Between me and the Lord

[Traveler]

I think that often it is a way to not have to admit that an individual is wrong. They have taken a stance and when presented with evidence that says otherwise, rather than admit they may be wrong it becomes "it's between me and the Lord.

Jerry

I think it goes a little beyond this - but not far. Very seldom will anyone analyze their beliefs and make actual adjustments. This is particularly true with such subjects as religion and politics. With such subjects when someone is not making sound rhetorical arguments – rather than consider their position they will most likely try to make up better arguments – I find myself doing this quite often.

A book that has greatly influenced my thinking on this subject is “Values and Teaching” by Louis E. Raths, Merril Harmin and Sidney B. Simon (out of print). This studies and addresses individual values and methods to validate your own as well as other’s values, beliefs and in essence “agency”. The focus is on methods to help clarify individual values. Interestingly few will engage in the clarification of their own values. There are many reasons but mostly it breaks down into being overcome or caving into peer pressure.

What the book points out is that a clear belief in values is very important for an individual to successfully navigate through life for emotional, spiritual and intellectual reasons. When values are clearly understood a person will delight in making their values public (among other things). When values are not clearly believed or understood a person will resort to a wide variety of methods to hide their difficulty in understanding – a response like “It is between me and G-d” or “It is none of your business” is an indication that they do not have a clear understanding. It can be an angry response given as a warning that they consider any inquiries as a personal threat or it may simply be a – please get off my back while I try to “clear the air” and figure this out. In essence I believe such efforts as a display of muddied beliefs and values.

Sadly I must admit that often I respond poorly to such a condition – being tempted to make the their situation worse rather that give any helpful assistance.

The Traveler

Edited February 21, 2014 by Traveler

[gfchase]

I think it goes a little beyond this - but not far. Very seldom will anyone analyze their beliefs and make actual adjustments. This is particularly true with such subjects as religion and politics. With such subjects when someone is not making sound rhetorical arguments – rather than consider their position they will most likely try to make up better arguments – I find myself doing this quite often.

A book that has greatly influenced my thinking on this subject is “Values and Teaching” by Louis E. Raths, Merril Harmin and Sidney B. Simon (out of print). This studies and addresses individual values and methods to validate your own as well as other’s values, beliefs and in essence “agency”. The focus is on methods to help clarify individual values. Interestingly few will engage in the clarification of their own values. There are many reasons but mostly it breaks down into being overcome or caving into peer pressure.

What the book points out is that a clear belief in values is very important for an individual to successfully navigate through life for emotional, spiritual and intellectual reasons. When values are clearly understood a person will delight in making their values public (among other things). When values are not clearly believed or understood a person will resort to a wide variety of methods to hide their difficulty in understanding – a response like “It is between me and G-d” or “It is none of your business” is an indication that they do not have a clear understanding. It can be an angry response given as a warning that they consider any inquiries as a personal threat or it may simply be a – please get off my back while I try to “clear the air” and figure this out. In essence I believe such efforts as a display of muddied beliefs and values.

Sadly I must admit that often I respond poorly to such a condition – being tempted to make the their situation worse rather that give any helpful assistance.

The Traveler

Thanks for your post. I think you make some valid points.

We are all at different points in our progression both of understanding and application. Sometimes we may completely understand a doctrine but when it comes to application it can be quite another thing to bend our will to that of Fathers. We may have a desire to change but Satan can have such an awful grasp. I know because I have been there in my own life, knowing without doubt that a principle is true but finding my faith weak. It was only when I decided that I was not willing to lose my eternal companion and our children in order to continue in my rebellion that I changed. We all sin and if we do so ignorantly that is one thing, but it is the sins that we refuse to repent for that will keep us from our goal.

Jerry

[LittleWyvern]

For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.

God does not spell out every little detail of exactly how He wants us to follow His commandments. God does this, I think, to help us grow. Sometimes, we have to think, study, pray, and ask for personal revelation. The answer we get may be different than an answer someone else may get, but I think going through the process of studying and praying is the point here, and the process of becoming proficient in these things is why it helps us grow and progress in the first place. Sure, it can be used to justify bad behavior as many have been quick to mention, but more often than not I think it means someone is trying to come to know something for themselves about how they should implement some Gospel teaching, and that's generally a good thing.

