Why would God create humans to be natural men and women that are His enemies?

[Teancum]

On 10/22/2021 at 8:05 PM, mfbukowski said:

Have you read any of my posts?

 

Many of them.

On 10/22/2021 at 8:05 PM, mfbukowski said:

I have shown that the alleged problem is a linguistic confusion which does not exist for LDS folks.

Well you think you have.  I am not sure you have.

On 10/22/2021 at 8:05 PM, mfbukowski said:

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.

Tell me does the LDS God possess the Omni's?

On 10/22/2021 at 8:05 PM, mfbukowski said:

Good and evil exist only as descriptions of how we feel about events- they are not metaphysical cosmic forces. 

Yes. The parent of a child suffering and dying from cancer sure feels pretty awful and is suffering. It is more than a description to them.  We live in a real and physical world.  I don't buy into nor understand (maybe I am not bright enough to grasp  it) your metaphysical mystical approach to seemingly most things. I highly doubt most of your fellow LDS friends to either.

On 10/22/2021 at 8:05 PM, mfbukowski said:

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 

While I utterly reject the God of Calvinism I understand how they got there and the Bible seems to help in that process.

[Teancum]

19 minutes ago, webbles said:

No, he isn't omnipotent.  He is bound by natural laws.  He can't do anything and everything.

I think LDS scriptures and many leaders disagree with you.  What authority do you base this conclusion on?

19 minutes ago, webbles said:

Also, you are just describing moral dilemmas.

Moral dilemmas are real and they are fair game for thinking about God and whether there really is one especially in light of the problem of evil and suffering. Interesting that you blithely ignore them.

[Teancum]

15 minutes ago, webbles said:

I don't think it is very vague.  The doctrine is that we are the same species as God.  We aren't any different from Him except for in our location on the path of progression.  So we come from the same substance that He is.  What ever He was initially, we were initially.  If we came from some "soup of stuff", then so would have God, and that doesn't make much sense.

Sources?

[CV75]

6 hours ago, Teancum said:

Your last comment sounds a lot like Calvinism to me.  It is not so much that God needs to be vindicated. It is whether the problem of evil and suffering speaks loudly that the personal God of Judeo Christian thought may not exist.

Either way, I see the problem of evil (God allowing or creating evil) to be a function of a lack of faith in a correct version and application of the Atonement of Christ. Of course one can question which of these versions and applications are correct, but that is not the problem.

[Teancum]

4 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Either way, I see the problem of evil (God allowing or creating evil) to be a function of a lack of faith in a correct version and application of the Atonement of Christ. Of course one can question which of these versions and applications are correct, but that is not the problem.

I guess I don't follow.  Can you expand a bit?

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Christ never sinned thus did not become a natural man.

He became a natural man in the Pearl of Great Price sense: He came a living soul upon this earth.

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Why did we need a fallen world to learn who we really are?  Has anyone beside Jesus not sinned?

To get a body with a brain with which to learn in a temporal realm to complement what we learned up to that point. Jesus descended below and ascended above to be a Savior, and so do we, following the same pattern.

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

The problem of evil and suffering and reconciling them with a loving benevolent God is a question people have been wrangling about for a long time.

And the problem is with incorrect versions and applications of the Atonement of Christ.

[CV75]

5 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I guess I don't follow.  Can you expand a bit?

You are saying that God allowing or creating evil is a problem, right? I am saying it isn't a problem with a correct version and application of the Atonement of Christ. A correct understanding puts His allowance of evil (and goodness) in perspective, and makes His creation of evil (and goodness) a non-starter.

[webbles]

26 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Sources?

That we are the same species as God?  Umm, "I am a child of God"?

[Fether]

54 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Is the LDS God omnipotent?  Is God omniscient?  What can the LDS God control and what can he not? I think that is crucial is your determination?  Cn the LDS God prevent a three year old from suffering from cancer?  Can the LDS God prevent the kidnapping of a young child and the murder of such a child?  If yes then the LDS God can prevent suffering and evil.  Could God prevent a toddler who accidently walks out in the street from being hit by a car?  If yes then God can prevent suffering.  If you were on the street corner and saw the child wandering into the path of an on coming car would you save the child?  

