<Satire>
Dear Weekly Standard,
I have been a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints all of my life, and so I know first-hand about the unkindness that comes from some of the more orthodox members of the church. Like the Pharisees in the scriptures, they are all hypocrites when it comes to living their religion... focusing only on the law, and not on the mercy and love that should be present in our communities.
Just last week, I came across a passage in the Book of Mormon that really resonated with me, because it talked about how damaging this type of person is. Of course, I've read parts of Mosiah before... mostly the verses in chapter 18 about mourning with those that morn and comforting those that stand in need of comfort... but I accidentally read a few pages earlier in the chapter and came across one of these orthodox religious types. I think this provides a good lesson on how to handle this sort of situation. I started in Mosiah 12.
So first off... just like some of these DezNat types, this guy comes in (in disguise of course because he's a coward) and starts nitpicking about the behavior of other people... you know "...this generation, because of their iniquities, shall be brought into bondage..." Like, dude, why don't you look at your own life before you start harping on others!
Then he incites violence against people. He singles out one progressive leader that he hates, and says that his life will be "...valued even as a garment in a hot furnace." Obviously, this is a dog whistle to rile up the alt-right against people who don't live up to their standards.
So then, this guy is approached by the government leaders. They respond in a really rational, calm, and down-to-earth way... because, like, if it were me, I would've wanted to punch him in the face like the nazi he was. They went straight to the kind parts of the scriptures... listen:
"How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings; that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good; that publisheth salvation..."
So calm, so peaceful, right?
And then he goes straight for this self-righteous "if ye keep the commandments, ye shall be saved... have ye done all this? I say unto you nay, ye have not. And have ye taught this people that they should do all these things? I say unto you nay, ye have not." I mean, the brazen unkindness and judgmental preachiness just gets under my skin.
So I guess in the end he gets what he deserves and gets burned alive. That's almost poetic isn't it? Because he was saying that was going to happen to the guy he was attacking, right?
So yeah, even in the Book of Mormon that these right-wingers in the church use all the time... this guy... what was his name? Yeah... Abinadi...
He can serve as a lesson to them about what happens when you don't use kindness. Checkmate judgmental Mormons!
Sincerely,
Evan B. Haram
</Satire>
Showing posts with label #kindness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #kindness. Show all posts
Monday, May 13, 2019
Tuesday, November 4, 2014
Authenticity and social media
I enjoy using social media. I regularly check Facebook, and although I rarely tweet anything, I follow a number of individuals and personalities on Twitter. There are a number of blogs I regularly read. Of course, as wonderful as some sources of news and information can be on the internet, I know enough to avoid some of the dark corners where the ugliness of humanity is on display...
Perhaps the experience of seeing how cruel people can be in the comments below videos and news articles made something I read from Elder Quentin L Cook's Facebook shocking to me. He said this:
On the other hand... Quentin L Cook is a prominent religious leader. He can't be advocating the kind of comments on YouTube that use the F-bomb in every part of speech except an article and a pronoun... can he? The invitation to authenticity can't mean an invitation to express hatred and vitriol from the comfort of the computer desk... right? He's not excusing people harassing one another because they authentically want to... Of course not.
The point is "we tend to broadcast the smiling details of our lives but not the hard times at school or work."
So to apply this, imagine an individual is having a difficult day at work. Because they are short-handed, this person is required to do more work than normal, but still has pressure to appear positive when dealing with impatient and unhappy customers. Under this pressure, the person makes a small mistake, and the supervisor has to come and assist in correcting it. The supervisor has a frustrated tone as they remind the person of the correct procedure, adding to the frustration of the day. After the workday is over, they come home to their computer and go to Facebook. Here they see advice telling them to "be authentic" in the use of social media, and not just "broadcast the smiling details" of life. They decide to write a big status indicating that their boss is a jerk for overworking them without increasing their pay, and that they were a jerk for handling a minor mistake. Unfortunately for this individual, they have forgotten that their boss followed them on Facebook. The boss posts a scathing reply and indicating how much pressure they were under, and how costly their mistake was. The individual is then invited to turn in their supplies and find another job.
