Why do people try to justify violence in the scriptures?

[Anonymous]

Today’s Sunday School lesson was on Elijah vs the priests of Baal. The teacher mentioned how he was uncomfortable with the last part where Elijah straight up slaughters the priests of Baal after winning the big fire showdown, and then asked why it would be ok to kill people for having different religious beliefs. The responses were quite concerning to me.

[Anonymous]

Arrakeen wrote:

…I don’t really like commenting in Sunday School lessons, but part of me thinks I should have said something. Am I the only one there who thinks it’s never ok to murder people, and that just because it’s in the Old Testament doesn’t mean it’s right?

I completely understand how you feel. Maybe it’s because I’m old, I would speak up. There are some in my ward that cringe when I raise my

hand. I don’t care anymore. When they ask a question, they should expect an answer. Even when it’s not the answer they may be looking for.

[Anonymous]

I just realized I didn’t answer your question. I believe it’s never ok to murder someone.

IMO. The only justification for taking a life is:

– to defend yourself against someone trying to take your life.

– to defend the lives of family & others in the same situation.

– while serving in the military or in a police force.

[Anonymous]

Richard Bushman said something about extending grace towards people that lived in a time when they needed to believe that their God was commanding/justifying the extermination of their enemies.

We create God in our own image to be what we need him to be. Our needs have changed in the last 4,000ish years.

In our church we believe that things have not changed and that God was the same back then as he is today. We manage this in two major ways: 1) We take modern church doctrines/temple ordinances and we imagine that these things always existed and where known and practiced by the prophets of old. Some call this retro-active continuity. 2) We take things that existed in the past and we try to smooth them over/justify/make them fit into our modern narrative.

We try to justify violence in the scriptures because it just doesn’t fit our narrative that good and holy men that God talks to and imbues with power from on high could also do things that we in our modern society find abhorrent.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

In our church we believe that things have not changed and that God was the same back then as he is today. We manage this in two major ways: 1) We take modern church doctrines/temple ordinances and we imagine that these things always existed and where known and practiced by the prophets of old. Some call this retro-active continuity. 2) We take things that existed in the past and we try to smooth them over/justify/make them fit into our modern narrative.

We try to justify violence in the scriptures because it just doesn’t fit our narrative that good and holy men that God talks to and imbues with power from on high could also do things that we in our modern society find abhorrent.

I do find it interesting that a common response to criticism of early church leaders is that they were men of their times. But for some reason we don’t seem to do that for scriptural prophets, even though I think it applies much better.

We also seem to be uncomfortable with the idea of the scriptures having an unreliable narrator. I have heard some people in church mention that Nephi may have been giving a biased recounting in the Book of Mormon, always portraying himself as the good guy and his brothers as the bad guys. But for the most part we tend to forget that the writers of the scriptures inevitably saw things through the lens of their own time, culture, and beliefs.

[Anonymous]

Arrakeen wrote:

We also seem to be uncomfortable with the idea of the scriptures having an unreliable narrator. I have heard some people in church mention that Nephi may have been giving a biased recounting in the Book of Mormon, always portraying himself as the good guy and his brothers as the bad guys. But for the most part we tend to forget that the writers of the scriptures inevitably saw things through the lens of their own time, culture, and beliefs.

History is written by the winners, always from the winner’s point of view whether or not that’s really right or just. I’m not saying scriptures are history and I don’t believe they are, but the same principle applies. What we get in scripture is the writer’s point of view, whether or not that’s really right or just. For some time I’ve thought it would be interesting to hear the story from Laman’s and Lemuel’s point of view, or maybe from Sariah’s. Of all the scripture writers I find I disagree with Alma most – I think he’s way off base.

[Anonymous]

Recently a friend posted the following on Facebook:

“Those men who laid the foundation of this American government and signed the Declaration of Independence were the best spirits the God of heaven could find on the face of the earth. They were choice spirits, not wicked men. General Washington and all the men who labored for the purpose were inspired of the Lord.” Wilford Woodruff

1) We have this false dichotomy where people are either choice spirits or wicked men. Maybe God can accomplish his work through complex characters with a mixture of both good and bad qualities.

