My favorite quote on this subject came from Pres. Kimball in Faith Precedes the Miracle,
"Is there not wisdom in his giving us trials that we might rise above them, responsibilities that we might achieve, work to harden our muscles, sorrows to try our souls? Are we not exposed to temptations to test our strength, sickness that we might learn patience, death that we might be immortalized and glorified?I think that most of this goes along with the idea that we suffer, in large part, to better ourselves and to create gods out of men, even when suffering is caused by someone else's bad choice. (Rom 8:28) But I like his illusion to the fact that if there weren't suffering, we would indeed be following Satan's plan and not that of a loving God. It's an odd paradox, but I don't think we would have suffering in this world if we were not the children of a loving Father. Satan's plan, to return all to heaven by force, would have required no suffering (or very little - even the donkey quickly learns to seek the carrot rather than the stick) but who would we be after such a life on earth? How could we hope to continue in the heavens, to have eternal life as opposed to mere immortality, if we were mindless robots who were simply used to following where we were led? God, while He does ask for obedience, requires faith and a willingness to endure. Thus good is not always rewarded with good. Sometimes consequences follow only after a prolonged waiting period. Life is sticky, chaotic and messy. But I think that all of this suffering and craziness is to point us back to God, to allow Him to make it work for our betterment and to turn our God given weaknesses into strengths (Ether 12:27).
"If all the sick for whom we pray were healed, if all the righteous were protected and the wicked destroyed, the whole program of the Father would be annulled and the basic principle of the gospel, free agency, would be ended. No man would have to live by faith.
"If joy and peace and rewards were instantaneously given the doers of good, there could be no evil - all would do good but not because of the rightness of doing good. There would be no test of strength, no development of character, no growth of powers, no free agency, only satanic controls.
"Should all prayers be immediately answered according to our selfish desires and our limited understanding, then there would be little or no suffering, sorrow, disappointment, or even death, and if these were not, there would also be no joy, success, resurrection, nor eternal life and godhood."
Finally, I don't think that God is a finite God. I believe Him to be omniscient, omnipotent and omni everything. I do believe that He can be finite in action but it is because He chooses to be finite not because He is. As I thought about all of this, I can't explain why this is an easy thing for me to accept (theoretically, in the fire I think it all sucks) but I couldn't help thinking of raising my own children. It drives me crazy to tell them no. I want to lavish them with anything and everything their little hearts desire. I want to give them all the experiences they want, to make them the best at everything and to remove every boulder or even pebble that would cause them the slightest anguish. But I know that I cannot. I, unlike God, don't have the power, but even if I did, I wouldn't. I want them to learn who they are, to experience the down sides and gain compassion. I want them to hurt and to be grateful for when that pain ends. I want them to taste it all and to know, for certain, for themselves, what they want and what they are choosing. In the end, I think God's means and ends are similar. He doesn't want Heaven full of spoiled brats with hands out looking for more ease; He wants people who have chosen to be there in spite of all.
10 comments:
This is one of the reasons I love you so much, you are a great thinker and don't take for granted the brain you have been given. I love how you put all of the things you learn together and form your own opinions. By the way, is it time for you to come home yet?? We miss you!!
Thank you for the fine, fine compliment. A reason I love you so much! That and you're just fabulous! Two weeks and a day and I'll be home. It's passing all so quickly but I miss everyone too. It will be good to go to the lake and swim.
I ditto Carrie's comment! I am awe of your brain! I wish I had the "smarts" like you. Can we trade a little bit of craftyness for a little bit of smarts? :)
I like your idea of a God who chooses to be finite. Lots to think while I should be working!
Thanks for this post.
I, unlike God, don't have the power, but even if I did, I wouldn't. I want them to learn who they are, to experience the down sides and gain compassion. I want them to hurt and to be grateful for when that pain ends.
I'm struggling to see how this resolves the problem of pain. If you are suggesting that extreme human suffering, allowed by a God who could intervene, should not be stopped by God, then some uncomfortable conclusions seem inevitable:
1. suffering is not actually bad, so we should not try to stop it, and
2. your belief in this principle, if firm enough, would allow you to stay your hand if your child were reaching for a hot stove. Better for him to be burned and learn peacefully, as it were.
Since I don't think you would actually agree with either #1 or #2, I'm curious how you excuse a good, omnipotent God for failing to intervene when, say, Andrea Yates is drowning her fifth child in the the vomit and feces filled bathtub in which she just murdered the other four? Seems like a good time to intervene, if ever.
Certainly seems more important than helping someone make a rent payment in return for a prompt tithing donation.
