Connie Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 "First seek to understand, then to be understood." -Stephen R. Covey Good principle to remember when it comes to contention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Folk Prophet Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 I think most of the misunderstandings come from individual relationships of the terms offence and contention. Because many are offended by the truth some seem to be trying to argue then that truth under such condition is the initiation of contention. Some would argue that delivery of a truth can be the initiation of contention. I believe such ideas concerning contention are false and misleading. When I become contentious – it is my fault and my mistake. Part of my flaw is thinking my contentiousness is someone else’s fault but the sad truth is that being contentious is my choice alone. That is part of the problem with choosing contention. We blame someone else and fail to take personal responsibility. They said something and because they said what they did is the excuse of the contentious. Sadly I am not always the first to admit my flaws and even more sadly one of my flaws is becoming contentious when I think someone is pointing out a flaw when I think there is no flaw. Under such circumstance I must have input from someone else to even realize that it is me that has surrendered to contention. Since I have this problem I very often assume others to have the same problem with contention and enjoy blaming them for their contentions and at the same time try to avoid blame for my contentiousness. The other problem I have is when I return to logic and reason – I tend to forget my contentious outburst as though they never happened and am completely blindsided by those that insist I take responsibility for my initial outbursts that I have lost from memory being sure I never said such a thing and if I did – I did not really mean it – especially the way it was understood. Thus convincing myself that even if I admit my contentious mistakes and apologize – it really is not going to help anybody or anything. To those that have survived my posts – thanks and to those that have not – I guess that it is really just your problem. There's a problem with this thinking though (as much as, overall, I appreciate it). By taking it to an extreme we can easily see the flaw. The most extreme form of contention, that is - battle to kill or be killed (or kill to save/protect others). The implication that anytime a situation leads to a battle and killing means it's our fault is strictly contrary to what is plainly taught in the Book of Mormon. There are times and situations when you defend your homes, families, and lives even unto bloodshed. And this is commanded by the Lord. So how, exactly, would you reconcile the command to have no contention with the command to defend your families and homes even unto bloodshed. Surely the taking up the sword and killing another as he tries to kill you is contention. Like I said, I appreciate your ideas, and I think they're most correct. But there must be a time and a place where (backing off of the extreme example) we stand our ground despite it becoming a "battle" of words. Just thinking through things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 There's a problem with this thinking though (as much as, overall, I appreciate it). By taking it to an extreme we can easily see the flaw. The most extreme form of contention, that is - battle to kill or be killed (or kill to save/protect others). The implication that anytime a situation leads to a battle and killing means it's our fault is strictly contrary to what is plainly taught in the Book of Mormon. There are times and situations when you defend your homes, families, and lives even unto bloodshed. And this is commanded by the Lord. So how, exactly, would you reconcile the command to have no contention with the command to defend your families and homes even unto bloodshed. Surely the taking up the sword and killing another as he tries to kill you is contention. Like I said, I appreciate your ideas, and I think they're most correct. But there must be a time and a place where (backing off of the extreme example) we stand our ground despite it becoming a "battle" of words. Just thinking through things. The concept to me is simple. When we act and are motivated by love, respect and personal sacrifice we have not been over taken by a contentious spirit. But when we act and are motivated by vengeance, disrespect, hate, malice, or any such thing with intent to be nasty, hurtful, cruel or unkind we have been overtaken by a contentious spirit. The concept to me is very simple – it is in the details of practice or application that I find the devil constantly tempting me. The Folk Prophet 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David13 Posted March 25, 2015 Report Share Posted March 25, 2015 To me it's much simpler. I seek truth. It may seem like contention if someone doesn't agree, but I know there are certain truths, that are, as has been said, self evident.Self defense, defense of home and family and possessions is just that. An entirely different thing.I think the concept is avoid contention in our daily affairs, in our relationships with others.But it doesn't mean we change our beliefs.dc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 To me it's much simpler. I seek truth. It may seem like contention if someone doesn't agree, but I know there are certain truths, that are, as has been said, self evident.Self defense, defense of home and family and possessions is just that. An entirely different thing.I think the concept is avoid contention in our daily affairs, in our relationships with others.But it doesn't mean we change our beliefs.dc As I read this I was not sure what you are trying to say. First you say "I seek truth." But then you end your comments by saying "But it doesn't mean we change our beliefs." I would ask the question - if truth will not change your beliefs - what then is the basis of your beliefs? Also why would you think some truths are self evident? Do you believe that there are thruths that are not self evident. Do you believe that self evidence is empirical evidence? Are you implying that there is empirical evidence to witness to any (spiritual truth) and all truth? Would you agree that if there is impirical evicence that such is proof of truth - including things spiritual? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMGuy Posted March 28, 2015 Report Share Posted March 28, 2015 For me contention usually comes about when a person or persons are more concerned with being right than with what is right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pa Pa Posted April 2, 2015 Report Share Posted April 2, 2015 What is it to you? Is it ever justified? When?Contention is always of the devil, as he "desires that all Ming be missable unto himself". You might feel good for a short moment be contentious...but it soon passes leaving you with dread, and an overwhelming desire to repent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.