LoudmouthMormon Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 Quote Why would God create humans to be natural men and women that are His enemies? The answer becomes apparent when our kids turn into teenagers. 4
smac97 Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: I don't think the LDS view solves the problem of evil. It is an attempted answer, sure, and it can cover some instances, yes, but it cannot account satisfactorily for all instances of evil (bad things happening). I say this as someone who has spent some time academically studying this (I have a bachelor's degree in philosophy). The first and biggest flaw is natural evil. How do you account for Matthew, a bus boy at a restaurant I used to be a regular at, being killed by a lightning strike his very first evening in Missouri where he had moved to go to college? All he did was step out to get something out of his truck. He was 17 years old. Hmm. I would not characterize this tragedy as "evil." 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: Your answer to Matthew's death seems to be that those that knew him needed to go through the difficulty of his passing in order to grow. Well, that's a reasonable post hoc rationalization/explanation. But it's also necessarily speculative. I think a big part of grappling with the Problem of Evil is acknowledging the constraints in which that problem is addressed. We don't have all the data, nor do we necessarily have a perfect grasp and conception of the data we do have. We also may lack the wisdom and patience and perspective to adjudicate the causes and purposes of tragedies such as Matthew dying by lightning strike. 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: In other words, it wasn't actually bad that he died, but a good thing for everyone else that he did. If this is your view, I kindly point you to Voltaire's satire Candide and the idea of "the best of all possible worlds." "Bad" covers a broad gamut, and is not necessarily congruent with "evil" where it ("bad") lacks a moral component. Last year I had a dear friend die from pancreatic cancer. It was "bad." He was in a lot of pain. It cut his life short. It deprived his friends and loved ones of his company and association. But I can't say the cancer was evil. There was no moral dimension to him contracting it. The cancer that killed my friend had no sentience, no agency, no motive. Also, I can't get on board with the central conceit of "the best of all possible worlds," at least as I understand the concept: Quote Best of all possible worlds, in the philosophy of the early modern philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716), the thesis that the existing world is the best world that God could have created. Leibniz’s argument for the doctrine of the best of all possible worlds, now commonly called Leibnizian optimism, is presented in its fullest form in his work Théodicée (1710; Theodicy), which was devoted to defending the justness of God (see theodicy). The argument thus constitutes Leibniz’s solution to the problem of evil, or the apparent contradiction between the assumption that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent (perfectly good) and the evident fact of evil (including sin and unmerited suffering) in the world. In rough outline, the argument proceeds as follows: 1. God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent; 2. God created the existing world; 3. God could have created a different world or none at all (i.e., there are other possible worlds); 4. Because God is omnipotent and omniscient, he knew which possible world was the best and was able to create it, and, because he is omnibenevolent, he chose to create that world; 5. Therefore, the existing world, the one that God created, is the best of all possible worlds. That does not seem to fit within the Latter-day Saint paradigm. We believe this world is "fallen." That it is in a telestial state. That it will someday "be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory." (AoF 1:10.) The earth, like us, has the capacity to be better than it is now. 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: The free-will theodicy that you also espouse (evil in the hands of each individual) also doesn't address natural evil. It also has it's major problems, too. It is a fairly common theodicy, so it has been deeply analyzed and criticized. I think such discussions, being philosophical, will never be fully answered to everyone's satisfaction. De gustibus non est disputandum and all that. I think the answer to the problem the individual reaches will be heavily based on assumptions he brings with him to the discussion. 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: You also claimed that there must be a balance, that we must know wickedness to know righteousness. We must experience both, to discern them from each other. 