While I don't personally know anyone who has dealt with it to that extreme, I do know people that have experienced negative consequences for using what seemed to be authenticity regarding their employment or schooling.
Not only online, but in many situations, religious standards ask disciples not to be true to themselves, but rather to discipline themselves. Consider the words of Alma to his son Corianton:
The goal behind every Christian faith should always be to make bad men good, and to make good men better... not to make men comfortable with how they currently are.
So how do the two ideas become reconciled?
The answer involves understanding the link between what Elder Cook described as "authenticity" and the word honesty.
The same dilemma is sometimes mocked in social media posts where a girlfriend approaches her boyfriend in some unflattering outfit and asks if it makes her look "fat." If he answers honestly, even if he is as polite as he can be, the girlfriend takes offense. If he tells her that it does not, he is being dishonest. And anymore, if he dodges the question, the girlfriend takes it as a yes, and takes offense. How does a person be "authentic" while still "denying himself"? How can a person be honest and kind?
Let me suggest that the request to be authentic is not a suggestion to air dirty laundry. It's not to "vent" or "lash out" or be "passive aggressive" toward people that seem irritating. When prophets and scriptures counsel men to be honest, they do not mean to be cruel. Latter Day Saints, as all Christians, ought to embrace that which is "virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praiseworthy." (Art of Faith 1:13) The invitation to be authentic does not mean to become cynical or pessimistic
either.
Being authentic means attempting to avoid hypocrisy. Practicing what we preach is vital to religious worship. In other words... continue to broadcast the smiling details of your life AND make sure you smile in life. Make a smiley-face emoji, but also try to make your face smile.
Being authentic also applies to how you treat others. If you have "friends" online... try and be actually friendly to them. If you disagree with someone, be civil, and resist the urge to stir up contention.
Don't pretend to be happy... become happy. Don't pretend to have faith... exercise faith. Don't pretend to be better than you are... but in a deliberate, diligent, and authentic manner, and in social media as well as every other aspect of life... become like Christ. Because Christ was the ultimate example of being the best.
Perhaps the experience of seeing how cruel people can be in the comments below videos and news articles made something I read from Elder Quentin L Cook's Facebook shocking to me. He said this:
Elder David A. Bednar recently cautioned members to be authentic in the use of social media. A prominent thought leader, Arthur C. Brooks, has emphasized this point. He observes that when using social media, we tend to broadcast the smiling details of our lives but not the hard times at school or work. We portray an incomplete life—sometimes in a self-aggrandizing or fake way. We share this life, and then we consume the “almost exclusively … fake lives of [our] social media ‘friends.’” Brooks asserts, “How could it not make you feel worse to spend part of your time pretending to be happier than you are, and the other part of your time seeing how much happier others seem to be than you?”At first glance, it almost seemed like he was advocating using social media to whine. Don't try to be positive... be yourself... right? And if you are authentically a disagreeable individual who derives pleasure from provocation, then don't pretend to be nice, because that's not authentic. If you are the type of individual who secretly indulges in graphic depictions of sex and/or violence, then don't pretend you are only online to read the Bible... right? Be true to yourself. Be authentic. Right?
On the other hand... Quentin L Cook is a prominent religious leader. He can't be advocating the kind of comments on YouTube that use the F-bomb in every part of speech except an article and a pronoun... can he? The invitation to authenticity can't mean an invitation to express hatred and vitriol from the comfort of the computer desk... right? He's not excusing people harassing one another because they authentically want to... Of course not.
The point is "we tend to broadcast the smiling details of our lives but not the hard times at school or work."