2) I think most reasonable people would agree that God works through imperfect people. However, traditionally believing LDS members give additional weight to the words of prophets. If Wilford Woodruff said that these men were choice spirits and NOT wicked men then to say otherwise is now disregarding a prophet. It then becomes a question of loyalty. Therefore, if I am sufficiently loyal to the gospel then I will try to justify any misdeeds of the Founding Fathers.

Some of what you described in Sunday School might just be group dynamics. Each person can be trying to show their loyalty and nobody wants to be the outlier/disloyal one.

[Anonymous]

Anciently it was believed that scripture could not be written by any man except through a higher power – then such scripture could not be understood except by that same higher power. As I understand, no light of truth can be understood except through the Holy Ghost (member of the G-d head).

With this understanding – I am not sure that the light of scripture concerning Elijah is understood well in this thread. Elijah did not kill or even harm the Priests of Baal. The G-d that gave them life took life away. This is not the only example in scripture where covenant breaking resulted in physical death – and perhaps the second death as well.

As covenant saints of G-d we are commanded not to seek to decide ourselves to take anyone’s life but rather to leave such decisions unto G-d (example Nephi). There is a problem because there are many that do not know that well the differences between being commanded of G-d and being beguiled by Satan. It really does not often come down to life or death – it is my impression that living by covenant is more than daily acts of Agency; usually in seemingly minor things. And then repentance when we are beguiled. If we are confused because we have not acted of faith and repented when beguiled – our confusion will be well established long before is comes to taking a life.

[Anonymous]

A person could start with the assumption that scripture perfectly relates the mind and will of god then work their way backwards from that starting position to rationalize anything and everything that happened in the story. I think this approach leads to more people justifying violence with scripture. If scripture communicates a violent act, it must have been the correct action, now come up with reasons why that’s the case.

Exercising judgment, making a determination about why what happened in the story was the correct behavior.

Compared to an approach where you recognize that scriptures were produced by fallible humans that didn’t have a perfect understanding. People that were doing their best to learn about and understand the world they lived in. With that approach you can start with the story and determine whether or not the story reflects qualities that you’d like god to possess.

Exercising judgement, making a determination about what you feel was good or bad behavior and being open to the idea that the story may not be communicating a good principle.

Watcher wrote:

With this understanding – I am not sure that the light of scripture concerning Elijah is understood well in this thread. Elijah did not kill or even harm the Priests of Baal. The G-d that gave them life took life away. This is not the only example in scripture where covenant breaking resulted in physical death – and perhaps the second death as well.

As covenant saints of G-d we are commanded not to seek to decide ourselves to take anyone’s life but rather to leave such decisions unto G-d (example Nephi).

I believe both stories are figurative, not literal, but there’s a big difference in those two examples. In the case of Nephi, Nephi himself carries out the action. If fire rains down from heaven and kills someone, there’s a better case that could be made that it’s god’s will. A better case but still a weak one. Coincidence is a thing, someone could be using god to explain something unexplainable that they witnessed, and the Father rains fire on the just and on the unjust. If you feel inspired to set someone on fire, it introduces a healthy amount of doubt (or should). Is that inspiration truly from god? How would someone tell if the inspiration was from god, an attempt to beguile from Satan, mental illness, etc. If god wants someone dead, let god do the dirty work.

I’d go down the checklist. Would setting someone on fire be the kind of thing god would inspire someone to do? For me that answer is a definitive no. The “inspiration” must be coming from some other source. Since that’s my answer I have to wonder why Nephi would reach the conclusions he reached. Because he said god told him? How did he know he wasn’t being beguiled, because he said so?

Since I view the action as morally wrong, it’s easier for me to say that Nephi did the wrong thing. I’d much rather believe that a human made a terrible mistake than the alternative, trying to rationalize Nephi’s behavior and lower my conceptualization of god and godlike qualities to match a fallible human’s behavior.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

A person could start with the assumption that scripture perfectly relates the mind and will of god then work their way backwards from that starting position to rationalize anything and everything that happened in the story. I think this approach leads to more people justifying violence with scripture. If scripture communicates a violent act, it must have been the correct action, now come up with reasons why that’s the case.

