Hypothetical question.

[NeuroTypical]

That's a very interesting point.

Then, what do you think is qualitative difference between the OP's situation and war time?

OP's situation: God is telling you to kill someone. (Assuming it's really Him telling you, and assuming that He is as good and just and perfect as you think He is.)

War time: Your commanding officer is telling you to kill someone. (Assuming you've sworn allegiance to a nation who has decided to engage in a just war.) You probably won't be assuming your CO is inspired or acting under God's direction.

People have been killing each other since the fall. The trick is to be on the good guy's side. Our church believes in being subject to governments, and has stated often that obeying (or giving) legitimate orders in wartime is fine with it. Back in WWII, there were saints in Nazi Germany serving in their military.

LM

[mountthepavement]

Apparently, this is from 1Nephi 4:13:

"It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief."

Now, do you agree or disagree with the statement, "The gospel is for individuals." Can I hear some thoughts on reconciling this notion with the passage above?

For instance, it may be that the calculus above is not of god but was nevertheless given by him to satisfy the "hard hearts" of humans, or something-such.

Also, I am led to recall god's stance on the unbelief of other nations and cities: That's when I recall the word "smote" coming into play. I could be wrong. He's a little like Mao in that regard. :)

[bmy-]

He's trying to play "Gotcha!" with Sister of Jared.

I'm really not. I created this thread before I had even seen her post in the 'advice' section. I did ask her to come into this thread because she seems to have the 'stereotypical' belief system. She's the perfect example of the opposing view.. and it's funny how our beliefs change when it becomes 'personal' (which is the whole point of this thread).

So, this kind of question is really akin to the age old question of "Why do good things happen to bad people?" Those who have faith know there is a purpose for everything. Those who don't use it as an excuse to reject God and faith.

It's not at all. It's simply a hypothetical situation.. what would you do? It's much like me asking you..

'If someone pointed a gun at your child and told you that he's going to kill them if you say you believe in God.. and spare them if you say that you do not. What would your answer be?'

The first thing that comes to my mind here is we are commanded by God to do many things. (The ten commandments for example) and we either obey or we don't. Wha'ts so special about this situation? We have a hard time obeying and many times we don't. The same can be said about this situation. We obey or we dont. Many times I do not. That's agency and that's what it's all about.

Thou shall not steal - Hmmm that's a nice pen I'll take it home from work.

Thou shall kill Laban - Hmmm that makes me feel uncomfortable all pass.

Thou shall keep the sabbath day holy - There's a rock concert on tv tonight and I'm going to watch it!

What's the difference here? What's the point of this thread? Is it because it seems to be a contradiction in commands? Thou shall not kill and the killing of Laban?

Not the contradiction of commandments.. it's more of a.. how much do we really trust the Prophet? Do we harbor doubt when it becomes personal? His words seem fine and dandy when we're not sticking our necks out.. but when it comes crunch time -- what then?

P.S. I'm fairly sure I'm not communicating particularly well here. I just want it understood that I don't think you are some vile sinner ripe for the plucking by Satan as you lead your army of Anti-Year Wait Apostates (AYWA) against all that is just and right and true and even against Apple Pie itself. Just sometimes we get taking in by the equivalent of a jingoistic post because we get tired of those who murmur and it reaches a tipping point on some minor issue. You didn't specifically ask but I got the sense you were trying to understand where people are coming from so I spilled the beans on my erratic and probably contradictory thought process of thanking the post in question.

I understand it just fine.. and what good is a forum if you cannot freely express your views? Nobody should be here for a 'pat on the back'.. at least not in the gospel discussion area. AYWA.. I should get a bumper sticker

I'm really trying to get a general feel for.. is it all talk? We say we 'trust the Prophet' and that he's effectively Gods tool to speak to us.. but do we really believe it in every situation -- or are we all pretending (and some.. just more honest about it than others).

I think it's to test to see how far we'd go in obeying our leaders. Funny thing is, when I was at Utah State, I had a friend make a comment that has stuck with me to this day. He said, "I know some Mormons who'd go head first off a bridge if just their bishop commanded them to because they believe he's inspired." I've always kinda wondered about that and from what I've seen from a few LDS I know, he may not be that far off the mark.

This is part of it.

[mountthepavement]

OP's situation: God is telling you to kill someone. (Assuming it's really Him telling you, and assuming that He is as good and just and perfect as you think He is.)

War time: Your commanding officer is telling you to kill someone. (Assuming you've sworn allegiance to a nation who has decided to engage in a just war.) You probably won't be assuming your CO is inspired or acting under God's direction.

People have been killing each other since the fall. The trick is to be on the good guy's side. Our church believes in being subject to governments, and has stated often that obeying (or giving) legitimate orders in wartime is fine with it. Back in WWII, there were saints in Nazi Germany serving in their military.

