The origin of sinners

[Calm]

3 hours ago, manol said:

an eye for an eye".

If you read the “eye for an eye” section of the OT, it is more about restitution. 

[Autonomous]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

If you read the “eye for an eye” section of the OT, it is more about restitution. 

 

It should be noted that currently, Jewish people do not practice baptism, as it is not part of their religious traditions, and they differ from Christians in their views on atonement, restitution, and repentance, believing that atonement is achieved through personal repentance, prayer, and charity, rather than through a singular sacrificial act or baptism.  (no Jesus)

eye for an eye was from Babylonian legal text (which influenced the Mosaic Law).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi

The Code of Hammurabi was not solely focused on restitution, but also on deterring wrongdoing and promoting societal order by imposing severe consequences, such as the death of a builder's son, to encourage others to act responsibly and avoid harm.

[Autonomous]

On 12/3/2024 at 4:27 PM, Calm said:

How do you know this?  The analogy that a drop of water will wear down a mountain that I hear some use doesn’t work for a human mind that can constantly reinforce its habits and beliefs.  Think more of a force field that has unlimited energy to draw on.  Only a blast that is strong enough to overload the field in one moment is enough.  My guess is there are some aspects of our nature that can be changed over time and others that need a controlled shock treatment in order to be reset.
 

My daughter underwent ECT which pulled her out of a depression that had lasted for years and hadn’t been touched by medication or therapy.  While she was put out and paralyzed to limit the suffering, she still had to endure the shocks (around 10 in three weeks iirc before it started working).  I would not be the least surprised if mortality is God’s shock treatment where our intelligence and spirits are the equivalent of unconscious and paralyzed through the veil to minimize the suffering.  We have had eternities up till now for the gentle approaches.  What’s left that requires such harshness is the stuff that can’t change without a reboot.  Once the reboot occurs, the gentle approaches can again be used to purify and refine as they will be effective.

Btw, those who cared for her during the treatments, including the doctors who administered the shocks, were some of the most loving, supportive medical staff I have ever encountered.  Not at all like the ones portrayed in the dramas that treat even modern ECT as some barbaric tool of domination that wipes out one’s individuality.

https://mentalhealthathome.org/2021/03/16/ect-real-life/

 

It is unjust to rationalize the immense pain in the world as necessary for refining human character, for example innocent children who endure unimaginable suffering. Judging those who experience harm as deserving of it for their spiritual refinement is deeply flawed.

Moreover, many people who live lives of luxury and comfort are not necessarily more virtuous.  Numerous individuals who commit evil acts are never subjected to suffering. This disparity challenges the idea that pain and suffering serve as a means for just divine refinement, as it does not align with the reality of human experience, where many endure suffering (or are not given a life of suffering) without any apparent purpose or moral improvement.

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Autonomous said:

t is unjust to rationalize the immense pain in the world as necessary for refining human character

I don’t think you understand my position based on the above, but I don’t believe you would accept it anyway because you have a relatively rigid way of judging things…which is fine, your sense of morality works for you.  It just makes conversation difficult and therefore I am not inclined to try and put a more nuanced discussion here.  Maybe another day.

I will simply say I see mortality itself with its separation from God as the ECT. That does not mean that many things of mortality are necessary as parts of it.  It is even possible that the simple act of birth in a physical body is sufficient given the many that die at birth that we assume have fulfilled their need to experience mortality.

Edited December 5, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Autonomous said:

This disparity challenges the idea that pain and suffering serve as a means for just divine refinement, as it does not align with the reality of human experience, where many endure suffering (or are not given a life of suffering) without any apparent purpose or moral improvement.

If we all share each other’s experiences at the end as if we all lived each life, then the disparities disappear.

[Autonomous]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

If we all share each other’s experiences at the end as if we all lived each life, then the disparities disappear.

I do appreciate and can go along with the idea that all beings are interconnected and that consciousness merges after death - just conservation laws.  Certainly better than degrees of glory, or heaven/hell concepts. 

Hinduism teaches that individual souls (Atman) ultimately reunite with the universal reality (Brahman), or Buddhism likens life to drops merging into an ocean. Panpsychism views consciousness as a fundamental aspect of the universe connecting all entities. Carl Jung - collective unconscious to Teilhard de Chardin’s Omega Point to modern metaphysics and New Age beliefs - giant melting pot where individual awareness returns to a universal source - everyone everywhere with everything works for me. (much happier than trials tests, failures and eternal heirarchies)

[manol]

I apologize to you guys for taking so long to reply; something came up that I had to focus on.

 

On 12/4/2024 at 1:51 PM, Calm said:

If you read the “eye for an eye” section of the OT, it is more about restitution. 

Yeah I suspected that may not have been the best example, so I said, “people whose understanding is some version of "an eye for an eye".”  Still probably should have spent more time choosing my wording.

There is a school of thought which holds that “by his stripes we are healed”, which imo implies that misdeeds call for punishment and someone has to be its recipient. I think this would be the “Penal Substitution” theory of the atonement at the link @JVW was referring to:

https://faithrethink.com/7-atonement-theories-from-church-history/

 

On 12/4/2024 at 11:09 AM, JVW said:

What is the paradigm of the atonement you subscribe to? I recently learned there are like 7 of them, is there one you like the best?

The "eye for an eye" was the law, and Christ fulfilled the law, and now it is not "eye for an eye" anymore, because of Him. Am I missing something with that statement?

God is love, and Zion is the goal. I agree with you, and I'm glad that Christ taught this elevated law...

Thoughts?