Exercising judgment, making a determination about why what happened in the story was the correct behavior.

Compared to an approach where you recognize that scriptures were produced by fallible humans that didn’t have a perfect understanding. People that were doing their best to learn about and understand the world they lived in. With that approach you can start with the story and determine whether or not the story reflects qualities that you’d like god to possess.

Exercising judgement, making a determination about what you feel was good or bad behavior and being open to the idea that the story may not be communicating a good principle.

Watcher wrote:

With this understanding – I am not sure that the light of scripture concerning Elijah is understood well in this thread. Elijah did not kill or even harm the Priests of Baal. The G-d that gave them life took life away. This is not the only example in scripture where covenant breaking resulted in physical death – and perhaps the second death as well.

As covenant saints of G-d we are commanded not to seek to decide ourselves to take anyone’s life but rather to leave such decisions unto G-d (example Nephi).

I believe both stories are figurative, not literal, but there’s a big difference in those two examples. In the case of Nephi, Nephi himself carries out the action. If fire rains down from heaven and kills someone, there’s a better case that could be made that it’s god’s will. A better case but still a weak one. Coincidence is a thing, someone could be using god to explain something unexplainable that they witnessed, and the Father rains fire on the just and on the unjust. If you feel inspired to set someone on fire, it introduces a healthy amount of doubt (or should). Is that inspiration truly from god? How would someone tell if the inspiration was from god, an attempt to beguile from Satan, mental illness, etc. If god wants someone dead, let god do the dirty work.

I’d go down the checklist. Would setting someone on fire be the kind of thing god would inspire someone to do? For me that answer is a definitive no. The “inspiration” must be coming from some other source. Since that’s my answer I have to wonder why Nephi would reach the conclusions he reached. Because he said god told him? How did he know he wasn’t being beguiled, because he said so?

Since I view the action as morally wrong, it’s easier for me to say that Nephi did the wrong thing. I’d much rather believe that a human made a terrible mistake than the alternative, trying to rationalize Nephi’s behavior and lower my conceptualization of god and godlike qualities to match a fallible human’s behavior.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I believe you have touched on some critical ideas, but I believe you many have missed some critical and important eternal principles. We tend to attempt to understand things from our social circle and culture. To understand either scripture we can and ought to study the historical and empirical evidence but in so doing we must (obviously) conclude that something is missing that prevents our understanding to be completed (perfect). This incompleteness is why serious questions cannot be resolved by scripture only. Note that in the Gospel of John, Jesus employs both logic and reference to scripture but that the scripture experts (Scribes and Pharisees) that should have been best prepared, remain unconvinced, even though they had right to sacred covenants.

We can add logic and historical precedence to help us better understand what it means to have a covenant within the framework of the Ancient Near Eastern Kingdom and the relationship of the Supreme Suzerain and his chosen servant vessel and how this relates to the citizens of the Kingdom. Which, BTW parallels closely to the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood referenced in D&C 84.

I will not pretend that I have authority to speak specifically because I am not called of G-d to do so. Rather I add my witness that in both cases the scriptures are correct and contain the light of truth but even more important that both the scripture references of Elijah and Nephi are prophetic and pertinent to our era which is the Last-days or end of time.

[Anonymous]

Watcher wrote:

I will not pretend that I have authority to speak specifically because I am not called of G-d to do so. Rather I add my witness that in both cases the scriptures are correct and contain the light of truth but even more important that both the scripture references of Elijah and Nephi are prophetic and pertinent to our era which is the Last-days or end of time.

When we’re admitted to the forum we all made a statement of justification for wanting to be here. Yours was

Quote:

To test my logic, reasoning and spiritual content with other and to better understand why other have come to the conclusions they believe important.

