering is absolutely necessary for the ultimate happiness of the children of God.

24 He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world, even that helayeth down his own life that he may draw all men unto him. (2 Nephi 26)

The fact is that by merely allowing suffering to go on, without intervention on His part, we have prima facie evidence that God must allow terrible afflictions and injustices to take place in order to bring His great plan of salvation and exaltation to a triumphant conclusion. In Alma 14, Alma explains this principle to Amulek as the wicked are in the process of destroying the righteous by fire in the city of Ammonihah:

9 And it came to pass that they took Alma and Amulek, and carried them forth to the place of martyrdom, that they might witness the destruction of those who were consumed by fire.

10 And when Amulek saw the pains of the women and children who were consuming in the fire, he also was pained; and he said unto Alma: How can we witness this awful scene? Therefore let us stretch forth our hands, and exercise the power of God which is in us, and save them from the flames.

11 But Alma said unto him: The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand; for behold the Lord receiveth them up unto himself, in glory; and he doth suffer that they may do this thing, or that the people may do this thing unto them, according to the hardness of their hearts, that the judgments which he shall exercise upon them in his wrath may be just; and the blood of the innocent shall stand as a witness against them, yea, and cry mightily against them at the last day. (Alma 14)

 

The Lord Jesus Christ powerfully demonstrated by the infinite and eternal suffering He endured during His atoning sacrifice that even God Himself must be subject to physical, emotional and spiritual agonies beyond measure. For in a universe based on the immutable law of opposition in all things, the fearful powers of darkness must be encountered and eventually overcome if we are to fulfill the measure of our creation and be crowned with eternal glory. We must follow in the example of Christ in first enduring the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune if we are to inherit eternal life...

 

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. (Romans 8:16-18)

Edited March 26, 2014 by teddyaware

[JLHPROF]

I am surprised considering the responses so far are all on the same side as my viewpoint.  I really thought there was more variety of notions on this concept based on what I've read.

 

How then have I seen all the following posted in just the past few weeks and most of these ideas received some support?

 

Recently someone said this about the plagues in Egypt killing children had to be myth (because God wouldn't kill innocent children).
Today's thread on the OT called God vengeful (because he destroyed cities)
The OW thread has featured people saying "God wouldn't discrimate" against women.
Recently there was even a thread implying that God was cruel to make Jesus suffer and die for our sins (instead of just granting forgiveness)

Edited March 26, 2014 by JLHPROF

[cdowis]

I had someone post regarding allowing evil in the world, "Evil prevails when good men do nothing", implying a careless attitude on the part of the Creator.

[teddyaware]

I am surprised considering the responses so far are all on the same side as my viewpoint.  I really thought there was more variety of notions on this concept based on what I've read.

 

How then have I seen all the following posted in just the past few weeks and most of these ideas received some support?

I thinks it's likely because those who take the opposing view are coming to realize their point of view is out of harmony with the scriptures. The only way a professed believer can believe suffering, even horrific suffering, isn't part of God's plan for the salvation of His children is to utterly ignore a veritable mountain of scriptural evidences that testify to the contrary.

Edited March 26, 2014 by teddyaware

[Thinking]

So, how do we justify putting our own ideas about right and wrong onto God?

 

What I know about God I have read about in books, magazines and manuals (written by men) and heard from the mouths of people who claim to know. God has not spoken to me literally Himself (meaning an audible voice). Even if I did hear an audible voice, how would I know it's from Him? Therefore, I must judge the message or story against whatever common sense I have.

[Nevo]

.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Nevo

[The Nehor]

To me it is making a God in their own image.  Kind of like carving an idol from wood or stone.

 

Then you hit the obvious problem. If God's morality is so different from ours as to be utterly alien we might be better off with idols of wood or stone. If what God means by love is torture and what He means by righteousness is slaughter then we have nothing in common with Him.

 

That is another lesson from the Book of Job. Job relentlessly applied morality to God to try to figure out why he was enduring what he was suffering. His friends gave speeches about how God was beyond our knowledge and unable to be judged. Job was justified and his friends were not. If one believes in a God whose morality is so different that we cannot sympathize then the difference between God and Satan is arbitrary as far as we are concerned.

[The Nehor]

I will be glad to add a dissenting voice to this thread. I do not consider the scriptural accounts that depict God as a petty, cruel, vindictive, bloodthirsty deity to be "translated correctly." The God I worship is good, whose dominion flows to him "without compulsory means" (D&C 132:46). While I believe he allows evil, I do not believe he is ever its author. 