None of the seven Atonement Theories describe my paradigm, but the “Moral Example” is probably the closest, because I think whether or not we believe Christ's teachings matters more than whether or not we believe something about Christ. “Universalist” was one of the theories, and I confess to being a Universalist of sorts... but I'm a “Long-path Universalist”; I think there are many, many things to be mastered along the way before we “get there”.

My current paradigm is based on the assumption that the way Christ taught us to perceive one another, and to behave towards one another, is not dissimilar to the way of the Gods, especially given that Christ wants us to be the same manner of men and women as he is. My current paradigm takes the teaching “I am the vine and you are the branches” pretty much literally; thus I view the word “atonement” through the lens of its root words: “at-one-ment”. So I look to “being at one with Christ” even if I do not yet have a precise definition and description of what that entails.

As for how Christ taught us to perceive one another, one example that stands out to me is the parable of the King who went among his people disguised as the least among them. I think we are to literally perceive one another, and in particular the “least” among us, as the King in disguise. Obviously this is not something we can do if we are busy judging one another.

And imo King Benjamin may have been speaking literally when he said “when you are in the service of your fellow beings you are only in the service of your God."

 

On 12/4/2024 at 12:12 PM, teddyaware said:

What may on the surface seem to be any injustice in the atonement of Christ isn’t. In order for Christ to know all things, in an infinite and eternally comprehensive manner, it was absolutely essential that he learn to comprehend all things experientially, through his emotions, not just theoretically through the intellect alone. In order for the Christ to be fully God, it wasn’t enough for him to intellectually grasp abstract concepts of eternal truth. No, the full breadth and depth of knowing all things can only be obtained by experiencing all the emotions God’s created creatures can feel as they experience both the pleasurable and miserable aspects of existence. An infinite and eternal fullness of emotional intelligence is required in order for the Christ to possess the requisite empathy, compassion and perfect divine love  to have the power to save and exalt his creations after fully satisfying the law of justice.

All the above also holds true when it comes to the expediency of Christ needing to experience the full spectrum of all the physical discomforts, pains and agonies that can befall those who are in possession of physical bodies. Therefore, the atoning sacrifice had to be a totally immersive infinite and eternal schoolmaster that would enable Christ to fully comprehend the full breadth of human suffering in all its aspects, and thereby be able to comprehend all things intellectually, emotionally, physically and spiritually. The Prophet Alma testified of these immutable truths in the following enlightening verses from the Book of Alma…

11 And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people.

12 And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH, that he may know ACCORDING TO THE FLESH how to succor his people according to their infirmities.

13 Now the Spirit knoweth all things; nevertheless the Son of God suffereth ACCORDING TO THE FLESH that he might take upon him the sins of his people, that he might blot out their transgressions according to the power of his deliverance; and now behold, this is the testimony which is in me. (Alma 7)

Yes!  

Imo we are participatory to Christ literally experiencing everything “according to the flesh”.  I think we are, right here and right now, in the presence of Christ; and the presence of Christ is in us.  

Imo The Vine is experiencing and participating in Creation through its Branches.   So imo YOU are The Vine experiencing and participating in this part of Creation through the Branch known hereabouts by the aptly-chosen name of "teddyaware".  

I think there are some pretty big teachings about who and/or what we really are hidden in plain sight.  A name is a person's identity; or, at least, a symbol for who (and what) they are: 

What name does a person take upon themself when they are baptized, and when they renew that covenant by partaking of the Sacrament each week?  In whose name do members of the Church speak from the pulpit or otherwise bear testimony?  In what name do we talk to God in prayer?

In the Temple a person makes covenants in three names:  Two of those names are arguably “Branch”, and one is arguably “Vine”.   If the Branches are of the Vine, then the Vine is likewise in the Branches. 

So I think we would not be fools to perceive the King in even the least among us.

 

On 12/4/2024 at 11:48 PM, Calm said:

If we all share each other’s experiences at the end as if we all lived each life, then the disparities disappear.

Absolutely! And when that day comes, I think we will find that everything will have worked together for the good of all. I think we will be filled with gratitude for one another.

 

On 12/5/2024 at 6:03 AM, Autonomous said:

I do appreciate and can go along with the idea that all beings are interconnected and that consciousness merges after death - just conservation laws.  Certainly better than degrees of glory, or heaven/hell concepts.

Hinduism teaches that individual souls (Atman) ultimately reunite with the universal reality (Brahman), or Buddhism likens life to drops merging into an ocean. Panpsychism views consciousness as a fundamental aspect of the universe connecting all entities. Carl Jung - collective unconscious to Teilhard de Chardin’s Omega Point to modern metaphysics and New Age beliefs - giant melting pot where individual awareness returns to a universal source - everyone everywhere with everything works for me. (much happier than trials tests, failures and eternal heirarchies)

Well said, my anonymous, autonomous, atheist friend!!

There is a parable which says the kingdom of heaven is like a net that gathers in "of all kinds".  And there was a president of the LDS Church who borrowed these words from a Scottish castle and had them replicated in the Missionary Training Center:  "Who e'er thou art, act well thy part." 

So my circle of inclusion includes you; I hope you don't mind.  But I gotta warn you, it's crowded in here. 

Edited December 9, 2024 by manol

[manol]

Oops hit "quote" instead of "edit" again... padding my post count...

Edited December 9, 2024 by manol

[MiserereNobis]

On 11/23/2024 at 7:04 PM, Pyreaux said:

In a perfect, divine realm, there is still room for personal preferences, diversity, and the continued exercise of agency. This means that even in heaven, individuals can enjoy variety, make choices, and retain personal tastes and preferences, whether they be for tacos or hamburgers.

The infamous Ahab on this board (if ya know, you know) once described doing laundry in heaven. Not my personal preference 😁