katherine the great Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 This source gives the picture as I have always understood it....Family Trees of the Bible: Family Tree Charts and Genealogical Information- SlackTime(PS. Go up one page from where it loads for the diagram.)So Josephus is the source.
scooby Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 I wouldn't care if Abraham did lie, but I'm with Schryver here
SlackTime Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Some have expressed the opinion that lying is okay depending on the circumstances. Consider this circumstance. A man in a marriage believes that telling the truth to his wife about certain things will likely cause her to divorce him and otherwise ruin his marriage and family. Is the man justified in lying to prevent his wife from finding out the truth?What if the truth being concealed is that the man has polygamously married and had conjugal relations with numerous other women?What if the truth being concealed is that the man no longer believes in the couple's religion?Personally I find both of these situations to be self-serving lies, or in other words, a lie designed to bring him gain. I think the following scripture applies... 37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man. In both these situations TODAY the person has apostasized.1. He denies the authority of the President of the Church over the keys of Celestial Marriage by engaging in polygamy. Here he wrests control and dominion which he has no right to.2. His apostasy in faith has an effect upon his relationships. Here he is covering his sins.- SlackTime
dblagent007 Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 As for Sarah being Abraham's niece:"Sarah was the half-sister of Abraham, being the daughter of his father Terah (Genesis 20:12). The Talmud [2] identifies Sarai with Iscah, daughter of Abraham's deceased brother Haran (Genesis 11:29), so that Sarah turns to be the niece of Abraham and the sister of Lot and Milka." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SarahHere is a journal article about the subject: http://www.jstor.org/pss/1454865 (it'll cost you)Here is one argument that Sarah is not Iscah: http://www.bibleinsight.com/iscah.html
dblagent007 Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 In both these situations TODAY the person has apostasized.1. He denies the authority of the President of the Church over the keys of Celestial Marriage by engaging in polygamy. Here he wrests control and dominion which he has no right to.Slacktime, have you read Rough Stone Rolling?
William Schryver Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Personally I find both of these situations to be self-serving lies, or in other words, a lie designed to bring him gain. I think the following scripture applies...Br. Slacktime, you know I regard you as highly as anyone I know from my years on this message board, but you have just now provided what I will henceforth label "Exhibit A" in my long-standing case that, unfortunately, too many Latter-day Saints are clueless and naive when it comes to recognizing the tactics and methods of the enemies of the restored gospel.Email me if you are confused by this.
katherine the great Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 As for Sarah being Abraham's niece:"Sarah was the half-sister of Abraham, being the daughter of his father Terah (Genesis 20:12). The Talmud [2] identifies Sarai with Iscah, daughter of Abraham's deceased brother Haran (Genesis 11:29), so that Sarah turns to be the niece of Abraham and the sister of Lot and Milka." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SarahSo the source is the Talmud. The Talmud also says, "She was superior to Abraham in the gift of prophecy. She was the "crown" of her husband; and he obeyed her words because he recognized her superiority." I doubt we'll find that in any Institute manuals!
SlackTime Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Br. Slacktime, you know I regard you as highly as anyone I know from my years on this message board, but you have just now provided what I will henceforth label "Exhibit A" in my long-standing case that, unfortunately, too many Latter-day Saints are clueless and naive when it comes to recognizing the tactics and methods of the enemies of the restored gospel.Email me if you are confused by this.Cluelessness and Naiveity (sp?) I have been convicted of before. You know that I will always welcome instruction from you. Please email me with such, I believe you know my email address. As for being a lamb who is about to fall to the lions, C'est pas- SlackTime
David T Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Now an even more disturbing OT story is the one about Jacob obtaining Esau's blessing by fraud and seemingly conspiring with his mother to deceive the Prophet!You should check out David Bokovoy's paper on this topic. It made me see this story in a whole new light.
