Punishment in Mortality... Or Not?


slamjet
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm being threatened with having to give a talk in August and in contemplating this, I've been trying to get my head prepared for the inevitable.  However, I'm having an issue with the term "punishment."  In October 1980 talk, Elder Packer stated that "We may foolishly bring unhappiness and trouble, even suffering upon ourselves. These are not always to be regarded as penalties imposed by a displeased Creator. They are part of the lessons of life, part of the test."  Also, in 2 Nephi 2:26 where it states that " ...save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day... .I've been trying to hone in on punishments and penalties and from what I've been able to read in the scriptures, I believe it's safe to say that while in morality, there is no punishment, that is not going to happen until the time of judgement after the resurrection.  So if punishment isn't technically in play while on earth, then we're not yet subject to penalties.  Besides, the Atonement has answered the law which includes, for the repentant, escape from suffering punishment and penalties. 

So if all this being the case, what do we call the consequences of sin in mortality, suffering?  Aversion therapy?  Or am I totally off the mark?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
3 minutes ago, slamjet said:

I'm being threatened with having to give a talk in August and in contemplating this, I've been trying to get my head prepared for the inevitable. 

Why not just decline the talk if you are that uncomfortable with it? I did so this week! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
4 minutes ago, slamjet said:

 I'll be the center of attention.  At least I'll admit to my narcissism.

I admit to mine as well. In fact, I sort of embrace it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, slamjet said:

So if all this being the case, what do we call the consequences of sin in mortality, suffering?  Aversion therapy?  Or am I totally off the mark?

There are nearly always two facets of a sin: the physical and the spiritual.

The Atonement always negates (given repentance) the spiritual side and pays the price for that implicit or explicit rebellion.

The Atonement may or may not reduce or eliminate the physical side. Sometimes, it affects others, sometimes not. The Atonement will probably not eliminate the suffering caused to others. It may or may not reduce the effect on oneself.

One of the phases or steps of repentance is restoration. If possible (and it's not always possible), when one repays or restores the injured party to his previous state, the sinner can change the equation entirely in regards to the offended mortal. But the harm to God is not so easily "straight-forwardly" repaired: we cannot make God "whole" again.

It isn't too far off the mark to see the repercussions of our sinful acts as "aversion therapy", with this major caveat: there is not always a direct negative effect on the sinner. A female teacher who seduces one of her students may not get caught. She does not suffer in any physical way from her perfidy. No aversion, no "therapy". A sod may or may not suffer from cirrhosis, may never crash, may never miss work, and might even enjoy hangovers. No aversion, no therapy.

But, for those who do suffer directly and physically, what they go through ought to teach them that touching the hot stove again is a seriously bad idea.

But their pain does not clear the slate, wipe out the debt. It is a beneficial side effect, nothing more.

Lehi

Edited by LeSellers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, slamjet said:

I'm being threatened with having to give a talk in August

Translation: You're being offered one of the best opportunities to learn and testify of the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  :P 

I think we are punished or penalized during mortality, but it's often by simply leaving us to our own resources - that is, leaving us without the Spirit, without blessings from God, etc.  Whom the Lord loves, he chastens - if you're not feeling chastened from time to time, you might also be far from God, and suffering the consequences of that.

Further, at least in scripture, we find where God has allowed wicked nations to be punished by more righteous nations (think Israel ousting the locals when they go in to inherit the land promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob).  And we see in the Book of Mormon instances of the wicked punishing the wicked.  In both cases, had the Lord's will been otherwise, these things would not have happened, and had the target of attack been righteous, the attack would have failed because the Lord wouldn't have willed said attack (in fact, there's an instance in that story of Israel where some of them attacked against the Lord's will and were soundly defeated; and numerous instances in the Book of Mormon where the wicked attacked and were repelled by the (more) righteous).

So, I think punishments come, but sometimes they're more subtle than we might like, and therefore hard for us to call punishments with certainty (not to mention the fact that we aren't always able to recognize the difference between tragedy and punishment, and probably ought not to try).  Other times, they may be happening on a scale so large that it's hard for an individual to recognize it...