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: But do we really need to have so much wickedness? I don't understand the question. Wickedness is a choice. 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: Couldn't there be one less instance of wickedness? Certainly. Each individual has agency, the ability to choose to act wickedly or righteously. 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: I mean, imagine if Mao had only murdered 44 million people instead of 45 million. Did we really need that extra million killed to have balance between good and evil? I don't understand what you are saying here. I don't think anyone is calling for or expecting parity between good and evil in the world. 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: If so, then I point you again to Voltaire and that this theodicy is simply saying there really isn't evil. But in the Latter-day Saint paradigm, there really is evil. 17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: I am a faithful believer in God. I do not have an answer to the problem of evil. I am wary of those who do, because every theodicy I have studied has obvious flaws. I understand people losing faith over it. I thank God that it has not hurt my faith. This is a fair point. I think Lehi in the Book of Mormon had a similar sentiment in mind when he spoke to his son, Jacob, about the concept of agency in 2 Nephi 2: Quote 17 And I, Lehi, according to the things which I have read, must needs suppose that an angel of God, according to that which is written, had fallen from heaven; wherefore, he became a devil, having sought that which was evil before God. 18 And because he had fallen from heaven, and had become miserable forever, he sought also the misery of all mankind. Wherefore, he said unto Eve, yea, even that old serpent, who is the devil, who is the father of all lies, wherefore he said: Partake of the forbidden fruit, and ye shall not die, but ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. 19 And after Adam and Eve had partaken of the forbidden fruit they were driven out of the garden of Eden, to till the earth. 20 And they have brought forth children; yea, even the family of all the earth. 21 And the days of the children of men were prolonged, according to the will of God, that they might repent while in the flesh; wherefore, their state became a state of probation, and their time was lengthened, according to the commandments which the Lord God gave unto the children of men. For he gave commandment that all men must repent; for he showed unto all men that they were lost, because of the transgression of their parents. 22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end. 23 And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin. And in the very next verse, Lehi seems to acknowledge that this stuff is difficult to fully grasp and comprehend: Quote 24 But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things. And in the verse after that, he steps back and summarizes, well, the endgoal of the whole plan: Quote 25 Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy. 26 And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon, save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day, according to the commandments which God hath given. 27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself. Like you, I am a faithful believer in God. And while I think the Problem of Evil is ultimately addressed in the Restored Gospel, I admit that - like you - I do not have a complete and perfect answer to it. I am presently content to fill in the gaps and flaws of my understanding with Lehi's statement that "all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things," and with Nephi's humble statement that he knows that God "loveth his children," but that he (Nephi) "{nevertheless does} not know the meaning of all things." (1 Nephi 11:17.) Thank you for your thoughts. I sure enjoy your presence and perspective. -Smac 2
Teancum Posted October 22, 2021 Author Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) On 10/21/2021 at 10:14 AM, Duncan said: One thing to consider is the scripture says the natural man is an enemy to God, it doesn't say that God is an enemy to the natural man What is the difference? If I am an enemy to someone they view me as their enemy. It says I am God's enemy not that he is mine. Edited October 22, 2021 by Teancum
Teancum Posted October 22, 2021 Author Posted October 22, 2021 On 10/20/2021 at 10:24 PM, Fether said: Another thing to consider is that our understanding of creation is different than others. We were not created from nothing, God did not design us from the ground up. We were organized from existing matter and then we were taught in pre-earth life. I’m that time we all developed personalities. I am not sure we are clear on the nature of what an intelligence is. Abraham seems to use the word in the framework of a spirit. I have more on this in a more fuller post I am working on. So I am not sure how that helps.
