Does Repentance Require Suffering

[RevTestament]

35 minutes ago, Eek! said:

Thank you... but I don't know means to be "rep"ed.  

Does it require suffering??

Sometimes you must suffer the "humor" of others....

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Eek! said:

Excellent reply!

The presence of suffering in this world seems to prove that God is either cruel or incompetent. But He is neither.

God does not devalue our freedom of choice by imposing His choices upon us. Nor is he threatened when we choose to learn our lessons the hard way.

This world is not our real home. By way of analogy, this world is sort of like an elaborate video game, and we have forgotten that we are somewhere safe while we play this video game. It is so engrossing that when our character is wronged or harmed or experiences loss, we think that WE have been wronged or harmed or experienced loss. We have forgotten who and what we really are.

This probably sounds like insanity, but before you dismiss it completely, remember what Jesus taught about turning the other cheek – how could that be anything other than a betrayal of self, unless the assault actually had no real effect? Even moreso, consider how Jesus reacted to his arrest, trial, and crucifixion. He acted as if he was perfectly safe all along, despite all appearances to the contrary. He didn't even hold it against his executioners! And then he demonstrated that indeed he had been perfectly safe all along by rising from the dead.

And remember that when we see him, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

I do not believe God is cruel or incompetent but to suggest that suffering in this world is against his wishes is a little crazy. People suffer all the time through no fault of their own and often not even the faults of others. If God is opposed to suffering he could have created a world without disease for example. He didn't. There are things to learn in pain.

The world may be an elaborate simulation but your video game analogy falls flat. You seem to be preaching a kind of dissociation with our life. Being eternally minded is good but Jesus wept at the tomb of Lazarus and mourned for other's rejection. Jesus pleaded with the father for a warp zone to skip the Atonement level....not exactly the thinking of someone who thought of life as a jaunt that doesn't hurt. Perfectly safe? I don't think you understand what Jesus did if you think of that as safety. Do you also consider the embrace of an iron maiden the same as that of a lover? Video games also do not throw you into hell for not collecting enough coins or pushing that annoying NPC off a cliff. God does. Life matters. Pain matters. Happiness matters.

It is true that Jesus can fix all our suffering because of what he did. He can heal the emotionally and psychologically damaged and wipe away all tears from our eyes but the tears are still real and they matter.

[Eek!]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I do not believe God is cruel or incompetent but to suggest that suffering in this world is against his wishes is a little crazy. People suffer all the time through no fault of their own and often not even the faults of others. If God is opposed to suffering he could have created a world without disease for example. He didn't. There are things to learn in pain.

The Atonement is not limited by distance or time. It heals the past in the present. It is not just for the forgiveness of sins, but for all kinds of healing. As you said, “people suffer all the time through no fault of their own and often not even for the fault of others.” If God wanted us to suffer, would He have provided the means for instantaneous healing? Yes the body can suffer and die, but we are not bodies.

When I was a child, something traumatic happened to me. On a scale of 1-10, I think it was a 9. The memory of that event crippled me for years. Then one day there was a sudden shift, which I attribute to the Atonement. Now there is zero pain in the memory. All that I feel when I remember that event is the healing that has taken the place of the suffering. So from where I am now regarding this event (and this shift didn't even have to wait until the next life!) there is no loss - there is only gain, only healing, and (this is gonna sound weird) only love.  And I have nothing against the other people involved. 

That example is my lead-in to these statements:

I believe that ALL THINGS work together for our good, and the ONLY way that can be true is for the Atonement to be able to heal all wounds as quickly as we will let it.

Through the Atonement, the Holy Spirit can re-interpret our past in the present and transform all pains into blessings. 

You and I may disagree on whether or not suffering is God's will, and what timeframes he has in mind, but we're probably not so far apart about the end result.

[JLHPROF]

15 hours ago, Eek! said:

I do not think it is God's will that any of His children suffer. 

Nonsense.  Perhaps it is not his "will" - ie he doesn't enjoy it, but it is part of the plan, the same plan God went through, the same plan that existed on every world ever created.

Everything in the design of the plan of salvation requires a fall to a state of suffering and a redemption from that suffering.
You could even argue that God himself suffers - he weeps, he feels anger and jealousy, he watches his children make the most foolish choices and action.

Mosiah 3:19 For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

While it may not be God's will (desire) it is sometimes God's will (decision) that suffering be experienced.
The atonement of Christ being a big example of that.  Also the flood.

