Free Agency of Plants and Animals?

[nuclearfuels]

1. The trees at the manger in Bethlehem and used in the cross at Golgotha were perhaps more valiant than the other trees, premortally?
2. The donkey that carried Mary to Bethlehem might also have been more valiant premortally?
3. If plants and animals had even the least amount of agency (not free will but greatly restrained will?) they could have used that to signifiy thier choices.
4. I dont think all plants and animals act only on instinct (think pets). Plants grow a certain way (avoiding each other to get more sunlight, in some trees anyway) and animals behave in certain ways (sometimes attacking prey, other times letting them go), so since they act here in mortality, why woudl they not have done so premortally? Why would they be resurrected if not to continue on a path of eternal progress?
5. Were the plants and animals which died before teh Savior resurrected when He was? I dont remember reading about that, kind of doubt it, but if they weren't, why weren't they? THey have other work to do in the Spirit World, proselytizing?  Will they be brought forth in the morning of the first resurrection or later?
6. Helaman 12:7 - 17 elaborating on Mosiah chapters 4 - 6 seem to indicate some type of willing compliance, no?

   7 O how great is the ^anothingness of the children of men; yea, even they are ^bless than the dust of the earth.

   8 For behold, the dust of the earth moveth hither and thither, to the dividing asunder, at the command of our great and everlasting God.

   9 Yea, behold at his ^avoice do the hills and the mountains tremble and ^bquake.

   10 And by the ^apower of his voice they are broken up, and become smooth, yea, even like unto a valley.

   11 Yea, by the power of his voice doth the ^awhole earth shake;

   12 Yea, by the power of his voice, do the foundations rock, even to the very center.

   13 Yea, and if he say unto the earth—Move—it is moved.

   14 Yea, if he say unto the ^aearth—Thou shalt ^bgo back, that it ^clengthen out the day for many hours—it is done;

   15 And thus, according to his word the ^aearth goeth back, and it appeareth unto man that the ^bsun standeth still; yea, and behold, this is so; for surely it is the earth that moveth and not the sun.

   16 And behold, also, if he say unto the ^awaters of the great deep—^bBe thou dried up—it is done.

   17 Behold, if he say unto this mountain—Be thou raised up, and ^acome over and fall upon that city, that it be buried up—behold it is done.

 

[JLHPROF]

Interesting topic.  I always love the quote about the elements of nature being more obedient that we are.
Which both proves agency AND perhaps implies less agency.

Another good scripture is 2 Nephi 2

13 And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away.
14 And now, my sons, I speak unto you these things for your profit and learning; for there is a God, and he hath created all things, both the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are, both things to act and things to be acted upon.
15 And to bring about his eternal purposes in the end of man, after he had created our first parents, and the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and in fine, all things which are created, it must needs be that there was an opposition; even the forbidden fruit in opposition to the tree of life; the one being sweet and the other bitter.
16 Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other.

Are plants and animals things that act, or are acted upon?

[rongo]

I think that intelligence is what acts, and spirit/physical matter is what is acted upon.

I think that lower creations have agency within their spheres, but only man (God's spirit children) has the ability to fully exercise agency along the full spectrum of obedience or rejection. 

[teddyaware]

6 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

1. The trees at the manger in Bethlehem and used in the cross at Golgotha were perhaps more valiant than the other trees, premortally?
2. The donkey that carried Mary to Bethlehem might also have been more valiant premortally?
3. If plants and animals had even the least amount of agency (not free will but greatly restrained will?) they could have used that to signifiy thier choices.
4. I dont think all plants and animals act only on instinct (think pets). Plants grow a certain way (avoiding each other to get more sunlight, in some trees anyway) and animals behave in certain ways (sometimes attacking prey, other times letting them go), so since they act here in mortality, why woudl they not have done so premortally? Why would they be resurrected if not to continue on a path of eternal progress?
5. Were the plants and animals which died before teh Savior resurrected when He was? I dont remember reading about that, kind of doubt it, but if they weren't, why weren't they? THey have other work to do in the Spirit World, proselytizing?  Will they be brought forth in the morning of the first resurrection or later?
6. Helaman 12:7 - 17 elaborating on Mosiah chapters 4 - 6 seem to indicate some type of willing compliance, no?

   7 O how great is the ^anothingness of the children of men; yea, even they are ^bless than the dust of the earth.

   8 For behold, the dust of the earth moveth hither and thither, to the dividing asunder, at the command of our great and everlasting God.

   9 Yea, behold at his ^avoice do the hills and the mountains tremble and ^bquake.

   10 And by the ^apower of his voice they are broken up, and become smooth, yea, even like unto a valley.

   11 Yea, by the power of his voice doth the ^awhole earth shake;

   12 Yea, by the power of his voice, do the foundations rock, even to the very center.

   13 Yea, and if he say unto the earth—Move—it is moved.

   14 Yea, if he say unto the ^aearth—Thou shalt ^bgo back, that it ^clengthen out the day for many hours—it is done;

   15 And thus, according to his word the ^aearth goeth back, and it appeareth unto man that the ^bsun standeth still; yea, and behold, this is so; for surely it is the earth that moveth and not the sun.

   16 And behold, also, if he say unto the ^awaters of the great deep—^bBe thou dried up—it is done.

   17 Behold, if he say unto this mountain—Be thou raised up, and ^acome over and fall upon that city, that it be buried up—behold it is done.

 

I hate to tell you this but you’re giving short shrift to mountains that are capable of feeling joy, valleys that can cry aloud, and the seas and dry lands that can tell the wonders of our Eternal King. And let’s not forget the rivers, brooks and small streams that can feel gladness, and the solid rocks that can cry tears of happiness. And finally, let’s always remember that the sun, the moon and the stars are able to sing songs of praise unto God.