IMO, the more important thing is the "Nephite Promise" (which was also given to Israel after they left Egypt): Be obedient and God will prosper you; be wicked and the land is cursed for your sake.  Seems like an easy choice. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, slamjet said:

I'm being threatened with having to give a talk in August and in contemplating this, I've been trying to get my head prepared for the inevitable.  However, I'm having an issue with the term "punishment."  In October 1980 talk, Elder Packer stated that "We may foolishly bring unhappiness and trouble, even suffering upon ourselves. These are not always to be regarded as penalties imposed by a displeased Creator. They are part of the lessons of life, part of the test."  Also, in 2 Nephi 2:26 where it states that " ...save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day... .I've been trying to hone in on punishments and penalties and from what I've been able to read in the scriptures, I believe it's safe to say that while in morality, there is no punishment, that is not going to happen until the time of judgement after the resurrection.  So if punishment isn't technically in play while on earth, then we're not yet subject to penalties.  Besides, the Atonement has answered the law which includes, for the repentant, escape from suffering punishment and penalties. 

So if all this being the case, what do we call the consequences of sin in mortality, suffering?  Aversion therapy?  Or am I totally off the mark?

I believe there is a very real difference between consequences and punishment.  The word punishment comes from the word punitive - which is different than consequences and is intended to force discipline or in essence correct or change behavior.  It comes from the philosophy of forced rehabilitation.  I think that the use of punishment for sin in scripture is somewhat of miss translation and interpretation of man's divine purpose and destiny and is a misunderstanding.  Does G-d try or force us to change our behavior?  I do not think so - the idea is a direct contradiction of agency.  Many consider deliberate negative reinforcement inferior to positive reinforcement as a teaching tool.  Others wonder why we should think at all in terms of behavior reinforcement which can be considered to be a contradiction of justice - but as we consider justice we are confronted with the tender compassion of mercy.

And so I believe that agency plays a critical role in determining the mercy G-d extends that we might not die and remain so.  Death being the unavoidable consequence or punishment of sin.  But the choice of agency is not between sin and it consequences or not sin and not the consequences of sin.  The choice of agency is between holiness and righteousness and not holiness and righteousness which is the foundation of sin.  Like the difference between light and darkness.  Light is the presents of something and darkness of that absents of that something.  Light is not the absents of darkness - it is the other way around - darkness is the absents of light.  Many are inclined to think that holiness or being perfect is the absents of sin or being with without flaw.  That just is not true and bring much misunderstanding.  Holiness, perfection, being whole or righteousness is the possession of something not the absents of something.  Being sinful or fallen is a state of incompleteness a state of missing something.

It is the purpose of G-d to bring us to completeness - that is the purpose of the atonement.  Being absent of sin is not the purpose of G-d.  Being absent of sin could better be accomplished through the plan of Lucifer or Satan.  But that absents of sin is not holiness and is not complete.  And so there seems to be a paradox for G-d only delivers us from sin.  It is our choice of agency to walk the holy path of life to eternal completeness.  This great flaw - I see as the foundations of all other churches and why there is only one "True" church that leads man beyond the absents of sin to be perfect oneness with G-d - which is G-d.

 

The Traveler

Edited by Traveler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, MormonGator said:

I'm being threatened with having to give a talk in August

Off topic, I have to speak tomorrow on family history. I'm passionate about it now, but not long ago always kind of dreaded the family history-themed meetings because I thought they were so boring. Boy, is that coming back to bite  me now. I'm having a really hard time writing a talk that won't be boring to people who aren't into genealogy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

I'm having a really hard time writing a talk that won't be boring to people who aren't into genealogy. 

Tell the stories.

A great grandmother who was a midwife, an uncle with cancer, a grandfather who served in WWI (or, for a child like you, WWII); the stories are what make Family History interesting. Tell of sealings, of the four years it took to find a fifth-great grandmother, and the one where the family history was wrong,: great grandma did not cross the plains with a handcart, but rode a train with her tow children, leaving her apostate husband behind in Indiana.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Tell the stories.

A great grandmother who was a midwife, an uncle with cancer, a grandfather who served in WWI (or, for a child like you, WWII); the stories are what make Family History interesting. Tell of sealings, of the four years it took to find a fifth-great grandmother, and the one where the family history was wrong,: great grandma did not cross the plains with a handcart, but rode a train with her tow children, leaving her apostate husband behind in Indiana.

Lehi

The 3rd great grandfather whose first wife was carried off by indians, never to be seen again.

That's pretty much what I have. People won't be bored hearing stories of my ancestors? I know I love them... but they are my family. 

Edited by Eowyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
34 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

Off topic, I have to speak tomorrow on family history. I'm passionate about it now, but not long ago always kind of dreaded the family history-themed meetings because I thought they were so boring. Boy, is that coming back to bite  me now. I'm having a really hard time writing a talk that won't be boring to people who aren't into genealogy. 