Just to argue the flip side, I'm not sure a world without suffering would be a very good world, either. If we had no murder, stealing, etc., would we consider losing a tennis match major suffering? If so, wouldn't somebody still have to suffer? Seems like suffering has to potentially exist forever. (And in Mormon cosmology, I'd say we think God suffers today watching his children fail. But so much for heaven, then!)
Or, taking a page from the Eastern playbook, perhaps heaven is about realizing that suffering comes from expectations, and we learn to stop expecting anything....
I think this is a hard subject. Certainly my heart aches and I question such acts as the Andrea Yates situation you mentioned. But I do think it's not as cut and dried as, "This is horrible suffering, why doesn't God stop it?"
Those children are guaranteed exaltation in the hereafter. Andrea Yates has sealed her own fate and when she stands before God, she will know, with every fiber of her being, what she has done and that the judgment rendered is as just and merciful as God can be.
So perhaps God does intervene but not in the way we, as mortals, would expect each other to intervene.
As to your specific objections:
1.suffering is not actually bad, so we should not try to stop it.
Suffering is horrible. I'm the first to admit that. But there is good that comes from suffering. Bad things happen to give us opportunities, not just to grow, but for us to intervene. Are we a society that will allow Andrea Yates to go free? I hope not and yet more and more we and our justice system turn our backs on suffering and give the perpetrators the rewards and protections which rightfully belong to the victim. And yes, I do think there is a bit of a catch-22 in that is we alleviate others suffering, are they growing as they should? I think it's a matter of balance and seeking the spirit. But I do think there is a great deal of suffering we as humans could stop and I think God leaves it up to us.
I also think that much good can come out of horrible acts; perhaps not for the individuals involved but for the community at large. I think this is another dimension of horrible suffering: God is not just taking into account my small self in this small life; He is considering all of us in our mortal lives and desiring our exaltation at the end. The Jewish holocaust was a monumental moment of human suffering; one I pray will never be repeated. But didn't it help to establish the nation of Israel? Isn't that a blessing for countless Jews? Is the trade off equal? I don't think so but I think there are other factors as well: condemning the guilty, those who would willing create such suffering; and helping the victims to find greatness. There are so many beautiful stories of human triumph in the holocaust that would never had happened had the horrible suffering not been present.
2. your belief in this principle, if firm enough, would allow you to stay your hand if your child were reaching for a hot stove. Better for him to be burned and learn peacefully, as it were.
I don't think I would do this quite the way you describe. I would warn my child over and over again and snatch his hand back as often as possible. But, if my child were determined enough (and this has happened), inevitably he would touch the stove and be burned. Hopefully, he would learn from this incident and never repeat it but there are those who must experience again and again.
Does not God do this with us? Are we not warned via the Holy Spirit and the Light of Christ (our conscience) against things that would harm us? Additionally, while not every community has the 10 commandments, many, if not all, have some sort of social code against murder, theft, adultery, etc. If I decide against all of this to commit a crime, can I say that I have not been warned and that Go d has not intervened? But if I do choose, how can God intervene and stop me without ending my agency? Also, as in the Andrea Yates case, how can He then condemn me for acts I never in fact committed? I do take peace in knowing that criminals will either at rehabilitate and repent or they will, at some point, be forced to pay for their crimes. This life ends up either just by the law of God or merciful through the blood of Christ.
As for your comment about God suffering, I have wondered about that on many occasion. I cannot imagine the numbers of tears I would shed if Hitler were my child. I don’t know how that works at all and I take it on faith that it will work out; believe me, there have been moments when I have wondered if I want to be exalted at all as I don’t want to cry throughout eternity as I watch my children mess up and hurt each other and themselves greatly in their mortal lives.
U:
I don't understand your comment left on BiV's page. Why does the fact that I don't believe God could create morally perfect beings from the get-go imply that I'm afraid of God or that God has no free agency or is not morally perfect?
I don't understand your logic.
Bad things happen to give us opportunities, not just to grow, but for us to intervene.
Why intervene? Surely not because we are trying to be like God, who does not intervene. Thus God either cannot (is not omnipotent) or does not (suffering is good).
But I do think there is a great deal of suffering we as humans could stop and I think God leaves it up to us.
God's still not off the hook. If I delegate a task to an irresponsible party, it's my job to step in if it's not getting done. Otherwise I obviously don't care whether it gets done or not.
Does not God do this with us? Are we not warned via the Holy Spirit and the Light of Christ (our conscience) against things that would harm us?