Great and worthy questions.

This goes back to the purpose of life and our unique view on it.

I’m inexperienced on this so maybe this is wrong, but I find the tradition Christian explanation on the purpose of life to be vague and unimpressive. God made us from nothing so that we can worship him, and he is only going to save those who you coded to be righteous and damn those he coded to be wicked or having never have heard of him.

Our understanding is that we have all existed for eternity and that God simply gathered us in our nothingness and is teaching us to be like him. This requires us to be here on earth and experience evil in its many forms and choose to reject it.

As for the suffering, this is purely objective and simplified version of it, but if there really is a God and there really is an eternity of happiness and peace to be had… this suffering, no matter how awful, is really nothing when compared to the grand plan. This suffering can also create great spiritual strength and resilience. Just like how God doesn’t stop the suffering of one of his children, I also would not stop my child from trying to learn to walk. Falling over may cause her to cry, but there is a more important lesson to be learned.

[The Nehor]

46 minutes ago, webbles said:

Not really.  The scriptures has places that say He can not lie, He can not go back on His promises.  Others say He is bound by natural laws.  Compared to us, He is omnipotent, but He isn't actually omnipotent in the pure sense of that word.

“And now, Zerahemnah, I command you, in the name of that all-powerful God, who has strengthened our arms that we have gained power over you……”

[webbles]

29 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I think LDS scriptures and many leaders disagree with you.  What authority do you base this conclusion on?

Alma 42: 13 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/alma/42?lang=eng&id=13#p13

Quote

13 Therefore, according to justice, the plan of redemption could not be brought about, only on conditions of repentance of men in this probationary state, yea, this preparatory state; for except it were for these conditions, mercy could not take effect except it should destroy the work of justice. Now the work of justice could not be destroyed; if so, God would cease to be God.

Brigham Young (as quoted by Howard W. Hunter) - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1989/10/the-golden-thread-of-choice?lang=eng

Quote

Brigham Young once said: “The volition of [man] is free; this is a law of their existence, and the Lord cannot violate his own law; were he to do that, he would cease to be God. … This is a law which has always existed from all eternity, and will continue to exist throughout all the eternities to come. Every intelligent being must have the power of choice.” (In Journal of Discourses, 11:272.)

Brigham Young (as quoted from the Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual) - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/enrichment-g-the-nature-and-purpose-of-law?lang=eng

Quote

President Brigham Young taught that “there is no being in all the eternities but what is governed by law” (Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 1).

Brigham Young in Journal of Discourses 11:286

Quote

Some men seem as if they could learn so much and no more. They appear to be bounded in their capacity for acquiring knowledge, as Brother Orson Pratt, has in theory, bounded the capacity of God. According to his theory, God can progress no further in knowledge and power; but the God that I serve is progressing eternally, and so are his children: they will increase to all eternity, if they are faithful

There's a few that I found.  I take from those that God can not break His laws, so He is limited.  He isn't omnipotent.  And the last quote says that God is still progressing in knowledge and power.

 

 

38 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Moral dilemmas are real and they are fair game for thinking about God and whether there really is one especially in light of the problem of evil and suffering. Interesting that you blithely ignore them.

I "blithely ignore them" because I don't believe God is perfectly omnipotent.  I also believe that God's purpose is "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man." (Moses 1: 39).  It isn't to end all suffering or evil and in fact He can't do that because He would then cease to be God and His purpose would be not be fullfilled.

[webbles]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

“And now, Zerahemnah, I command you, in the name of that all-powerful God, who has strengthened our arms that we have gained power over you……”

Yeah, to us, he is "all-powerful".  But he isn't perfectly omnipotent.  See my post at 

 for some scriptures and quotes on why I don't think he is perfectly omnipotent.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Hard to reconcile that with scripture.

Alma 37:16 indicates that “God is powerful to the fulfilling of all his words,” not that He has unlimited power. He is limited to righteousness, which entails the work of justice (Alma 42:13) and the mercy and grace of the Atonement of Christ (v. 25) which enable His “great and eternal purposes …the salvation and the redemption of men, men, and also their destruction and misery. (v. 26)."

