Complete Honesty Versus Protection Of Faith

[altersteve]

You mention the 11 witnesses quite often. In your opinion did they see the plates with visionary eyes as some critics have stated happened? I guess I need to know if in fact they saw the plates with physical eyes. Thanks, Why Me!

Either way, they didn't deny it. And I've never seen a critic be able to explain why not.

[Tacenda]

Either way, they didn't deny it. And I've never seen a critic be able to explain why not.

Good enough, thanks.

[DBMormon]

Tacenda, on 11 July 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

You mention the 11 witnesses quite often. In your opinion did they see the plates with visionary eyes as some critics have stated happened? I guess I need to know if in fact they saw the plates with physical eyes. Thanks, Why Me!

You also must keep in mind and there are examples of this but it was common for Joseph and other early leaders who participated in visions to say it was a spiritual visionary experience and they were unsure of whether it was a actual physical real world experience or whether it was a spiritual experience outside the real world.

Even Paul says the same thing in I belive 2nd corinthians ch. 12: vfirst few verses where he says whether in the body or out of the body he did not know. Another way of stating that would be "whether with my real eyes or spiritual eyes I do not know"

Think of JS first vision.... He sees God and Christ but when it's over, he comes to. How does he resolve what is a physical occurence in this world and what is a spiritual occurence in another realm?

Edited July 12, 2012 by DBMormon

[Libs]

Tacenda, Dr. Peterson recommended the book, Investigating The Book of Mormon Witnesses, by Richard L. Anderson, as a very good source on the witnesses. I put the book on my Kindle and have read a little more than half, and it is very interesting. A lot of detail in there that might interest you, as well.

[Tacenda]

Tacenda, Dr. Peterson recommended the book, Investigating The Book of Mormon Witnesses, by Richard L. Anderson, as a very good source on the witnesses. I put the book on my Kindle and have read a little more than half, and it is very interesting. A lot of detail in there that might interest you, as well.

Thanks Libs. I'd like to check it out among so many other books. I guess I'm one that hoped it would be with physical eyes vs. spiritual eyes. To me anyone can dream etc. and call it a vision. But then again, people have had dreams or visions come true. Especially say on an upcoming death or accident that occurs in someones dream and then happens. So yay, I can see God relaying it that way.

Edited July 12, 2012 by Tacenda

[ERayR]

Thanks Libs. I'd like to check it out among so many other books. I guess I'm one that hoped it would be with physical eyes vs. spiritual eyes. To me anyone can dream etc. and call it a vision. But then again, people have had dreams or visions come true. Especially say on an upcoming death or accident that occurs in someones dream and then happens. So yay, I can see God relaying it that way.

You seem to be conflating spiritual with a dream state. To me that is incorrect. Viewing with "spiritual eyes" would be having what you are seeing witnessed by the Holy Ghost. I find very few of my spiritual verifications come when I am sleeping. They come when I am wide awake searching for answers.

[Calm]

http://en.fairmormon...y_Martin_Harris

http://en.fairmormon...tual_or_literal

http://en.fairmormon...ernatural_power

I highly recommend the book Libs is reading for getting more detail and overall context.

Edited July 12, 2012 by calmoriah

[Libs]

Thanks Libs. I'd like to check it out among so many other books. I guess I'm one that hoped it would be with physical eyes vs. spiritual eyes. To me anyone can dream etc. and call it a vision. But then again, people have had dreams or visions come true. Especially say on an upcoming death or accident that occurs in someones dream and then happens. So yay, I can see God relaying it that way.

Yes, that statement from Martin Harris, about seeing with his "spiritual eyes", kind of bothered me, as well, until I read more about it. Harris actually had his testimony engraved on his tombstone...he was that sure of it. Whatever he saw and however he saw it, was very convincing, to him.

[Tacenda]

You seem to be conflating spiritual with a dream state. To me that is incorrect. Viewing with "spiritual eyes" would be having what you are seeing witnessed by the Holy Ghost. I find very few of my spiritual verifications come when I am sleeping. They come when I am wide awake searching for answers.

Yes, looking back, they were fully awake not asleep. Sorry , I tend to speak before I think, thanks for pointing it out.

[volgadon]

You seem to be conflating spiritual with a dream state. To me that is incorrect. Viewing with "spiritual eyes" would be having what you are seeing witnessed by the Holy Ghost. I find very few of my spiritual verifications come when I am sleeping. They come when I am wide awake searching for answers.

I would say it is seeing something that only God could show you.

[why me]

This is the crux. When people with crippling, gnawing doubt don't get solid answers within a certain time window, the damage to their confidence and faith is often insurmountable, even when their questions and concerns *are* completely answered (and they acknowledge this). The feelings of betrayal and deception linger, even if "these particular concerns" were answered.