And don't forget the scourge on Zion's Camp.  When Joseph tried to stop the suffering by administering to the sick and dying, God struck him too.  It was God's will that the suffering they brought upon themselves be completed.

 

[Eek!]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Nonsense.  Perhaps it is not his "will" - ie he doesn't enjoy it, but...

 

It sounds to me like we could easily descend into an argument based largely on semantics, and I don't think that would be productive.

You and I draw the line between what we believe to be God's will, and what we don't, in different places.  I mean no offense to you or anyone else with where I draw the line, just so you know.  For most of my life I believed as you do.  But now, the idea of God willing that His children suffer is simply inconsistent with my current perception of Him.  

I also believe that a good teacher never engenders fear, and if inducing suffering was something God did, then we would have very good reason to fear Him.  It is difficult to love that which you fear.  Yes there are plenty of scriptures that support the idea of fearing God, but I do not think they are the teaching the highest level of truth on the subject. 

All of that being said, I firmly believe that God can turn any negative experience into a powerful net positive, such that ultimately all things work together for our good, regardless of whose will the original negative experience was or wasn't.  Do you think we have any common ground there? 

[Eek!]

Dangit, I wish I could edit my posts!

I should have said "I also believe that a good teacher never bases his teachings on fear,"   I used fear to teach my kids not to run out into the street, but then switched over to a rational explanation as soon as they were old enough.  Of course I flatter myself to imply that I was a good teacher! 

 

[JLHPROF]

27 minutes ago, Eek! said:

It sounds to me like we could easily descend into an argument based largely on semantics, and I don't think that would be productive.

You and I draw the line between what we believe to be God's will, and what we don't, in different places.  I mean no offense to you or anyone else with where I draw the line, just so you know.  For most of my life I believed as you do.  But now, the idea of God willing that His children suffer is simply inconsistent with my current perception of Him. 

I also believe that a good teacher never engenders fear, and if inducing suffering was something God did, then we would have very good reason to fear Him.  It is difficult to love that which you fear.  Yes there are plenty of scriptures that support the idea of fearing God, but I do not think they are the teaching the highest level of truth on the subject. 

All of that being said, I firmly believe that God can turn any negative experience into a powerful net positive, such that ultimately all things work together for our good, regardless of whose will the original negative experience was or wasn't.  Do you think we have any common ground there?

Dangit, I wish I could edit my posts!

I should have said "I also believe that a good teacher never bases his teachings on fear,"   I used fear to teach my kids not to run out into the street, but then switched over to a rational explanation as soon as they were old enough.  Of course I flatter myself to imply that I was a good teacher!

 

 

Proverbs 9:10 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

Maybe not the highest, but still scriptural.  We don't get to pick and choose our scriptures.

Edited May 17, 2016 by JLHPROF

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, Eek! said:

It sounds to me like we could easily descend into an argument based largely on semantics, and I don't think that would be productive.

You and I draw the line between what we believe to be God's will, and what we don't, in different places.  I mean no offense to you or anyone else with where I draw the line, just so you know.  For most of my life I believed as you do.  But now, the idea of God willing that His children suffer is simply inconsistent with my current perception of Him.  

I also believe that a good teacher never engenders fear, and if inducing suffering was something God did, then we would have very good reason to fear Him.  It is difficult to love that which you fear.  Yes there are plenty of scriptures that support the idea of fearing God, but I do not think they are the teaching the highest level of truth on the subject. 

All of that being said, I firmly believe that God can turn any negative experience into a powerful net positive, such that ultimately all things work together for our good, regardless of whose will the original negative experience was or wasn't.  Do you think we have any common ground there? 

Yes I think we have some common ground here and I think we agree more than you realize. 

Earlier I asked you to think of feeling sorrow as a form of suffering.   Now I'm going to ask you to think of feeling sorrow for our sins as a good thing.  It's good for us to feel sorrow for our sins.  For one thing it helps us to know that sinning is not a good thing to be doing. So our sorrow/suffering for our own sins works together for our good, and that it works that way is a good thing.

To not feel sorrow for our own sins would be a bad thing.  Because we need that sorrow/suffering to help us know what isn't good for us.

Do you now see more of the common ground we are sharing?

Pop quiz:

1. Is suffering for our own sins a good thing or not? 

2. Should we want to suffer just a little bit or a whole lot?

3. I prefer to suffer just a tiny little bit.  Just enough to help me to know what isn't good for me to be doing when I am doing something that isn't good for me to be doing.  How about you?