So to apply this, imagine an individual is having a difficult day at work. Because they are short-handed, this person is required to do more work than normal, but still has pressure to appear positive when dealing with impatient and unhappy customers. Under this pressure, the person makes a small mistake, and the supervisor has to come and assist in correcting it. The supervisor has a frustrated tone as they remind the person of the correct procedure, adding to the frustration of the day. After the workday is over, they come home to their computer and go to Facebook. Here they see advice telling them to "be authentic" in the use of social media, and not just "broadcast the smiling details" of life. They decide to write a big status indicating that their boss is a jerk for overworking them without increasing their pay, and that they were a jerk for handling a minor mistake. Unfortunately for this individual, they have forgotten that their boss followed them on Facebook. The boss posts a scathing reply and indicating how much pressure they were under, and how costly their mistake was. The individual is then invited to turn in their supplies and find another job.
While I don't personally know anyone who has dealt with it to that extreme, I do know people that have experienced negative consequences for using what seemed to be authenticity regarding their employment or schooling.
Not only online, but in many situations, religious standards ask disciples not to be true to themselves, but rather to discipline themselves. Consider the words of Alma to his son Corianton:
Now my son, I would that ye should repent and forsake your sins, and go no more after the lusts of your eyes, but cross yourself in all these things; for except ye do this ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. Oh, remember, and take it upon you, and cross yourself in these things. (Alma 39:9)Consider also the words in the book of Matthew:
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. (Matthew 16:24-25)
The goal behind every Christian faith should always be to make bad men good, and to make good men better... not to make men comfortable with how they currently are.
So how do the two ideas become reconciled?
The answer involves understanding the link between what Elder Cook described as "authenticity" and the word honesty.
The same dilemma is sometimes mocked in social media posts where a girlfriend approaches her boyfriend in some unflattering outfit and asks if it makes her look "fat." If he answers honestly, even if he is as polite as he can be, the girlfriend takes offense. If he tells her that it does not, he is being dishonest. And anymore, if he dodges the question, the girlfriend takes it as a yes, and takes offense. How does a person be "authentic" while still "denying himself"? How can a person be honest and kind?
Let me suggest that the request to be authentic is not a suggestion to air dirty laundry. It's not to "vent" or "lash out" or be "passive aggressive" toward people that seem irritating. When prophets and scriptures counsel men to be honest, they do not mean to be cruel. Latter Day Saints, as all Christians, ought to embrace that which is "virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praiseworthy." (Art of Faith 1:13) The invitation to be authentic does not mean to become cynical or pessimistic
either.
Being authentic means attempting to avoid hypocrisy. Practicing what we preach is vital to religious worship. In other words... continue to broadcast the smiling details of your life AND make sure you smile in life. Make a smiley-face emoji, but also try to make your face smile.
Being authentic also applies to how you treat others. If you have "friends" online... try and be actually friendly to them. If you disagree with someone, be civil, and resist the urge to stir up contention.
Don't pretend to be happy... become happy. Don't pretend to have faith... exercise faith. Don't pretend to be better than you are... but in a deliberate, diligent, and authentic manner, and in social media as well as every other aspect of life... become like Christ. Because Christ was the ultimate example of being the best.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
My mom is awesome!
I remember when I was attending elementary school that one of the least enjoyable parts was the use of the school bus. While there were some bus drivers that were friendly and did their best to make the experience safe and enjoyable, there was one in particular (who was assigned to the route that I used) who seemed irritated with the inconvenience of ferrying children to and from school. I never once saw them smile, and when they spoke, it was laced with condescension.
I was in the unfortunate position of being one of a small number that got off at a certain stop. Of that number, I was the only one that crossed the street. Of course, normally this required the driver to exit the bus and hold a stop sign up to assist the student in crossing, but my six-year-old heart was not brave enough to confront the disagreeable driver and request this service. Instead, I developed what seemed at the time to be a brilliant solution that would allow me to get home without having to face the scary bus driver. I would get off the bus and feign as though I was following the other children who went down the opposite way, without crossing. Then, when the bus was gone, I would cross the street myself.