[Maureen]

I think the phrase reflects a fundamental truth. I don't think that it excuses anyone of their sins or does it in anyway relieve someone of the consequences of their actions or thoughts, but, having said that, in the ultimate and final sense each of us will answer to God and He is the final and last arbiter. So, all things that a person does is between the individual and the Lord...

God does not spell out every little detail of exactly how He wants us to follow His commandments. God does this, I think, to help us grow. Sometimes, we have to think, study, pray, and ask for personal revelation. The answer we get may be different than an answer someone else may get, but I think going through the process of studying and praying is the point here, and the process of becoming proficient in these things is why it helps us grow and progress in the first place. Sure, it can be used to justify bad behavior as many have been quick to mention, but more often than not I think it means someone is trying to come to know something for themselves about how they should implement some Gospel teaching, and that's generally a good thing.

Exactly! We, as reasonable, thinking human beings have every right to determine for ourselves how we interpret what God asks from us. Others who are not in a position of stewardship can have their own opinions also, but are not in a postion to tell someone else they are doing it wrong just because they disagree.

M.

[MarginOfError]

The best example that comes to mind of the concept of "between me and the Lord" is printed in the Church Handbooks under the section regarding contraception.

It is the privilege of married couples who are able to bear children to provide mortal bodies for the spirit children of God, whom they are then responsible to nurture and rear. The decision as to how many children to have and when to have them is extremely intimate and private and should be left between the couple and the Lord. Church members should not judge one another in this matter. https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church/selected-church-policies?lang=eng#21.4.4

My understanding of the phrase is simple: there is no universally correct answer that applies to every individual. Thus, it is up to the individual to decide with the Lord what the correct course of action is for the individual.

Doe the phrase get abused? I'm sure it does. But it gets abused by people who want to use it to justify their unwise decisions and it gets used be people who want to Lord their self-righteousness over others. Sadly, it seems to me (subjectively) that the majority of responses in this thread take a cynical view of what this phrase means. That makes me kind of sad; almost as if even after all of the discussions we've had on so wide a variety of topics here, many of us still have trouble recognizing that the Lord might give different answers to different people in similar situations.

But anyway, "between me and the Lord" means, to me, that I don't feel like there is a universal truth to the situation and that I am doing my best to understand what it is the Lord expects me to do. It also means that I should probably assume that those around me are doing their best as well.

[MarginOfError]

gfchase mentioned "I think that often..." often being the key word that people say this because they are unable to admit they are wrong.

Yet, there are right and there are wrong answers, even with tithing:

D&C 119:4. What Is an Honest Tithing?

Elder John A. Widtsoe explained: “Tithing means one-tenth. Those who give less do not really pay tithing; they are lesser contributors to the Latter-day cause of the Lord. Tithing means one-tenth of a person’s income, interest, or increase. The merchant should pay tithing upon the net income of his business, the farmer upon the net income of his farming operations; the wage earner or salaried man upon the wage or salary earned by him. Out of the remaining nine-tenths he pays his current expenses … etc. To deduct living costs … and similar expenses from the income and pay tithing upon the remainder does not conform to the Lord’s commandment. Under such a system most people would show nothing on which to pay tithing. There is really no place for quibbling on this point. Tithing should be given upon the basis of our full earned income. If the nature of a business requires special interpretation, the tithepayer should consult the father of his ward, the bishop.” (Evidences and Reconciliations, 2:86.)

The end sentence also determines tithing is not only between the Lord and the individual, but between the Lord, the individual, and the bishop.

Meh...sort of.

The Church's official language on tithing is simple: "The simplest statement we know of is the statement of the Lord himself, namely, that the members of the Church should pay one-tenth of all their interest annually,' which is understood to mean income. No one is justified in making any other statement than this." This would imply, to me, that the decision truly is one of those that is "between the individual and the Lord*." If the individual wishes to seek counsel from the bishop, the individual may do so.

