- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Here is a verse that I believe is always taken out of context. To say that sexual sins are next to murder. Alma 39:5 Know ye not, my son, that these things are an abomination in the sight of the Lord; yea, most abominable above all sins save it be the shedding of innocent blood or denying the Holy Ghost?
This is always used to show that sexual sins are next to murder but they forget to read the whole story leading up to this verse.
2 For thou didst not give so much heed unto my words as did thy brother, among the people of the Zoramites.
Now this is what I have against thee; thou didst go on unto boasting in thy strength and thy wisdom.3 And this is not all, my son. Thou didst do that which was grievous unto me; for thou didst forsake the ministry, and did go over into the land of Siron among the borders of the Lamanites, after the harlot Isabel.
4 Yea, she did steal away the hearts of many; but this was no excuse for thee, my son. Thou shouldst have tended to the ministry wherewith thou wast entrusted.
5 Know ye not, my son, that
these thingsare an abomination in the sight of the Lord; yea, most abominable above all sins save it be the shedding of innocent blood or denying the Holy Ghost? 11 Suffer not yourself to be led away by any vain or foolish thing; suffer not the devil to lead away your heart again after those wicked harlots.
Behold, O my son, how great iniquity ye brought upon the Zoramites; for when they saw your conduct they would not believe in my words.12 And now the Spirit of the Lord doth say unto me: Command thy children to do good, lest they lead away the hearts of many people to destruction; therefore I command you, my son, in the fear of God, that ye refrain from your iniquities;
I believe that a careful reading shows that the sin next to murder is leading people into destruction by our bad examples.
Murder being causing the physical death of someone and the sin next to it being causing someone’s spiritual death.
All the more reason to be careful on sites like this one to not lead anyone astray.
BJE wrote:I believe that a careful reading shows that the sin next to murder is leading people into destruction by our bad examples
Good clarification.
Heber13 wrote:
BJE wrote:I believe that a careful reading shows that the sin next to murder is leading people into destruction by our bad examples
Good clarification.
Yes indeed, I have also made note of that. If you leave out the line about the harlot (two sentence segments) it becomes very clear that scripture section is about leading people away from God by not doing what he was supposed to be doing.
What Cadence said. Everyone focuses on a few things they love and ignores what they don’t want to mess with trying to explain or what they view as less important.
Old Timer wrote:
What Cadence said.Everyone focuses on a few things they love and ignores what they don’t want to mess with trying to explain or what they view as less important.
And I don’t think people are doing it to mislead or to try to manipulate others. Mostly intent is good. Mostly it is to inspire the soul.
It just isn’t always correct. But then again…when were the scriptures written with intent for historical accuracy?
People do the same thing with quoting prophets out of context. BJE that is a nice interpretation. I find it interesting the Mormon mind tends to jump to sex as the most heinous thing as opposed to something more destructive. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Old Timer wrote:
Everyone focuses on a few things they love and ignores what they don’t want to mess with trying to explain or what they view as less important.
Yes, I have noticed this in talks supporting ideas that I quite like. Any newish idea that is presented as something new and originating outside of the normal priesthood structure is likely not going to gain traction. Anything presented as an improvement or correction on what church leaders have taught is likely to meet a reflexively defensive reaction. I have noticed some influencers on the edges of the tent of Zion present ideas as though church leaders had taught this idea all along. I suppose for me this is part of knowing your audience and tailoring your presentation to them.
I also enjoy the concept that the scripture are living documents that receive new meanings and new interpretations with each passing generation to make them relevant.
I suppose a major factor in how much this bothers me is what I see as the hypocrisy. We play fast and loose with truth, accuracy, and context when it suits us while at the same time promoting ourselves as searchers and defenders of ultimate truth. When other churches and movements do this sort of thing we call it apostasy.
Cadence wrote:
BJE that is a nice interpretation. I find it interesting the Mormon mind tends to jump to sex as the most heinous thing as opposed to something more destructive.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Doesn’t that have a lot to do with the Puritan background at the times the church was forming? (IOW….traditions of people causing interpretations to validate their beliefs?)