mfbukowski Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 3 hours ago, Teancum said: Meh? So to get the best for my kid I should become his enemy, threaten him with eternal, Give him cancer or starve him or not step in when he is child and someone kidnap him, sexually abuse him and/or murder him. And I should send one of my kids to live in abject poverty and misery and another to live in luxury. Just because I want the best for him. And words have meaning and are used in certain way to convey a message. You are twisting my words, and it seems you don't even know our doctrine- but I know you do. I don't understand why you pull this..... stuff. Teaching a child is not making him an enemy. "Eternal" punishment does not mean punishment forever it means God's punishment, since Eternal is a name of God and that punishment is temporary because we know that in the end all knees will bend at the name Jesus. You are describing child abuse as coming from God? This is just so backwards I know you could not actually believe it. And YOUR words have a meaning all right and simply turn God into a monster, an absurd caricature. This is not a reasoned argument it is a tirade that makes no sense. Go sleep it off. 1
Duncan Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 14 minutes ago, Teancum said: What is the difference? If I am an enemy to someone they view me as their enemy. It says I am God's enemy not that he is mine. but it doesn't say that God is an enemy to the natural man, which means that God isn't an enemy to the natural man 1
pogi Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 The whole article explains it well: https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/knowhy/what-makes-mankind-an-enemy-to-god 2
Popular Post Stormin' Mormon Posted October 22, 2021 Popular Post Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) I've always thought of the natural man in terms of spiritual entropy. In physics, entropy describes the nature of matter and energy to regress to a more disorganized state. In order to reverse entropy, new inputs into the system (from somewhere outside the system) are required. In like manner, our spiritual natures require inputs in order to maintain a closeness to God. Without those inputs, spiritual entropy devolves us to the natural man. In other words, the natural man is not the state of our creation, but the end result of it if we do not put forth any effort to counter it. Edited October 22, 2021 by Stormin' Mormon 6
mfbukowski Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 3 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said: I've always thought of the natural man in terms of spiritual entropy. In physics, entropy describes the nature of matter and energy to regress to a more disorganized state. In order to reverse entropy, new inputs into the system (from somewhere outside the system) are required. In like manner, our spiritual natures require inputs in order to maintain a closeness to God. Without those inputs, spiritual entropy returns us to the natural man. In other words, the natural man is not the state of our creation, but the end result of it if we do not put forth any effort to counter it. Good stuff! And God "organized" our world and we are- or should be- organizing ourselves by countering mental and physical entropy to fill the measure of our creation- our full potential! We too are organizing "our world" daily- or should be The church is the best human improvement movement ever devised. Why it's even something that God might have thought up! It's worth 10% of our increase just to get into this human development club we belong to! Be all you can be! Join the Mormons! When God is a human, humanism becomes theology..... 1
teddyaware Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) On 10/20/2021 at 4:57 PM, Teancum said: Mosiah 3:19: 19 For the anatural bman is an cenemy to God, and has been from the dfall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he eyields to the enticings of the fHoly Spirit, and gputteth off the hnatural man and becometh a isaint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a jchild, ksubmissive, 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. Why would God create creatures that are his enemy? In Christian thought there are varying ideas on the purpose of creation amongst Christian sects and Mormonism certainly has a unique view. And then there are the philosophies of the Omni's and some LDS thinkers have some interesting ideas on this though LDS scripture seem to tilt towards the more general understanding. I think the omnis play into this. More on this later. But one thought. In LDS thought humans were supposed to fall from grace. Adam and Eve had to fall. Sin had to be introduced into the world. We would all sin so we were destined to become God's enemy. It was planned. This to me some like an insidious plan to create us to have to start as God's enemy. So let's talk about it. Do you find anything deficient or unreasonable in the following explanations from Adam and Eve as to why there is a need to experience the fall ? 9 And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam, which beareth record of the Father and the Son, saying: I am the Only Begotten of the Father from the beginning, henceforth and forever, that as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will. 10 And in that day Adam blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God. 11 And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the eternal life which giveth unto all the obedient. (Moses 5) So is the fact that life would be utterly meaningless, barren, and devoid of in-depth wisdom and joy a sufficient reason to have to experience the fallen nature? Or do you think God should just somehow try find a way to to bestow all the above mentioned blessings without his children first being put through a test commensurate in challenge to the wonderful blessings received? Edited October 22, 2021 by teddyaware
