The problem of evil case study: genocide [Trigger warning, if you need it]

[Stargazer]

15 hours ago, Calm said:

Yeah, does for me too. Especially since Alma and Amulek are saved a short time later. Why were they irreplaceable and not those who perished?

I think that was Alma’s best guess why the Spirit stopped him. 

To me, this is one of the most profound passages in the Book of Mormon. The first time I read it I wept bitterly. But not because these people died as martyrs to the faith, but to the words "The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand; for behold the Lord receiveth them up unto himself, in glory..." Being fairly certain that Alma was very close to the Spirit, I don't think it was Alma's best guess, but even if it had been a guess, he would have been guessing right.

Arguably, the victims of that act had done their duty, they had endured to the end, and were valiant in the testimony of Jesus. More so in some ways than Alma and Amulek had been, to that point. Those two had yet more to endure, to perform, and to serve. They were spared death because their labors were not yet complete, and they had more to do. The ones who died had successfully completed their missions. Who thinks that when their spirits passed through that gate of death, and their pain was erased, that they weren't immediately blessed with unimaginable joy? I don't. 

Death comes to us all at the ends of whichever road we are expected to follow. One of my granddaughters reached the end of her road at 3 months, and one of my great grandmothers reached it at age 87. Amulek wanted to save those martyrs from their fate, like any good person would want to do. But he seemed momentarily to have forgotten that our lives are intentionally but a brief moment. Some of us will leave it quietly without much fuss or pain (as did my wife), but others will leave it painfully and in fear (as did those drowned in the waves during the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami). But go we must when our time comes.

In some ways I envied my wife. She was taken, but I was left behind. Her work on the earth was successfully finished, but mine is yet to be done. My apparent general health suggests that I will be forced to continue laboring for some years yet, and I don't know when I will be permitted to join her. As much as I naturally fear death to a certain degree, I am quite reconciled to it. I trust that the Lord will take me on his timetable, and that it will be good -- as long as I have managed to remain faithful.

As for the OP's topic, there is no problem of evil, as such. The only possible problem is that some of us will make bad choices and disqualify ourselves for eternal life. And due to pride, some of us may even reject Christ's atonement and find ourselves in the least Kingdom of Glory. But for all of us there will be Glory, because we kept our First Estate. Except for a very small number of SoPs. 

[Teancum]

12 hours ago, blackstrap said:

Imagine if God were to intervene to prevent every possible evil in the world. We would end up in individual bubbles protected from all interactions. I think God does intervene but very minimally and most  subtly. Then again , maybe we just think we are here a la The Matrix. 🙄

 

 

Well that is the problem. All of this is just imagining. Even that this god exists.

[Teancum]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

It isn’t hard to understand why he doesn’t intervene in quite a lot of stuff. But the extreme stuff (think babies being tortured), I can understand why some wonder. 
 

To others…how would you imagine him intervening?  Little nudges here and there so no one tempted to molest children ever has the opportunity to do so?  Couldn’t be obvious because then it wouldn’t take faith to believe.  I have thought about this some.  It seems possible sometimes and others not so much without altering who we as individuals are.  

There are also natural disasters.  If he had always take the worst edge off somehow, quieted down volcanoes and storms for example, would we know the difference?  Wouldn’t we just assume that is the way the world works?

I wonder if he can’t intervene because he has to keep a certain distance or his presence becomes so overpowering that it rewrites our own emotions and desires. I have long believed we came to earth to get a chance to live and make our own choices away from the  naturally highly influential presence of our heavenly parents.  As someone who was talked into changing my major into one I didn’t like because I thought my dad knew better than I did even though I had long resisted doing things his way, I can’t imagine how we could think the least independently in God’s presence, especially if there was some level of oneness that we tapped into premortality. 

And maybe if he is nudging us here and there without our permission, he could change our brain structure or the spiritual aspect of it.  I have read quite a few scifi stories where someone is a telepath altering others’ minds or memories for their good. But it never turns out good and people get really pissed off. In some ways that is what we ask God to do for us, but my guess is we feel very differently when we invite him to do so versus him doing it against our will. 

