How Would You Defend the Concept of a Benevolent and Omnipotent God?

[Joseph Smith looks in hat] “Uh, also, I can have as many… wives… as I want?”

So my mother, father, wife, child etc. are only a practice run and not the real thing?

Today we offer those that feel persecuted in such a manner professional help and perhaps medication, because feeding into persecution complexes can only hurt the patient.

There could have been a way to engineer a species of sentient beings who are perfect and live in harmony and never suffer from lack of anything and never die.

Would that be interesting? Probably not. Maybe. I’m not sure.

If you were “The God”, what would you prefer to create? Perfect indestructible beings who never grow because they are already perfect, or something fun but really messy?

There is a middle ground. There are consequences for your actions, but babies do not die painful deaths from natural causes. That’s what a benevolent omnipotent God could create.

Nice mixed metaphor!

Benevolent God? Let’s have a look at the source book.

In Exodus chapter 12 verse 12 God states:

“For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night and will smite all the first-born in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; …”

And there follows a massive slaughter of men, women and children (plus animals) by God.

And why?

To make the Pharaoh release the Israelites.
But why wouldn’t Pharaoh let the Israelites go?

Because in Exodus chapter 7 verse 3, God has told Moses:

“And I will harden Pharaoh’s heart…”

So this ‘benevolent’ God who could have easily persuaded Pharaoh, instead gleefully sets up a massacre.

The Old Testament is full of examples like this (this is just the worst one.)

We suffer unnecessary pain to keep God from getting bored?

And slaughtering the first born of all the animals accomplished what, exactly?

To quote that great philosopher Zapp Branigan
“If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards…checkmate!”

It’s honestly pretty difficult to program an angel. Those things are designed for city-level smiting, and the recursive what-ifs necessary in the mission code to get it to exclude animals would be a bit much even for an omnipotent creature to do.

I don’t know. It is a possibility that can’t be disproved. Don’t forget that there is also the abundant joy that exists. Can you have one without the other?

Let’s not forget punishing numerous generations for the sins of their forebears.
Not allowing illegitimate children and the disfigured into the Temple.

I have known joy. Thankfully I have never known pediatric bone cancer.

I feel like my joy isn’t enhanced by knowing that some children die in agony.

IMHO yes. If anything I believe we have guardian angels who are our real parents. The most direct and involved ones who watch over us and care for us. In the sense that a guardian is one that looks after a child as a parental authority figure. This fleshes out the family a bit over my simplistic example, but yes physical children are not the same as spiritual children. It is the spiritual structure that is real, physical so we can understand the structure.

I can have chocolate ice cream without topping it with shit so, sure, why not?

In this case Jesus seemingly losing everything ends up receiving the greatest gift the Father can actually give him - family. Brothers and sisters that are in His image and likeness. Jesus created His family, which are us.

To be clear I’m not talking about your joy versus someone else’s agony, I’m talking about your joy versus your agony.

The number of people that have both lost more and suffered more are uncountable, and they got much worse than a three day suspension from life.

But the fact that you know topping it with shit would be bad for you is really important to you. So you are happy when it is not topped with shit.

Isn’t that exactly what supposedly happens in Heaven? if so, then can have one without the other.