Does this seem very "intelligent" to you? - updated 22Feb

[Gadianton]

Could the 1/3 have won the battle? To me that’s part of the question—if there was always an outcome of that loss then it was just part of the plan. No deviation, no agency, just set pieces in a staged drama.

I completely agree, I came to believe pre-mission that he could have. Yes-men like Jesus are a dime a dozen when they know they can't win.

If the "cosmic drama" is a real existential fight then it must be a real fight, not a stage show. It could be Satan is delusional or irrational, he thinks he can win but can't, or he knows he can't win but is so angry he can't stop himself. But God is rational, and if he knows he can't lose, and if other agents either place proper trust in that or have a rational understanding that he can't lose, then the proper attitude of the hosts of heaven is that "all is well in Zion". I don't have a quote but I think leaders in general see this view as inappropriate, and take the view that Satan is, in fact, somewhat of a stage show. He not only knows he can't win, but when the Father's voice speaks, Satan snaps to attention and does what he's told.

[malkie]

As I said before, history is written by the victor.

What if Lucifer had come up with a better plan than Elohim inherited, and simply asked for some credit? It was a plan that gave the spirits an earthly experience, complete with agency, but still allowed for all to achieve godhood. But the jealous Elohim and Jesus, instead of letting Lucifer carry out his plan, banished him for no other reason than NIH. Why don't we know? There was a coverup, and all memory of Lucifer's plan has been wiped from our minds.

Don't ask me what the better plan was - Lucifer's ways, he tells me, are not my ways

Could the 1/3 have won the battle? To me that’s part of the question—if there was always an outcome of that loss then it was just part of the plan. No deviation, no agency, just set pieces in a staged drama.

I don't see why not - numerical strength is not always a guarantee of victory.

We are also assuming, by using the 1/3, that the story told in the scriptures is true. I would propose that we not simply make that assumption. At the same time, we can perhaps reconsider what I had previously had as basic assumptions: Elohim is good, and Lucifer is evil. I cannot think of any good reason to believe these ideas. I could all be propaganda.

On the other hand, my view may be jaundiced due to exposure to good scifi writers like Damon Knight. Perhaps Elohim's purpose in his interactions with humans is similar to that of the altruistic aliens in To Serve Man.

The story opens at a special session of the UN where three alien emissaries are testifying that the purpose of their mission to Earth is to bring humans "the peace and plenty which we ourselves enjoy, and which we have in the past brought to other races throughout the galaxy".

To Serve Man

ETA: think of To Serve Man as a repackaging of the theme of the good shepherd.

[Limnor]

Could the 1/3 have won the battle? To me that’s part of the question—if there was always an outcome of that loss then it was just part of the plan. No deviation, no agency, just set pieces in a staged drama.

I don't see why not - numerical strength is not always a guarantee of victory.

We are also assuming, by using the 1/3, that the story told in the scriptures is true. I would propose that we not simply make that assumption. At the same time, we can perhaps reconsider what I had previously had as basic assumptions: Elohim is good, and Lucifer is evil. I cannot think of any good reason to believe these ideas. I could all be propaganda.

On the other hand, my view may be jaundiced due to exposure to good scifi writers like Damon Knight. Perhaps Elohim's purpose in his interactions with humans is similar to that of the altruistic aliens in To Serve Man.

The story opens at a special session of the UN where three alien emissaries are testifying that the purpose of their mission to Earth is to bring humans "the peace and plenty which we ourselves enjoy, and which we have in the past brought to other races throughout the galaxy".

To Serve Man

ETA: think of To Serve Man as a repackaging of the theme of the good shepherd.

Snaps it right back into focus.

We were discussing inevitability and whether free agency was a reality in the drama, but you’ve brought it back to the present. If the story itself is propaganda, then whether the 1/3 could have won is beside the point. The whole story serves to shape loyalty rather than to reflect an actual event.

[Rivendale]

Why a plan? Is it because every new world has new intricate adversarial attacks? Is it possible one of these worlds the adversary wins? Because on Earth, Mormonism gets absolutely pummeled according to population numbers.

Is it possible that God knows in advance that not everyone is going to sign on to 'the plan'? If so, is there a contradiction? That's what I meant by two things being true at the same time. He knew there would be more than one. If He knew there would be more than one we might extrapolate from that that He would know that there would be a lot more than one.

Regards,
MG

Contradiction? Not following. It sounds like he is in the culling or butchering buisiness where he wants only the finest steaks on the table to worship his pallet. He uses mind wipes and trickery to convince man he is trying to serve man.

[MG 2.0]

Is it possible that God knows in advance that not everyone is going to sign on to 'the plan'? If so, is there a contradiction? That's what I meant by two things being true at the same time. He knew there would be more than one. If He knew there would be more than one we might extrapolate from that that He would know that there would be a lot more than one.

Regards,
MG

Contradiction? Not following. It sounds like he is in the culling or butchering buisiness where he wants only the finest steaks on the table to worship his pallet. He uses mind wipes and trickery to convince man he is trying to serve man.

Rather than taking a "butcher" position one might take an 'agency' position. I often observe that some folks that have a vendetta against God seem to always think He could have done things better. As though He is the only one that matters and/or that He has complete control of everything. Even that which is outside of Himself/independent.

When we're discussing one-third, by the way, is that one-third as in a fractional pie chart representation or is it one group out of three parts? Are we committed to absolutes as far as actual numbers go? Are we looking at numerators and denominators?