Well this topic is not what we would have some god do or not do. It really is about whether such a being exists. I think this topic is strong evidence that such a being does NOT exist. Rather than try to put the square peg in the round hole it seems more likely that there is no god. At least not the theistic god the Bible, Quarn, Book of Mormon and so on.

[MrShorty]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

I think the problem of evil is in the question: “If there is a God…”

Then, as you point out, the problem becomes the decision to believe in God given the presence of evil,

We often make a point about this "choice to believe." Perhaps it is just the influence of @california boy's question, but, even as one who chooses to believe, I wonder how important this choice really is. If I choose to be a believer and then sit idly by while someone suffers, praying that they will be able to learn whatever lessons God has in store for them to learn from their suffering, it would seem that my choice to believe in God is not a good choice. One thing I have sometimes seen among ex-believers is greater urgency to bring goodness into this life, since they no longer believe in a next life where injustices can be corrected, which can seem like a good "fruit" of their choice to disbelieve. Of course, those are not the only two choices, but it begins to me to feel like the choice to believe or not isn't all that important. What seems more important are the choices one makes because of their choice to believe or disbelieve.

[MrShorty]

5 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

There is a difference between being all-powerful and eternal Law. Law is law, even our Father cannot go against eternal law. 

Should we, therefore, continue to seek to worship God, or should we seek to worship whatever this is that is above God and constrains His actions? When God decided to test Abraham's obedience by commanding him to sacrifice his son, should Abraham have looked God in the face and told Him, "Human sacrifice is evil. I will not submit to your arbitrary obedience test."?

Again, this is one of those LDS things to posit that maybe God isn't as all-powerful as we've been led to believe. It contributes something to the conversation around the problem of evil, but I'm not convinced that its contribution is all that satisfying.

[MrShorty]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

It really is about whether such a being exists.

I know this is often the point of many conversations around the problem of evil. I also know that I cannot control the discussion thread. For me, I'm inclined less towards a "does God exist?" kind of question and more inclined towards, "will I respond to the problem of evil with a desire to do what I can to alleviate and prevent evil?" I've said before that I find those theodicies that emphasize our call to bring goodness into the world as best we can more compelling. As Mason put it, will we look at the evils around us and determine that we are no longer content with the world we have and are willing to put forth the effort to change the world we have? As I said to @CV75, I'm not sure that the question of whether God exists or not is important in our decision to bring goodness into the world.

[Okrahomer]

3 hours ago, Duncan said:

They appear to be like a hotdog in a hurricane

😇 Sorry…I’m just here to read, but Duncan!  What in the world is a hotdog in a hurricane???!

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Stargazer said:

The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand; for behold the Lord receiveth them up unto himself, in glory..."

I have no doubt that Alma knew the Lord was taking their souls to be with him, but that is different than knowing why imo.

The part I think was likely his best guess (and I would say it was inspired but incomplete, so “guess” is not the best word) was God allowing the righteous to be horribly slaughtered so his judgments against the wicked for killing them would be just….as if they wouldn’t be just if the wicked desired to destroy and yet were prevented according to the teachings of Jesus.  If lusting in the heart (imo this means one would act on it if one could) is as bad as acting on lust and committing adultery, than surely murder and torture in one’s heart is as bad as acting out and intentionally murdering someone.

Quote

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.

Quote

But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/nt/matt/5?lang=eng#p1

Edited September 2, 2024 by Calm

[The Nehor]

16 hours ago, blackstrap said:

Imagine if God were to intervene to prevent every possible evil in the world. We would end up in individual bubbles protected from all interactions. I think God does intervene but very minimally and most  subtly. Then again , maybe we just think we are here a la The Matrix. 🙄

 

 

If all the suffering of the world came from other humans I could sort of get it but this world is designed to cause a whole lot of suffering and it is set up to pit us in competition with each other to encourage us to make each other suffer. I am not asking for total protection here but why do we need these extremes? Especially since they often break people.

