Posted on 04/30/2010 10:47:13 AM PDT by Colofornian
OREM, Utah -- A mother loses everything. A suffering god defies the taunts of Furies. Brother stands against brother -- with a kiss.
I'm listening to Terryl Givens, a University of Richmond professor of literature and religion, as he recounts some stories in literature where God utterly fails. You can do this sort of thing in literature -- it is fiction, after all.
Givens, who is speaking to a group at the seventh annual meeting of the Society for Mormon Philosophy and Theology on March 25, recognizes the value of literature for exploring ideas. Deep ideas -- like trying to imagine what is left if God fails.
Christ does appear in these stories, "but it is a Christ who is methodically and excruciatingly shorn of his salvific capacity," Givens says.
I have to admit, sitting in the front row at Givens' presentation, that I am only vaguely familiar with the stories he is using for his illustrations. I also fear that I am completely missing his point. (I am either experiencing self-doubt or self-awareness.) However, the room at Utah Valley University is filled with scholars, philosophers and theologians sitting on the edge of their seats. Givens is in his element.
He talks about how these famous stories are examples for how mankind can still be moral agents without God. Even as the characters stare into the abyss, even as their faith is stripped away, they make moral choices that seem startling.
In one story poem, "The Ruined Cottage" by William Wordsworth, a mother loses her children and her husband. Her prayers go unanswered. Her hopes torture her. She dies alone in a decaying hut. "The story is a long, harrowing, almost unbearable tale of futility," Givens says. "Dead letters sent to an absent God." The narrator in the poem, confronted by this tale of woe, recognizes the "impotence of grief" -- then pronounces a blessing upon the dead sufferer. Without any heavenly support, the blessing is a pure act of human will, Givens says.
The dramatic poem "Prometheus Unbound" by Percy Shelley retells the Greek myth of Prometheus who was tortured by the head god, Jove, for helping humans. Prometheus' liver is eaten each day by an eagle and re-grown each night. He suffers bravely for thousands of years. But then, Jove sends the Furies, who illustrate the futility of suffering by showing Prometheus the life of Jesus. The Furies tell him that, for all Jesus' sacrifice, it did no good and no one appreciates it (remember, this is fiction). Prometheus accepts this devastating assessment, but still, in the end, says to the Furies: "Thy words are like a cloud of winged snakes; and yet I pity those they torture not." He has admitted defeat, Givens says, yet he pities his tormenters. The Furies are stunned to silence.
In his novel "The Brothers Karamazov," Fyodor Dostoyevsky has the atheist Ivan systematically destroy the faith of his brother Alyosha, a priest. Ivan's logic -- centering on whether Alyosha would have created a world with suffering if he had been God -- crushes Alyosha's belief in a just God. Ivan tells his brother a parable about a modern-day Jesus who is sentenced to death by a Christian leader. Ivan's parable ends with Jesus kissing his modern captor. Alyosha then kisses his brother Ivan. It is more than an act of defiance. It is an act of faith when there is nothing worthy of faith.
And suddenly, there is Joseph Smith.
All these fictional stories were in the context of creedal Christianity, not restored Christianity. They were written to show that even without God, man is an independent moral force. We may not have the power to stop our plunge over Niagara Falls, Givens says, "but we can laugh all the way down if we choose." But Joseph Smith taught something extraordinary that turns these tales upside down again.
"God, angels and men are all of one species," Givens quotes Elder Parley P. Pratt, who was summarizing Joseph Smith's teachings. Truman Madsen, although not mentioned, wrote in his book, "Eternal Man," about how this is an utterly mind-shattering idea: People are eternal beings.
For most religions, however, there is an insurmountable gap between mankind and God. God is completely and totally other. The stories, however, fictionally knock that God down and leave man still standing in some way.
"Ironically," Givens says, "it is only in contemplating the absence of God from the universe that they discovered the divine in man."
"In the absence of God, when facing the failure of the transcendent, the human will is capable of reconstituting a meaningful universe," Givens says. "But what Joseph Smith taught is that God's divinity is similarly constituted. Love is not just his nature, it is his origin."
It seems that the stories do not eliminate the need for God; they merely demonstrate the collapse of the transcendent, the collapse of the insurmountable gap -- something that Joseph Smith taught all along. The similarity and kinship with God and mankind's ability to become like him is starkly shown.
"God's pain is as infinite as his love," Givens says. God shows himself to be the most divine at the moment of his greatest suffering.
This doesn't seem a surprise to Mormons: these moral stabs of love and indomitable will against the abyss of suffering. Instead, it seems as natural as a baby learning from his parents how to walk. Whose children are we anyway?
"The divine nature of man and the divine nature of God are shown to be the same," Givens says. "It is the will to love and the will to suffer which are also the same."
"This is a rhetoric that is instantly recognizable across the spectrum of Christianity: There is something divine in us and it has to do with love. What I'm trying to say is 'No! Really, this is what makes God God,'" Givens says. It isn't that God's love is beyond us or transcendent. "It's God as an independent agent willing to love someone. And if we are the same species as God, we can do the same thing."