LM

That is very well-thought out. I guess, though, I am just wondering how we as christians can let the orders of a "good government" supersede the commandment, do not kill. Just the same old question. Any more thoughts?

[hordak]

OP's situation: God is telling you to kill someone. (Assuming it's really Him telling you, and assuming that He is as good and just and perfect as you think He is.)

War time: Your commanding officer is telling you to kill someone. (Assuming you've sworn allegiance to a nation who has decided to engage in a just war.) You probably won't be assuming your CO is inspired or acting under God's direction.

People have been killing each other since the fall. The trick is to be on the good guy's side. Our church believes in being subject to governments, and has stated often that obeying (or giving) legitimate orders in wartime is fine with it. Back in WWII, there were saints in Nazi Germany serving in their military.

LM

Yes, but it is mush easier to produce you CO at a court martial.:)

[mountthepavement]

Yes, but it is mush easier to produce you CO at a court martial.:)

I would "give you a laugh", but I don't know how.

[Wingnut]

I would "give you a laugh", but I don't know how.

It deserves a laugh, but the laugh button isn't available in the Gospel Discussion forum.

[beefche]

Thank you. This is my attitude almost exactly. In the scenario posed in this thread.. I would say no (if I even could, in the presence of God..) simply because at this point in time I feel like nothing is worth that. It's not the idea that the Prophet is wrong.. it's the idea that he could be wrong that makes me hesitate.

However.. what of statements like this one? It got quite a bit of 'thanks' in another thread (so obviously quite a few people agree). I invited this person into this thread to discuss.. so we'll see how it goes from here.

It seems to me that people take the saying 'when the Prophet speaks the discussion is over' a bit to far.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOMEONE

Silly me, I thought we were led by a prophet of God, and I thought perhaps this was the Lord's church, and that He was at the head of it, and that He gave His prophets guidance about His will for His church...

If we believe we are led by a prophet of God, and if we believe the scripture that says God reveals his secrets to his prophets.... Time to follow the prophet...

If we don't believe it, why are we members of this church? If we are NOT led by a prophet, all these sacrifices are unnecessary.

This is actually a continuation of the thread about temple marriage and how one can circumvent getting married in the temple and having family members witness the wedding.

He is quoting Sister of Jared from her response on the temple wedding thread. Since I believe bmy's motivation is to get people to agree with him that we should exploit a loophole in the church's procedures, I think we should just confront the elephant in the room.

So, here's my question: We believe that we are led by a prophet and we also believe in personal revelation. If a prophet has set guidelines and procedures (which sometimes--not always--has a principle behind it) for the church, what is our responsibility (given our personal revelation) in following those guidelines?

[marshac]

Very few people in the history of the world will be put in a position that you describe. In fact, it is so rare that the few examples we have of it are well known. In the scenarios you have suggested, I can only think of one that fits any of them, and that is of Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac.

I'll give you another- mountain meadows.

Based on the comments, it seems as though there has been a very slow shift in the church ethos from one of perfect obedience, to "seek personal confirmation for things you don't agree with"

It's a good change IMO :)

[JohnnyRudick]

How would you be able to differentiate between the two? If you were having a hallucination of some sort, you would not be in a reational state of mind to make any other conclusion. Many people who kill their own children or others have said they SAW God or was directly told by Him, so how do you combat that?

You let the Law take it's course

And

Let God sort it out:)

Bro. Rudick

[mountthepavement]

Let God sort it out:)

In the present thread, I can't help thinking you are alluding to "kill 'em all,...," if you've heard that phrase.

[NeuroTypical]

I'll give you another- mountain meadows.

Based on the comments, it seems as though there has been a very slow shift in the church ethos from one of perfect obedience, to "seek personal confirmation for things you don't agree with"

I'm not exactly sure that I would characterize the MMM as an instance where people thought they were doing God's will. I would be more comfortable characterizing MMM as an instance of paranoia mixed with fear, resulting in mob mentality.

I certainly wouldn't call it an example of perfect obedience to the church, as Brigham did everything he could to stop it from happening in the first place. Not to mention all of Joseph and Brigham's plentiful comments about how it's wrong to let the church do your thinking for you.

LM

[JohnnyRudick]

In the present thread, I can't help thinking you are alluding to "kill 'em all,...," if you've heard that phrase.

Now that is quite an assumption:)

No, what I said was to let the Law sort it out.

She is accused of killing her kids.

Our system of justice has a means for presenting evidence for and against that conclusion.

The light of Christ will aid the jury one way or another and they have an option to follow it or not.

Criminal law here is a very good tool for sorting things out.

We have no "God would have me do it" defense though:mellow:

If you wish to follow God's lead weather it is a true lead or not, you must be also willing to accept the consequences.