This method worked for a couple months, and it seemed to be a great solution... however, one day, the angry driver shouted to me as we approached my stop. She told me that she had seen me crossing the street, and that she could get in trouble for that. She told me I should ride to the next stop and cross the street there, where she was already getting off the bus. Of course I was horrified that my technique had been discovered. (Only later I realized that this bus driver was not as observant as I had initially believed, since she had neglected using her mirrors for two months.) At any rate, I did as I was told.
When I arrived at home, my mom immediately noticed that I was upset. I did not divulge the details of the event, but gave a general complaint about the bus driver.
After some time, I decided it would be a great idea to return to my previous method, as it would allow me to return home much quicker than going all the way to the next stop and backtracking. Except, in a hurry to get home, I went behind the bus and ran across the road. The bus driver noticed me and shouted something in an angry tone. Though I do not know what she had yelled, I felt ashamed and guilty, and ran home. My mom calmed me down enough to learn that her six-year-old son had been expected to go to another stop to cross for the convenience of the driver. I saw a fire in her eyes that I have never forgotten. She stormed out the door and ran down the street, where the bus was stopped to allow other children to cross. I have no idea what my mom said to her, but every day for the remainder of the year, the bus driver got out of her seat, grabbed her stop sign, and walked me across the street without speaking another word to me.
There was never any doubt that my mom loved me. She repeatedly went to bat for my siblings and I whenever we needed. She volunteered in our classes, she encouraged us in pursuing musical talent, she supported us in athletic competitions. She exemplified a woman determined not to outsource the nurture of her children to anyone else, regardless of the opportunity costs for pursuing her own entertainment or enjoyment.
She was not the type of mother that sought personal recognition by earning scout awards for her boys... in fact, she remained loving and supportive even when her boys discovered how much they disliked such programs. If she was disappointed in how I neglected developing skills on the piano or the trumpet, she did not express it in any way that made me feel less valued.
In hindsight, it was as though my mom had confidence in us and our potential beyond what we were. It was as though she knew that we would turn out alright in spite of our flaws. As I grew older, and struggled with self-doubt and discouragement, the confidence of my mother proved to be extremely valuable. That is not to say that I have become a billionaire whose philanthropic efforts have saved millions of lives... but I have a beautiful wife and wonderful children, and the traditions and values that my mom worked tirelessly to pass on to me have been invaluable to our family... and though I have probably not always done the things she might have preferred, her kindness has been constant.
Though my mom has not always been a resource for evaluating calculus problems, balancing chemical equations, or analyzing the logic of computer code, no amount of help in these areas can replace what she has been to me. Thinking of her reminds me of the sentiment of the Apostle Paul... "...whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away" but charity never faileth. (1 Corinthians 13)
I am certain I am not alone among those expressing appreciation for their mothers, particularly on Mother's Day... but it is my hope that we might be more appreciative of the women that work tirelessly to forge each building block in society... surely these heroes should not remain "unsung".
I was in the unfortunate position of being one of a small number that got off at a certain stop. Of that number, I was the only one that crossed the street. Of course, normally this required the driver to exit the bus and hold a stop sign up to assist the student in crossing, but my six-year-old heart was not brave enough to confront the disagreeable driver and request this service. Instead, I developed what seemed at the time to be a brilliant solution that would allow me to get home without having to face the scary bus driver. I would get off the bus and feign as though I was following the other children who went down the opposite way, without crossing. Then, when the bus was gone, I would cross the street myself.
This method worked for a couple months, and it seemed to be a great solution... however, one day, the angry driver shouted to me as we approached my stop. She told me that she had seen me crossing the street, and that she could get in trouble for that. She told me I should ride to the next stop and cross the street there, where she was already getting off the bus. Of course I was horrified that my technique had been discovered. (Only later I realized that this bus driver was not as observant as I had initially believed, since she had neglected using her mirrors for two months.) At any rate, I did as I was told.
