- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Is omnipotent and Loves his children and Answers prayers? I just can’t reconcile all three together.
Here is my question: Think of a child that is repeatedly abused, that child is goes to church every Sunday and prays to God to stop his abuser. The abuse continues.
The traditional reasoning just doesn’t work here.
1. Sometimes the answer is “No” – This makes sense for getting a promotion, selling a house, etc, but why would God ever say no to stopping abuse?
2. God lets wicked people be wicked so his judgement is just. – This could make sense for the first and maybe second offense, but is the punishment for the abuser going to be so different that it is worth sacrificing a child for the 10th or 20th or 100th time? Why would it be more important to God to punish the wicked than protect the innocent?
3. God can’t intervene in free agency, he can’t make someone stop doing something. – OK, but he is given credit for people finding car keys or an extra $20, why not inspire people who are supposed to be in tune to find out about the abuse and do something about it? Or drop a tree on the perpetrator, or give him a bad case of Parkinson’s disease.
If I knew my child was being hurt, I would stop at nothing to protect them. I can’t reconcile my feelings about a loving God that wouldn’t do the same.
So I’m left with leaving one thing out:
Maybe God isn’t that powerful. If that is so, what powers does God have that I should worship, petition and obey him? Why should I ask him for help if he doesn’t have the power to help?
Maybe God doesn’t love his children. Or he loves some of them, but not all. He doesn’t mind seeing some suffer, he only protects and cares for chosen ones.
Maybe God doesn’t hear or answer prayers. That isn’t his purpose, we expect too much of him. Well then, what does he care about? Why should I bother with an aloof detached god?
I can see no way to answer these questions without redefining what God is.
You make some very good points, and I tend to agree. For me I view earth life similar to going away to school, our parents don’t live in the same city, they cannot come to our rescue in an instant. To me this situation says we are to learn to grow up and take care of ourselves. God is there to give us emotional support, and strengthen us in our trials. He may lift us, dust us off, pat us on the back and say “go get ’em tiger!” but the task is ours to accomplish. Agency and all the rest is key.
(book of Orson)
Your reasoning makes sense. some individuals have awful realities to live through. personally i think the HUGE reason God put us here is for us to gain a physical body and along with that comes a physical reality.
I too have thought does God really want us to “worship” him ?
personally the idea of a God wanting to “worship” him sounds kind of self-serving. i prefer to see God as a parent who isn’t looking so much to be worshipped but is only looking to be acknowledged – much like how a good parent likes to hear from a child that has left home from time to time. Orson makes some good points too.
Quote:I can see no way to answer these questions without redefining what God is.
Then redefine what you believe God is.
See how smiple that answer was?
It’s not easy to do – absolutely difficult for many people, but it really is that simple, imo. Continue to deconstruct what you can and cannot accept about what God is – and live according to that new, personal understanding – always open to altering your construction as more time passes and new understandings come to you. “Follow” God to the best of your own understanding and ability, and I am convinced God will accept that – no matter what God actually is.
Here’s one of the few answers I have gotten that may make some sense. In order to fulfill our purpose and tests on this earth, God has to allow free agency. Even in the BofM God did not stop the people from being burned and suffering. It says that those would stand against the wicked and testify against them in judgment. So, why would God allow this? Because He knew the damage could be reversed. Through the atonement of Jesus Christ all damage will be reversed but those who did evil will have proven themselves as to who they have become and are. I also believe that all those tough times can work together for good. “ONLY GOD CAN TURN A MESS, INTO A MESSAGE
A TEST INTO A TESTIMONY,
A TRIAL INTO A TRIUMPH
A VICTIM INTO A VICTORY.
Philosphers call this “The Problem of Evil” and it’s very, very old. The following quote is attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus (341BC-270BC): Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?It’s become clear to me that the idea of father-figure God who is emotionally and physically anthropomorphic is incompatible with what we observe in terms of the problem of evil and unanswered prayers. Yeah, it just doesn’t make sense that a loving omnipotent father-God would fail to answer a child’s prayers to stop being abused, either because he refused to answer or because he was powerless to answer. There are a whole lot of other situations that a loving God ought to intervene in, but doesn’t. For example, we know that some LDS couples are infertile and unable to have children. That means that God sends some of his pre-mortal spirits to irresponsible high school girls who got pregnant while drunk at a party while refusing to answer the requests of some responsible, loving, but infertile LDS couples for a child. There is no way at all that I can see to make sense of that situation except to say that God does not get involved in fertility issues. God could prevent most divorces of LDS people by warning one or both fiancees that their marriage is doomed and they should break off the engagement and go find someone else, but God doesn’t do that very often (if at all,) because if he did, there would be almost no divorces among lifetime active Mormons.