Regards,
MG

[Rivendale]

You can't have agency without full disclosure of what you signed on to previous the mind wipe. It is fine print on the contract nobody ever reads.

[MG 2.0]

You can't have agency without full disclosure of what you signed on to previous the mind wipe. It is fine print on the contract nobody ever reads.

I suppose what matters here is whether or not before that "mind wipe' we trusted God and His plan. Whether at the point, before the wipe, we knew there would be risk, suffering, and sin.

I think you would agree that regardless of the "mind wipe" we live in a world in which choices do reveal character, loyalties, and desires that we choose to develop and/or moderate and stay away from. If you went through a medical procedure which left you with temporary amnesia would you be unable, during that time, to exercise moral agency? Typically before medical procedures we have to sign documents with 'fine print' that absolve medical professionals from responsibility for something that may inadvertently happen during surgery. If we have amnesia we may not remember even signing the 'contract' (release form). We still act upon our inclinations, desires, and develop character during that time. Short or extended.

You are right, we do not remember anything that may have been before we were born. If we did exist and we did remember do you see that as having any relevant meaning or impact on the lives of human beings spread across the planet?

I suppose day to day conversations would be a lot different.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

You can't have agency without full disclosure of what you signed on to previous the mind wipe. It is fine print on the contract nobody ever reads.

That reminds me of what members are faced with the first time they go to the temple to take out their endowment. Just before you proceed to find out what covenants you are being asked to sign on to there’s a warning. Which basically says that if you choose to proceed from that point then you are deemed to have agreed to all the covenants about which you currently have no knowledge.

It’s like signing up to a car purchase agreement before knowing the price of the vehicle, the repayment schedule, the duration of the agreement, the type of vehicle, or even knowing that it’s a car purchase agreement in the first place. That’s how Mormon agency works.

[Rivendale]

You can't have agency without full disclosure of what you signed on to previous the mind wipe. It is fine print on the contract nobody ever reads.

I suppose what matters here is whether or not before that "mind wipe' we trusted God and His plan. Whether at the point, before the wipe, we knew there would be risk, suffering, and sin.

I think you would agree that regardless of the "mind wipe" we live in a world in which choices do reveal character, loyalties, and desires that we choose to develop and/or moderate and stay away from. If you went through a medical procedure which left you with temporary amnesia would you be unable, during that time, to exercise moral agency? Typically before medical procedures we have to sign documents with 'fine print' that absolve medical professionals from responsibility for something that may inadvertently happen during surgery. If we have amnesia we may not remember even signing the 'contract' (release form). We still act upon our inclinations, desires, and develop character during that time. Short or extended.

You are right, we do not remember anything that may have been before we were born. If we did exist and we did remember do you see that as having any relevant meaning or impact on the lives of human beings spread across the planet?

I suppose day to day conversations would be a lot different.

Regards,
MG

Going into a mortal medical procedure is not the same thing as signing off on a bizarre eternal salvation test. Mortal medical procedures have plenty of background information to give a person so that a informed decision can be made. We know what having a body entails whereas before we apparently signed off with zero mortal life experiences and a trust me bro salespitch. One third of Elohim's clients gave him the middle finger so I imagine there was enough information that trust me bro fell flat.
The entire scenario is expecting a person to agree to John Rawles veil of ignorance without ever knowing the details of a human life. Being told what could happen does not excuse the fact the swath of suffering is not spread fairly or equally. And worse? Some people are preordained to escape the normal randomness and get prophet powers that helps them with their Kobayashi Maru test. The entire tapestry of God's plan is ludicrous.

[malkie]

I suppose what matters here is whether or not before that "mind wipe' we trusted God and His plan. Whether at the point, before the wipe, we knew there would be risk, suffering, and sin.

I think you would agree that regardless of the "mind wipe" we live in a world in which choices do reveal character, loyalties, and desires that we choose to develop and/or moderate and stay away from. If you went through a medical procedure which left you with temporary amnesia would you be unable, during that time, to exercise moral agency? Typically before medical procedures we have to sign documents with 'fine print' that absolve medical professionals from responsibility for something that may inadvertently happen during surgery. If we have amnesia we may not remember even signing the 'contract' (release form). We still act upon our inclinations, desires, and develop character during that time. Short or extended.

You are right, we do not remember anything that may have been before we were born. If we did exist and we did remember do you see that as having any relevant meaning or impact on the lives of human beings spread across the planet?

I suppose day to day conversations would be a lot different.

Regards,
MG

Going into a mortal medical procedure is not the same thing as signing off on a bizarre eternal salvation test. Mortal medical procedures have plenty of background information to give a person so that an informed decision can be made. We know what having a body entails whereas before we apparently signed off with zero mortal life experiences and a trust me bro salespitch. One third of Elohim's clients gave him the middle finger so I imagine there was enough information that trust me bro fell flat. The entire scenario is expecting a person to agree to John Rawles veil of ignorance without ever knowing the details of a human life. Being told what could happen does not excuse the fact the swath of suffering is not spread fairly or equally. And worse? Some people are preordained to escape the normal randomness and get prophet powers that helps them with their Kobayashi Maru test. The entire tapestry of God's plan is ludicrous.

In particular, apart from first-time experimental procedures, in a medical situation there are usually lots of survivors who can talk about their experience, share tips on pre- and post-procedure living. In many cases there are support groups, some of which are attended by the medical practitioners.

However, there is a noticeable dearth of similar supports for the whole pre- and post-life experiences.