When I arrived at home, my mom immediately noticed that I was upset. I did not divulge the details of the event, but gave a general complaint about the bus driver.
After some time, I decided it would be a great idea to return to my previous method, as it would allow me to return home much quicker than going all the way to the next stop and backtracking. Except, in a hurry to get home, I went behind the bus and ran across the road. The bus driver noticed me and shouted something in an angry tone. Though I do not know what she had yelled, I felt ashamed and guilty, and ran home. My mom calmed me down enough to learn that her six-year-old son had been expected to go to another stop to cross for the convenience of the driver. I saw a fire in her eyes that I have never forgotten. She stormed out the door and ran down the street, where the bus was stopped to allow other children to cross. I have no idea what my mom said to her, but every day for the remainder of the year, the bus driver got out of her seat, grabbed her stop sign, and walked me across the street without speaking another word to me.
There was never any doubt that my mom loved me. She repeatedly went to bat for my siblings and I whenever we needed. She volunteered in our classes, she encouraged us in pursuing musical talent, she supported us in athletic competitions. She exemplified a woman determined not to outsource the nurture of her children to anyone else, regardless of the opportunity costs for pursuing her own entertainment or enjoyment.
She was not the type of mother that sought personal recognition by earning scout awards for her boys... in fact, she remained loving and supportive even when her boys discovered how much they disliked such programs. If she was disappointed in how I neglected developing skills on the piano or the trumpet, she did not express it in any way that made me feel less valued.
In hindsight, it was as though my mom had confidence in us and our potential beyond what we were. It was as though she knew that we would turn out alright in spite of our flaws. As I grew older, and struggled with self-doubt and discouragement, the confidence of my mother proved to be extremely valuable. That is not to say that I have become a billionaire whose philanthropic efforts have saved millions of lives... but I have a beautiful wife and wonderful children, and the traditions and values that my mom worked tirelessly to pass on to me have been invaluable to our family... and though I have probably not always done the things she might have preferred, her kindness has been constant.
Though my mom has not always been a resource for evaluating calculus problems, balancing chemical equations, or analyzing the logic of computer code, no amount of help in these areas can replace what she has been to me. Thinking of her reminds me of the sentiment of the Apostle Paul... "...whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away" but charity never faileth. (1 Corinthians 13)
I am certain I am not alone among those expressing appreciation for their mothers, particularly on Mother's Day... but it is my hope that we might be more appreciative of the women that work tirelessly to forge each building block in society... surely these heroes should not remain "unsung".
Monday, October 15, 2012
Is God a Tyrannical Dictator?
For anyone that has followed this blog for any degree of time, it should be evident that I love to emphasize the power of God over the love of God.
I have often felt that throughout Christianity, and even in my own church, God is portrayed like a feel-good pill rather than a King. Of course this is not always the case, and Christians from many sects will from time to time express their confidence in God's abilities instead of only his compassion, but discussion of God seems unbalanced in favor of kindness.
When Christians study and invest only in the one attribute, it is easy for them to be surprised, shocked, or even shaken when their beliefs are challenged; especially so when attacks are derived from sources they accept and treasure such as the Bible. Being confronted with a version of God that kills every man woman child and beast except for those in the protection of Noah's ark seems to portray God as a cruel murderer that made a mistake.
God spoke through the prophet Samuel to King Saul giving him a cruel directive: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." (1 Samuel 15:3) When Saul spared Agag, the King of the Amalekites, and also took animals alive, the Lord said to Samuel: "It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments." (1 Samuel 15:11) After being reproved by the prophet of God, Saul sought forgiveness of the Lord. Samuel did not respond with the compassion one might expect from one speaking on behalf of a merciful God: "thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Israel." (1 Samuel 15:26) Additionally, the prophet made the situation right in the eyes of God when he personally killed Agag. (1 Samuel 15:33) How can God be so loving if he ordered his people to enact genocide on a people?