 

I agree with Terryl and Fiona Givens, who put the matter thusly in their book, The God Who Weeps:

 

This also has problems. I also believe God is good. Still, with God allowing evil is almost the same as causing it. He could end disease on a whim, cause the disasters that plague humanity to stop, and cause the earth to spontaneously produce the food we need. He could silence the cries of a mother over a dead child by raising it, end the suffering of those coping with mental and emotional problems stemming from flaws in their body that cause huge amounts of suffering. He does not. I am convinced He does not for good reasons but God inflicts suffering (a definitively BAD thing) on us for our good.

 

God has compassion and mercy and loves us but it is not the compassion, mercy, and love we desire.

 

As CS Lewis once said most of us wish God loved us a little less so He was not so invested in correcting us, humbling us, perfecting us, and all the other things that hurt a hell of a lot.

[teddyaware]

I will be glad to add a dissenting voice to this thread. I do not consider the scriptural accounts that depict God as a petty, cruel, vindictive, bloodthirsty deity to be "translated correctly." The God I worship is good, whose dominion flows to him "without compulsory means" (D&C 132:46). While I believe he allows evil, I do not believe he is ever its author. 

 

I agree with Terryl and Fiona Givens, who put the matter thusly in their book, The God Who Weeps:

Where in the scriptures does it say or indicate that God is petty, cruel, vindictive, or bloodthirsty? For example, was God being any of these things when He brought the great floods (whether regional or global doesn't matter) to destroy in the flesh the wicked who were ripened in iniquity and would not come unto Christ and repent? Or was God being any of these things when He restrained Alma from using the power of the priesthood to prevent the wicked from burning alive the innocent inhabitants of Ammonihah? Was the Lord being any of these things when He destroyed many cities and took the lives of many thousands of the inhabitants of ancient America at the time of the death of Christ? Or will He be any of these things when the following prophesy of Malachi is fulfilled at the second coming Christ?

1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. (Malachi 4)

I'll answer each of my own questions with a resounding NO. The very verses of scripture from which Givens takes his theme of the God who weeps is found in Moses 7 where we are told God often has to destroy the wicked but takes no pleasure in it. Moses teaches us that the reason why God destroys those who are ripened in iniquity is because He loves them with all of His heart and realizes the only thing that can save them from their own evil hearts is to be destroyed in the flesh, while sending their spirits to the spirit prison to learn how to come unto Christ and repent by first being fully exposed to the miserable consequences of their own rebellion and  folly.

38 But behold, these which thine eyes are upon shall perish in the floods; and behold, I will shut them up; a prison have I prepared for them.

39 And that which I have chosen (Christ) hath pled before my face. Wherefore, he suffereth for their sins; inasmuch as they will repent in the day that my Chosen shall return unto me, and until that day they shall be in torment;

40 Wherefore, for this shall the heavens weep, yea, and all the workmanship of mine hands.

 

God's only motivation is pure eternal love. He is not petty, cruel, vindictive of bloodthirsty. The problem is that sometimes he must do things that seem cruel to those who do not understand the truth, and in their ignorance those who do not understand blaspheme the character of God.

 

[sunstoned]

They are 100% right.  That is the God they believe in.  Its justthat they do not believe in the God that is. that I believe in.

There, fixed that for you.

[Kenngo1969]

If I believe that there are people on the Earth who are God’s mouthpieces (one, in particular), and I believe they tell me what He wants me to know, then I must trust Him by trusting what they say.  One of the reasons why we say that people on Earth are children of God is because, yes, they have the potential to become like Him (emphasis on “potential”).  If I have the potential to become like Him, that means I’m not there yet.  If I’m not there yet, I might conclude there are things that He knows that I, despite all of the mortal intelligence and understanding and learning capacity with which He has blessed me, do not.  I am a “child” in my understanding compared to God’s omniscience.

 

When I was young, I had to trust that my parents knew best even though my young mind did not yet understand why they told me to do some things (and to not do others).  Sometimes I became petulant and perhaps even angry.  My parents simply had to be longsuffering and patient and to assure me that, in time, I would understand.  God, with His additional perspective, understanding, intelligence, and so on, operates much the same way, even though we might become petulant and angry, and might not understand.  We simply have to trust that, in time, we will understand His panoramic perspective.  I know that the virtues of patience, of waiting, and of acquiring additional perspective in time don’t play well in a world of “instant everything” and in a world full of mortals who think they already know everything: if someone purporting to speak for God tells them they should do something they don’t understand, then it’s “god” who must have the “problem.”

 

Is it any wonder that patience, and childlike, faith and submissiveness, are among the cardinal virtues God asks us to cultivate, yet are the least popular among the supposedly “enlightened”?