  Genealogy bores me to tears, so I can actually help you out with making it interesting. Try to focus on individual stories from your past relatives that you find interesting. I found out my great-grandfather loves football. In fact, he even played one day with ____ (insert famous football player there). 

My own grandfather played one night with Glen Miller during World War II-so you can find some interesting things now and then that will interest others. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Eowyn said:

People won't be bored hearing stories of my ancestors?

As long as your ancestors were human beings, the stories will be interesting to anyone.

If, indeed, they were so mundane that there is only one, of a classic rape (à la Rape of the Sabines), you might be pressed. But that only means the stories are not known, not at all that they didn't happen, nor that they were tedious people. All of our ancestors were vibrant, living beings with problems and heartache, love and children, challenges that made or broke them.

And that goes for the horse thieves, too.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Traveler said:

It is the purpose of G-d to bring us to completeness - that is the purpose of the atonement.  Being absent of sin is not the purpose of G-d.  Being absent of sin could better be accomplished through the plan of Lucifer or Satan.  But that absents of sin is not holiness and is not complete.  And so there seems to be a paradox for G-d only delivers us from sin.  It is our choice of agency to walk the holy path of life to eternal completeness.  This great flaw - I see as the foundations of all other churches and why there is only one "True" church that leads man beyond the absents of sin to be perfect oneness with G-d - which is G-d.

I wish I could understand more this part of your reply, especially the highlighted sentences. 

Edited by Edspringer
misspelled words
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2016 at 6:01 PM, slamjet said:

So if all this being the case, what do we call the consequences of sin in mortality, suffering?  Aversion therapy?  Or am I totally off the mark?

I would say judged, conviction, penalty, fines, sentencing, etc. (Alma 30:10-11) according to the laws of the mortal society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

Went well, I think. People said they enjoyed it. I'm not sure if anyone would have said if they didn't though. :D

Take all the attaboys, er, girls you can get.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2016 at 4:01 PM, slamjet said:

I'm being threatened with having to give a talk in August and in contemplating this, I've been trying to get my head prepared for the inevitable.  However, I'm having an issue with the term "punishment."  In October 1980 talk, Elder Packer stated that "We may foolishly bring unhappiness and trouble, even suffering upon ourselves. These are not always to be regarded as penalties imposed by a displeased Creator. They are part of the lessons of life, part of the test."  Also, in 2 Nephi 2:26 where it states that " ...save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day... .I've been trying to hone in on punishments and penalties and from what I've been able to read in the scriptures, I believe it's safe to say that while in morality, there is no punishment, that is not going to happen until the time of judgement after the resurrection.  So if punishment isn't technically in play while on earth, then we're not yet subject to penalties.  Besides, the Atonement has answered the law which includes, for the repentant, escape from suffering punishment and penalties. 

So if all this being the case, what do we call the consequences of sin in mortality, suffering?  Aversion therapy?  Or am I totally off the mark?

This kind of sounds like punishment to me as I read it.

Mosiah 21:15
15 And now the Lord was slow to hear their cry because of their iniquities; nevertheless the Lord did hear their cries, and began to soften the hearts of the Lamanites that they began to ease their burdens; yet the Lord did not see fit to deliver them out of bondage.

Edited by seussreader
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, seussreader said:

This kind of sounds like punishment to me as I read it.

Mosiah 21:15
15 And now the Lord was slow to hear their cry because of their iniquities; nevertheless the Lord did hear their cries, and began to soften the hearts of the Lamanites that they began to ease their burdens; yet the Lord did not see fit to deliver them out of bondage.

I don't see that as punishment when looking at it from God's eyes.  Rather, it is the path that these people needed to give them a better chance at achieving success in the plan of happiness.

I like Pres. Uchdorf's analogy of God showering blessings like rain upon the earth and the people punishing themselves by opening an umbrella.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2016 at 6:01 PM, slamjet said:

I'm being threatened with having to give a talk in August

This made me LOL.

In my case, the bishopric is scared that the time will come when they won't have much of a choice but to have me give a talk... hah hah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

This made me LOL.

In my case, the bishopric is scared that the time will come when they won't have much of a choice but to have me give a talk... hah hah.

For me, it went like this:

I take care of the A.V. for my ward (as an assignment) because I own most all of the equipment needed and I have fun playing with my "toys."  So during a ward activity, the conversation with the Bishop's Second Counselor was:

Counselor: We need speakers for August, are you going to be around?