Well, no, obviously not. Anecdotes suggest that God selects some favorites and gives them warnings to avoid suffering, but for the majority of regular folks, they don't get much warning. Do you believe that everyone who is victimized, injured, bereaved, etc. had some spiritual warning in advance that they failed to heed? (In your discussion you are focusing on people who do evil things--I'm talking about people who suffer unjustly. Perhaps my analogy was unclear: I don't think touching a stove is evil, but it leads to suffering.)
I have clarified the logic of my statement back on BiV's blog.
From my perspective, there are a couple of things that are key to the need for suffering and God’s supposed lack of interference.
One is the Plan of Salvation and understanding that this life is a moment, a passing from a beginning to a greater life beyond this. God is not working to make us happy here but to give us eternal joy and this life is a means to that end but not necessarily an end in and of itself. For that reason, I think there are many things, positive and negative, that are not dealt with fully in this life but in the next. I don’t think you can look at this life without including the next.
Two is the need for agency and how primal this is to our progression. I mentioned on BiV’s blog that the round square I see in this is not the existence of morally perfect free agents, but in anyone creating morally perfect free agents. We cannot be a morally perfect free agent without choosing to be one ourselves. To this end, their must be opportunities to choose and in order to have real choice there must be good and bad and two things to actually choose between. (2 Ne 2:11-13)
Why intervene? Surely not because we are trying to be like God, who does not intervene. Thus God either cannot (is not omnipotent) or does not (suffering is good).
As we’re having this discussion, I’m questioning more and more about God not intervening; I’m beginning to think He does, just not in the way that we humans wish He would. I was thinking during the Sacrament this past Sunday that the atonement is a large intervention into our lives. Surely He is a God who understands suffering and does all He can, short of taking away agency, to prevent it. You say that our intervening is not being like God. I submit that I don’t think any of us is compassionate or loving enough to intervene by offering up our Son to be beaten and murdered for the sake of those who where killing Him. Additionally, scriptures and prophets have been given and I do not exclude this to only the Judeo-Christian history or even the LDS. Most (dare I say all) world religions, which I see as having trickled down, at some point, from the gospel, offer up rules of conduct, ways to live a better life, the need for suffering to purify us, etc. There is also our conscience. We may not receive the Holy Spirit yelling at us to make certain choices (as Mormon legends state) but I have had moments where I’m uncomfortable and make a different choice than I would have; I have moments when I knew – that pit in my stomach – that I had just made a wrong choice and been unkind, etc. Are not these interventions from our Creator?
Do you believe that everyone who is victimized, injured, bereaved, etc. had some spiritual warning in advance that they failed to heed?
No, I don’t. I believe that if we lived as perfect of a life as possible, we would still suffer. I think this is a balance between God’s intervention and not intervening and a balance between being saved from some sufferings but still needing to experience pain, deprivation and real suffering. I don’t have to touch the stove to learn the lesson of heat and burning, but eventually there are lessons that I don’t seem to learn without real experience. I wager that many of my trials as a child and an adult have made me a better, more compassionate person. I can guarantee that if I hadn’t had these experiences, I would be a wholly different person and not for the better.
God's still not off the hook. If I delegate a task to an irresponsible party, it's my job to step in if it's not getting done. Otherwise I obviously don't care whether it gets done or not.
I agree that God is not off the hook but I see the scenario the same as what you have listed. What is the job? Our immortality and eternal life. God has already seen to the former and He is working on the latter. I submit that means that He cannot intervene as you are expecting Him to (to stop the suffering of each of us) if He wants the job to get done. There is a judgment in the next life. There are blessings in this life. I think your vision of how this job gets done (our eternal life) is different from God’s vision.
I disagree that God picks favorites. I know from my own experience that I see blessings that are already there and receive more when I open myself up to the possibility of God working in my life. I know that when I was learning to pray, a dear friend asked me, “If, while you are praying, you hear ‘I love you,” why isn’t that God?” I think He is there in so many ways but we, ourselves, bind His action and ability to intervene by refusing to give Him space and refusing to hear or see what He would offer.
And you mentioned in a previous post that if we didn’t have real suffering, i.e., children being killed by their mother, famine, death, rape, etc., perhaps we would consider losing a tennis match to be the end of the world. The need for suffering still exists in order to find joy when we do not suffer. I never seem to appreciate my body so much as when some chronic pain abates or I can do something, at last, that I have been unable to do for a time (i.e., broken limbs, surgery, etc.).
So, if we take away suffering and assume that such suffering could not exist in the presence of an Omni and benevolent God, what is left? What is your vision of the world as you would have it be?
Post a Comment