Theoretical Theology

on 26 February 2009

In my last post I discussed the hand of God in All things. Particularly in relation to me being gay, but now I want to take it a bit further.
Given:
1 The Lords Hand is in all things (D&C 59:21)
2 Whatsoever thing persuadeth to do good is of the Lord (Ether 4:12)
3 All things shall give thee experience and shall be for thy good (D&C 122:7)

Here are their Inferences:
1 Nothing doesn’t have the Lord’s hand in it
2 Everything from the Lord is good.
3 Things that give us experience are good

Given these, isn’t it safe to assume that everything in this life comes from God, both the “evil” and the “good”? Does anyone really do anything “evil”? We might think that another’s actions are evil, but we do not know their own mind. In order for you to do something you have to believe it is good, or at least that it is the best possible outcome. You might choose to make an “evil” choice that is a choice that is self-defeating, that harms you based on someone else’s scale. But in order to make that decision you have to believe that you are making the good or less evil choice. You have to believe that you have some knowledge that makes your seemingly evil choice good. Isn’t Satan’s flaxen cord just persuading us to do good?

Take Hitler. Was his choice to challenge the rest of Europe, incarcerating non-Aryans an evil choice? We see it as an evil choice but was he sitting there in his bed thinking, “I am so evil”? NO! He was most likely thinking that he was doing what was best for him, for Germany, maybe even for God. So wasn’t he persuaded to do good?

If God’s hand is in all things, then wasn’t his hand in having Hitler commit the holocaust. He wasn’t forced to it, but the LORD’s had was there, persuading him to do good.

In the Crusades, the Crusaders believed that they were doing God’s will that they were doing that which was good. So was their murdering of Muslims in the name of good and of God, are they at fault?

How about we look at an example closer to home. Did Brigham Young believe that in restricting the priesthood from blacks that he was doing that which was good? Did he believe that it was from God? I would like to assume Yes because I don’t think that the Prophet could go against what he thought was God’s will. If this is so then either A. it was God’s will that the blacks have the priesthood withheld, or B. By following that which he knew was right, Brigham Young was justified and was not lead down to hell, but was instead following that, which persuaded him to do good.

We assume that Hitler will be punished in the Telestial kingdom, but what if that isn’t so? If it is wouldn’t Brigham Young also belong there for restricting the rights of the priesthood and thus stopping thousands upon thousands of souls from entering into the gospel on this earth, thus harming their spiritual selves whereas Hitler only harmed the physical selves of the Jews. Isn’t the Spirit more important than the Body? And yet we think that Brigham Young will achieve exaltation. How do we rationalize this? Wouldn’t it be safe to assume that those who end up in the lower kingdoms and even outer darkness are those who have the feeling of what is right, or what persuades them to do good and then they go against it. Isn’t a member of the Outer Darkness one who denies Christ after having full knowledge make more sense in this light? Those who go against that which persuades them to do good and to follow God are those who are sons of perdition?

Even Eve had to be persuaded by the good she thought would come from eating the fruit. And we know that her eating the fruit was a key component to our existence because Adam fell that men might be and men are that they might have joy. (2 Nephi 2:25) Does this mean that the tempting of Eve came from God? Was it a temptation? Or was it a prompting?

I have been questioning this for a little while now and the following is where this train of thought leads me. It brings into question Lucifer’s role in all things.

The above analysis of the scripture leaves me with only 2 possibilities (given that my analysis is correct)

1.
God’s hand is in all things but it is a figurative meaning or more transitive. For example, Satan exists because there must need be opposition to all things and when Heavenly Father created Christ, Satan was the opposition to him. Very similar to how darkness is the absence of light, cold the absence of heat, then evil would be the absence of God. Given option 1. God created Satan and therefore, all of Satan’s temptations have God’s hand in them because Satan was created by God.

2.
The second option has two sub-scenarios, that is it could have been on purpose, or has been adapted to fit the plan. This option depends upon understanding what God’s purpose for us is. I postulate that his utmost desire is for us to return to him, that HE loves us and desires us to have the joy that he has in his position. Given this utmost desire of God, what does he have in store for the 1/3rd of the host of heaven?

After all, their “sin” was A. their first known use of agency, and B. there was no clear right and wrong of either plan, that was why it was put to a vote rather than dictated by the LORD. Had the 1/3 been 50%+1 what then would have happened? Would the eternal plan of happiness been disrupted? NO, it is eternal. C. All of us make the same choice as the 1/3rd each and every day. Their choice was to not follow Christ. How often do we make that choice weekly? Daily? Hourly? And yet we can still achieve Celestial Glory if we but turn to Christ. So why when our mistakes are often much more grievous and against a greater light are they punished more severely?

So getting back to Option 2. Could it be part of the Fathers plan to create Satan as the Devil? Was he a necessary component? Maybe not to the Garden, but to the state of the world as it is? Is there any redemption for our brother Lucifer? How would it become? Would it not come by Lucifer following the role that he was given by the Father? After all, did Satan believe he was doing evil when he proposed his plan? Or was he doing what he thought was good? And aren’t all good things from the LORD?

Wouldn’t this be a much better explanation of opposition in all things, the veil ( in that if we were aware of this it would throw all of our actions out of whack?) and wouldn’t it be the perfect plan of a perfect Father whose utmost desire is for his children to get back to him? Wouldn’t our Father leave the 90 and 9 and go after the one Lost sheep? Wouldn’t he provide a way for Lucifer to get back to HIM? Lucifer, his beloved son of the Morning who desired to be great in the eye of the Lord.

I leave you now with a quote by Mark Twain.

But who prays for Satan? Who in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most, our one fellow and brother who most needed a friend yet had not a single one, the one sinner among us all who had the highest and clearest right to every Christian's daily and nightly prayers, for the plain and unassailable reason that his was the first and greatest need, he being among sinners the supremest?

1 comments:

Alan said...

Wow. Lots here to comment on but no time right now so let me just throw this one thing out for you David. Consider whether you have spun the D&C quote correctly. All things being "FOR thy good" (Joseph's) may not mean that all things ARE intrinsically good in themselves, but rather that their effect on him can be for HIS good, that is, can benefit him. To me this scripture confirms the principle that attitude is everything.

More thoughts later when I'm sitting in the airport.

Post a Comment