That was all I meant:rolleyes:

Bro. Rudick

Edited June 18, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Spelling;(

[ztodd]

I'm not sure if it's proper to discuss these types of hypothetical questions on an internet forum.

[Snow]

I'd do whatever the LORD commands. Does that mean I would do one of the above on simply the word of a General Authority or even President Monson? Of course not. I would require the LORD to reveal directly to me that the commandment was His will.

This is true however, not only for the activities above, but for the very basis of the authority of the President of the Church in the first place as well as all things commanded through Him and all Church leaders. I would say the same about home teaching. Do not do your home teaching strictly because your EQ President says so, get a revelation.

-a-train

So let's say that you were both sheriff and judge in Labanville and you caught Nephi killing Laban. Nephi's defense is that God told him to do it.

What do you do with Nephi?

[Snow]

I'm not sure if it's proper to discuss these types of hypothetical questions on an internet forum.

It's probably best that you not read them then.

[ztodd]

It's probably best that you not read them then.

Lol - you're right about that.

Best that nobody reads them or discusses them.

[pam]

Read what?

[WillowTheWhisp]

I think it's a great place to discuss them because you get a far wider range of opinions than you would in a real life group scenario.

If a church leader told me to kill someone I would not do so. I would discuss it with other leaders. I think that's one reason why we have 3 members in a presidency. If one of them goes cuckoo the other two would notice.

[a-train]

So let's say that you were both sheriff and judge in Labanville and you caught Nephi killing Laban. Nephi's defense is that God told him to do it.

What do you do with Nephi?

He should be tried, and if convicted, sentenced according to the law.

-a-train

[beefche]

Please bare with me as this is not meant to be offensive in any way.. if you find it offensive, please consider that this is a serious topic that one must deal with sooner or later.

1 Nephi 4:18 says.. (and this is the basis of my topic)

"18 Therefore I did obey the voice of the Spirit, and took Laban by the hair of the head, and I smote off his head with his own sword."

If commanded to by the Prophet.. would you..

1) Kill your son or daughter?

2) Kill your mother/father?

3) Kill your Bishop?

4) Set off a bomb in the parking lot after Church?

If yes -- why? If no -- why not? Yes.. I realize that this is not even a remotely likely situation.. that does not matter. It's a what if situation.

I'll start.. as I find that fair. No (to all) I would not. I'd surely accept the consequences as I feel that whatever punishment given to me for failing this task is nothing compared to the guilt I would feel.

I don't understand the question...seriously. You said that this topic "one must deal with sooner or later." Why? When has a modern prophet (from Joseph Smith to current) asked us to kill a person? When has a modern prophet asked us to commit acts of terror to the degree you indicate?

I get asked this question about once a year by non-members who do not understand the role of a prophet. My answer is the same, "They wouldn't ask that." If I were to break a law, then I would expect to be punished by that law. I guess I just don't understand why anyone thinks the Prophet would ask such a thing.

I think a more realistic question is "If commanded by the prophet, would you..."

--give up your personal beliefs, political views, or other views to support a cause promoted by the 1st Presidency?

--give up material possessions or worldly profession/accolades to serve in a manner you may not want if asked by the Prophet?

--do as asked by the Prophet something that you simply don't want to do or think you can't do or because you think it's going to cause problems in your life that you'd rather not deal with?

Those are more realistic and ones we deal with on a daily basis. I think many people are willing to do one great big deed, but it's the little things that can damn us.

[bmy-]

I don't understand the question...seriously. You said that this topic "one must deal with sooner or later." Why? When has a modern prophet (from Joseph Smith to current) asked us to kill a person? When has a modern prophet asked us to commit acts of terror to the degree you indicate?

It's a hypothetical question.. i've said that in the thread and I think I even mentioned it in my PM to you. You've never been asked a question like this before? Another good one is 'Your two children are trapped in a burning building.. and you can only save one. Which one do you save?"

They aren't practical (hopefully) but they sure as heck make people do some soul searching and realize that maybe their answers are simply rehearsed. One would say 'trust the Prophet' and I say 'to what extent'.. it seems funny to not trust him on a direct commandment but to take general revelations to heart, doesn't it?

I get asked this question about once a year by non-members who do not understand the role of a prophet. My answer is the same, "They wouldn't ask that." If I were to break a law, then I would expect to be punished by that law. I guess I just don't understand why anyone thinks the Prophet would ask such a thing.

Again.. I stated that in the OP. It doesn't matter if someone would or would not ask something. It matters that said person could. It's a hypothetical question.. and saying "They wouldn't ask that" is a copout. Nobody is going to hold your answer against you.. so feel free to contribute.

Those are more realistic and ones we deal with on a daily basis. I think many people are willing to do one great big deed, but it's the little things that can damn us.