"Joseph Smith's cosmology gives us a way of sacrificing transcendence without the loss of absolute meaning," Givens says. "And I don't think we fully appreciate its power."
I leave Givens' presentation with the unsettling feeling that I just heard something profound -- but something that may have been just out of my reach. I worry about how I can write about it. I'm filled with self-doubt. It is as if the Furies gather around me to tell me it can't be done.
But I write it anyway. Ha! Take that, Furies.
[Ya know, if this Mormon Lit prof changed the word "moral" to "immoral," he would (finally) be right on!]
From the column: Joseph Smith taught something extraordinary that turns these tales upside down again. "God, angels and men are all of one species," Givens quotes Elder Parley P. Pratt, who was summarizing Joseph Smith's teachings.
Well, Joseph Smith indeed elevated man to God's level & reduced God down to man's level (even though he did this post-Book of Mormon; that product of his imagination mentions absolutely zilcho about God being a man; or having a body of flesh & bones; or men becoming gods; or anything about basic Mormon teachings of "eternal progression," exaltation, or three degrees of glory).
From the column: For most religions, however, there is an insurmountable gap between mankind and God. God is completely and totally other...they [referenced fictional works] merely demonstrate the collapse of the transcendent, the collapse of the insurmountable gap -- something that Joseph Smith taught all along..."The divine nature of man and the divine nature of God are shown to be the same..."
Translation? Givens is just saying that Smith brought God down to our level ("collapsed" the transcendent nature of God; destroyed God's unigueness as a wholly, holy other being). Smith redefined his god in his own image. How pathetically sad. (No wonder he and some of his followers, like apostles Orson Hyde and Pratt, made Christ out to be a polygamist...and many Lds leaders, who made God out to be a polygamist who sexually brought about billions of spirit children).
From the column: ...in contemplating the absence of God from the universe that they [these writers of fiction] discovered the divine in man." ...There is something divine in us...And if we are the same species as God..."Joseph Smith's cosmology gives us a way of sacrificing transcendence without the loss of absolute meaning..."
Translation: Joseph Smith was just like these writers of fiction in assigning divinity to men; why we're just the "same species" as the gods. Yeah, I know this normally leads to loss of meaning, but once you've redefined yourself as a god, why you, too can love and suffer like he does.
Can you spell "New Age?" (Smith was just a cutting-edge New Ager who hauled it in under the guise of a "restored" Christianity)
I'm afraid I've never understood this particular "paradox."
If God creates beings with free will, that free will by definition includes the capacity to do evil and thereby cause suffering. The only way to get rid of all suffering would be to eliminate free will, and I personally can't see the point of creating beings without it.
Good point.
And LDS wonder why we say they are not Christians
You know, Prof. Givens has a marvelous vocabulary; and the kind of voice you can listen to for hours.
But having heard that clip of his on the PBS "The Mormons" two-part series, where they show him saying, "fully reconstituted" a few times...and then at this lecture, he uses the word "reconstituting/reconstituted" a few more times, you almost get the feeling that Prof. Givens stands in front of a mirror, practicing and re-practicing him saying "fully reconstituted" and "methodically and excruciatingly shorn of his salvific capacity"...
Now THERE'S a statement to make you sit up and take notice!
Now THERE'S a statement to make you sit up and take notice!
("Yeah, as my triple-great grandpa-pa's brother used to say, 'God, angels and men are all of one species.'" -- Mitt Romney, self-proclaimed candidate for the Great White Throne)
God’s thoughts are not our thoughts; His ways are not our ways. Ain’t that the truth.
Yes & No. While you could say that the only way to get rid of all suffering would be to root out free will, (and effectively root out real people as they are "constituted" in the process :) ), that's NOT the only way to get rid of all suffering...at least for some.
Imagine a missionary going into a leper colony. He successively asks over the course of years 10 female lepers to marry him. He assured each one that while his present calling could not be ignored, one day he would whisk his bride back to the mainland, where he promised she would be treated and cured of leprosy. The first nine reject him, refusing to believe his promise. The 10th accepts.
The pain of rejection was lamentable, especially when the groom knew each one could be cured. Yet, in light of his eventual bride, he did not regret the rejection-filled process.
The same is true of our Lord Jesus, who both created us and serenades us to be His now and in heaven. He created us knowing the first parents would abuse their stewardship of free will; and He created us knowing that most of their children would reject Him. Yet, He saw the bride from afar, and said, "She's worth it all."
Of the 12 times Jesus used the word, Gehenna -- the Greek word coming to symbolize "hell" - all but one came from Jesus' lips. He discussed "everlasting fire" and "everlasting punishment" in Matt. 25:41,46. Therefore, God knew all suffering would never be averted. And, in fact, He knew their suffering would be "everlasting" (what is "life" outside the Life-Giver, after all?)