But I even find the Church's language "which is understood to mean..." interesting. It admits that there is no definitive, canonized, revealed word on what constitutes "interest annually." The use of "income" is a common understanding, but the statement doesn't go so far as to claim "income" as irrevocable and eternal principle.

* This is even reflected in the tithing settlement process, where the bishop is instructed to mark each member's declaration. It doesn't matter if the bishop believes the member's declaration or not (for the purposes of tithing settlement).

[Vort]

Doe the phrase get abused? I'm sure it does. But it gets abused by people who want to use it to justify their unwise decisions and it gets used be people who want to Lord their self-righteousness over others. Sadly, it seems to me (subjectively) that the majority of responses in this thread take a cynical view of what this phrase means. That makes me kind of sad; almost as if even after all of the discussions we've had on so wide a variety of topics here, many of us still have trouble recognizing that the Lord might give different answers to different people in similar situations.

The question was what does the phrase mean to you. Pam didn't specify whether she meant "what does it mean literally" or "how do you interpret its normal usage". You are taking the first meaning; many of us took the second.

I strive to avoid cynicism, but I am willing to recognize and name it. The phrase "between oneself and the Lord" has been cynically perverted in many instances as a self-justification of some sort. I don't think that recognizing that fact makes one cynical (unless, of course, it is not a fact at all, in which case it is a false and corrosively cynical observation -- but I think it really is true and that I'm not being cynical in recognizing that).

[Maureen]

I see the phrase as a valid declaration for those who need to defend their position against those who are more than willing to cast self-righteous judgement on them.

M.

[Leah]

The best example that comes to mind of the concept of "between me and the Lord" is printed in the Church Handbooks under the section regarding contraception.

My understanding of the phrase is simple: there is no universally correct answer that applies to every individual. Thus, it is up to the individual to decide with the Lord what the correct course of action is for the individual.

Doe the phrase get abused? I'm sure it does. But it gets abused by people who want to use it to justify their unwise decisions and it gets used be people who want to Lord their self-righteousness over others. Sadly, it seems to me (subjectively) that the majority of responses in this thread take a cynical view of what this phrase means. That makes me kind of sad; almost as if even after all of the discussions we've had on so wide a variety of topics here, many of us still have trouble recognizing that the Lord might give different answers to different people in similar situations.

But anyway, "between me and the Lord" means, to me, that I don't feel like there is a universal truth to the situation and that I am doing my best to understand what it is the Lord expects me to do. It also means that I should probably assume that those around me are doing their best as well.

Sooo.....I could say that the Lord gave me the answer that I don't have to pay tithing ever and you would accept that, correct?

I mean, I am a poor widow and all that and no one is to question what the Lord tells me, correct?

[LittleWyvern]

Sooo.....I could say that the Lord gave me the answer that I don't have to pay tithing ever and you would accept that, correct?

This is completely and utterly ridiculous. Let me go back to something I said earlier to explain why:

I think it means someone is trying to come to know something for themselves about how they should implement some Gospel teaching, and that's generally a good thing.

Pay attention to that word implement, because I'm going to explain the difference a commandment and its implementation. We all know the common refrain from our parents: "clean your room!" I'm going to liken that to a commandment. With that commandment we may be given specific guidelines, such as "leave nothing on the floor" and "put your toys in that shelf," but not everything is specified. Many things are left up to the child's personal preference, such as the order he or she cleans things in the room or the order of the toys on the shelf. This is by design: having to specify everything would be tedious and would suddenly become worthless once one little thing (such as a new toy) changes. Thus, the child must decide some things on their own. Now repeat this thought exercise to ten children in ten different houses. Each child may decide to clean their room in their own way, but as long as their room is clean and the guidelines are followed, no one child is cleaning their room the "right" way. They are free to implement the commandment as they please, so far as they follow the commandment.