I specifically want to know how you came to the conclusion that the stories of Nephi and Elijah are both prophetic and pertinent. Is it because you have a firm belief that the scriptures are all inspired or directly the word of God (a belief I do not share)? Or is there some sound logic or reasoning that brings you to this conclusion?

The “covenant path” has certainly become a catchphrase/buzz word among many of the top and local leaders of the church of late. I have two issues with the idea. 1. a. I’m pretty sure God doesn’t make deals; b. I’m very sure no one can buy their way into heaven; c. I’m also pretty sure God doesn’t favor any one child or group of children over any other child or group of children, supposed promises or covenants notwithstanding. 2. Most of the covenants members supposedly enter into they do so without a whole lot of free will, choice or foreknowledge. In my own case I don’t recall ever hearing anything about the “baptismal covenant” (not specifically referenced by that name anywhere in scripture) until well after I was baptized. I was like “Really? I don’t recall promising that.” I was ordained a priest the day after I was baptized, again without any tutoring about any covenant responsibilities, although I can say there was some explanation a few months later when ordained an elder. And then there’s the temple. I think this is somewhat better in some places now since much of it is on the church website (including what covenants we will enter into), but back in the day I had no clue until it came time to make the alleged covenants. What was I (or anyone else) supposed to do then? Truth is I believe the “covenant path” to be nothing more than the usual fear, guilt, and shame the church loves to sell to members.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

If god wants someone dead, let god do the dirty work.

Amen to that. Why should we carry that responsibility if the consequences of being wrong are so drastic? Let God do it. I highly doubt the experience of cutting off a drunk guy’s head was a positive growth experience for Nephi that helped him become more Christlike. I can’t imagine God commanding us to kill each other would really benefit anyone, and to me would make God an evil deity not worthy of worship. I believe instead that violent people from a violent era naturally believed in a violent God, and those ideas ended up influencing the accounts in the scriptures.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

Watcher wrote:

I will not pretend that I have authority to speak specifically because I am not called of G-d to do so. Rather I add my witness that in both cases the scriptures are correct and contain the light of truth but even more important that both the scripture references of Elijah and Nephi are prophetic and pertinent to our era which is the Last-days or end of time.

When we’re admitted to the forum we all made a statement of justification for wanting to be here. Yours was

Quote:

To test my logic, reasoning and spiritual content with other and to better understand why other have come to the conclusions they believe important.

I specifically want to know how you came to the conclusion that the stories of Nephi and Elijah are both prophetic and pertinent. Is it because you have a firm belief that the scriptures are all inspired or directly the word of God (a belief I do not share)? Or is there some sound logic or reasoning that brings you to this conclusion?

The “covenant path” has certainly become a catchphrase/buzz word among many of the top and local leaders of the church of late. I have two issues with the idea. 1. a. I’m pretty sure God doesn’t make deals; b. I’m very sure no one can buy their way into heaven; c. I’m also pretty sure God doesn’t favor any one child or group of children over any other child or group of children, supposed promises or covenants notwithstanding. 2. Most of the covenants members supposedly enter into they do without a whole lot of free will, choice or foreknowledge. In my own case I don’t recall ever hearing anything about the “baptismal covenant” (not specifically referenced by that name anywhere in scripture) until well after I was baptized. I was like “Really? I don’t recall promising that.” I was ordained a priest the day after I was baptized, again without any tutoring about any covenant responsibilities, although I can say there was some explanation a few months later when ordained an elder. And then there’s the temple. I think this is somewhat better in some places now since much of it is on the church website (including what covenants we will enter into), but back in the day I had no clue until it came time to make the alleged covenants. What was I (or anyone else) supposed to do then? Truth is I believe the “covenant path” to be nothing more than the usual fear, guilt, and shame the church loves to sell to members.

Thank you for your interest, DarkJedi: I will attempt to answer your questions if only in part. Obviously, I am not a source of much that you say you seek. Never-the-less, during my life I have received two very different types or kinds of witnesses concerning the scriptures. One is spiritual the other Is empirical. Much of my empirical understanding of Nephi and Elijah came during studies while traveling in the Middle East for my work. Please note that both stories have deep roots in Meddle East traditions. For example, beheading has traditional meaning with epoch stories of David and Goliath. David explained to Goliath some of the essence of meaning as to two met on the battlefield.