Cold Steel Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 I've never seen how this could possibly be an issue, but like Laban being killed by Nephi, it keeps coming up in Gospel Doctrine classes. The scriptures speak, not of always telling the complete truth, but to not bear false witness. If the mob breaks into Joseph Smith's house and demands to know where the prophet is, no one ever questions it when Emma or someone else replies that he's out of town or not there. In Abraham's case, he was telling the truth, but not the full truth. It was prevarication, which is not anywhere specifically condemned in the scriptures. Under the Mosaic Law, all men were expected to be fully honest in all their business and other dealings. But when prevarication can save one's life, it's not the same as bearing false witness. Lying to get power or gain is a sin and it's said to be one of the greatest sins of our times. But the withholding of the whole truth is not a sin. It was, after all, God's commandment that caused Abraham not to reveal the whole truth, and as a prophet, Abraham could speak for God. Later, in a dream, God revealed the entire truth to Abimelech: But Abimelech had not come near her; and he said,
SlackTime Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Slacktime, have you read Rough Stone Rolling?Absolutely have, enjoyed it very much.- SlackTime
consiglieri Posted February 22, 2010 Author Posted February 22, 2010 No, the Hebrew word is laughed, not rejoiced. Same for both Abraham and Sarah. Also, look at the context. Shall a son be born to one who is 100 years old? Shall the 90 year old Sarah give birth?Interestingly, a class member interjected this same comment about the word "laughter" being the Hebrew for "rejoiced," apparently using the footnote in the LDS KJV.I said that Abraham found it so funny, he fell on his face laughing.One thing I did not mention because of time constraints is that the same word is translating "jesting" when Lot's sons-in-law think Lot is just kidding around when he says to get out of town because God is going to destroy the city.I also did not have time to mention that in the Sarah version of this story, she was confronted with having laughed and she lied, saying she did not laugh. This would seem strange if she were really simply "rejoicing."All the Best!--Consiglieri
consiglieri Posted February 22, 2010 Author Posted February 22, 2010 I'd introduce you to Gene Kelly Consig...if he were still alive.Gene Kelly is like, my all time hero, Dude.Gotta dance!All the Best!--Consiglieri
consiglieri Posted February 22, 2010 Author Posted February 22, 2010 Within which the only thing possibly worse would be Clint Eastwood's singing.I talk to the treesBut they don't listen to me.
consiglieri Posted February 22, 2010 Author Posted February 22, 2010 Now an even more disturbing OT story is the one about Jacob obtaining Esau's blessing by fraud and seemingly conspiring with his mother to deceive the Prophet!We'll be covering the seemingly fraudulent activites of "the supplanter" in a future lesson.All the Best!--Consiglieri
Zakuska Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 It is kind of Ironic since our own scriptures says this..."let God be true, but every man a liar"Rom 3:4
consiglieri Posted February 22, 2010 Author Posted February 22, 2010 You should check out David Bokovoy's paper on this topic. It made me see this story in a whole new light.Thanks for the lift, Nack!I am printing the article out now, and will see about covering aspects of it in Gospel Doctrine class.My students are always interested in "new light."All the Best!--Consiglieri
volgadon Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 We'll be covering the seemingly fraudulent activites of "the supplanter" in a future lesson.All the Best!--ConsiglieriThe moral of that story is that appearances can be decieving.
consiglieri Posted February 22, 2010 Author Posted February 22, 2010 I propose a cage fight during the 2010 FAIR Conference! You may want to reconsider upon learning that structurecop is my second.What's your prediction for the fight, Clubber?. . . Pain.All the Best!--Consiglieri
Senator Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 But when prevarication can save one's life, it's not the same as bearing false witness. Righteous PrevaricationThis has been an interesting Gospel principle that we have learned about today through our study of God's dealings with the prophets.To bad it isn't taught in Gospel doctrines class.It would seem to be an arrow of indispensable strategic import to have safely tucked away in our quiver of knowledge of God.
dblagent007 Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Personally I find both of these situations to be self-serving lies, or in other words, a lie designed to bring him gain. I think the following scripture applies...I agree. Have you changed your answer after some PMs with Will (and perhaps recalling what you read in RSR)?
SlackTime Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 I agree. Have you changed your answer after some PMs with Will (and perhaps recalling what you read in RSR)?Not a bit. Have you a question or a point? I'm clueless and naive, feel free to disabuse me. - SlackTime
rodheadlee Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 The text is clear that Abraham lied. And God told him to.What baffles me is that Mormons are just fine with Nephi cutting off the head of a defense-less man, but shudder at the thought of Abraham telling a lie.Don't put us all in the same box. You don't even know me or what I think.
LeSellers Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Where does the idea that Sarah was Abraham's NIECE instead of half sister come from?Hard to say, but we don't know much about Sariah's mother
staccato Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 From the Aaronic Priesthood Manual, Lesson 49: Honesty and Integrity,
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.