Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the News

[Green Monstah]

With all due respect, this is grossly simplistic view of both agency and theodicy.

I mean, yes. But one could argue that the only reason it’s nuanced is because objectively, it’s extremely easy to poke holes in the concept of Mormon* revelation…really from the beginning.



*I’m not saying others don’t have the same issue.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I mean, yes. But one could argue that the only reason it’s nuanced is because objectively, it’s extremely easy to poke holes in the concept of Mormon* revelation…really from the beginning.



*I’m not saying others don’t have the same issue.

Knock yourself out. But if the basis of your argument is "God should not let bad things happen", then we aren't going to get very far.

[Bo Diddley]

I mean, yes. But one could argue that the only reason it’s nuanced is because objectively, it’s extremely easy to poke holes in the concept of Mormon* revelation…really from the beginning.



*I’m not saying others don’t have the same issue.

Is that like disproving the existence of God?

[Green Monstah]

Knock yourself out. But if the basis of your argument is "God should not let bad things happen", then we aren't going to get very far.

Clearly, suffering is part of the human experience.

But good/bad isn’t binary is it? There are human experiences that scar the human mind. I mean if Jesus can help you find your lost car keys, can he at least prevent a rape? Or pump the breaks on infanticide? Or maybe tell a stake president not to give a child predator access to kids in his/her calling? It may be that intense, life-altering trauma serves a greater purpose. If God can’t change that aspect of his plan, he’s either not omnipotent or a kind of a sadist. If the former, I’m curious where the boundaries of his benevolence are. If the latter, well, there’s plenty evidence to support the assertion.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Shot:

But good/bad isn’t binary is it?

Chaser:

If God can’t change that aspect of his plan, he’s either not omnipotent or a kind of a sadist.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Why God permits suffering and evil is probably the oldest theological debate. Lots of great discussions/essays/books on the topic. Thomas Aquinas for starters.

[Northwestcoug]

Why God permits suffering and evil is probably the oldest theological debate. Lots of great discussions/essays/books on the topic. Thomas Aquinas for starters.

Kinda wish he was less than omnipotent and he’s powerless to ‘permit’ the more heinous variety of suffering. A belief in a deity who loves us and wishes he could prevent an eon of pretty bad suffering would be more palatable

[Green Monstah]

Why God permits suffering and evil is probably the oldest theological debate. Lots of great discussions/essays/books on the topic. Thomas Aquinas for starters.

Thank you. I’m sure the condescension was unintentional. Haha.

this isn’t my first foray into the problem of evil. But I am being honest with myself that I don’t think God is revelatory or able/willing to intervene. And I’m okay with it. You should be too.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Kinda wish he was less than omnipotent and he’s powerless to ‘permit’ the more heinous variety of suffering. A belief in a deity who loves us and wishes he could prevent an eon of pretty bad suffering would be more palatable

That’s a different reality.

You ever read the Japanese novel “Silence”? The entire book is dedicated to this theme. One of my favorite books. Martin Scorsese said it was his favorite book so that is why he made it into a movie a few years ago. Doesn’t provide a pat answer but I thought the ending was beautiful. It resonated with me.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Thank you. I’m sure the condescension was unintentional. Haha.

this isn’t my first foray into the problem of evil. But I am being honest with myself that I don’t think God is revelatory or able/willing to intervene. And I’m okay with it. You should be too.

I think there are far more possibilities than you seem willing to allow.

[tooblue]

Thank you. I’m sure the condescension was unintentional. Haha.

this isn’t my first foray into the problem of evil. But I am being honest with myself that I don’t think God is revelatory or able/willing to intervene. And I’m okay with it. You should be too.

The concept of intervention as discussed here is a human invention. God is not human—he is not created in our image and we should avoid anthropomorphizing him and assigning him as being "able" or "willing". Again, those are human conceptions with clearly defined parameters and limitations—human defined limitations.

Revelation is also not a matter of ableness or willingness. Theologically, in LDS terms, we are admonished to put off the natural man:

"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."

Again, speaking in LDS theological terms, we exercised our agency and kept our first estate to be proved:

And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them.

To be proved as we submit to all things that the "Lord seeth fit to inflict upon us" as a consequence of our choice to live a mortal existence; as a consequence of our willingness and ableness to learn, grow, strive and want to become like God.

So there must be a wide spectrum of responses those who have been abused.

If there were not a wide spectrum of responses, then there would be no need for revelation (or enticings of the Holy Spirit) to which we can yield because our response would exclusively be driven by genetics, instinct and our environment.

The enticings of the Holy Spirit or revelation help us make the choice (agency) to step beyond genetics, instinct and environment.

[Northwestcoug]

That’s a different reality.

You ever read the Japanese novel “Silence”? The entire book is dedicated to this theme. One of my favorite books. Martin Scorsese said it was his favorite book so that is why he made it into a movie a few years ago. Doesn’t provide a pat answer but I thought the ending was beautiful. It resonated with me.

That book has been sitting dormant on my list for awhile. I really enjoyed reading Endo's 'The Samarai' when I was at the Y.

[beefytee]

Thank you. I’m sure the condescension was unintentional. Haha.

this isn’t my first foray into the problem of evil. But I am being honest with myself that I don’t think God is revelatory or able/willing to intervene. And I’m okay with it. You should be too.

If God is all-knowing and set things up from the beginning, why would He need to intervene? It may seem like intervention to us, but to have God intervene is like him correcting his mistake, something that he isn't supposed to make. I tend to consider things set up from the beginning to work out correctly, at least in the very end.

[Green Monstah]

I think there are far more possibilities than you seem willing to allow.

Certainly more than I’m articulating.

[Green Monstah]

If God is all-knowing and set things up from the beginning, why would He need to intervene? It may seem like intervention to us, but to have God intervene is like him correcting his mistake, something that he isn't supposed to make. I tend to consider things set up from the beginning to work out correctly, at least in the very end.

I also believe God set things up from the beginning and got out of the way.