Standing up together to Make a Change within Mormonism.

[_Buffalo]

You obviously haven't been in leadership positions in the Church or been a home teacher or visiting teacher--or at the very least, had no clue as to the purpose of these positions.

I am currently a home teacher, and have had minor leadership positions. I've never had the opportunity to report the concerns of the people I taught to the brethren.

Contempt can have that blinding effect on some people.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Ironic!

[_Buffalo]

I prefer to look at it like the loving hands of a father letting go so that the toddler can learn to walk confidently on its own, and this knowing that the toddler will at times stumble and fall--understanding that the benefits of walking outweigh the risks and harm of falling, particularly when there are loving hands to pick us up and brush us off and comfort and encourage us on our life journey.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

So, lack of divine guidance is evidence of divine guidance?

[_Buffalo]

[
As such, he must have some other transcendent purpose in mind for not only allowing hunger and poverty to continue during mortality

Gosh, I hope it's important.

[_Hades]

It is wise to thoughtfully consider and reconsider important matters such as this. I have done so multiple times over the years, and have become all the more convinced in the processes. So, let me mention some of the things I have considered and reconsidered in relation to this question that you may have not.

For one, I have considered the omnipotence and loving nature of God, and figured that if God's objective was to eliminate hunger and poverty, he had the power to have done so long ago. In fact, in the minds of those of us who believe, he could have created the world in such a way that hunger and poverty would not have existed to begin with.

However, since I believe he created a world where there has been much hunger and poverty over the many millennia of mortal existence, and has not himself eliminated it, and has even declared through Christ that "The poor you will always have with you" (Mt 26:11), this suggest to me that elimination of these things is not his objective.

As such, he must have some other transcendent purpose in mind for not only allowing hunger and poverty to continue during mortality, but also in commanding his followers to bless and feed the poor. To me, there is a reason that God sent us, his beloved children, away from the abundance of his heavenly home, down to inhabit the lone and dreary world.

And, as I understand the gospel and plan of progression and salvation, that transcendent purpose is to enable God’s children to progress to become like him--and this not only by their learning and growing through the things they would suffer and overcome, but also by developing the Christ-like attributes of empathy (mourning with those who mourn) and charitable love (succoring those in need) for others.

This kind of growth is not possible except there be things like hunger and poverty. As such, elimination of hunger and poverty may not only not be God’s objective, but it may also be at cross purposes with God’s transcendent objective.

Of course, I am not suggesting that God doesn’t desire for us to work to minimize the ravages of hunger and poverty. He does desire for us to work towards that end (as you and others have pointed out). But, that is somewhat different from wanting to eliminate poverty, and it completely opposite from God supposedly caring little about the suffering of humanity.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

That all sounds real nice to those who aren't poor and hungry.

Wade, is there some reason why 90% of what you say sounds condescending? Is that just the Mormon way? Is the Mormon God condescending? Is your Christ condescending?

I pray to all that is holy that I was not that way when I was TBM. If there is anything I need to repent of it would be that.

[_wenglund]

I am currently a home teacher, and have had minor leadership positions. I've never had the opportunity to report the concerns of the people I taught to the brethren.

Have you reported the concerns to your home teaching supervisor? If so, then that is how the system is supposed to work. It would be wildly impractical to bring the concerns of all 14 million members individually to the attention of the Brethern.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

So, lack of divine guidance is evidence of divine guidance?

No. Your misinterpretation is evidence of reading comprehension challenges--which is yet another reason why you aren't in a position to tell Christ's chosen leaders how to run Christ's Church.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Guest]

If the elimination of hunger were God's goal for mortal life, then you may have a point. It isn't, and so you don't. Instead, what you inadvertently demonstrate is a marked lack of familiarity with God's plan and the intents and purpose of his gospel--which is all the more reason you and others aren't in a position to lecture the Church about how to do its job.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade has a point. If babies didn't die of hunger, who would ever merit Mormon exaltation? Considering that hardly anyone would ever find the "restored gospel" and sense it to be anything more than a strange regional religion mostly incorporating peculiar western and American cultural Christianity, and with any research, a history that mostly perturbs one's conscience and sense of moral integrity, death of children must be the most integral part of God's plan.

Starvation is needed to bring a few souls back into the Celestial.

[_Roger Morrison]

Seems we have to differentiate between "God", that according to you, Wade, cares little about the sufferings of humanity, and the Son-of-God, Jesus, who seems to put suffering humanity as man's number one responsibility:: feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick, etc. . .