23 Let the mountains shout for joy, and all ye valleys cry aloud; and all ye seas and dry lands tell the wonders of your Eternal King! And ye rivers, and brooks, and rills, flow down with gladness. Let the woods and all the trees of the field praise the Lord; and ye solid rocks weep for joy! And let the sun, moon, and the morning stars sing together, and let all the sons of God shout for joy! And let the eternal creations declare his name forever and ever! And again I say, how glorious is the voice we hear from heaven, proclaiming in our ears, glory, and salvation, and honor, and immortality, and eternal life; kingdoms, principalities, and powers! (D&C 128)

[nuclearfuels]

On 2/5/2021 at 1:52 PM, JLHPROF said:

Which both proves agency AND perhaps implies less agency.

......

Are plants and animals things that act, or are acted upon?

Great points.

It suggests that even w/ their lesser agency, they use it more intelligently than us humans. Ouch.

I think plants and animals are acted upon but it's probably more nuanced like they are 70-80% acted upon or influenced by instinct but the rest of their actions are thier choice?

[nuclearfuels]

On 2/5/2021 at 2:05 PM, rongo said:

I think that intelligence is what acts, and spirit/physical matter is what is acted upon.

I think that lower creations have agency within their spheres, but only man (God's spirit children) has the ability to fully exercise agency along the full spectrum of obedience or rejection. 

Agreed. Good points!

[3DOP]

My weekend contribution/distraction, according as to your opinion:

How about no "agency", (freedom) for plants and non-human earthly animals? One can say that they use their "lesser agency...more intelligently than us humans. Ouch", or as I would say, they have no agency (free will), and behave "intelligently" according to what they are by nature through instinct. They do not reason, nor do they choose. There are no individual decisions among the non-human earthly animals based on morals to which their conscience is obliged. Nor are there meetings of the clans among the the non-human earthly animals to discuss what they should do. I hold this truth as a rational certainty.

Likewise, and more so, I hold as a rational certainty that mountains and rivers, valleys and oceans are unable to make decisions about what they will do. Any "rejoicing" or "mourning" in mineral creation as described by revelation will be connected to created or uncreated intellect and right or wrong use of the will. "Mineral happiness or sadness" is dependent on the use of reason and will by man, angels, and God. Reason and will are the image of God in man. (I know you guys would add the physical aspect. That is fine. As far as this discussion goes for me, it is about man and other animals, man and vegetables, man and minerals.)

Higher non-human animals approach on a graded scale to have emotion and even personal characteristics without reaching the potential of the human being. But the capacity to reason and to choose elevates man far (I refrain from saying "infinitely far") above all mineral creation. Does a star or a lake have sorrows or joy, anxiety or peace of mind? Whatever the Psalms say, let us not confuse poetry for literally precise philosophy or theology.

On the Day of Judgment will dirt clods and tomatoes and flies have heaven or hell before them according as how they chose to live? Put in a more LDS way, can a faithful babbling brook inherit the Celestial kingdom? Put in a more Protestant way, can a faithful volcano be saved? Put in a more a Catholic way, can a faithful pearl, or even a charitable oyster be in a state of grace?

Edited February 7, 2021 by 3DOP

[InCognitus]

12 hours ago, 3DOP said:

Put in a more LDS way, can a faithful babbling brook inherit the Celestial kingdom?

Everyone should know the answer to that question.  Do you know the Primary children's song, "Give Said the Little Stream"? 

(In case not, see here).

 

[Ahab]

Agency is what we call the power to choose and I suppose all living things have the power to choose what they will do and won't do, and when to do what we tell them to do, if they are going to do something we tell them to do.

So will our family dog end up in the celestial kingdom?  I don't really know and I don't really want to be the one to make that judgement.  I just know we still like him (it's a male dog) even when he doesn't do something we tell him to do.

[3DOP]

20 hours ago, InCognitus said:

Everyone should know the answer to that question.  Do you know the Primary children's song, "Give Said the Little Stream"? 

(In case not, see here).

 

Hi InCognitus. Thank you for your reply, though I do not know if understand it.

I remember Fanny Crosby hymns from my Protestant days. From what I know of the author, I doubt she believed that the Little Stream could become a child of God, or inherit eternal life. Are you saying that this Protestant song expresses an LDS belief that not only every faithful animal and vegetable, but faithful non-living matter has free will and can become a god in the Celestial Kingdom? Its a question. Please clarify. I am not saying that is what you believe. Unless someone has another direct reply to me, you have the last word on this subject as far as I am concerned.

Regards,

3DOP

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, 3DOP said:

Hi InCognitus. Thank you for your reply, though I do not know if understand it.

I remember Fanny Crosby hymns from my Protestant days. From what I know of the author, I doubt she believed that the Little Stream could become a child of God, or inherit eternal life. Are you saying that this Protestant song expresses an LDS belief that not only every faithful animal and vegetable, but faithful non-living matter has free will and can become a god in the Celestial Kingdom? Its a question. Please clarify. I am not saying that is what you believe. Unless someone has another direct reply to me, you have the last word on this subject as far as I am concerned.

Regards,

3DOP

Well honestly, I was partially joking since this is such a well known children's song, and songs (as this one) are based on poetic language which can't always be taken literally.   But the song fits the discussion since it describes the godly attribute of "giving" found in many aspects of nature, in the little stream providing life giving moisture to the fields, and the rain to the flowers.  They are obedient to the laws of God in their respective areas of creation and their giving provides life to others. 

I don't think this implies they have "agency" as such, since these creations simply follow the patterns of natural laws.  But they have been organized for specific purposes in God's grand design of the universe, and their "behaviors" provide many metaphor opportunities for teaching gospel principles.

Edited February 9, 2021 by InCognitus