I will attempt to address your questions. First your concern that G-d does not make deals. How could you have any such idea if you personally have not had any dealings with G-d? If you have had any dealings with G-d then that proves that G-d not only makes deals but you have yourself made such a deal. You will have to explain why this simple logic does not explain deals.

You say you are sure no one can buy their way into heaven. I assume then that you believe there is a heaven, and we currently are not there. Unless you have knowledge of heaven and what is necessary for entry – I do not see how you can be “quite sure”. I do not understand your logic. If there is any entry into heaven, there must be a currency for such entry. If you mean that you do not think mortal man has access to such currency – if that is what you mean then perhaps, we have some common ground.

As for covenants I can only reference my own journey and my understanding. There are many examples of covenant failure, and it appears to me that you think your efforts have ended in failure. I would suggest that it is flawed logic to assume that your failures are proof that success is impossible. Regardless of how many counterfeits that may possibly exist that is not logic or statistical evidence that a genuine does not exist. For a possible solution I would point you to D&C 132 with a particular reference to verse 7 and the need for the Holy Spirit of Promise to “seal” your covenants or contracts (dealings).

I think we must be careful at this point because I wonder if you can point out anything in this mortal existence where you or anyone else has made any knowledgeable choice of anything – in particular, to the conclusion of any choice. To be specific, though I cannot empirically prove all possibilities – yet so far as we know everything that lives will eventually die regardless of any choices – which using the metrics you suggest; all choices are eventually meaningless. If that is really the case and you believe it – Why are you posting on this forum?

Thank you again for your interest.

[Anonymous]

You are making some huge and erroneous assumptions here.

Watcher wrote:

I will attempt to address your questions. First your concern that G-d does not make deals. How could you have any such idea if you personally have not had any dealings with G-d? If you have had any dealings with G-d then that proves that G-d not only makes deals but you have yourself made such a deal. You will have to explain why this simple logic does not explain deals.

This is the most perplexing assumption. If you have read much of what I have written here (and I understand that’s a lot and I don’t write about the same things all the time) you will know that I lean toward deist ideas in that I believe God is the Creator and Parent. But I also believe God is mostly hands off, set the universe in motion and in that way the universe is perfect in what it is supposed to accomplish – giving us the opportunity to learn and experience that which we need to in order to return to God. I do believe I communicate with God (at least the Holy Spirit) and thus have had “dealings” with God but have made no “deals” (note these two – dealings and deals – are different definitions in context). I ask God for nothing and as far as I can tell God has only given that which God gives to everyone.

Quote:

You say you are sure no one can buy their way into heaven. I assume then that you believe there is a heaven, and we currently are not there. Unless you have knowledge of heaven and what is necessary for entry – I do not see how you can be “quite sure”. I do not understand your logic. If there is any entry into heaven, there must be a currency for such entry. If you mean that you do not think mortal man has access to such currency – if that is what you mean then perhaps, we have some common ground.

Very simply put I am sure no one can buy their way into heaven because the price has been paid by our Savior Jesus Christ. Nothing we can do earns our way to heaven. While we do sometimes get conflicting messages from our leaders in this regard, when we get back to the true core doctrine they always come back to that – Jesus paid the price through the infinite atonement and we are unprofitable servants (although I actually believe God is our servant, not the other way around).

Quote:

As for covenants I can only reference my own journey and my understanding. There are many examples of covenant failure, and it appears to me that you think your efforts have ended in failure. I would suggest that it is flawed logic to assume that your failures are proof that success is impossible. Regardless of how many counterfeits that may possibly exist that is not logic or statistical evidence that a genuine does not exist. For a possible solution I would point you to D&C 132 with a particular reference to verse 7 and the need for the Holy Spirit of Promise to “seal” your covenants or contracts (dealings).