This is what I mean by implement. Continuing my example, your statement is like saying a child can decide not to clean their room and still say he or she is following the commandment because not everything was exactly specified, which makes absolutely no sense. Not paying tithing ever obviously violates the commandment of paying tithing, and as God is just, He would not conflict Himself like this. However, we are given the commandment of paying 10 percent of "our income" and are left to determine how we should calculate "income." That is what I think needs to be decided between us and the Lord: the concretions. Some commandments, like tithing or cleaning our room, contain some abstractions which we are to decide how to implement based on prayer, study, and personal revelation so far as they do not violate the abstractions themselves. Different people may have their own implementations, and that's perfectly fine: no one person is "right" as far as they are still following the commandment.

Edited February 21, 2014 by LittleWyvern
I can't grammar today

[MarginOfError]

Sooo.....I could say that the Lord gave me the answer that I don't have to pay tithing ever and you would accept that, correct?

I mean, I am a poor widow and all that and no one is to question what the Lord tells me, correct?

Yes, I would actually. I might tell you once, and only once, that I don't agree with your rationale, but would also be honest about the fact that I do not know what revelations you are receiving and have not business judging them.

I would then ask you if you wanted to go grab a [root] beer. Because whether or not you pay what I consider to be a full tithe, or whether or not you pay tithing at all has no bearing whatsoever on how we interact with each other. I simply lack the time or energy to get worked up over how you interpret what constitutes Leah's full tithe.

Now, when I'm your bishop and your temple recommend renewal comes up, we might have a different conversation. But that's an entirely different set of variables.

[Leah]

This is completely and utterly ridiculous. Let me go back to something I said earlier to explain why:

Pay attention to that word implement, because I'm going to explain the difference a commandment and its implementation. We all know the common refrain from our parents: "clean your room!" I'm going to liken that to a commandment. With that commandment we may be given specific guidelines, such as "leave nothing on the floor" and "put your toys in that shelf," but not everything is specified. Many things are left up to the child's personal preference, such as the order he or she cleans things in the room or the order of the toys on the shelf. This is by design: having to specify everything would be tedious and would suddenly become worthless once one little thing (such as a new toy) changes. Thus, the child must decide some things on their own. Now repeat this thought exercise to ten children in ten different houses. Each child may decide to clean their room in their own way, but as long as their room is clean and the guidelines are followed, no one child is cleaning their room the "right" way. They are free to implement the commandment as they please, so far as they follow the commandment.

This is what I mean by implement. Continuing my example, your statement is like saying a child can decide not to clean their room and still say he or she is following the commandment because not everything was exactly specified, which makes absolutely no sense. Not paying tithing ever obviously violates the commandment of paying tithing, and as God is just, He would not conflict Himself like this. However, we are given the commandment of paying 10 percent of "our income" and are left to determine how we should calculate "income." That is what I think needs to be decided between us and the Lord: the concretions. Some commandments, like tithing or cleaning our room, contain some abstractions which we are to decide how to implement based on prayer, study, and personal revelation so far as they do not violate the abstractions themselves. Different people may have their own implementations, and that's perfectly fine: no one person is "right" as far as they are still following the commandment.

But people are saying we are not to doubt someone when they state they took it to the Lord in prayer, and they got X answer.

If we use the interpretation offered elsewhere, if I have zero dollars left after I pay for food, clothing, shelter, etc., then I don't have to pay tithing because I have no "overplus". With this approach, I can easily do the math to show no "overplus", and therefore not have to pay tithing. If it's "between me and the Lord", then this exercise in mental gymnastics should be perfectly acceptable, yes? Are they not still following the commandment? People keep saying it's between me and the Lord, don't they?

We had a poster on this forum claim that Heavenly Father gave them the green light to have premarital sex with the guy they were dating so as not to lose him. Is that between them and the Lord? Are they not still following the commandment? Is it a matter of.....here is the commandment...here is the church teaching...but if you've asked Heavenly Father if you can do something completely contrary to that, it's a-okay as long as you say Heavenly Father told you so?

Or are there actually lines drawn?

Investigators read forums such as this one. They could come away with a lot of misinformation and misunderstanding.

[Leah]

Yes, I would actually. I might tell you once, and only once, that I don't agree with your rationale, but would also be honest about the fact that I do not know what revelations you are receiving and have not business judging them.