Yet we are told happiness is the objective. It is baffling.

Edited September 2, 2024 by The Nehor

[Calm]

13 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

If all the suffering of the world came from other humans I could sort of get it but this world is designed to cause a whole lot of suffering and it is set up to pit us in competition with each other to encourage us to make each other suffer. I am not asking for total protection here but why do we need these extremes? Especially since they often break people.

Yet we are told happiness is the objective. It is baffling.

Can we reject evil or at least selfish qualities in ourselves if we don’t understand that they can result in harm to others?  Why would we be willing to do the work of changing if we did not see a purpose to it, such as protecting those we love and those we should love?

I don’t get why the extremes would be necessary, but I can understand the smaller stuff. 
 

Psychopaths can be willing to hurt others because of the lack of empathy. Maybe we have to feel the pain, truly experience it and not just observe or speculate about harm and evil to be willing to undergo purging it from our souls. 

Edited September 2, 2024 by Calm

[CV75]

2 hours ago, MrShorty said:

We often make a point about this "choice to believe." Perhaps it is just the influence of @california boy's question, but, even as one who chooses to believe, I wonder how important this choice really is. If I choose to be a believer and then sit idly by while someone suffers, praying that they will be able to learn whatever lessons God has in store for them to learn from their suffering, it would seem that my choice to believe in God is not a good choice. One thing I have sometimes seen among ex-believers is greater urgency to bring goodness into this life, since they no longer believe in a next life where injustices can be corrected, which can seem like a good "fruit" of their choice to disbelieve. Of course, those are not the only two choices, but it begins to me to feel like the choice to believe or not isn't all that important. What seems more important are the choices one makes because of their choice to believe or disbelieve.

There are many kinds of belief; in my experience it is best to choose the kind of belief that answers our questions and then act accordingly. What makes us “human” worthy of regard dignity and respect is not in doing good or rationalizing it, but in  our agency to choose to do good and evil, typically prefaced with a belief in what constitutes good and evil. So, the issue of choosing to believe in God is only important when someone tries so resolve the problem of evil (as presented in the OP) without deciding whether they believe in God (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) in the first place, while firmly believing in evil.

Edited September 2, 2024 by CV75

[california boy]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

That would depend on why imo. I think the issue is whether one is willing to accept that perhaps there is something that would change the perception of the situation if known.

Possibilities that I have speculated about…

1) Somehow the self of those who suffer beyond the ability to learn from it are mentally, emotionally, and spiritually protected from being harmed by the experience, such as it’s an illusion and no one is actually suffering. Problem with that one is people survive torture, etc and can share how they felt the pain.

2) Our years of mortality are so short and limited in actual depth even the most horrific experience amounts to a stubbed toe for our eternal self that is actually experiencing life (our minds appear to be independent beings, but what if our minds are actually only part of a greater mind, not a hive mind, more like how the hemispheres of our brain function on their own as well as interacting with each other so our reality is much more than just a logic exercise or artistic experience, but a blending).  If an individual cell can feel pain, it seems it would often be quite extreme as cells get destroyed all the time and yet in our brain that cell’s pain makes little impact on its own.  Most probably feel that doesn’t work because they see our minds that suffer in this world as quite sentient in ways that greatly exceed individual cells or groups of cells and therefore it would still be wrong to allow perception of suffering for any part of a global mind that experiences reality seemingly on its own. 
 

I have thought of more, but need to take a break. 

Honestly I don't think I am cut out to be a god.  I have a hard time looking at something like the holocaust or the starvation that Stalin or Mao engaged in being nothing more than a stubbed toe even from an eternal perspective.  Going through something like that, or even reading about something like that doesn't motivate me at all to want to become like God.  

It makes me think there is a thin line between who Satan is and who God is.  While I was more under the belief that there was huge differences between them.  