I can't think of a way that my comment could be any more misconstrued than what you just managed--which is remarkable considering that you likely weren't intending to do violence to what I said.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Hi Wade,
You inferred that "God" had/has little concern for those who are starving. That "His" plan is of a higher purpose. In Mormon theology you are probably correct. This interpretation is what separates LDSism from the rest of Christianism.
A rather moot point as there is no substantial theological truth in either the Jewish-Christian tradition and the Mormon Church that sprung from that tradition.
Human empathy and charity are independent from theological dogma and have evolved as civility replaced barbarism over the centuries.
We have just witnessed an example of that in the near-bloodless, 18 day, revolution in Egypt! The world is changing! Thanks to spiritual intellectual humanitarian use of advancing electronic technology.
Back to reforming the Mormon Church. . . It isn't only the Mormon Church that needs reforming. It is the whole Jewish Christian tradition that requires serious study and revamping.
(In my seriously considered opinion :-) I am surely not alone in thinking so. . .
Warm regards,
Roger M.

[Guest]

I think all the starving babies in Africa would agree with you that God is doing a bang up job at the moment.

Maybe it really is time for a management change, both in the church and at the "higher levels".

If the elimination of hunger were God's goal for mortal life, then you may have a point. It isn't, and so you don't. Instead, what you inadvertently demonstrate is a marked lack of familiarity with God's plan and the intents and purpose of his gospel--which is all the more reason you and others aren't in a position to lecture the Church about how to do its job.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Yet the church spends millions of dollars and man hours every year trying to do just that -- reduce hunger and suffering for people throughout the world. But, perhaps, as you say, the true motivation of the church isn't to eliminate these events -- their own God doesn't have this goal, as you say. However, in the absence of a convincing motivation, one is left to wonder why exactly the church would spend time and money on these efforts. Good PR, perhaps?

Actually, you might have a point about this not being God's goal in life. If it were, I guess he would have done something worthwhile about it by now. As I understand Mormon theology, his purpose is to "bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man". He wants to turn as many of us as possible into little clones of himself, I guess to further his own standing in the counsel of Gods. If a few people get hurt, starve to death, or end up in the telestial kingdom along the way, oh well.

After all, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, as the saying goes.

[_keithb]

It is wise to thoughtfully consider and reconsider important matters such as this. I have done so multiple times over the years, and have become all the more convinced in the processes. So, let me mention some of the things I have considered and reconsidered in relation to this question that you may have not.

For one, I have considered the omnipotence and loving nature of God, and figured that if God's objective was to eliminate hunger and poverty, he had the power to have done so long ago. In fact, in the minds of those of us who believe, he could have created the world in such a way that hunger and poverty would not have existed to begin with.

Yes, the omnipotent and loving nature of God -- watching people die from starvation and disease, having the power to help but choosing not to do so.

If I did that to my kids, wouldn't I go to jail?

However, since I believe he created a world where there has been much hunger and poverty over the many millennia of mortal existence, and has not himself eliminated it, and has even declared through Christ that "The poor you will always have with you" (Mt 26:11), this suggest to me that elimination of these things is not his objective.

And this is an argument for the compassion of your God . . . how?

As such, he must have some other transcendent purpose in mind for not only allowing hunger and poverty to continue during mortality, but also in commanding his followers to bless and feed the poor. To me, there is a reason that God sent us, his beloved children, away from the abundance of his heavenly home, down to inhabit the lone and dreary world.

Yes, there is a reason. God wants to make all of his sons into mini-Gods and all of his daughters into eternal baby machines to increase his glory compared to the other members of the counsel of Gods and to increase his glory.

So, in other words, he allows personal suffering among his children to increase his personal glory. Sounds loving to me.

And, as I understand the gospel and plan of progression and salvation, that transcendent purpose is to enable God’s children to progress to become like him--and this not only by their learning and growing through the things they would suffer and overcome, but also by developing the Christ-like attributes of empathy (mourning with those who mourn) and charitable love (succoring those in need) for others.

Strangely enough, my ability to love someone and feel compassion for them really isn't contingent on either their or my suffering. I am able to love my family, even when they are in good health. I can even love others around me, even when they have enough food to eat.

To me, this has always sounded like someone making excuses for a God who doesn't seem to give a . . . hoot.

This kind of growth is not possible except there be things like hunger and poverty. As such, elimination of hunger and poverty may not only not be God’s objective, but it may also be at cross purposes with God’s transcendent objective.

Again, I find that I am able to love people even when I'm not watching their body being eaten away by cancer or starvation.

Also, I've already stated what God's stated objective is: make mini-Gods at any cost.

Of course, I am not suggesting that God doesn’t desire for us to work to minimize the ravages of hunger and poverty. He does desire for us to work towards that end (as you and others have pointed out). But, that is somewhat different from wanting to eliminate poverty, and it completely opposite from God supposedly caring little about the suffering of humanity.

If you believe in an omnipotent God, then you believe that he could end all suffering this very instance. The fact that he allows it to continue so that his "plan" of making mini-Gods for his personal glory can continue speaks volumes to the type of being Mormons believe in and expect others to worship.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

God's message to the poor: tough bananas.