This one perplexes me as I fail to see why you believe I have failed at covenants without evidence – you don’t know me. While I have been known to engage in loud laughter, and no one does all they can do (I agree with Elder Uchtdorf there), I generally have kept the covenants I don’t believe I made because I’m a nice guy and try to be a good person – not because I expect to earn points toward heaven but because I believe that’s the one thing God has asked us to do (be nice to one another with no expectation for reward). Note also that I don’t believe section 132 to be scripture, it doesn’t pass the test (multiple writers with the same message, that’s what prophets do).

Quote:

I think we must be careful at this point because I wonder if you can point out anything in this mortal existence where you or anyone else has made any knowledgeable choice of anything – in particular, to the conclusion of any choice. To be specific, though I cannot empirically prove all possibilities – yet so far as we know everything that lives will eventually die regardless of any choices – which using the metrics you suggest; all choices are eventually meaningless. If that is really the case and you believe it – Why are you posting on this forum?

Yes, we do need to be very careful. As I said above you don’t know me. But even if you did, there is no place for judgement here. Please don’t misquote me or put words in my mouth – I never said all choices are meaningless, and I do not believe that to be the case. We do make choices and every choice has a consequence (and I do not believe in predestination). Why do I post here? I can’t share my membership justification because it’s no longer there from 9 years ago and an upgrade in the meantime, but I can paraphrase it. It was essentially that I was happy to find this forum because of the support it offers and that I expected to be a regular participant. That was 7672 posts ago. Simply I post here 1. to support others who are struggling with the church and help them StayLDS and 2. to seek support for my own struggles (and StayLDS). Those two have switched places since 2013. I post here because there are not only two points of view, only right or wrong, or only black and white. There’s not only gray either, there’s a whole rainbow out there, and when we lift our eyes we can see that. I believe scriptures often (almost always) have more than one meaning on purpose, and what one means to you can have a totally different meaning to me and not only is that OK, I believe it’s part of God’s plan. God can speak to us through scripture (and many other ways) and what God has to say to you is likely different than what God has to say to me. Yet there are some things God wants all of us to know. The only one of those I’m pretty sure about is that we’re supposed to be nice to one another. What God has to say to me personally is only my business unless God indicates I should share or I feel like sharing. I regularly share here, but most of what I share is my own experience, observations, and beliefs. I believe there is a God (or Gods) and I hope there is redemption.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

You are making some huge and erroneous assumptions here.

Watcher wrote:

I will attempt to address your questions. First your concern that G-d does not make deals. How could you have any such idea if you personally have not had any dealings with G-d? If you have had any dealings with G-d then that proves that G-d not only makes deals but you have yourself made such a deal. You will have to explain why this simple logic does not explain deals.

This is the most perplexing assumption. If you have read much of what I have written here (and I understand that’s a lot and I don’t write about the same things all the time) you will know that I lean toward deist ideas in that I believe God is the Creator and Parent. But I also believe God is mostly hands off, set the universe in motion and in that way the universe is perfect in what it is supposed to accomplish – giving us the opportunity to learn and experience that which we need to in order to return to God. I do believe I communicate with God (at least the Holy Spirit) and thus have had “dealings” with God but have made no “deals” (note these two – dealings and deals – are different definitions in context). I ask God for nothing and as far as I can tell God has only given that which God gives to everyone.

Quote:

You say you are sure no one can buy their way into heaven. I assume then that you believe there is a heaven, and we currently are not there. Unless you have knowledge of heaven and what is necessary for entry – I do not see how you can be “quite sure”. I do not understand your logic. If there is any entry into heaven, there must be a currency for such entry. If you mean that you do not think mortal man has access to such currency – if that is what you mean then perhaps, we have some common ground.

Very simply put I am sure no one can buy their way into heaven because the price has been paid by our Savior Jesus Christ. Nothing we can do earns our way to heaven. While we do sometimes get conflicting messages from our leaders in this regard, when we get back to the true core doctrine they always come back to that – Jesus paid the price through the infinite atonement and we are unprofitable servants (although I actually believe God is our servant, not the other way around).