There are those in the world of Christianity that dismiss these things as "old testament" even to the point of imagining that there was a "God of the old testament" in ancient times that was different from Christ in the new testament. Of course, those that embrace these excuses may be challenged as well. Ananias and Sapphira were members of the Church of Jesus Christ in the stewardship of the early Apostles. At that time, Christians gave all of their possessions to the Apostles, and were given back according to their needs. This husband and wife claimed to the Apostles that they were giving all of the money they had received from a portion of land, but in truth, they conspired to lie about the amount and keep some of the money themselves. As a reward, they were stuck dead by God. (Acts 5:1-11)
There exist Christians that are shocked and surprised when they learn these things exist in the Bible. If they know only the mercy and compassion of God that is so emphasized in contemporary Christianity, then they may even question their faith.
Indeed, it is easy to portray our Heavenly Father as a Heavenly tyrant. He sits on his throne in the high heavens and commands people to do as he says or be condemned to the torment of hell. To those who would worship him and have no other God before him, he promises rich rewards of mansions in his kingdom. He imposes his definition of good and evil on all individuals, regardless of their culture, understanding, or upbringing.
How do Christians deal with the cruel and jealous version of God portrayed in the holy scriptures?
The worst technique is to ignore it. Pretending that the flood in the ancient world, the plagues of Egypt, or the violent invasion and conquests in Israel were symbolic of something is foolish. Doubting them, or claiming that these things are "fulfilled" because Christ gave a new law provides grounds for dismissing large sections of valid scripture, and perhaps leading to selective Christianity or new-age Christianity where Jesus is not the authoritative son of God, but simply a good philosopher.
Another incorrect technique is to swing the pendulum too far the other way. I do, as all Christians should, maintain that God is never wrong. When he sent the flood or slew the Amalekites or sent famines and diseases and curses, he was right to do so. He made the correct decision. This does not mean that we may derive authority to make a posse and slay the wicked in the name of God, as may have been practiced in the dark ages.
The approach to finding the answer is important. When confronted by uncomfortable facts about God, a bad strategy is to pray to God demanding that he explain himself. If he is truly the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, then he does not owe anyone an an explanation. In fact, he has gone to a lot of effort to put humanity in a situation where the eternal consequences to decisions do not occur immediately. He has invested in the creation of an environment to prove the faith of individuals. That means that not answering such demands is in his interest. The frequent emphasis on faith throughout the scriptures is not just a good idea, it is fundamental to accomplishing God's plan for humanity.
Those who insist that God "prove himself" can use the following two step process to uncover the proof they seek:
1. Wait
2. If God has not revealed himself, repeat step 1.
In the end, God will appear, and every knee will bow before him. It is just a lot better to accept him before this happens. Those that persist in demanding proof 'right now' will either not receive it, or they will receive it and it will be unpleasant so as to remind others that patience is in fact a virtue. (Jacob 7, Alma 30)
That having been said, there is a faith-based approach for recognizing the benevolence of God. In fact, I submit that this is a fundamental reason that there exists a Godhead. Almost all Christianity believes in some form of the trinity, and regardless of the interpretation, the following statements should ring true:
1. We know that God the Father is good because of the goodness of his son Jesus Christ. (John 14:6-7)
2. We know that the accounts of Christ's goodness and power in the Bible are accurate because of the witness of the Holy Ghost. (John 14:26)
While this may not seem to specifically address the examples that seemed to portray God as cruel and unforgiving, this approach does something more important. The witness of the Holy Ghost establishes something beyond the reading comprehension that is generally available by opening the scriptures; this is a mechanism for personal interaction with God. Knowing who God is personally allows an individual to make their own judgement about his character, and according to Christ, it is the definition of eternal life. (John 17:3)
It is one thing for me to point to the compassion of Christ as he fed 5000 people in Galilee and say he is kind. (John 6:1-13) It is another when I describe the peace he has given me when I plead for help with my doubts, questions, and mistakes. Frequently using prayer, scripture study, and worship in a diligent effort to find God is a slow path. It is strait and narrow. As Lehi saw in vision, those that walk it can be confused by clouds of darkness, or the attacks of those in spacious buildings. (1 Nephi 8) Ultimately, those that press forward with faith that God will answer them will find the truth. They will find the love of God.
