A question about Who Is Truth
What of Justice and Mercy in the Book of Mormon?
We can misread these passages if we approach them with the assumptions of idea-truth. We import idea-truth assumptions into the text. Here is the passage in question (written by Alma to his son Corianton):¶
And thus we see that all mankind were fallen, and they were in the grasp of justice; yea, the justice of God, which consigned them forever to be cut off from his presence.
And now, the plan of mercy could not be brought about except an atonement should be made; therefore God himself atoneth for the sins of the world, to bring about the plan of mercy, to appease the demands of justice, that God might be a perfect, just God, and a merciful God also. …
But there is a law given, and a punishment affixed, and a repentance granted; which repentance, mercy claimeth; otherwise, justice claimeth the creature and executeth the law, and the law inflicteth the punishment; if not so, the works of justice would be destroyed, and God would cease to be God (Alma 42:14-15, 22).
It is easy to interpret these verses as talking about Justice and Mercy as abstract laws that God Himself is beholden to (or “God would cease to be God”). When we take a person view of truth seriously, though, we can reread these scriptures. Alma uses the terms justice and mercy to depict two different states of the soul, or ways of being in relation with God. Justice refers to our separation or alienation from God: “And thus we see that all mankind were fallen, and they were in the grasp of justice; yea, the justice of God, which consigned them forever to be cut off from his presence” (Alma 42:14). Mercy refers to reconciliation with God.¶
Simply put, if sin is rebellion against God, we cannot be reconciled with God while sinning. Can we “rebel” against someone, and not be at odds with them (i.e., reconciled)? If we could be reunited with God while still living in the midst of sin, there would be no justice (that is, separation from God due to sin) in the first place. The concept itself would be meaningless. Alma describes this as “mercy destroying justice.” If sin really does alienate us from God, then mercy—that is, reunion and reconciliation with God—can only happen on conditions of repentance (that is, the cessation of sin and rebellion).¶
And that’s why we need Christ. Through the Atonement, Christ empowers us to change our ways, lay aside our sinful habits and lifestyles, and become new creatures in Christ. Without this, Alma teaches, “there was no means to reclaim men from this fallen state, which man had brought upon himself because of his own disobedience” (Alma 42:12). In this way, the Atonement brings about mercy (that is, reconciliation with God) while at the same time preserving justice (that is, alienation from God due to sin), by helping us return to God as changed people. Amulek taught the Zoramites:¶
And thus [Christ] shall bring salvation to all those who shall believe on his name; this being the intent of this last sacrifice, to bring about the bowels of mercy, which overpowereth justice, and bringeth about means unto men that they may have faith unto repentance.
And thus mercy can satisfy the demands of justice, and encircles them in the arms of safety, while he that exercises no faith unto repentance is exposed to the whole law of the demands of justice; therefore only unto him that has faith unto repentance is brought about the great and eternal plan of redemption (Alma 34:15-16).
It might be fruitful to read these verses in this way: “This is the intent of this last sacrifice, to initiate a reconciliation of man with God, which overpowereth the separation caused by sin and rebellion, because it bringeth about means unto men that they may have faith to change their lives and lay down their instruments of rebellion, and thereby restore their relationship with God.” Christ’s sacrifice does not so much appease the demands of cosmic law as it invites us to change our ways and reconcile with God. In this way, it overpowers our separation from God due to sin, without undoing the very concept of sin and separation in the first place.¶
Why would God cease to be God, if sin did not separate us from Him? James Faulconer explains that in Hebrew thought, identity is bound up in activity. Things (or persons) are what they do. If something (or someone) changes what it does, it changes what it is, as well the relations it has with others. “Though God has a particular form,” he writes, “for Hebrew, to be God is not necessarily to have that particular form. To be God is not to fit under a particular logical, biological, or ontological category but to live and act in a particular way, namely, the godly way.”1¶
So when Alma warns that 'God would cease to be God,' he is not saying God would be demoted by a higher cosmic law. He is making a profound statement about God's very nature, in the covenantal tradition. To be God is to be a being of perfect integrity, whose actions are always consistent with His character. A God who could look upon rebellion and call it reconciliation would not be a God of emeth—of steadfastness and reliability. He would cease to be the very being we worship.¶
In this view, justice and mercy are not external laws God must obey; they are descriptions of how a perfectly loving and perfectly integral Person acts. As Elder D. Todd Christofferson explains, “A God who makes no demands is the functional equivalent of a God who does not exist.”2 If rebellion, pride, and enmity no longer alienated us from God, this would profoundly alter what it means for Him to be our God. He would no longer be the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.¶
Footnotes
This answer is drawn fromRethinking the Atonement of Christ, where the argument is made in full.