Me: Yes I am. BTW, what day is the activity?

Counselor: Sunday

Me: [thinking] Sunday, what activity is on a Sunday that they need my speakers for? [/thinking]

Me: So what activity do you need speakers for?

Counselor: Sacrament meeting,

Me: 0_o what the heck?  That was dirty.

Counselor: Yes it was, *smirking* but now I know you're in town and available. *walks away*

I kid you not, that's just how it went.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@slamjet,

So, you're having a problem with the word "punishment".  I hope you can expound on that a bit.

I see the absolutes as cause(s) and effect(s).  Bad things happen and good things happen.  Some are natural results.  Some are direct punishments from God.  Some are because of the actions of others.  The other day, my son was running around the house and tripped and got a bloody lip and loose tooth.  That was a natural result.  But the common thought is (he got his just punishment).  My daughter was playing with the stick which my son tripped on (we're not allowed to play with sticks inside the house).  I sent her to her room.  This was a direct punishment from her father.

It is difficult for us as mortals to really know the mind of God to determine which is which.  But most of the time, I see most consequences as being natural results of our actions.  yet there is no denying some things in scriptures and possibly our own lives as direct punishments from God.

One perspective is to consider all negative effects as "punishments".  They can be natural or direct from God.  But not all of them have to do with our actions or choices.

Currently, I have a friend who is being sued because someone he dealt with likes to sue people.  Is that a punishment?  He never did anything wrong.  But an evil person is making decisions that are hurting my friend.

How about high powered criminals and politicians (but I repeat myself).  They certainly do much evil.  But what are their punishments? They live a life without peace (natural result).  And they will never know Celestial Glory in eternity.  Punishment or natural result?  Is there really a difference?

If you don't like the wording, go ahead and change it, if it is truly just a semantic objection.  But back it up with scriptures and the words of modern prophets.

 

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, slamjet said:

For me, it went like this:

I take care of the A.V. for my ward (as an assignment) because I own most all of the equipment needed and I have fun playing with my "toys."  So during a ward activity, the conversation with the Bishop's Second Counselor was:

Counselor: We need speakers for August, are you going to be around?

Me: Yes I am. BTW, what day is the activity?

Counselor: Sunday

Me: [thinking] Sunday, what activity is on a Sunday that they need my speakers for? [/thinking]

Me: So what activity do you need speakers for?

Counselor: Sacrament meeting,

Me: 0_o what the heck?  That was dirty.

Counselor: Yes it was, *smirking* but now I know you're in town and available. *walks away*

I kid you not, that's just how it went.

I'm gonna love that counselor...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

If you don't like the wording, go ahead and change it, if it is truly just a semantic objection.  But back it up with scriptures and the words of modern prophets.

From everything I've read thus far, it doesn't seem like a semantic issue.  Consequences of choices in mortality then in the end, punishment for the non-penitent and delivery from judgement for the penitent.  Yes, there is the law but we will be required to answer for breaking the law at the final judgement.  It seems to me that the Atonement allows us to live in mortality without having to immediately answer the law.  If that were not the case, the consequence of breaking the law is being cut off from the presence of God for eternity since one sin would make us imperfect and unable to be in His presence.

With that being the case, mortality is filled with resistance and consequences all designed to further our education and character.  I found this quote that was in Faith Precedes the Miracle:

“No pain that we suffer, no trial that we experience is wasted. It ministers to our education, to the development of such qualities as patience, faith, fortitude and humility. All that we suffer and all that we endure, especially when we endure it patiently, builds up our characters, purifies our hearts, expands our souls, and makes us more tender and charitable, more worthy to be called the children of God … and it is through sorrow and suffering, toil and tribulation, that we gain the education that we come here to acquire and which will make us more like our Father and Mother in heaven.”

It seems to boil down to God is not a failed parent.  If he were, we'd all have to suffer the punishment of being cast off forever.  Instead, we suffer consequences which can be a temporary state depending on our free-will.  Bottom line for mortality: Society punishes, God teaches.

I'm willing to accept that I may be way off the mark, but I think I'm closer to the mark than away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2016 at 5:01 PM, slamjet said:

However, I'm having an issue with the term "punishment." 

 

10 minutes ago, slamjet said:

From everything I've read thus far, it doesn't seem like a semantic issue. 

Maybe I need to take a step back a bit.  What did you mean by the first statement above from the OP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share