4. Is there also some benefit of feeling sorrow for other people's sins?  Maybe just enough to help us to want to do something to try to help them?  And while helping them to feel sorrow/suffering for what they are doing too, when they are doing something that isn't good for them to be doing?

5. What Church are you a member of?

Edited May 17, 2016 by Ahab
typo

[Kenngo1969]

Suffering, in many cases (though not all, at least, not in the short term), is simply a natural consequence of sin.  I suppose that recognizing what one has been robbed of (or has robbed oneself of) as a result of sin brings with it a form of suffering.  Whether or not repentance requires suffering, it does require sorrow.  That, I think is one of the major lessons the Book of Mormon teaches over, and over, and over again.  And as the Book of Mormon also teaches, there are different kinds of sorrow: One may sorrow, in a sense, because God will no longer allow him to take delight in sin (which, in my opinion, falls into the "natural consequence" category); or one may experience Godly sorrow unto repentance. 

[Eek!]

10 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Do you now see more of the common ground we are sharing?

...Pop quiz:

Yes, we do share quite a bit of common ground.  I was hoping that was the case.

I HATE pop quizzes!  They didn't say anything about that when I signed up!

1. Is suffering for our own sins a good thing or not?   Full recognition and then immediate course-correction are a good thing, but I'll admit that recognition pretty much inevitably entails suffering.  However I think suffering for sins in and of itself produces no healing - it's what we do next that counts.   

2. Should we want to suffer just a little bit or a whole lot?  The longer we wallow in it, the more time we waste carrying a burden that can be undone by the Atonement.  

3. I prefer to suffer just a tiny little bit.  Just enough to help me to know what isn't good for me to be doing when I am doing something that isn't good for me to be doing.  How about you?   That sounds to me l like a really good balance.

4. Is there also some benefit of feeling sorrow for other people's sins?  Maybe just enough to help us to want to do something to try to help them?  And while helping them to feel sorrow/suffering for what they are doing too?  There is nothing wrong with empathy and compassion, and if I came across as saying there is, that was a big mistake on my part!  However I believe that in general correcting other people's behavior is largely the job of the Holy Spirit (yes there are reasonable exceptions).  Remember that Jesus very clearly taught that judging others is not our job.  I think our job is to help remove the barriers between them and the Holy Spirit, and we do that by responding with love instead of attack.  We are to protect the innocent where necessary, but our primary job is to be healers, not policemen.  In my opinion. 

People are very good at rationalizing whatever behavior they want to engage in (myself included!), so I believe that any effective change happens on the level of what we think (from whence our actions come).  And the Holy Spirit is much better at shifting someone's thinking than we are, as He already knows what lessons a person needs.  Even though we have good intentions, we usually do more harm than good when we adopt a role that is not ours.  But none of our mistakes in this area are fatal ones. 

5. What Church are you a member of?   None.  I participated in the LDS Church for many years.  I think the LDS Church has a very rich library of teachings and concepts, and produces very good people.   

 

[JLHPROF]

3 minutes ago, Eek! said:

5. What Church are you a member of?   None.  I participated in the LDS Church for many years.  I think the LDS Church has a very rich library of teachings and concepts, and produces very good people.  

That explains a few things. 
Not a bad thing.

[Eek!]

6 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

That explains a few things. 
Not a bad thing.

Thank you!

[Ahab]

Eek!

Good to know you better and I'll be your friend as well as I can be, which will include me trying to help you in any way I think will help you.

I found out a while back that God, our Father,  and Jesus and the Holy Spirit help us not only personally but through others they inspire, including us fallible mortals.  And there is even the possibility that they may inspire you to help me in some way,  too.

I, for one, need ALL of the help I can get!

[jkwilliams]

23 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Suffering, in many cases (though not all, at least, not in the short term), is simply a natural consequence of sin.  I suppose that recognizing what one has been robbed of (or has robbed oneself of) as a result of sin brings with it a form of suffering.  Whether or not repentance requires suffering, it does require sorrow.  That, I think is one of the major lessons the Book of Mormon teaches over, and over, and over again.  And as the Book of Mormon also teaches, there are different kinds of sorrow: One may sorrow, in a sense, because God will no longer allow him to take delight in sin (which, in my opinion, falls into the "natural consequence" category); or one may experience Godly sorrow unto repentance. 

Yep. I can't imagine anyone repenting of something they didn't feel sorrow for doing. If you're totally content--with no sorrow--you'll probably keep doing it.