While this may not be an enumerated list of explanations regarding all the dealings God has had with men from the days of Adam, it will provide confidence in the truth that God is never wrong. Not only is he real, but he is omniscient, omnipotent, and his influence is omnipresent. Those that press forward in faithful effort to know God do more than escape the damnation of hell, or earn the rewards of heaven... they become new.
This is the fundamental purpose of Christianity: the power to make bad men good, and good men better. Sometimes helping a person become better requires letting bad things happen to them. Sometimes it requires that they get sick, or that they lose a loved one. Sometimes it requires wars and conquests, and other times it requires peace and quiet. Sometimes it requires famines and starvation, and other times it requires feasting and plenty.
Though God uses various means at various times with various people, and though sometimes it may not make sense, or even seem incorrect, those that know God have confidence that he is not a tyrannical dictator. He is a benevolent father... and he has a plan to save us all.
I have often felt that throughout Christianity, and even in my own church, God is portrayed like a feel-good pill rather than a King. Of course this is not always the case, and Christians from many sects will from time to time express their confidence in God's abilities instead of only his compassion, but discussion of God seems unbalanced in favor of kindness.
When Christians study and invest only in the one attribute, it is easy for them to be surprised, shocked, or even shaken when their beliefs are challenged; especially so when attacks are derived from sources they accept and treasure such as the Bible. Being confronted with a version of God that kills every man woman child and beast except for those in the protection of Noah's ark seems to portray God as a cruel murderer that made a mistake.
God spoke through the prophet Samuel to King Saul giving him a cruel directive: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." (1 Samuel 15:3) When Saul spared Agag, the King of the Amalekites, and also took animals alive, the Lord said to Samuel: "It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments." (1 Samuel 15:11) After being reproved by the prophet of God, Saul sought forgiveness of the Lord. Samuel did not respond with the compassion one might expect from one speaking on behalf of a merciful God: "thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Israel." (1 Samuel 15:26) Additionally, the prophet made the situation right in the eyes of God when he personally killed Agag. (1 Samuel 15:33) How can God be so loving if he ordered his people to enact genocide on a people?
There are those in the world of Christianity that dismiss these things as "old testament" even to the point of imagining that there was a "God of the old testament" in ancient times that was different from Christ in the new testament. Of course, those that embrace these excuses may be challenged as well. Ananias and Sapphira were members of the Church of Jesus Christ in the stewardship of the early Apostles. At that time, Christians gave all of their possessions to the Apostles, and were given back according to their needs. This husband and wife claimed to the Apostles that they were giving all of the money they had received from a portion of land, but in truth, they conspired to lie about the amount and keep some of the money themselves. As a reward, they were stuck dead by God. (Acts 5:1-11)
There exist Christians that are shocked and surprised when they learn these things exist in the Bible. If they know only the mercy and compassion of God that is so emphasized in contemporary Christianity, then they may even question their faith.
Indeed, it is easy to portray our Heavenly Father as a Heavenly tyrant. He sits on his throne in the high heavens and commands people to do as he says or be condemned to the torment of hell. To those who would worship him and have no other God before him, he promises rich rewards of mansions in his kingdom. He imposes his definition of good and evil on all individuals, regardless of their culture, understanding, or upbringing.
How do Christians deal with the cruel and jealous version of God portrayed in the holy scriptures?