pogi Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Teancum said: What is the difference? If I am an enemy to someone they view me as their enemy. It says I am God's enemy not that he is mine. It could be read both ways, honestly. When it says the natural man is an enemy to God, it may not be commenting on God's perspective of us at all, and may be more about our actions and behaviors toward him. It could be interpreted, "the natural man is an enemy toward God." "To" and "toward" are interchangeable in meaning. Edited October 22, 2021 by pogi
CV75 Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 This doctrine from Mosiah 3:19 makes us "enemies with benefits"! 2
Kenngo1969 Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 49 minutes ago, Teancum said: What is the difference? If I am an enemy to someone they view me as their enemy. It says I am God's enemy not that he is mine. You really can't see the fallacy in the bold? I'm sure there are many, many people in this world who, to put it mildly, do not care for me (present company included? ). By your logic, then, I MUST hate them? What happened to the Christian ethic (“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you ...")? 2
smac97 Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 46 minutes ago, Teancum said: Quote One thing to consider is the scripture says the natural man is an enemy to God, it doesn't say that God is an enemy to the natural man What is the difference? One of my sons, during his years as a toddler, was quiet a firebrand. He had quite a temper, even to the point of hitting me when he was angry. This arose because I had put him in time-out, and he refused to stay in his room (the doors had no locks, so we couldn't keep him in there). So I would take him into his room, close the door, and sit down with a book and read. He would cry and yell and rant, and I would more or less ignore him. He sometimes came up to me and tried to hit me in the face. I was a bit more stern with him about that, but mostly I just let him vent his spleen, then let him out when he started to behave. Was I his enemy during these torture sessions? Yep. Was he my enemy? Of course not. 46 minutes ago, Teancum said: If I am an enemy to someone they view me as their enemy. It says I am God's enemy not that he is mine. Actually, no. Let's look at it: Quote 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. "Natural man" seems to be a reference to a posture, an attitude. Something that the individual can "put off." During my teen years I found I had quite a temper. Now I don't. I changed myself. I was a sour-tempered person, now I am not. So it is, I think, with the "natural man" designator. Thanks, -Smac 3
Kenngo1969 Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) @Teancum Quote Why would God create humans to be natural men and women that are His enemies? The answer to your question, Teancum, is that it is not the creation that made natural men and women enemies to God, but, rather, the Fall : "The natural man [and woman] is an enemy to God and has been from the Fall of Adam ..." Edited October 22, 2021 by Kenngo1969 1
pogi Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) On 10/20/2021 at 5:57 PM, Teancum said: Mosiah 3:19: 19 For the anatural bman is an cenemy to God, and has been from the dfall of Adam... This is all played out in the temple narrative and creation story. Who is the "natural man" in this story? The fallen Adam. What did Adam do after partaking of the fruit? He hid from God's voice calling out to him. Adam was genuinely scared/terrified of how God might react to his disobedience. Stan convinced him that he would be better off in hiding. Satan convinced him that he was worthless after his fall and exposed in his fallen state "see that you are naked...hide!" Satan convinced fallen Adam that he was safer in his presence than in the presence of God. He was safer putting his own will before the will of God. He embodied the sentiment of "my will not thine be done", which is the definition of enmity towards God. Satan wanted him to know without a doubt that he was now a natural man and therefore unacceptable before God (kind of like how you are interpreting this verse). God continued to call out in concern and love for Adam, hoping that he would hear his voice and soften his heart toward God, but God allowed him his agency. Adam's heart was finally pricked and took the brave step of faith in standing naked and exposed before the all seeing eye of God - fully expecting God to strike him down ("though shalt surely die"). Instead, God preserved his physical life, extended his probation, and restored his spiritual life and wrapped him in the sacrificial skins of the atonement as a token of his love. Not quite the welcoming embrace you would expect from one who perceives you as their enemy. Fallen Adam represents all of us. This is the story of the natural man and God's outreached arms, tender mercies, and love towards them. Edited October 22, 2021 by pogi 1
Kenngo1969 Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 28 minutes ago, smac97 said: ... During my teen years I found I had quite a temper. Now I don't. I changed myself. I was a sour-tempered person, now I am not. ... Ya got a little a that MacDonald Irish in ya, do ya?!
