Being our Brother's Keeper?

[Moksha]

The Bible says we are supposed to be our Brother's Keeper.

1. Is the meaning of this limited to fraternal siblings?

2. If the meaning of us being our Brother's Keeper is broader, what limitations would you place on this and why?

[BenRaines]

I would say it extends to all. All are our brothers and sisters. Best teaching of this is King Benjamin in the Book of Mormon as he teaches his people.

For those who care to argue I am not saying better than Christ's teachings I am saying I like the way King Benjamin says it.

Ben Raines

[FlaviusHambonius]

I believe being your brothers keeper would apply to all Gods children also. It would be sad if it only applied to immediate family.

I think that when unpredictable things happen to people is where the test comes into play about how people will spontaneously help that certain individual or cirumstance, whether how small or large the scale.

If your talking about lifetime welfare recipients who have used the system or endless foreign aid that we have given as a country then perhaps we need to look at the 'Brothers Keeper' rule a little differently.

[Just_A_Guy]

The Bible says we are supposed to be our Brother's Keeper.

Not in those words, it doesn't.

This discussion may be more enlightening if we base it in the actual text of the scriptures, rather than latter-day sound bytes.

[skippy740]

Genesis 4:9 & Moses 5:34: And the Lord said unto Cain: Where is Abel, thy brother? And he said: I know not. Am I my brother’s keeper?

(I read that like: "Am I his secretary?")

[tubaloth]

The same question was asked of Jesus, what came of it was the parable of the good Samaritan.

For the most part that answers your questions. Your brother is the ones that needs your help.

[Just_A_Guy]

FWIW, the word for "keeper" used in that verse is shamar, which generally implies "guardian" or "protector".

My point, though, was that the Bible does not say we are our brother's keeper; it merely quotes the world's first recorded Satanist and murderer suggesting the proposition as a hypothetical question.

A more informed discussion could come out of evaluating--say--several of the parables of Jesus, or King Benjamin's sermon in the Book of Mormon.

[skippy740]

Luke 10:25-29

25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?

27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy aheart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

29 But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?

Loving your neighbor is different than being your brother's keeper. You can love your neighbor without being responsible for his actions or his whereabouts.

[NeuroTypical]

You can love your neighbor without being responsible for his actions or his whereabouts.

And sometimes, loving your neighbor involves being his keeper. But probably not that often.

It happened once when I was five. For some reason, my dad showed up with a big armload of pistols and rifles. He said they belonged to our next door neighbor, who was having a very hard time with something, and we were just going to 'keep an eye on these' for a week or two.

I never found out what happened, but the guns went back home after a while, and the next decade was uneventful.

LM

[Moksha]

FWIW, the word for "keeper" used in that verse is shamar, which generally implies "guardian" or "protector".

My point, though, was that the Bible does not say we are our brother's keeper; it merely quotes the world's first recorded Satanist and murderer suggesting the proposition as a hypothetical question.

So if we ignore the direct implied answer that, "Yes Cain, you were supposed to be your brother's keeper", we can view this as a mere hypothetical?

[Moksha]

My thought is that by defining what it means to be our brother's keeper as narrowly as possible, we could disavow any responsiblity regarding his welfare and save ourselves the hassle and expense of needing to help people. Sounds good no?

[NeuroTypical]

Oh, I suppose. Being 'a keeper' is something that just isn't much of our culture any more, so even if we wish to apply the most broad definition, we tend to cast about looking for what it means.

The way I see it, "Love thy neighbor as thyself" is not only higer up on the list of priorities (as it is one of the 'two great commandments'), but it's also easier to figure out how to do it.

(It's also quite a bit harder to apply in some cases, IMO.)

LM

[ozzy]

My thought is that by defining what it means to be our brother's keeper as narrowly as possible, we could disavow any responsiblity regarding his welfare and save ourselves the hassle and expense of needing to help people. Sounds good no?

Depends on which side of me you are appealing to. If you are speaking to the part which strives to be charitable, then no it doesn't. Sorry. :) But if you are appealing to the side that believes we should all suffer the fate and punishments of self neglect, then yes, it sounds brilliant.

Sadly though, many scriptures say that without charity we are nothing, can amount to nothing, and everything we have also is and amounts to nothing. Eternally, we would be far better off broadening the view of 'my brothers keeper.'

[Moksha]

Depends on which side of me you are appealing to. If you are speaking to the part which strives to be charitable, then no it doesn't. Sorry. :) But if you are appealing to the side that believes we should all suffer the fate and punishments of self neglect, then yes, it sounds brilliant.