Mosiah 3: 2 - 21 uses the word "Omnipotent" and describes what it means, and it seems limited to the above characterization. Note where the subject thread topic falls within this teaching. Mosiah 5:2 - 3 ties this Omnipotence to “infinite goodness” and not “unlimited power.”

ETA: "Infinite" is also qualified, as in 2 Nephi 25: "...believe in Christ, the Son of God, and the atonement, which is infinite for all mankind..."

Edited October 24, 2021 by CV75

[The Nehor]

32 minutes ago, webbles said:

Yeah, to us, he is "all-powerful".  But he isn't perfectly omnipotent.  See my post at 

 for some scriptures and quotes on why I don't think he is perfectly omnipotent.

I agree with you but putting limits on what God can do is dangerous when we know so little and defining what those limits are even more so.

Especially in the context Teancum was talking about in terms of preventing catastrophes or curing cancer which I think God can do.

In the context this bit from then-Elder Spencer W. Kimball fits:

Quote

Was it the Lord who directed the plane into the mountain to snuff out the lives of its occupants, or were there mechanical faults or human errors?

Did our Father in heaven cause the collision of the cars that took six people into eternity, or was it the error of the driver who ignored safety rules?

Did God take the life of the young mother or prompt the child to toddle into the canal or guide the other child into the path of the oncoming car?

Did the Lord cause the man to suffer a heart attack? Was the death of the missionary untimely?

Answer, if you can. I cannot, for though I know God has a major role in our lives, I do not know how much he causes to happen and how much he merely permits. Whatever the answer to this question, there is another I feel sure about.

Could the Lord have prevented these tragedies? The answer is, Yes. The Lord is omnipotent, with all power to control our lives, save us pain, prevent all accidents, drive all planes and cars, feed us, protect us, save us from labor, effort, sickness, even from death, if he will. But he will not.

 

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

But you say this because you have been taught to believe it and think it is true. 

There are plenty of converts to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who who don't believe that simply because they "have been taught to believe it and think it is true."  While he can speak for himself, one example of such a convert that springs immediately to mind (and I hope he won't mind my mentioning him ) is our own @mfbukowski.  So even if I grant your contention that I "believe it" simply because I was "taught to believe it" and because I "think it is true," that doesn't account for (in the aggregate, at least) the millions of people who came to believe it because a Divine Being communicated the truth of it to their souls.

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

But does it make sense? Is it rational?

Isaiah 55:8-9 and 1 Corinthians 2:11 come to mind.  If it doesn't make sense to the carnal, natural, logical, rational mind, so what?  This guy didn't think it makes much sense to the carnal, natural, logical, rational mind, either.

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Why would an all powerful God have to shed blood to pay for sin?

Because that was the plan that the Gods decided upon "in the beginning."  (See, um, the Temple endowment. )  The Atonement isn't simply something that saves the members of humanity who repent of their sins from having to suffer the punishment for those sins, though it does do that (see again Doctrine and Covenants 19:16-19).  Also, it is the mechanism that prevented the entire plan from being frustrated at the outset (see again 2 Nephi 9, circa vv. 4-14).

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

This idea seems more of a human construct of law an punishment than divine.  

Okay.  I can't help you there.  I can't account for what it seems to you.  You're free to draw your own conclusions all of which fail completely to account for anything (everything) anybody writes here.  Which I predict, is exactly what you will do in ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...  

 

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

Alma 37:16 indicates that “God is powerful to the fulfilling of all his words,” not that He has unlimited power. He is limited to righteousness, which entails the work of justice (Alma 42:13) and the mercy and grace of the Atonement of Christ (v. 25) which enable His “great and eternal purposes …the salvation and the redemption of men, men, and also their destruction and misery. (v. 26)."

Mosiah 3: 2 - 21 uses the word "Omnipotent" and describes what it means, and it seems limited to the above characterization. Note where the subject thread topic falls within this teaching. Mosiah 5:2 - 3 ties this Omnipotence to “infinite goodness” and not “unlimited power.”

Sometimes those limits are implied but not always.

[CV75]

3 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Sometimes those limits are implied but not always.