Quote:

As for covenants I can only reference my own journey and my understanding. There are many examples of covenant failure, and it appears to me that you think your efforts have ended in failure. I would suggest that it is flawed logic to assume that your failures are proof that success is impossible. Regardless of how many counterfeits that may possibly exist that is not logic or statistical evidence that a genuine does not exist. For a possible solution I would point you to D&C 132 with a particular reference to verse 7 and the need for the Holy Spirit of Promise to “seal” your covenants or contracts (dealings).

This one perplexes me as I fail to see why you believe I have failed at covenants without evidence – you don’t know me. While I have been known to engage in loud laughter, and no one does all they can do (I agree with Elder Uchtdorf there), I generally have kept the covenants I don’t believe I made because I’m a nice guy and try to be a good person – not because I expect to earn points toward heaven but because I believe that’s the one thing God has asked us to do (be nice to one another with no expectation for reward). Note also that I don’t believe section 132 to be scripture, it doesn’t pass the test (multiple writers with the same message, that’s what prophets do).

Quote:

I think we must be careful at this point because I wonder if you can point out anything in this mortal existence where you or anyone else has made any knowledgeable choice of anything – in particular, to the conclusion of any choice. To be specific, though I cannot empirically prove all possibilities – yet so far as we know everything that lives will eventually die regardless of any choices – which using the metrics you suggest; all choices are eventually meaningless. If that is really the case and you believe it – Why are you posting on this forum?

Yes, we do need to be very careful. As I said above you don’t know me. But even if you did, there is no place for judgement here. Please don’t misquote me or put words in my mouth – I never said all choices are meaningless, and I do not believe that to be the case. We do make choices and every choice has a consequence (and I don not believe in predestination). Why do I post here? I can’t share my membership justification because it’s no longer there from 9 years ago and an upgrade in the meantime, but I can paraphrase it. It was essentially that I was happy to find this forum because of the support it offers and that I expected to be a regular participant. That was 7672 posts ago. Simply I post here 1. to support others who are struggling with the church and help them StayLDS and 2. to seek support for my own struggles (and StayLDS). Those two have switched places since 2013. I post here because there are not only two points of view, only right or wrong, or only black and white. There’s not only gray either, there’s a whole rainbow out there, and when we lift our eyes we can see that. I believe scriptures often (almost always) have more than one meaning on purpose, and what one means to you can have a totally different meaning to me and not only is that OK, I believe it’s part of God’s plan. God can speak to us through scripture (and many other ways) and what God has to say to you is likely different than what God has to say to me. Yet there are some things God wants all of us to know. The only one of those I’m pretty sure about is that we’re supposed to be nice to one another. What God has to say to me personally is only my business unless God indicates I should share or I feel like sharing. I regularly share here, but most of what I share is my own experience, observations, and beliefs. I believe there is a God (or Gods) and I hope there is redemption.

Thank you for your response: I will attempt to highlight some of my misunderstandings:

Just a couple of things – You have stated that you do not believe that G-d makes “deals”. Then you said: “Very simply put I am sure no one can buy their way into heaven because the price has been paid by our Savior Jesus Christ.” That looks like a really BIG deal to me!!! – that G-d has made. If you believe in the Atonement of Christ – why do you insist that it was not a “deal”?

As for your covenants – you did indicate to me that when you were baptized and ordained to the priesthood (a day later) that you had no concept what you were doing. I do not believe that a valid and binding covenant can be made in ignorance. I had nothing but your own words. You are correct – I do not have knowledge of your covenant intent, but it does appear from your own words – that you had no intent. It may be that since then, you have entered into a binding covenant with a promised to be a disciple of Christ. This renewal of the baptism covenant (as I understand) is called repentance and can be made official through the ordinance of the sacrament. If you have repented of your former ignorance – then it would appear to me (as I understand such things from my own experience) that you would have a valid covenant. But you posted nothing about repentance in your description.

Thanks for taking time to communicate.

[Author]

Posts