[Duncan]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

Yep. I can't imagine anyone repenting of something they didn't feel sorrow for doing. If you're totally content--with no sorrow--you'll probably keep doing it.

I agree and you can just keep feeling bad every time you do it to. I was thinking of an addiction, you do it and feel bad and guess what you do when you feel bad about something ? run back to whatever addiction you have, it's a never ending cycle! 

[The Nehor]

14 hours ago, Eek! said:

The Atonement is not limited by distance or time. It heals the past in the present. It is not just for the forgiveness of sins, but for all kinds of healing. As you said, “people suffer all the time through no fault of their own and often not even for the fault of others.” If God wanted us to suffer, would He have provided the means for instantaneous healing? Yes the body can suffer and die, but we are not bodies.

When I was a child, something traumatic happened to me. On a scale of 1-10, I think it was a 9. The memory of that event crippled me for years. Then one day there was a sudden shift, which I attribute to the Atonement. Now there is zero pain in the memory. All that I feel when I remember that event is the healing that has taken the place of the suffering. So from where I am now regarding this event (and this shift didn't even have to wait until the next life!) there is no loss - there is only gain, only healing, and (this is gonna sound weird) only love.  And I have nothing against the other people involved. 

That example is my lead-in to these statements:

I believe that ALL THINGS work together for our good, and the ONLY way that can be true is for the Atonement to be able to heal all wounds as quickly as we will let it.

Through the Atonement, the Holy Spirit can re-interpret our past in the present and transform all pains into blessings. 

You and I may disagree on whether or not suffering is God's will, and what timeframes he has in mind, but we're probably not so far apart about the end result.

If you know a way to use the atonement to end the pain from my kidney stones PLEASE TELL ME!

[Eek!]

19 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

If you know a way to use the atonement to end the pain from my kidney stones PLEASE TELL ME!

I subscribe to the view that physical illness can have a non-physical cause.  

Is there someone you are still angry with?  Do you hold on to an ancient woundedness that no longer serves you? 

That is where the Atonement can help you.  Treasuring our grievances can make us ill, but that is the kind of burden the Atonement can undo. 

If you would like for me to get more specific, let me know and I will do my best.

I can't promise that healing an ancient anger will relieve the pain of your kidney stones, nor make any promises about the timeframe, but it's worth a try.  That being said, DO NOT throw away your medication and fire your doctor just to demonstrate your faith in the words of a purple cartoon cat. 

 

[Ahab]

47 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

If you know a way to use the atonement to end the pain from my kidney stones PLEASE TELL ME!

Just wait until you are resurrected,  which will happen due to the atonement. You won't need to worry about having pain from kidney stones then.

You won't be waiting for very much longer, in the eternal perspective. 

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, Eek! said:

I subscribe to the view that physical illness can have a non-physical cause.  

Is there someone you are still angry with?  Do you hold on to an ancient woundedness that no longer serves you? 

That is where the Atonement can help you.  Treasuring our grievances can make us ill, but that is the kind of burden the Atonement can undo. 

If you would like for me to get more specific, let me know and I will do my best.

I can't promise that healing an ancient anger will relieve the pain of your kidney stones, nor make any promises about the timeframe, but it's worth a try.  That being said, DO NOT throw away your medication and fire your doctor just to demonstrate your faith in the words of a purple cartoon cat. 

 

There is no medication for it other then pain pills when they happen.

I do not think I am angry at anyone and I have patched up most of my old wounds.

My one "permanent" medical affliction appears to be gone right now. Doctor and I are both confused. Asked God if he had decided to heal me for some reason and got no answer. Possible my medication was just too much (doubtful) or that the condition is more complicated then we thought.

[Eek!]

2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Just wait until you are resurrected,  which will happen due to the atonement. You won't need to worry about having pain from kidney stones then.

You won't be waiting for very much longer, in the eternal perspective. 

Isn't he the guy who dropped that anvil on your head?  You're not offering to speed things along for him out of gratitude, are you??

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Just wait until you are resurrected,  which will happen due to the atonement. You won't need to worry about having pain from kidney stones then.

You won't be waiting for very much longer, in the eternal perspective. 

Uh-oh.

[Ahab]

10 minutes ago, Eek! said:

Isn't he the guy who dropped that anvil on your head?  You're not offering to speed things along for him out of gratitude, are you??

Nah, it will be over for him soon enough.