I think that the problem comes expectations. What I have noticed is that when members become influenced by critic sites, and doubt begins to emerge, the wavering member begins to seek evidence that the church is true and what they are looking for is something that confirms the truthfulness of the church. Of course, this cannot be found. Then, disappointment comes and down they go.

We live in an age where doubters want evidence.

[why me]

This is the crux. When people with crippling, gnawing doubt don't get solid answers within a certain time window, the damage to their confidence and faith is often insurmountable, even when their questions and concerns *are* completely answered (and they acknowledge this). The feelings of betrayal and deception linger, even if "these particular concerns" were answered.

I think that the problem comes expectations. What I have noticed is that when members become influenced by critic sites, and doubt begins to emerge, the wavering member begins to seek evidence that the church is true and what they are looking for is something that confirms the truthfulness of the church. Of course, this cannot be found. Then, disappointment comes and down they go.

We live in an age where doubters want evidence.

[why me]

You mention the 11 witnesses quite often. In your opinion did they see the plates with visionary eyes as some critics have stated happened? I guess I need to know if in fact they saw the plates with physical eyes. Thanks, Why Me!

I have said this many times. After being asked over and over again about their experience, they did mention spiritual eyes. But this basically meant that they had a spiritual experience when they saw the plates. All spiritual experiences such as what they had can claim 'spiritual' eyes. But they were very specific that the experience they had was real and not made up or visionary. Here is oliver on his deathbed:

On 5 March 1850, the day Oliver Cowdery died at the Peter Whitmer Sr. home, he was surrounded by his wife, their only daughter Maria Louise, his brother-in-law David Whitmer, Hiram Page (his nurse), others of the Whitmer family, his half-sister Lucy and her husband Phineas Young. Oliver asked to be raised so he could speak. As he had done hundreds of times before, he bore a resolute testimony of the Book of Mormon. Phineas reported that Oliver, on his deathbed, confided in him, "There was no Salvation but in the valley and through the priesthood there." ¹⁰³ Thus ended the mortal life of the Second Elder of Mormonism.

http://maxwellinstit...nscripts/?id=50

This seems quite real to me.

[why me]

Even Paul says the same thing in I belive 2nd corinthians ch. 12: vfirst few verses where he says whether in the body or out of the body he did not know. Another way of stating that would be "whether with my real eyes or spiritual eyes I do not know"

And of course, these witnesses knew this verse. Something that the critics don't seem to comprehend.

[DBMormon]

I find very few of my spiritual verifications come when I am sleeping. They come when I am wide awake searching for answers.

Some of my most profound spiritual experiences have come through dreams

[ERayR]

Some of my most profound spiritual experiences have come through dreams

I don't doubt that at all but my mind doesn't seem to work that way or else I just haven't learned to interpret them well. I dream often and in color too but when I get my most profound insights is when I am fully awake meditating on something.

[SamIam]

Recently someone posted in a thread about honesty and the Lord's expectation of being honest, completely honest and hiding nothing.

We also had a discussion recently about what if withholding information protects the faith of the weak.

When is dishonesty ok?

As is common, I think where we stray is right from the get go in how we initiate our point to start looking for an answer to the question. IMO were this question to be based at the proper perspective and point it would be much more simply stated as what is the difference between honesty and dishonestly? The way it is stated above already presumes a dishonest condition prevails. Though unintentional, I think this is that poisoning the well concept I have learned on this board.

Maybe this should be a corollary to the Godwin’s rule or something but I am always amazed at how often aspects of answers to questions can be found in the Garden of Eden story.

To convince Eve to partake of the fruit Satan informs her that so doing will enable her to be as the God’s knowing good and evil and that in that day they will not die.

In Alma 12, Alma is basically teaching the same thing “becoming as gods, knowing good from evil,?” He also adequately sustains a perspective that could be construed to be what Satan intended that in that day they did not die but entered into a probationary period.

The point is that though both Satan and Alma use the same words and phrases to describe aspects of truth, the words do not define the truth. Satan is a liar and cannot tell the truth. Everything he says is tainted with a desire to vaunt himself above God, against his plan, and to enslave any he can deceive. On one hand we say that Satan tells the truth from time to time to deceive and yet we are told from the perspective of God that light and truth have forsaken that evil one. In other words, to be perfectly accurate, Satan never tells the truth.

From this I draw some distinctions about what is truth.

1.) The intent of the user of the words used to describe the point of view defines it. Satan has no goals ever, not in the least degree, to benefit anyone but himself, so even if he uses a statement of truth it is imbued with the intent of his heart and it becomes a lie.