It seems to me.. the opposite. People are willing to do the small things.. because they become habits. We pay tithing, follow the WoW, home teach, etc.. and it's easy. Once you get used to it you barely notice it.

But if the Prophet were ask you to do something that seemed completely backwards to everything you've been taught.. and said 'Trust me, I'm Gods representative here on earth.. and He trusts me. So listen and act accordingly.'

[rayhale]

In the book “Farms Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Vol. 1, NO. 1 (Fall 1992)” In the chapter “Legal perspectives on the slaying of Laban” by John W. Welch, which can be found on www.gospelink.com; http://www.gospelink.com/library/document/91337 [this is a pay to use site].

In the chapter, the author points out one major piece of evidence that says that the rules of law were different back then, and that when Nephi killed Laban, he didn’t commit murder. One key piece of evidence is that Nephi’s brothers, Laman and Lemuel accuse him of usurping power, of trying to become a ruler and teacher over them, of trying to trick them by his cunning arts and “foolish imaginations” (1 Nephi 16:37-38; 17:20), but never do they accuse Nephi of murder.

We, as a Western society, need to realize that people in the scriptures lived under different set of ethical standards as we do. Different cultures have unique values and idiosyncratic legal expectations.

Edited June 22, 2009 by rayhale

[Helgi]

I'm back from my temporary suspension from this site.. I served my 7 day ban and (hopefully) I learned my lesson. I've got no clue how long this thread will stay alive (or my account) but I'm sincerely interested in the answer to this question. Please bare with me as this is not meant to be offensive in any way.. if you find it offensive, please consider that this is a serious topic that one must deal with sooner or later.

1 Nephi 4:18 says.. (and this is the basis of my topic)

"18 Therefore I did obey the voice of the Spirit, and took Laban by the hair of the head, and I smote off his head with his own sword."

If commanded to by the Prophet.. would you..

1) Kill your son or daughter?

2) Kill your mother/father?

3) Kill your Bishop?

4) Set off a bomb in the parking lot after Church?

If yes -- why? If no -- why not? Yes.. I realize that this is not even a remotely likely situation.. that does not matter. It's a what if situation.

I'll start.. as I find that fair. No (to all) I would not. I'd surely accept the consequences as I feel that whatever punishment given to me for failing this task is nothing compared to the guilt I would feel.

I´ve often contemplated that passage myself.

I was once placed in the position, whether to obey the leadership of the branch/district I was in, or to follow my own concience.

The matter regarded a mother and step dad, who had legally adopted a girl, but later the biological mother of the child, who was in reality the daughter of said mother who was the childs adopted mother and biological grandmother, - The adoption was reverted back to the biological mother.

The grandmother (adopted mother) took a photograph of herself and applied for a passport in her daughter´s name (the biological mother) and left the country, on a false passport. The leadership new of the adoption process, and decided to keep things quiet.

When I learned of this, I turned the people in.

The mission president went ballistic on me, and pointed his finger very angrily at me. I allowed him to vent his frustrations, and asked him if he knew that they had travelled on false passports etc. etc. etc. - To which he replied no, and was like a beaten dog.

The branch/district was already divided and not growing. Now the division became even clearer, and it ended up with a general authority coming to the branch/district to settle matters.

It has now been over 10 yrs., and there are now two branches.

I violated Church doctrine by NOT following or sustaining my leaders in this matter, but upheld The Articles of Faith, by BEING HONEST IN MY DEALINGS, AND FOLLOWING THE LAW OF THE LAND.

The leadership were ignorant of the couples deception of travelling on false passports etc.

So they based their judgement on false witness. They made an error in praying for justification of their actions, rather than guidance.

It is very rare, that you would be placed in the same position as Nephi, However, The D&C clearly states, that if YOU and/or YOUR FAMILY are in MORTAL DANGER, and you take matters into your own hands. You are justified.

[Snow]

In the book “Farms Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Vol. 1, NO. 1 (Fall 1992)” In the chapter “Legal perspectives on the slaying of Laban” by John W. Welch, which can be found on www.gospelink.com; http://www.gospelink.com/library/document/91337 [this is a pay to use site].

In the chapter, the author points out one major piece of evidence that says that the rules of law were different back then, and that when Nephi killed Laban, he didn’t commit murder. One key piece of evidence is that Nephi’s brothers, Laman and Lemuel accuse him of usurping power, of trying to become a ruler and teacher over them, of trying to trick them by his cunning arts and “foolish imaginations” (1 Nephi 16:37-38; 17:20), but never do they accuse Nephi of murder.

We, as a Western society, need to realize that people in the scriptures lived under different set of ethical standards as we do. Different cultures have unique values and idiosyncratic legal expectations.

Perhaps you can explain to us why it was legal to chop off someone's head in order to steal their property in 600 bce Jerusalem.