"Infinite" is also qualified, as in 2 Nephi 25: "...believe in Christ, the Son of God, and the atonement, which is infinite for all mankind..."

I think it is good that they are only sometimes implied, as an object lesson for the principle that "Omnipotence" has a limited meaning in the gospel context.

[The Nehor]

21 minutes ago, CV75 said:

"Infinite" is also qualified, as in 2 Nephi 25: "...believe in Christ, the Son of God, and the atonement, which is infinite for all mankind..."

I think it is good that they are only sometimes implied, as an object lesson for the principle that "Omnipotence" has a limited meaning in the gospel context.

How is the atonement not infinite?

Edited October 24, 2021 by The Nehor

[CV75]

42 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

How is the atonement not infinite?

Being infinite for all mankind, it is not infinite for any more than than that. But I also have a fairly liberal view of what "mankind" means, as I include everything mankind finds joy in, or all creation, in what is covered by the Atonement of Christ. Not only does He redeem human beings physically and spiritually, but He resurrects all other forms of life and glorifies them and the earth, etc. But I see it as not infinite inasmuch as there are terms and conditions for the personal realization of a fulness of the Atonement of Christ. It is not without limitation in that regard.

[Olmec Donald]

7 hours ago, Teancum said:

Why did we need to come sin and have a savior?  Why does God need to let His Son be killed to pay for my sin?  Why can't he just forgive me?

I agree with you.  It does not make sense to me that God needs someone to punish, much less that the just should be punished for the unjust.  I understand the reasoning given for it (to satisfy the demands of divine law), but I find it inconsistent with the idea of a God who is fair.  And I'm not interested in worshipping an unfair God.

5 hours ago, Teancum said:

 Why would an all powerful God have to shed blood to pay for sin?  This idea seems more of a human construct of law and punishment than divine.  

I think you are correct.  If we can be expected to forgive seventy times seven with no strings attached, then so can God.  

5 hours ago, Teancum said:

Can the LDS God prevent a three year old from suffering from cancer?  Can the LDS God prevent the kidnapping of a young child and the murder of such a child?  If yes then the LDS God can prevent suffering and evil.  Could God prevent a toddler who accidently walks out in the street from being hit by a car?  If yes then God can prevent suffering.  If you were on the street corner and saw the child wandering into the path of an on coming car would you save the child?  

I do not know what God, be he/she/it/they LDS or otherwise, can and cannot do.  I understand the sense of injustice IF God can intervene and does not.

On the other hand IF nothing real is actually lost, if all injustices are made right, if all pain is healed, and if we full-knowingly agreed to all of this for reasons which are not obvious to us now, then maybe it's not as bad as it appears at first glance.

*  *  *  *

Previously I posted links to some near-death experience videos but shied away from trying to distill them into an applicable set of ideas. This is because I am no more qualified to do the data analysis than any of you, and probably less so than many of you. But now I'm feeling like my previous post is incomplete without at least some such effort on my part. So despite my aversion to being cast as an apologist for an NDE perspective, here goes my amateur analysis:

We can't see it down here, but we are connected to everyone, even to the point of oneness with everyone. This shows up in the life review, where the effects of our actions (both good and bad, but most memorably the bad) are experienced from the point of view of the other person. The oneness with everyone (and everything) is such that each of us is a tiny part of a vastly greater whole, and our primary identity is that vastly greater whole, not our earth-life self.

We are loved unconditionally beyond anything we have experienced on earth, and we will be healed of whatever pain and injustice we received down here. We will not be condemned and punished for whatever pain and injustice we gave to others. We will have to re-experience it and learn from it, and while unpleasant, this process is not only educational but also cleansing and healing.

Once we have been through this therapeutic cleansing, and have laid aside everything that we do not need, we bring with us (into the Light) the love that we experienced; that is, the love we gave and the love we received, and the knowledge and understanding from the experiences we had, in particular how we treated others. We are loved deeply and individually throughout the entire process, and so is everyone else. Once we have been reunited with the Light we will have instant access to all knowledge.