Edited September 2, 2024 by california boy

[california boy]

5 hours ago, Calm said:

That would depend on why imo. I think the issue is whether one is willing to accept that perhaps there is something that would change the perception of the situation if known.

Possibilities that I have speculated about…

1) Somehow the self of those who suffer beyond the ability to learn from it are mentally, emotionally, and spiritually protected from being harmed by the experience, such as it’s an illusion and no one is actually suffering. Problem with that one is people survive torture, etc and can share how they felt the pain.

2) Our years of mortality are so short and limited in actual depth even the most horrific experience amounts to a stubbed toe for our eternal self that is actually experiencing life (our minds appear to be independent beings, but what if our minds are actually only part of a greater mind, not a hive mind, more like how the hemispheres of our brain function on their own as well as interacting with each other so our reality is much more than just a logic exercise or artistic experience, but a blending).  If an individual cell can feel pain, it seems it would often be quite extreme as cells get destroyed all the time and yet in our brain that cell’s pain makes little impact on its own.  Most probably feel that doesn’t work because they see our minds that suffer in this world as quite sentient in ways that greatly exceed individual cells or groups of cells and therefore it would still be wrong to allow perception of suffering for any part of a global mind that experiences reality seemingly on its own. 
 

I have thought of more, but need to take a break. 

Sorry, I pushed reply and nothing happened.  So I pushed it again.  Looks like they both went through.

Edited September 2, 2024 by california boy

[Calm]

17 minutes ago, CV75 said:

What makes us “human” worthy of dignity and respect is not in doing good or rationalizing it, but in  our agency to choose to do good and evil, typically prefaced with a belief in what constitutes good and evil.

So we would be worthy of respect if we consistently chose evil?

[CV75]

2 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I know this is often the point of many conversations around the problem of evil. I also know that I cannot control the discussion thread. For me, I'm inclined less towards a "does God exist?" kind of question and more inclined towards, "will I respond to the problem of evil with a desire to do what I can to alleviate and prevent evil?" I've said before that I find those theodicies that emphasize our call to bring goodness into the world as best we can more compelling. As Mason put it, will we look at the evils around us and determine that we are no longer content with the world we have and are willing to put forth the effort to change the world we have? As I said to @CV75, I'm not sure that the question of whether God exists or not is important in our decision to bring goodness into the world.

It is only important when He is inserted into the caliculus with the question, “If there is a God…,” and this is how the thread began. Someone who believes in evil and acts accordingly to oppose it would find this question irrelevant. They have their concept of good and evil already without God in the picture. And it is fine that they (and societies) have no choice but to allow evil to exist because they know their limitations.

On the other hand, God of course allows evil not because of His limitations but because His unconditional love and regard is expressed by not interfering with anyone’s agency, no matter how He might view their choices. He can take such a high road because He perfectly reconciles everything in the long run, unlike individuals and societies. But as noted above, not everyone finds that important.

[Calm]

Quote

have a hard time looking at something like the holocaust or the starvation that Stalin or Mao engaged in being nothing more than a stubbed toe even from an eternal perspective.

It’s not like I do in anything else besides speculation trying to reconcile the experience I have had with the love of God with the less pleasant as well as the horrific side of life.  I most definitely don’t treat actual suffering in a “that’s okay, it’s no big deal in the long run” mode.  If someone used such ideas to lessen their involvement in helping to lessen suffering where they may, I think they are missing the point of the mortality lesson.  Hopefully their eternal is not (I do believe our perceived minds are a small part of our eternal awareness due to the veil, whatever that might be).

I think there is a massive difference between God and Satan because God loves us and Satan doesn’t.

I also don’t have an issue with anyone saying they don’t see the CK as desirable or our idea of God as that great.  Since all we can manage is a muddled, smudged up view in this life, why should I expect more?  I don’t think our decisions that affect our final status will come until we no longer see through a glass darkly.  The whole guessing which is the tiger and which is the lady that mortality often is just isn’t the framework for either justice or mercy.  It’s a game show.