I hear you there. At times it seems like we really have an Angelic voice on our shoulder telling us to be charitable and watch out for others well being, while at the same time having a Demonic voice telling us that when we should only care about ourselves and the rest can go and rot.

Sometimes the Angel wins and sometimes the Devil.

[Ammonite]

I've been thinking about this topic a lot today after tragedy hit one of our neighbors. When at least half the town was watching the SuperBowl, our neighbor's house burned down. I felt terrible because I might have been able to call 911 sooner but thought that the strange popping sounds I heard were coming from the pork ribs I had in the oven. It wasn't until my daughter saw smoke 5 minutes later that the fire department was called. Even though the station is literally 1 mile down the street, it took 30minutes for them to round up firemen and get the trucks in front of the house. By that time, the fire had engulfed the roof. In less than an hour, they lost everything and our next-door neighbor's home was slightly damaged.

I was thinking about this topic because I don't really like these neighbors. The parents don't take care of their 3 sons. Their younger boys are regularly banned from riding the school bus for hitting and are often left alone in the care of the 12 year old while the parents are out doing who knows what. After school, their 6 year old son is always looking for some place to play. Some of my neighbors don't let him in anymore because of very bad behavior (hitting the kids, swearing and yelling at the adults) so he's been in our home nearly every weekday for the past month. So far he has been perfectly behaved, probably because my house is the only place he can go for real meals (the 12 yr old does all the cooking) and be safe from his older brothers. My husband has had to break up fights between them before.

I feel guilty for not feeling too sad that they won't be living near us for a while because my son and their youngest were becoming closer friends. Although J***** was behaving for me, I doubted it would last without supportive teachings in his own home. My two brothers got into lots of trouble (theft, drugs, prison) partly because they chose poor friends and so I might be a little bit paranoid when it comes to my son.

At the same time I am eager to be part of the ward and neighborhood effort to help them. I have no doubt that my role is to serve them regardless of my feelings about the parents and concerns about the boys. I am sorrowful for their loss but I would also be relieved if they decide not to return. Obviously my charity is lacking.

Edited February 8, 2010 by Ammonite

[Blackmarch]

The Bible says we are supposed to be our Brother's Keeper.

1. Is the meaning of this limited to fraternal siblings?

2. If the meaning of us being our Brother's Keeper is broader, what limitations would you place on this and why?

1) No. I think it goes hand in hand with "Love thine enemy."

2) I'd like to place all sorts of limitations, but I doubt that would be Godly.

[JudoMinja]

I've been thinking about this topic a lot today after tragedy hit one of our neighbors. When at least half the town was watching the SuperBowl, our neighbor's house burned down. I felt terrible because I might have been able to call 911 sooner but thought that the strange popping sounds I heard were coming from the pork ribs I had in the oven. It wasn't until my daughter saw smoke 5 minutes later that the fire department was called. Even though the station is literally 1 mile down the street, it took 30minutes for them to round up firemen and get the trucks in front of the house. By that time, the fire had engulfed the roof. In less than an hour, they lost everything and our next-door neighbor's home was slightly damaged.

I was thinking about this topic because I don't really like these neighbors. The parents don't take care of their 3 sons. Their younger boys are regularly banned from riding the school bus for hitting and are often left alone in the care of the 12 year old while the parents are out doing who knows what. After school, their 6 year old son is always looking for some place to play. Some of my neighbors don't let him in anymore because of very bad behavior (hitting the kids, swearing and yelling at the adults) so he's been in our home nearly every weekday for the past month. So far he has been perfectly behaved, probably because my house is the only place he can go for real meals (the 12 yr old does all the cooking) and be safe from his older brothers. My husband has had to break up fights between them before.

I feel guilty for not feeling too sad that they won't be living near us for a while because my son and their youngest were becoming closer friends. Although J***** was behaving for me, I doubted it would last without supportive teachings in his own home. My two brothers got into lots of trouble (theft, drugs, prison) partly because they chose poor friends and so I might be a little bit paranoid when it comes to my son.

At the same time I am eager to be part of the ward and neighborhood effort to help them. I have no doubt that my role is to serve them regardless of my feelings about the parents and concerns about the boys. I am sorrowful for their loss but I would also be relieved if they decide not to return. Obviously my charity is lacking.