So a reconstruction of what God is will be necessary if one is to believe in God. I’d like to do this, but I want to base my reconstructed view of God on reality and not on wishful thinking. If I get to decide what I believe about God, I’m quite concerned that my reconstructed view of God would be of a God who is as imaginary as Santa Claus. So I really don’t know what to put into my reconstructed view of God.
There is a very good Mormon Matters podcast on “The Problem of Evil and Suffering” (Parts 1, 2, 3), Episodes 119, 120, 121. It does a good job summarizing the different philosophical arguments around these questions, and the Mormon take on it.
Ray’s answer is about the best I’ve heard on this. How we want God to be and then see what evidence we have to support it is an interesting exercise. I believe faith includes finding true knowledge of the characteristics of God, and letting that lead to trust and action.
rebeccad wrote:
1. Sometimes the answer is “No” – This makes sense for getting a promotion, selling a house, etc, but why would God ever say no to stopping abuse?Agreed agreed agreed. With your entire post. Thank you for sharing my thoughts. I know that God can’t immediately punish the wicked and reward the righteous. We would essentially all be forced to do right. Then God would cease to be God. But the church has always taught us that He would listen when we really needed it. If we were hurt it would usually a blessing in disguise. And in the few circumstances where He thought we needed testing, He would let bad things happen, but we would learn and be better for it. But when you and or your kids are the ones being abused, it really is evil for someone to stand in your face and say that. No good comes from abuse. Ever.
I have come to believe that the God taught of in most Christian churches, and yes especially the LDS, does not exist. He either does not keep people from harm, or he does not keep me and many others from harm. He either can’t or chooses not to. IDK which. No matter which way you slice it that was not what was taught in Sunday school.
I now have the opinion that the church leaders live rose-colored lives and things by and large worked out for them that way. They had there struggles, but by and large things worked right. They can justify the conversion/retention tactics of giving rose-colored stories to the membership. They also see life through a magnifying glass. The life close to them seems so real, and so big. And the suffering out there is so far away and rare. This is the typical view of the membership. Reality is I think most people over most of the history of time and throughout the world are born into a life of misery where God does not listen and maybe never intervenes. There is so much more suffering that we LDS mormons imagine.
Really I say conversion/retention effort because like other people have mentioned in other threads here, if the church taught the truth, that God rarely if ever helps, almost no one would convert and almost no one would stay in the church. The skeptic side of me says that they might know its a lie and they perpetuate it anyway because the church would fail. No tithing money. But I choose to believe the leaders just live in happy land. Land of the favorites. Land of the blessed.
But I do struggle with this…. I have seen real miracles in other people’s lives. Is it all really just chance? IDK. It really seems sometimes God plays favorites, and it has little to do with righteousness. It is not limited to good people. It seems more of a genetic thing. Either you are born into a cursed family or a blessed family but it’s like genes… you can’t seem to change it.
This isn’t a fully developed thought, because it just occurred to me as I am reading through this thread: Quote:The Prime Minister gazed hopelessly at the pair of them for a moment, then the words he had fought to suppress all evening burst from him at last.
“But for heaven’s sake – you’re wizards! You can do magic! Surely you can sort out – well – anything!”
Scrimgeour turned slowly on the spot and exchanged an incredulous look with Fudge, who did manage a smile this time as he said kindly, “The trouble is, the other side can do magic too, Prime Minister.” -J.K. Rowling
(Yes I just used Harry Potter in pondering my personal theology. You gotta problem with that?)
Maybe God is more evenly matched with Satan than we want to admit.
A child thinks that their daddy is the strongest, smartest person in the world, in fact they rely on that so that they can trust that their father will protect them. But then a child grows up and realizes that their father is just a normal person with weaknesses and faults, doing his best not to conquer the world, but just to keep it together for one more day.
Maybe God is more like that. Someone who is powerful, and loving, but sometimes it is all he can do to keep the earth rotating on its axis for just one day.
If there truly is opposition in all things, then Satan would be equally and oppositely as powerful as god. I would argue that this world is indeed Satan’s domain. If that is so maybe next life really is that much better. rebeccad wrote:Maybe God is more evenly matched with Satan than we want to admit.
Maybe. Yet, also, maybe we have used superficial definitions for both God & Satan, just as we needed a superficial definition for our god-like parents.As a friend reminded me, “Before there was light, it was dark.”