Edited September 2, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

but because His unconditional love and regard is expressed by not interfering with anyone’s agency

But he does interfere through blessings and spiritual promptings, does he not?

[california boy]

6 hours ago, CV75 said:

Yes, because the regard and dignity God extends to us is found in our unimpeded agency, not in His unconditional love for us. 

So are you saying that if we want to be more like God and we see someone harming another person, a god like response would be, I don't want to interfere with the murderers agency??  While a less than god like response would be more like, I can't let this happen?? 

[CV75]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

So we would be worthy of respect if we consistently chose evil?

I originally used the word "regard" which I see now conveys my point better "dignity and respect" -- so let's go back to using "regard." I will change it.

Yes, I believe God holds us in regard no matter what we do, by allowing us to do it, even if that is to consistently choose evil. He also loves us no matter what we do, but will not interfere with the consequences any more than He will interfere with our agency. Everything Jesus did in His atoning work(s) cements/seals His regard and love for us.

[CV75]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

But he does interfere through blessings and spiritual promptings, does he not?

I don't see those as interference.

[california boy]

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

It’s not like I do in anything else besides speculation trying to reconcile the experience I have had with the love of God with the less pleasant as well as the horrific side of life.  I most definitely don’t treat actual suffering in a “that’s okay, it’s no big deal in the long run” mode.  If someone used such ideas to lessen their involvement in helping to lessen suffering where they may, I think they are missing the point of the mortality lesson.  Hopefully their eternal is not (I do believe our perceived minds are a small part of our eternal awareness due to the veil, whatever that might be).

I think there is a massive difference between God and Satan because God loves us and Satan doesn’t.

I also don’t have an issue with anyone saying they don’t see the CK as desirable or our idea of God as that great.  Since all we can manage is a muddled, smudged up view in this life, why should I expect more?  I don’t think our decisions that affect our final status will come until we no longer see through a glass darkly.  The whole guessing which is the tiger and which is the lady that mortality often is just isn’t the framework for either justice or mercy.  It’s a game show.

It seems pretty murky to me the difference between standing by and doing nothing when evil is being done and encouraging evil to be done.  The results seem to be pretty similar.

[CV75]

2 minutes ago, california boy said:

So are you saying that if we want to be more like God and we see someone harming another person, a god like response would be, I don't want to interfere with the murderers agency??  While a less than god like response would be more like, I can't let this happen?? 

No. We have far more limitations than God. We have to do what we think is best, just as He does with His wherewithal. The fullness of the Gospel teaches what He considers the best thing(s) to do, when, how, why, where, etc.

Generally, people are simply going to do their best (or not).

[The Nehor]

34 minutes ago, CV75 said:

It is only important when He is inserted into the caliculus with the question, “If there is a God…,” and this is how the thread began. Someone who believes in evil and acts accordingly to oppose it would find this question irrelevant. They have their concept of good and evil already without God in the picture. And it is fine that they (and societies) have no choice but to allow evil to exist because they know their limitations.

On the other hand, God of course allows evil not because of His limitations but because His unconditional love and regard is expressed by not interfering with anyone’s agency, no matter how He might view their choices. He can take such a high road because He perfectly reconciles everything in the long run, unlike individuals and societies. But as noted above, not everyone finds that important.

Then logically the road to becoming like God is not to bother trying to bring about good but to instead just trust God will all eventually sort it out. In fact I suspect there are many who believe in God who take this tact already.

[CV75]

30 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Then logically the road to becoming like God is not to bother trying to bring about good but to instead just trust God will all eventually sort it out. In fact I suspect there are many who believe in God who take this tact already.

That's one form of "logic," I suppose!

[Calm]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

So are you saying that if we want to be more like God and we see someone harming another person, a god like response would be, I don't want to interfere with the murderers agency??  While a less than god like response would be more like, I can't let this happen?? 

Another issue….Isn’t a murderer interfering with the agency of the person they murder?  Why is the murderer’s agency more valued than the victim’s?

Edited September 2, 2024 by Calm