I do not think you are lacking in charity (at least not any more than is normal for being human ). Your concerns are expected, as you are looking out for the welfare of your own family. It is important to keep our families safe, and sometimes that means limiting interaction with "bad influences".

However, attempting to judge where to draw the line with such influences can be very difficult. We want to welcome all into the fold of the gospel, especially those who are struggling as they need it the most. The mere fact that you have been allowing their son to play with yours and eat meals with you, despite the behavioral problems and your fears, says a lot about your charity. I think it is possible that he behaves better in your home because he feels the spirit there.

And don't beat yourself up over how long it took to get them help. We always see something more that could have been done, and we tend to take unneccessary guilt upon our shoulders. It's not your fault their house caught fire, and from what you've written here, I'd say you did all you could to help.

Just keep being a good example, make sure the child knows what behavior is expected of him in your home and hold him to it. Who knows, years down the line he may be struggling in his life, and he will remember your charity. He will remember the Christ-like love your family showed him and even respect you for setting boundaries with his behavior. You may feel like you are doing little to be charitable right now, but a little love, friendship, and understanding can go a long way.

[Just_A_Guy]

So if we ignore the direct implied answer that, "Yes Cain, you were supposed to be your brother's keeper", we can view this as a mere hypothetical?

I would venture to guess that one doesn't get an exemption from the sixth commandment just because one hasn't been officiallly designated as the "keeper" of one's potential victim. I would further venture to guess that God understands this, and viewed the "brother's keeper" bit as a red herring.

His direct answer to Cain was not "yes, you are his keeper"; it was "what hast thou done?" The implication is: "I'm not interested in what you haven't done; I'm interested in what you have done--to wit, murder."

My thought is that by defining what it means to be our brother's keeper as narrowly as possible, we could disavow any responsiblity regarding his welfare and save ourselves the hassle and expense of needing to help people. Sounds good no?

My thought is that by defining what it means to be our brother's keeper as broadly as possible, we could disavow any responsibility of government to ensure personal liberty and institute (at gunpoint) a gigantic government ponzi scheme with liberals at the top. Sounds good, no?

Edited February 8, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[Moksha]

My thought is that by defining what it means to be our brother's keeper as narrowly as possible, we could disavow any responsiblity regarding his welfare and save ourselves the hassle and expense of needing to help people. Sounds good no?

My thought is that by defining what it means to be our brother's keeper as broadly as possible, we could disavow any responsibility of government to ensure personal liberty and institute (at gunpoint) a gigantic government ponzi scheme with liberals at the top. Sounds good, no?

Seems like these statements are on the same wavelength. For the record we could parse the words at Church if need be, and in our hearts we could heed that other voice on our shoulder. Concern for the welfare of others sounds so socialist if it implies action.

[Guest]

Seems like these statements are on the same wavelength. For the record we could parse the words at Church if need be, and in our hearts we could heed that other voice on our shoulder. Concern for the welfare of others sounds so socialist if it implies action.

Concern for welfare of others is only socialist if it is administered such that every person has no other choice but to be concerned instead of voluntarily being concerned without economic impetus.

And that, right there, Moshka, is the rub.

[Just_A_Guy]

Concern for welfare of others is only socialist if it is administered such that every person has no other choice but to be concerned instead of voluntarily being concerned without economic impetus.

And that, right there, Moshka, is the rub.

Touché.

[Moksha]

... it is administered such that every person has no other choice but to be concerned instead of voluntarily being concerned without economic impetus.

Should the spiritual impetus to do the right thing come into play here, or does the demand of economic participation outweigh everything else?

[Just_A_Guy]

Obviously some degree of a social safety net is necessary, but this notion of compelling people to "do the right thing" sounds oddly familiar.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest]

Should the spiritual impetus to do the right thing come into play here, or does the demand of economic participation outweigh everything else?

The spiritual impetus to do the right thing should be the only thing to come into play. If you helped the poor because you get a tax break for it, that's not being your brother's keeper either. Or even offering concern for the welfare of your brothers as long is it is convenient... nope, that doesn't cut it either. Or even offering concern for the welfare of your brothers because it is the law. Nope. The only acceptable answer is that you are your brother's keeper because you chose to love God with all your heart, mind, and strength, and chose to love your neighbor as yourself... that should be the only reason.

Edited February 9, 2010 by anatess

[Moksha]

Obviously some degree of a social safety net is necessary, but this notion of compelling people to "do the right thing" sounds oddly familiar.

It should, it is the action part of the Mormon motto, "Choose the Right".