Heber13 wrote:
Cadence wrote:
BJE that is a nice interpretation. I find it interesting the Mormon mind tends to jump to sex as the most heinous thing as opposed to something more destructive.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Doesn’t that have a lot to do with the Puritan background at the times the church was forming? (IOW….traditions of people causing interpretations to validate their beliefs?)
From what I’ve gathered (mostly from Givens but RSR as well), Joseph’s church was not very puritan at all and Joseph did not seem to hold high puritan ideals. The whole puritan thing crept in later – quite a bit later.
Roy wrote:
I suppose a major factor in how much this bothers me is what I see as the hypocrisy. We play fast and loose with truth, accuracy, and context when it suits us while at the same time promoting ourselves as searchers and defenders of ultimate truth. When other churches and movements do this sort of thing we call it apostasy.
I’ve got an example of that from this past SS. We covered the story with “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.”
Obviously it’s tricky to square that with our eternal marriage doctrine but the answer was that we have modern day revelation that clarifies the problem of the seven brothers and the wife. They weren’t sealed! As we discussed this I couldn’t help but think, contextually Jesus is talking to the Sadducees. Our answer doesn’t make any sense in that context. I can imagine a Sadducee saying, “Wait… what?” but to us it’s a neat, tidy bow to make an uncomfortable scripture say what we want it to say.
Cadence wrote:
BJE that is a nice interpretation. I find it interesting the Mormon mind tends to jump to sex as the most heinous thing as opposed to something more destructive.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Of course that’s just my interpretation but the scriptures speak for themselves.
Other verses which indicate that leading people astray is next to murder are when Alma the younger tells about his conversion. He said.
Alma 36:13 Yea, I did remember all my sins and iniquities, for which I was tormented with the pains of hell; yea, I saw that I had rebelled against my God, and that I had not kept his holy commandments.
14 Yea, and
I had murdered many of his children, or rather led them away unto destruction;yea, and in fine so great had been my iniquities, that the very thought of coming into the presence of my God did rack my soul with inexpressible horror. Despite the common misinterpretation of that verse to say sexual sins are next to murder (which I believe it absolutely does not say), if you ask any average Mormon who sits in the chapel every Sunday to list the worst sins from a list of sins that includes lots of things other than “sex”, I am quite positive the vast majority would ignore that verse and choose plenty of other things as worse. I think adultery would be perhaps the only sexual sin that would be in the top 10 – except for members who would add homosexual “fornication”, as well. Torture – rape (which is not purely a sexual action) – child abuse – elderly abuse – slavery – kidnapping – sex trafficking (again, not a purely sexual action) – ignoring someone who is starving and letting them die (technically not murder) – knowingly blaspheming – aggravated assault
I just brainstormed 9 other options without much thought. I think the large majority of members would not put sexual sin ahead of any of them – especially if the actual sexual sin mentioned in that chapter (fornication, since there is no indication he was married) is included in the list.
Sometimes, it is important to separate hyperbolic scriptural (mis)interpretations from what most members would say in a real conversation about an issue.
Old Timer wrote:
Sometimes, it is important to separate hyperbolic scriptural (mis)interpretations from what most members would say in a real conversation about an issue.
yes…this! +1
Sometimes people are trying to make a point, sometimes they get carried away with feelings, sometimes they like to make bold (even if irrational) claims.
Who am I to keep them from worshipping how they want. I don’t have to agree with their opinions.
dande48 wrote:
I don’t think it’s intentional. I think most GAs, members, etc believe that if it supports their central message, and helps people to “come unto Christ” (however/whatever that means), it must be true… without checking context. It’s not really what I’d call deciet. It’s seeing evidence in everything to support what you already believe.
I mostly agree with this. Also, I am no religious scholar, but it seems to me that prooftexting and different interpretations of “truth” may be one of the reasons there are so many different religious sects in the first place… sects that all claim the same book(s) of scripture as the word of God. They just don’t agree about what the word of God means.
I have currently landed in a place where I habitually read the context, but even then I don’t often feel sure about the truth of my own ideas and interpretations. I do think that, proof texting or not, one viable purpose of scripture is self reflection and self improvement. Maybe the lesson I take away from a scripture is different than someone else’s, but if it is for self betterment, how much does that matter? When doctrine is being defined that is another matter though…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.