2.) Even though Alma can use the same words that are a lie coming from Satan again his intent is single minded. He has no desire to vaunt himself above God and only seeks in the purity of his heart to build up the kingdom of God.

I am not saying this is an easy perspective to discern in ourselves but in some way the words are not the point of focus but the intent of the heart is the point of focus. When we as individuals say things that are designed to avoid taking responsibility for our actions, we are looking inward with no concern for God’s kingdom. We are being dishonest.

It is always easier for the masses to stay with the simple never lie approach. Better to be safe than sorry is the caveat that justifies this position. For many this is the very best place to be if they avoid the temptation to be one of those that Job 38:2 inquires after, “ Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?”...which they illustrate by placing themselves in a position to judge others in a position above them in spiritual understanding. However, if you are going to break ranks and actually try to understand the things of God your education is going to be more intense. God is going to require that you no longer hide behind the safety point of ignorance and let you play it safe. Instead he is going to expect you to advance to the point of “better to know and be safe,” over “better safe than sorry.”

The law is thou shalt not bear false witness which we interpret to be thou shalt not lie based upon an amalgamation of many scriptural statements. The dichotomy also exists in scripture. Is not Abraham blessed and protected by God after deceiving Pharaoh concerning his wife. We are told thou shalt not kill, but Nephi is commanded to kill Laban. Jacob appears to deceive Jacob by the illusion of furry arms, but when Jacob finds out he does not remove the blessing as would be the case with a liar – as God removed Satan’s opportunity for a crown by casting him out – in simple terms, for being a liar. The same holds true for Joseph Smith, while a difficult thing to do, I am sure, it was more in keeping with the building up of the Kingdom of God, to restrict his teaching on polygamy to those that could initiate the practice and thus perpetuate the Kingdom of God, than to blanket reveal it to the masses and undo the Kingdom of God. In time it all works out and as Deborah alluded to in the quote of hers I have included, if people are being lead by the spirit they will find the information in the correct time.

A couple of other examples are found when Christ rebuked the demons that declared who he was. On one level, the truth of their words, some might say let them declare him but Christ understands that the testimony of a liar is only deception and even listening to any “truth” espoused by the devil is an act of deception to get you to listen to him at all. Once you start dividing on whether the words are true and not the intent then you suffer the risk of being deceived which is the goal of all of Satan’s lies – to bring you into subjection to him.

Another example is Paul in this story from Acts:

]

Acts 16:16

16 And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying:

17 The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation.

18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

One might think that telling the people that “these men are the servants of the most high God,” isn’t such a bad thing. The words ring true, don’t they? However, Paul is not deceived by the words. He knows the intent of Satan is to align the damsel’s divination talents with speaking truths, thus empowering her for greater deceptions still. Paul recognizes the lie of the truth she told and commands…I emphasize commands the demon to depart. Her truths were lies and now it is manifests to all who are present.

Deborah states:

name='Deborah' timestamp='1341684558' post='1209143578']

At some point do you think members are interested enough to start studying on their own? There are sources in the church if one wants to find them.

I think she nails it on the head, there are sources to understand these principles, the writings of prophets the scriptures are the best places to begin.

So the final qualification that I will try to find words to describe but will surely fail of those that do not want to hear the message is simply that it appears the intent of the heart is the deciding factor. It is possible to be asked to do something of the Lord that others will construe to be deception. However, we must hold to the examples of scripture that prove that sometimes seem to illustrate an incongruent but perfectly correct perspective. After all it is not safe to over step scripture for the philosophies of men, when the scriptures so clearly have several exceptions to the rule that are in opposition to the philosophies of men.

This is very advanced reasoning though and I must conclude it with do not lie, and do not kill and you will always be better safe than sorry. Make these things the pattern of your life and never sway from it. However if you prove yourself sincere and diligent and single minded in building up the Kingdom of God be prepared to be asked to follow up on that single minded determination to be obedient in building up the kingdom of God by understanding the principles involved. Nephi’s whole battle in the slaying of Satan is precisely this battle of I always have believed thou shalt not kill and I have made it a point of focus to be obedient to this law. When push came to shove the Lord inquired of him are you obedient to the law or are you obedient to me. Nephi quickly realizes the law is death and obedience to the law giver, God is life.

So the point that I really think is the most important of this entire thread is until you know God, his character, traits and attributes that it is better safe than sorry to avoid judging those that that have a better sense of his character, traits and attributes. Once you do know God you will realize that is better to know and be safe and you will see there is no judgment to be cast, other than the leaders of the church know exactly what they are doing.

To say it differently - until you are the one that actually receives the guidance to act in a pattern differently than the “safe than sorry masses” can accept, it is better to not judge those who may be in the “better to know and be safe” group with false and presumptive accusations of dishonesty.

Edited July 18, 2012 by SamIam