I would then ask you if you wanted to go grab a [root] beer. Because whether or not you pay what I consider to be a full tithe, or whether or not you pay tithing at all has no bearing whatsoever on how we interact with each other. I simply lack the time or energy to get worked up over how you interpret what constitutes Leah's full tithe.

Now, when I'm your bishop and your temple recommend renewal comes up, we might have a different conversation. But that's an entirely different set of variables.

So even if presented with the statement "Heavenly Father told me it's a-okay to have sex with my boyfriend, because I may never get another chance to hook a guy into marrying me", we are not to "judge" them? You honestly believe that would be a revelation from the Lord? Are you saying that the Lord will give individual revelations that directly contradict a commandment or a clear teaching of the church?

I don't need to get worked up how much someone is paying in tithing, as well. I do have concerns when people try to promote teachings that are in contradiction with church teachings (I am speaking in a general sense here) and how some people perceive that anything - ANYTHING - is a-okay as long as they add the disclaimer that the Lord gave them the green light. I have seen this happen and I find it confusing, at best.

[Suzie]

I think MOE's point is that sometimes the Lord can have different set of answers for different people.

I believe the official quote of the Church with regards to how many children a couple should have clearly states it should be left to them and the Lord and it's indeed a great example to illustrate the point.

And yes, the phrase is many times abused to justify sin or any other sort of behavior. I think is perfectly fine to say we disagree once (if we feel to do so) but other than that, I think we (average members) should keep our noses out of it unless of course we have super-powers abilities that allow us to see everything they see, hear every little thing they hear, know every little thought, know all intentions of their hearts and so on and because I doubt any of us can do that, I believe that's between them and the Lord.

[Sharky]

So even if presented with the statement "Heavenly Father told me it's a-okay to have sex with my boyfriend, because I may never get another chance to hook a guy into marrying me", we are not to "judge" them? You honestly believe that would be a revelation from the Lord? Are you saying that the Lord will give individual revelations that directly contradict a commandment or a clear teaching of the church?

I don't need to get worked up how much someone is paying in tithing, as well. I do have concerns when people try to promote teachings that are in contradiction with church teachings (I am speaking in a general sense here) and how some people perceive that anything - ANYTHING - is a-okay as long as they add the disclaimer that the Lord gave them the green light. I have seen this happen and I find it confusing, at best.

No, I do not believe that would be revelation from God; however, it is as I believe a commandment as revealed by God that we shall not judge. So I would not have a problem with it, the choice to follow your "revelation" is yours to make as are the consequences.

Unless perhaps your boyfriend happened to be one of my teenage sons then I might have something more to say about it!

Heck, when we all join MOE for a [root] beer, I don't even care of you all leave the "[root]" out of your beers ... though very tempting it might be for me to join in & leave it out of mine too if you did!

The saying "It is between me and God" to me is generally a way of saying "Don't judge me" -or- "You who are without sin cast the first stone."

So even if I don't necessarily believe you that it came to you through "personal revelation" ... I can not cast that stone of judgment against you.

[Just_A_Guy]

Now, when I'm your bishop . . .

Wait--"when"? Not "if", but "when"?

What does MOE know that the rest of us don't?

[LittleWyvern]

But people are saying we are not to doubt someone when they state they took it to the Lord in prayer, and they got X answer.

I have never said that we should accept all answers, but instead that we should accept all answers that aren't contradictory.

If we use the interpretation offered elsewhere, if I have zero dollars left after I pay for food, clothing, shelter, etc., then I don't have to pay tithing because I have no "overplus". With this approach, I can easily do the math to show no "overplus", and therefore not have to pay tithing. If it's "between me and the Lord", then this exercise in mental gymnastics should be perfectly acceptable, yes? Are they not still following the commandment? People keep saying it's between me and the Lord, don't they?

I'm getting the feeling that you aren't attempting to understand what I have to say, and instead trying to trick me into saying something. Regardless, I'm saying that there may be different ways of defining income that all may be right so long as they don't contradict the commandment of paying tithing. Doing mental gymnastics to get out of paying tithing at all obviously contradicts the commandment.