My definition of God is still evolving – actually I’m pretty sure it cannot help but always be evolving.
Yet, the basic principle is the same: God is a principle – not a person, or any temporary limit, to me at this point.
God is love – which is a creative energy.
Is creative energy all powerful? Well, not really – it is potentially powerful – but the right creative elements have to be there.
IE: When a child suffers (a part of the child is killed – whether spiritually or physically)… it is not because there are no creative elements in this world – there are plenty – but they were not present to sustain the child in the most creative (healthy) way. Basically, it’s the idea that we are God’s hands – children of God & when a prayer goes unanswered, it is because some of us who were most needed, were not in sync with God/creative energy/love.
Did God see that all this was good – overall – despite all the suffering?
Yes. Goodness is based on the potential to be something else, like evil, otherwise it just is.
And good & evil are relative to circumstances.
I wonder… what does the ideal – most Godly life look like?
I imagine it has billions of different expressions, but how much “negative” or uncomfortable feelings are experienced, in relation to positive or comfortable emotions? We always think of being happy as just happiness – but does it require the opposite to appreciate such joy?
Perhaps this needs its own thread, but right now I’m seeing a belief in a devil as, quite honestly, kind of superstitious. It just sounds superstitious to say that the evil spirits are after us and are going to GET us if we’re not careful. Just like acts of nature’s power that used to be attributed to God are now attributed to nature (like lightning and hurricanes,) many evil acts formerly thought to be caused by evil spirits are now known to be caused by mental illness. It seems like a step backwards to me to say that if a person is hearing voices, it’s not caused by schizophrenia, it’s caused by evil spirits. Or that a depressed person is letting the evil spirits get them. Or that a violent criminal was tempted by the devil to mug someone. I can’t say for sure that there is no devil. But just as God’s influence in the world has shrunk as scientific discoveries have been made, so Satan’s influence has shrunk as we have understood more about mental illness and brain injury/disease. An unhealthy or damaged brain can easily lead to unhealthy behavior, including violent behavior, and the documented cases are many.
I’ve heard it said that if there is a devil, there must be a God. I can buy into that.
But the story of the third of the host of heaven following Lucifer’s plan in the pre-mortal life has been sounding less plausible to me. How ineffective of a father must God have been to have a third of his children commit an act that was so evil (following Lucifer) that they didn’t even qualify to get a body? If that story were true, each one of that third must have been far more evil than Ted Bundy. What kind of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother have that many spirit children who are that evil?
So at this point I don’t think that the “devil” explanation for moral evil (as opposed to natural evil) in the world makes the most sense. It’s much more complicated than the “mental illness” explanation for extremely bad behavior.
I must admit, inquiringmind, I have had a harder time with that story too, but in my case its because I just can’t see the “being damned forever” thing. It just doesn’t make sense heavenly parents would make spirits just to categorize and damn forever so many. A good parent would never cast off any child forever with no hope. I think there has to be some truth to the story but I don’t think we got it right. I think I do believe in both God and Satan, and I think they are indeed beings, but I am thinking they transcend everything we know here in ways we cannot understand. God is everywhere and yet god is a personage. I think.
RDSUT, I’m posting a new thread on the third of the host of heaven because I’ve been curious about it for awhile. Quote:I’ve heard it said that if there is a devil, there must be a God. I can buy into that.
This is along the lines of what I am thinking about. It is sensible to me from a perspective of opposing forces. Macroscopically, a magnet can’t have a north pole that is stronger than its south pole. If you think of “good” as a force, it makes sense that there is a balanced, similar force “evil”.
Quote:But the story of the third of the host of heaven following Lucifer’s plan in the pre-mortal life has been sounding less plausible to me. How ineffective of a father must God have been to have a third of his children commit an act that was so evil (following Lucifer) that they didn’t even qualify to get a body? If that story were true, each one of that third must have been far more evil than Ted Bundy. What kind of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother have that many spirit children who are that evil?
This is an interesting story, and it requires a far more literal interpretation of God than I am ready to believe yet. But in a thought experiment that God and Satan are about matched forces of Good and Evil, this makes some sense to me. Both had good ideas, both were persuasive, and all of us chose. Or maybe not, maybe we that are hanging out on earth with the undecideds. Maybe 1/3 chose Satan, 1/3 chose God, and 1/3 couldn’t decide. So we were sent to earth to be exposed to both so we could see both good and evil up close, witness them, experiment with them and then figure out which one we want.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.