Dangers of "The Plan"

[_Jason Bourne]

What he was pointing out (and I agree) is that no matter what a person did, the result was "of God" regardless.

But who says it is of God? The member, the culture or what? Philosophical answers may come up differently. I understand the mind set and have had it. But I think I have started to move out of certian simple pious responses and to think about these things more while still retaining faith. It seems that many here White House jettison faith were very simplistic and rigid, and most likely not their fault as most are and the Church fosters that. But when challanged why not mature spirtually instead of throwing it all out?


It

gives the impression that you were predestined to do that regardless, and God was going to be there. However, I explained Omnipotent could mean that God knows all possible choices you have at any given situation, and so it can seem as though you were predestined. Your free agency is still intact, though, as God does not exactly know what choices you will make, only what choices you have at any given time.

I think you mean omniscience. I believe that absolute omniscience is not compatible with free will. Like you I believe God knows all outcomes of all choices but not the choices we will make. And He only intervenes to make sure the over all plan is not put out of whack my someones bad choice. Other wise he let's it roll.

[_Nephi]

What he was pointing out (and I agree) is that no matter what a person did, the result was "of God" regardless.

But who says it is of God?

Since Scottie is describing the dangers of "the plan" which is promoted by the church, then it is "the plan" which says it is of God.

[_Scottie]

Lets take a more literal example.

The Golden Plates were buried by Moroni in upstate New York. God has pre-ordained Joseph Smith to the calling of restoring the church. Somehow Joseph Smith HAS to find his way to Palmyra in order for him to find the plates and translate the Book of Mormon. How was this accomplished? Somewhere along the way, God had to impede the choices being made to make sure that Joseph Smith Sr moved to that particular area. It was part of God's plan. Somehow, free agency was lifted from Joseph Smith Sr. There is no way God was going to let them move anywhere but Palmyra.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Well, duh. I got your point perfectly. I was a Mormon too, you know, and I've been hearing this stuff since before you were born. I'm trying to point out the lameness of it all.

I am sorry, but when I saw this:

It's the dog's nature to eat the steak. You can train him not to eat the steak, you've trained his nature out of him, you've taken away his free agency.

I thought you didn't understand my analogy. I can train my dog to not eat the steak, but he is still choosing not to eat the steak because he knows the consequences of doing as such. Regardless, there is free agency still there... If there was no free agency, then there would be no choosing to do the right, and there would be lack of free agency.

To put this in human perspective, it is human nature to go and procreate with as many mates as possible. It increases the chances of species survival, but just because I don't do that doesn't mean I can't choose to do that. I choose not to. Besides, it is in the nature of an individual do go have sex when it is not socially or economically viable. Knowing that this is not a good course of action and there is bad consequences including hardships that would not be experienced if social and economic circumstances were different, isn't this the same God that programmed me to desire sex in these situations? Same thing as putting the steak on the floor for the dog, isn't it?

Your analogy works fairly well for the Mormon belief in free agency, which is a belief that I now reject for many reasons. It no longer computes with my view of God. I don't believe that God has programmed us for anything at all, one way or the other, or that we are here on probation, or that there are eternal rewards or punishments for the decisions we make in life. I don't believe in a God who participates in this world. The more you try to explain free agency, the happier I am to be free of it.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

A problem with "The Plan" that has puzzled me has to do with children and the age of accountability. God knew us well enough in the pre existance to send the spirits who were worthy of celestial glory to physical bodies that would expire before the age of 8. How does this fit with free agency? For a test to be universal and fair, doesn't everyone need to participate? If God can know the outcome, why the test? Why the need for the act of birth for one of these valiant spirits to have a body after this probationary state? Really, if God can waive the test for some, then its just as plausible that these same individuals can receive a body at the drop of the hat down the road.

If you think about all of mankind through the ages, a fair portion of children did not make it to the age of 8. I guess the celestial kingdom will be represented in part by a large group who skipped the probationary state.

Those of you who have had children that reached the ripe old age of 8, know that there is not a whole lot that they can be expected to be accountable for(like choosing membership in a religion). In the church, you would be hard pressed to find a more nonsensical term than the "Age of Accountability".

Indeed. An 8 year old may be capable of understanding that he shouldn't hit his little brother and shouldn't sass his mother, but as far as an 8 year old being capable of consenting to baptism because he understands the first thing about it, other than that it's a rite of passage that the big kids do and gets lots of approval, that's a supreme example of Mormons fooling themselves.

[_Some Schmo]

It is a dangerous way to live life. Since I no longer believe in God, I have now taken responsibility for what may or may not happen to me. I won't buy a motorcycle because the danger is all too real. There is no guardian angel watching over me. I am on my own. I must take every precaution to make sure nothing bad happens to me.

I've held the opinion for a few years now that god (and satan) belief is just the "pious" route to escaping personal responsibility. I totally get where you're coming from on this.

In response to other posts in this thread, namely the this idea that god's only "partially omniscient": there's no such thing. That's an oxymoron (heavy emphasis on 'moron'). Omniscience means "all knowing", not "partially all knowing." By that definition of omniscient, we're all omniscient, which is to say, none of us are, because that's not what omniscience means. You can't just go around redefining "omniscience" to make it fit with your personally made up vision of god. Omniscience is like pregnancy; you either are or you are not. You can't be partially pregnant. There are no degrees here.

Clearly, people (in this thread, anyway) are getting a sense that it's a logical impossibility for a god to be simultaneously omnipotent and omniscient, because if god knows what the future brings, he's powerless to change it. Hence the mental gymnastics in order to make "omniscience" something it isn't.

[_asbestosman]

Omniscience is like pregnancy; you either are or you are not.

I wonder if you could be omniscient and not realize it.