Fether Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 1 hour ago, Teancum said: I am not sure we are clear on the nature of what an intelligence is. Abraham seems to use the word in the framework of a spirit. I have more on this in a more fuller post I am working on. So I am not sure how that helps. Your right. But the main point is that God did not create us. He organized us and then raised us (how this fits in with him being our literal father, I do not know) our nature is our own. We are not some software God wrote to fulfill some purpose, we have always existed and God put us here so we can learn to be like him. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2014/07/youth/to-the-point/why-did-god-create-us “God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself” - Joseph Smith “You ask the learned doctors why they say the world was made out of nothing, and they will answer, “Doesn’t the Bible say he created the world?” And they infer, from the word create, that it must have been made out of nothing. Now, the word create came from the word baurau, which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship. Hence we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos—chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory. Element had an existence from the time He had. The pure principles of element are principles which can never be destroyed; they may be organized and re-organized, but not destroyed. They had no beginning and can have no end.” - Joseph Smith 1
Teancum Posted October 22, 2021 Author Posted October 22, 2021 3 hours ago, mfbukowski said: You are twisting my words, and it seems you don't even know our doctrine- but I know you do. I don't understand why you pull this..... stuff. Teaching a child is not making him an enemy. "Eternal" punishment does not mean punishment forever it means God's punishment, since Eternal is a name of God and that punishment is temporary because we know that in the end all knees will bend at the name Jesus. You are describing child abuse as coming from God? This is just so backwards I know you could not actually believe it. And YOUR words have a meaning all right and simply turn God into a monster, an absurd caricature. This is not a reasoned argument it is a tirade that makes no sense. Go sleep it off. The comments are sincere. And yes I do know the doctrine. Quite well. Maybe you should consider some of the absurdity of that doctrine. Its all about the problem of evil and suffering and reconciling it with a loving God. I am surprised this is so triggering for you.
Teancum Posted October 22, 2021 Author Posted October 22, 2021 3 hours ago, Duncan said: but it doesn't say that God is an enemy to the natural man, which means that God isn't an enemy to the natural man Right. It says we are God's enemy not that God is our enemy. 1
Teancum Posted October 22, 2021 Author Posted October 22, 2021 2 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: You really can't see the fallacy in the bold? I'm sure there are many, many people in this world who, to put it mildly, do not care for me (present company included? ). By your logic, then, I MUST hate them? What happened to the Christian ethic (“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you ...")? We are speaking of a passage that says the natural man...all humans....are an enemy to God. We are God's enemy. God made us, or created a situation, where we all would end up His enemy unless we put off the natural man. What is so hard about this?
let’s roll Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 On 10/20/2021 at 5:57 PM, Teancum said: But one thought. In LDS thought humans were supposed to fall from grace. Adam and Eve had to fall. Sin had to be introduced into the world. We would all sin so we were destined to become God's enemy. It was planned. This to me some like an insidious plan to create us to have to start as God's enemy. So let's talk about it. I guess we could spend time speculating about King Benjamin’s choice of words. Or we could work on becoming more meek, patient, humble and full of love. I’m opting for the latter. 1
The Nehor Posted October 22, 2021 Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) “I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made.” - FDR This and many quotes with the same general meaning exist from all kinds of people throughout history. By this standard God’s enemies are a bunch of putz spirits and some deranged fallen mortals. One of the best arguments for the goodness of God I have heard. Edited October 22, 2021 by The Nehor
mfbukowski Posted October 23, 2021 Posted October 23, 2021 4 hours ago, Teancum said: The comments are sincere. And yes I do know the doctrine. Quite well. Maybe you should consider some of the absurdity of that doctrine. Its all about the problem of evil and suffering and reconciling it with a loving God. I am surprised this is so triggering for you. Have you read any of my posts? I have shown that the alleged problem is a linguistic confusion which does not exist for LDS folks. None of our Doctrine can be accused of including "the problem of evil and suffering and reconciling it with a loving God." We believe in an immanent embodied God and a non-deterministic universe where people can choose to do or not do things approved morally by God, and / or society. Good and evil exist only as descriptions of how we feel about events- they are not metaphysical cosmic forces. No where is the issue of omnipotence vs free will raised in the scriptures, it grows, I believe from Enlightenment protestantism as followed by, for example, Calvinism 1
mfbukowski Posted October 23, 2021 Posted October 23, 2021 4 hours ago, Teancum said: We are speaking of a passage that says the natural man...all humans....are an enemy to God. No so. The entire purpose of the gospel is to raise humanity ABOVE being "natural men"
Recommended Posts