But He knew all suffering for some would cease. Jesus, by suffering Himself, redeemed suffering. He devoured it for those who would trust Him to do so in their own personal road of suffering. 'Tis too bad, it's so few, who will trust Him to cure them of their spiritual leprosy:
13"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. (Matt. 7:13-14)
But even as you said that, Saundra, you said God's - singular possessive -- not gods' -- plural possessive.
Now are you just pretending to come across "Christian" like by subscribing to a FR "presentation" of adhering to only one god? (When you know Mormons hold to at least three gods -- and for those Lds who believe they become a god, you know that makes at least 4!)
Saundra, is Jesus that singular God?
* Thomas calls Jesus his God in John 20:28; even the Nephite disciples likewise called Jesus “their Lord and God” (singular) (3 Nephi 19:18).
* Lds Doctrine & Covenants says Jesus is God (19:4; 62:1; etc.)
* Since there’s only one true God in the Bible and in most LDS scriptures (for example, Pearl of Great Price says "no God besides me" (1:6), either Jesus is a false god or THE one true God.
* As Jesus Christ is a God to Thomas (John 20:28) -- so Thomas has two gods?
It would seem, Saundra, since you cite Isaiah 55:8, that it would be wisdom to us to quickly review this prophet in context, especially going back 10-12 chapters.
Now, were I to impose Mormon theology upon the prophet Isaiah's words, I'd have to change verses to read as follows:
* "I am the Lord, and there are others; apart from me there are multiples of gods." (A perversion of Is. 45:5)
* "I am the Lord, who has organized all things, who with a council of gods stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth with my fellow divine family members." (A twisting of Is. 44:24)
* "It is us who made the earth, and created mankind upon it. Our own hands stretched out the heavens; we marshaled their starry hosts." (A pretzel version of Is. 45:12)
* "I am the first, well almost, and I am certainly not the last; there are other gods all around me." (More twisting - this time of Is. 44:6)
*"Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago? You are our witnesses. Are there gods beside me? Yes, I know plenty." (Utter perversion of Is. 44:8)
*"Before me generations of gods were formed, and so shall it be evermore happily ever after." (Ah, again, the Mormon "gospel" twisted version of Is. 43:10)
May I "sweetly" challenge you, Saundra, to go back to your Biblical roots and meditate day and night upon Isaiah 43, Isaiah 44, and Isaiah 45? Isaiah reminds us, as if the above verses weren't enough, in 45:14: "'Surely God is with you, and there is no other; there is no other god.'"]
Can you say, Saundra that you have no God but Elohim? If Jesus is a distinct "god," then you do have another! (Same with the Holy Spirit) AND, if you think YOU can become another god, you've just added more gods into this mix.
His ways are not our ways. Ain’t that the truth.
Yes, it is, Saundra. But even on the human level it would be a bad assumption to divide what God has not divided.
For example: You meet a woman who says she is Mrs. Finkelbinderbottomschmauser. You say, "No way. I just met a gentleman who told me his name was Finkelbinderbottomschmauser, and I told them there's gotta be only one Finkelbinderbottomschauser name in the world, and he agreed with me." (And he was right) "And now you come along and tell me you share the same name. So which one of you is the real one?"
Obviously, if the two are married as one, they share the same identity without sharing the same "personage." If that's true at the human level, how much more intricate is the unifying intimacy of the Father and the Son at "ways not our ways"???
Saundra, "separate personalities" doesn't mean identity-wise, separate "beings." Even in marriage, 2-become-1.
Likewise, Jesus always has been God (John 1:1).
God always was God (Ps. 90:2).
Jesus has existed from all eternity in a special relationship with the Father (see Micah 5:2).
Even D&C 39:1 reads, "Hearken & listen to the voice of him who is from all eternity to all eternity, the Great I AM, even Jesus Christ..."
So you can't fully understand how three-are-one? Well, Saundra, to quote someone special to me: "God’s thoughts are not our thoughts; His ways are not our ways. Ain’t that the truth."
This guy again...
De Groote...
I hope hes not a relative...
“God’s thoughts are not our thoughts; His ways are not our ways. Ain’t that the truth. - Saundra Duffy
I’ll sharpen that up for you a bit...
“God’s thoughts are not our mormon thoughts; His ways are not our mormonic ways. Ain’t that the truth.”
You are absolutely right!
True enough. I never said everybody would always suffer, only that suffering cannot completely disappear as long as free will is around to muddy the waters.
I presume you're aware this is exactly the Muslim and Jewish criticism of Christianity?
Still, some Jews revere a future Messiah; and recognize the operation of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament. They will still filter all through One God.
As for Muslims, they (can) critique the Christian God on all kinds of grounds...
...a God of love (vs. the Muslim God of sheer will)
...an immanent God (vs. the purely transcendent Muslim God)
...a highly sovereign God who is interactive with His people (vs. a fatalistic Muslim God)
Bottom line...is that BOTH Muslims & Mormons do not understand a 3-in-1 God. So for Mormons, they reduce God to the level of a man to better understand him. For Muslims, they do the opposite and fail to see the immanence/presence of God...a servant-leader God.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.