So based on my incomplete and highly fallible understanding of near-death experiences, here are some possible take-aways:

1. Nothing bad that happens here has any lasting effect. The victims and the perpetrators will all be healed.

2. We are loved beyond what we can begin to imagine.

3. Our reality is a great oneness of which each earth-life self is a tiny but cherished part (hence "the worth of souls is great" - we are not separate in the way that we seem to be down here).

The following are more speculative extrapolations on my part:

4. Our choices absolutely matter, and our progression benefits those we are connected to (i.e., everyone), but we are not on trial for our eternal salvation.

5. One of our contributions to the great oneness that we are a tiny part of (which includes everyone) is the love that we give.

6. Another contribution is first-hand knowledge (available throughout the oneness) from our experiences. Because all negative effects from earth life are healed, any loss to anyone because of their experiences is temporary.

7. My guess is that the contributions of individuals who "signed up" for a particularly painful and/or lonely earth life are that much more powerful and precious (parable of the widow's mite).

So by this line of thinking we have nothing to fear, and how we treat others probably matters more than which belief system we subscribe to.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Olmec Donald

[Calm]

6 hours ago, webbles said:

So becoming a natural man is not a guaranteed condition of the fallen world. 

I think this conversation may be  making things too complicated. I think the “natural man” is just a way of referring to our “natures” and this refers to what we are without the influence of God and the ability he gives us to repent.  For all but Christ, if left to ourselves we would get trapped in a spiral of sin and its consequences (perhaps sin affects the spirit like alcohol affects the body, damaging it, killing off brain cells…and if the body lacked self repairing mechanisms, crippling and then death would be much sooner).
 

Christ’s nature was aligned already with God before birth and therefore his “natural man” was sinless.

[Calm]

7 hours ago, Teancum said:

Why did we need to come sin and have a savior?  Why does God need to let His Son be killed to pay for my sin?  Why can't he just forgive me?

 

7 hours ago, Teancum said:

Why did we need a fallen world to learn who we really are?  Has anyone beside Jesus not sinned?

I think God’s presence is naturally so powerful that without being distanced from him, we couldn’t develop full agency…think of how children withdraw when overwhelmed or agree to do stuff they don’t want to because of peer pressure. 
 

As far as sinning, I believe it is a result in most of not fully understanding the consequences of our behaviours on ourselves and on others. By experiencing a life of sin, we learn why it is better not to sin. 
 

Also God could provide us with anything we wanted. Without having limitations on what we can get, we won’t be able to learn what we really value, what we are willing to sacrifice for.  A fallen world is necessary to provide limitations of both resources and abilities to make use of resources. 

[Calm]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

“And now, Zerahemnah, I command you, in the name of that all-powerful God, who has strengthened our arms that we have gained power over you……”

He has all powers the universe is capable of producing, but he does not possess powers that do not naturally exist…perhaps he can’t make time go backwards, for example, because that is physically impossible.  Perhaps he can’t make gravity disappear, but may be able to apply certain principles that make it appear as if it has been negated like those watching planes would assume is happening if they don’t understand the principles of aerodynamics and how to manipulate air to provide lift. 

Edited October 25, 2021 by Calm

[SeekingUnderstanding]

47 minutes ago, Calm said:

perhaps he can’t make time go backwards,

“all is as one day with God, and time only is measured unto men.” - It sounds like God lives in a block universe where time is emergent and not fundamental. Several verses teach similarly (that He knows the end from the beginning etc.) Not relevant to the point you are making, but it always fascinated me when I believed. 

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

“all is as one day with God, and time only is measured unto men.” - It sounds like God lives in a block universe where time is emergent and not fundamental. Several verses teach similarly (that He knows the end from the beginning etc.) Not relevant to the point you are making, but it always fascinated me when I believed. 

Yes, I would love to be able to imagine what life would be like for nonlinear beings (as Star Trek calls them).  It must be more than just being aware of the past, present, and future all at once. Somehow one must be able to act as well, so does the action just take place in one moment as it does for us or is their action applied across all time at once…is reality shifted but no one who lives in time aware of a shift because the past is altered as well as the present…nothing has changed in their awareness.  And if they act in ‘the present’, is the past adjusted too or only the time that is the future to that moment?

Edited October 25, 2021 by Calm