The worst technique is to ignore it. Pretending that the flood in the ancient world, the plagues of Egypt, or the violent invasion and conquests in Israel were symbolic of something is foolish. Doubting them, or claiming that these things are "fulfilled" because Christ gave a new law provides grounds for dismissing large sections of valid scripture, and perhaps leading to selective Christianity or new-age Christianity where Jesus is not the authoritative son of God, but simply a good philosopher.
Another incorrect technique is to swing the pendulum too far the other way. I do, as all Christians should, maintain that God is never wrong. When he sent the flood or slew the Amalekites or sent famines and diseases and curses, he was right to do so. He made the correct decision. This does not mean that we may derive authority to make a posse and slay the wicked in the name of God, as may have been practiced in the dark ages.
The approach to finding the answer is important. When confronted by uncomfortable facts about God, a bad strategy is to pray to God demanding that he explain himself. If he is truly the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, then he does not owe anyone an an explanation. In fact, he has gone to a lot of effort to put humanity in a situation where the eternal consequences to decisions do not occur immediately. He has invested in the creation of an environment to prove the faith of individuals. That means that not answering such demands is in his interest. The frequent emphasis on faith throughout the scriptures is not just a good idea, it is fundamental to accomplishing God's plan for humanity.
Those who insist that God "prove himself" can use the following two step process to uncover the proof they seek:
1. Wait
2. If God has not revealed himself, repeat step 1.
In the end, God will appear, and every knee will bow before him. It is just a lot better to accept him before this happens. Those that persist in demanding proof 'right now' will either not receive it, or they will receive it and it will be unpleasant so as to remind others that patience is in fact a virtue. (Jacob 7, Alma 30)
That having been said, there is a faith-based approach for recognizing the benevolence of God. In fact, I submit that this is a fundamental reason that there exists a Godhead. Almost all Christianity believes in some form of the trinity, and regardless of the interpretation, the following statements should ring true:
1. We know that God the Father is good because of the goodness of his son Jesus Christ. (John 14:6-7)
2. We know that the accounts of Christ's goodness and power in the Bible are accurate because of the witness of the Holy Ghost. (John 14:26)
While this may not seem to specifically address the examples that seemed to portray God as cruel and unforgiving, this approach does something more important. The witness of the Holy Ghost establishes something beyond the reading comprehension that is generally available by opening the scriptures; this is a mechanism for personal interaction with God. Knowing who God is personally allows an individual to make their own judgement about his character, and according to Christ, it is the definition of eternal life. (John 17:3)
It is one thing for me to point to the compassion of Christ as he fed 5000 people in Galilee and say he is kind. (John 6:1-13) It is another when I describe the peace he has given me when I plead for help with my doubts, questions, and mistakes. Frequently using prayer, scripture study, and worship in a diligent effort to find God is a slow path. It is strait and narrow. As Lehi saw in vision, those that walk it can be confused by clouds of darkness, or the attacks of those in spacious buildings. (1 Nephi 8) Ultimately, those that press forward with faith that God will answer them will find the truth. They will find the love of God.
While this may not be an enumerated list of explanations regarding all the dealings God has had with men from the days of Adam, it will provide confidence in the truth that God is never wrong. Not only is he real, but he is omniscient, omnipotent, and his influence is omnipresent. Those that press forward in faithful effort to know God do more than escape the damnation of hell, or earn the rewards of heaven... they become new.
This is the fundamental purpose of Christianity: the power to make bad men good, and good men better. Sometimes helping a person become better requires letting bad things happen to them. Sometimes it requires that they get sick, or that they lose a loved one. Sometimes it requires wars and conquests, and other times it requires peace and quiet. Sometimes it requires famines and starvation, and other times it requires feasting and plenty.
Though God uses various means at various times with various people, and though sometimes it may not make sense, or even seem incorrect, those that know God have confidence that he is not a tyrannical dictator. He is a benevolent father... and he has a plan to save us all.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)