The example that I'm trying to get at is that interpretations such as "gross pay," "net pay," or "10% of whatever my personal finance says is my income" are fine because they don't contradict the commandment of tithing. God lets us work out the details, but I don't believe He lets us change the commandments themselves.

We had a poster on this forum claim that Heavenly Father gave them the green light to have premarital sex with the guy they were dating so as not to lose him. Is that between them and the Lord? Are they not still following the commandment? Is it a matter of.....here is the commandment...here is the church teaching...but if you've asked Heavenly Father if you can do something completely contrary to that, it's a-okay as long as you say Heavenly Father told you so?

Again, if you understood what I'm trying to say you'd realize these questions are illogical.

Or are there actually lines drawn?

The line as I understand it is between the abstractions (or, as some call it, the interface) and the implementation. The commandments taught by God are not up for debate, but the ways we follow these commandments can certainly be a topic of discussion.

Investigators read forums such as this one. They could come away with a lot of misinformation and misunderstanding.

If you feel I am spreading lies or confusing people with anything I say, please, mention them explicitly instead of just tilting your head and mouthing "look over there!"

[Quin]

Yes, I would actually. I might tell you once, and only once, that I don't agree with your rationale, but would also be honest about the fact that I do not know what revelations you are receiving and have not business judging them.

I would then ask you if you wanted to go grab a [root] beer. Because whether or not you pay what I consider to be a full tithe, or whether or not you pay tithing at all has no bearing whatsoever on how we interact with each other. I simply lack the time or energy to get worked up over how you interpret what constitutes Leah's full tithe.

Now, when I'm your bishop and your temple recommend renewal comes up, we might have a different conversation. But that's an entirely different set of variables.

I think this right here is the line that some people are getting confused / conflating.

Because we have TWO levels.

What's between us and Heavenly Father.

What's between us and the Church.

Tithing (and many other things) have both standards applied.

Even so, it's no one else's business... except ours, our leadership, and Heavenly Father.

If asked, yes, we may have an opinion.

But judgement isn't ours.

That's between that person, their bishop, & God.

I think you did a beautiful job at illustrating that difference.

Q

[MarginOfError]

So even if presented with the statement "Heavenly Father told me it's a-okay to have sex with my boyfriend, because I may never get another chance to hook a guy into marrying me", we are not to "judge" them? You honestly believe that would be a revelation from the Lord?

I honestly believe that whatever this woman decides, I need to do everything in my power to both feel a genuine love for her as a person and to convince her that I have this love for her.

Are you saying that the Lord will give individual revelations that directly contradict a commandment or a clear teaching of the church?

You mean like when the Lord commanded Nephi to murder Laban?

I don't need to get worked up how much someone is paying in tithing, as well. I do have concerns when people try to promote teachings that are in contradiction with church teachings (I am speaking in a general sense here) and how some people perceive that anything - ANYTHING - is a-okay as long as they add the disclaimer that the Lord gave them the green light. I have seen this happen and I find it confusing, at best.

And as far as I, personally, as MOE the random guy on the internet is concerned, that's enough for me. When I am a common judge in Israel with a stewardship over such a person, I may act differently.

[MarginOfError]

Wait--"when"? Not "if", but "when"?

What does MOE know that the rest of us don't?

I'm being called on Sunday. I'm going to run the coolest ward ever.

[Just_A_Guy]

I'm excited to hear your plans for the scout troop.

[Guest]

Oh heavens.

[classylady]

Everything is between "me and the Lord". Eventually, I will have to answer for any and all my actions.

[Vort]

You mean like when the Lord commanded Nephi to murder Laban?

For the record: The Lord did not command Nephi to "murder" Laban. The Lord commanded Nephi to kill Laban.

"Murder" is intentional, wrongful killing. If the Lord commands it, it is by definition not wrongful.

[MarginOfError]

For the record: The Lord did not command Nephi to "murder" Laban. The Lord commanded Nephi to kill Laban.

"Murder" is intentional, wrongful killing. If the Lord commands it, it is by definition not wrongful.

I think this would strengthen my point. That is, if the Lord commanded a woman to have premarital sex with a man, then it is, by definition, not wrongful because the Lord commanded it.