At the presentation of this plan, two spirits stepped forward. One, who later filled the role of Christ supported the idea of the plan and offered to help implement it, while another, later filling the role of Lucifer or Satan offered an opposing plan whereby we would get temporal bodies, but free agency would be surrendered to him, and thereby he could ensure that our safe return.
Mormons believe that at the end of the day, the plan offering freedom of choice was accepted and the other rejected. Whether you believe that happened or not, I think there are some important principles it can be used to teach.
- Freedom of Choice is necessary to advance.
- Surrending that freedom to anyone prevents advancement and is contrary to the plan of God.
- Advancement is an eternal principle, as is freedom.
Now lets look at the lesson I was asked to teach my Sunday School class on Sunday. The lesson was to begin with a quote by a prophet from LDS scriptures.
"Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doings."
The objective of sharing the quote was to discuss with the children why it was important that this man who live 1600 years ago, was able to see our day, and then dovetail into a lesson which reinforced the idea that strict obedience to this prophets teachings is required for happiness.
I'm hoping you see the problem with that. In order for someone 1600 years ago to see our day and see what we were doing, it would seem to require that freedom of choice be non-existent, or that God is so confident in our choices that he would know exactly what we would be doing. From that we could then deduce that our fates are sealed, that we don't have to opporunity to change course at any point, unless it was scripted from the beginning.
I'm not saying that the teachings of this particular prophet were wrong, but I do think that they require an honest analysis prior to being followed.
Mormons are very big on obedience. My father used to teach us that "Obedience is the first law of Heaven". Actually reading the scriptures would seem to indicate that a love of God and your fellow men is the first law, but that doesn't necessarily lend itself to convincing your kids to do something they don't want to do.
There is a belief that devout obedience will lead to a state of mind known as "The Peace of the Lord." My understanding is that you will reach a point where you know longer need to choose. While it is always portrayed in a positive light and a great blessing to know longer have to choose, I can't see any difference between "The Peace of the Lord" and the plan attritbuted to Satan in the initial doctrine I shared.
We grow and advance because of experience, both ours, and by observing that of others. Experience comes about by making choices. If you take away choice, you take away experience. If you take away experience, you take away the ability for someone to advance.
Why would we not want to advance, and why would a God (if you believe in one) choose to have the human race seeking to become of civilization of mindless robots, all single mindedly worshipping him. I know of men who might seek for this, but none of them have turned out to be very nice people, not having any recognizable form of divinity in their behavior.
I'm grateful for the freedom to choose. It's a gift and my right, by nature of who I believe I am. If you seek to take that away from me, you better come prepared for a fight, because I will defend it to the death, and beyond.
My Sunday School class received a lesson from this prophet on Sunday, but it had nothing to do with blind obedience or anything in line with what I believe was the original plan presented by Satan.
The hardest thing about religion as a practice (as opposed to spirituality without form) is that it often mixes with a trait that is profoundly human and yet also often destructive: wanting to be right. It's easy to collapse rituals that are supposed to get us in touch with god, or pathways to god you might say, with being right. And that's when we get into trouble.
ReplyDeleteSomething else plays into this, I think, our need for certainty. Perhaps this is another way to say that we want to ensure survival, I don't know.
But being certain and being right are illusions. As you point out, I think dogma is not the path to god, even though that is really what most religions advocate.
Good for you for teaching your kids to think for themselves, and to choose.
I have a take on that lesson that may be a bit different. I do not think that anyone's agency was compromised by the prophecy, but that what was seen and prophesied was something in the aggregate of our society, and not necessarily the actions of an individual. I think that the ancient prophet was encouraging us to not be part of the group to choose wrongly, or in other words, encouraging us to use our agency to spare us some undesirable consequences.
ReplyDeleteIf I see a car stopped on the tracks in the path of a speeding locomotive, I can foresee that the car will be smashed, but knowing the outcome has taken no one's agency away if they intended to park there. I think that he was suggesting that we may be better off by getting out of the car.
The issue of following what someone teaches is a separate issue. That does indeed require our thoughtful consideration and evaluation as to whether what is being taught is correct or even inspired, or whether it comes from wrong thinking (and I have heard plenty of the latter across the pulpit in my nearly 7 decades.)
I was much more comfortable with the freedom of thought and agency in accepting what was good in the time of Pres McKay than what I often perceive from some very rigid leaders now. I feel that they are doing their best, but also feel that we are far ahead if our obedience comes from thoughtful knowledge. If we are here to prove ourselves, we have proved nothing by blind obedience, and there is no progress from unthinking conformity.