When is it okay to contradict or disobey a prophet?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Current prophets are probably wrong about some point of doctrine or another. We know this because past LDS prophets have been wrong about the laws of God, and we have no reason to believe that current prophets are any less fallible. So why is disobeying a prophet such a big deal? Is it worse to say that President Monson is wrong about the sinfulness of same-sex relations than that President Young was wrong about the sinfulness of interracial relations? At least one prominent Mormon apologist has said that Young was wrong, but none have said that Monson is wrong. Why? What standard do Mormons use to determine whether it's permissible to contradict one of their prophets?

Monson is not wrong. This is Biblical.

[wenglund]

Nobody answered my previous questions so I will ask them again.

If a prophet is wrong about something related to the gospel, and you know it's wrong, why would the Lord expect you to follow the prophet anyway?

I don't know that the Lord would expect it.

If your bishop was wrong about something would you follow him anyway?

No.

At what level do you get to decide? Apostle? Seventy? Stake President?

Everyone is free to choose.

Perhaps the questions weren't answered previously because the answers are so obvious (except maybe to elguanteloko) as to go without saying.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Jason]

This thread is scary.

Obeying God can often be very scary. Ask Abraham, Moses, Jonah, or Nephi about that.

[semlogo]

Obeying God can often be very scary. Ask Abraham, Moses, Jonah, or Nephi about that.

Or Deanna Laney.

[Jason]

let's see: if you and your dad are walking down the street and he tells you to kill the child next to you but you see no reason to, would you do it? Why?

Once I was sure that's what he really wanted - yes. Why? Because I know my dad to be a righteous person who would never ask me to do something morally wrong, especially not on a matter of life or death.

Again, trust.

first of all, how can a society like that exist? that seems completely unrealistic.

Well, they don't exist very long, because God tends to destroy them by one method or other when they get to that point rather than send them more sons and daughters to be irretrievably corrupted.

secondly, when God told Moses to kill even the children the Midianites were already defeated. They could have simply just taken the children and educate them well...

Could they have?

Moses' concern seems to be that the Israelites could not in fact have re-educated them without becoming corrupt themselves.

Were the Israelites actually capable of showing the compassion this would take towards defeated enemies? Remember that the Israelites were not necessarily righteous - just more righteous than the Midianites.

that is very far from your precondition to moral infanticide and yet God did it (also, remember they took the women for themselves).

Are you sure that it's so very far from my precondition? What exactly is known about the state of the Midianites at the time?

once again, it is impossible to know if what God asked is indeed good since you never know His reasons. Thus, ALL that God asked, asks, will ask, is good; there is no room for you evaluating any action of God to determine if it is good or bad since they are all good for you.

Trust. As I've already said many times, it's an issue of trust.

if you obey God only because you will "miss the blessings" and do whatever He asks you to knowing you are harming others... I don't see that as good at all. I don't see Abraham's intent to sacrifice his son as good, I don't see your obedience as good, I don't see obeying for the biggest prize as good. I plan on opening a thread on obedience and its merits; I hope I will count with your participation.

The scriptures disagree with you. Abraham's obedience was counted as righteousness. And you misunderstand me. I don't think the right reason to obey God is to avoid missing blessings, but that is an obvious consequence of not obeying Him.

again, you mentioned that 1) only God can tell us what is moral, and 2) He does not establishes morality in any way... these two are mutually exclusive. It does not matter if He created the real morality or not since, according to you, He is the only one who has the knowledge of what is moral and what is not. If only He can tell us what is moral then He indeed establishes what you think is the real morality.

It isn't really the case that only God can determine what is moral in every circumstance - we have some capacity to do so - it's just that when we disagree with God on what is moral He is correct, because He has a far greater capacity to discern the full consequences of any action than we do. And when it comes to determining whether it is right to kill someone then God is the only authority who we can trust to make this judgement correctly.

It does not matter if you will someday know or if you will never know God's reasons. The problem is that you are willing to harm others even when you see no reason to.

I would prefer to say that I am willing to do whatever God commands, even if I don't understand why He is commanding it at the moment, because I trust Him and believe He will never ask me to do wrong.

I trust Him... and I trust in that He knows my reasons to disobey to be better than to just obey for the big prize in the afterlife. again, I will soon open a thread about this issue of obedience and I hope I can count with your participation.

It appears you don't really believe that He may in fact have a superior understanding of the consequences of your actions than you do. Since He has told you that He does in fact have that understanding it would appear you don't in fact trust His word on the subject.

Again, verification that it is actually God speaking is something I have completely left out of consideration. For purposes of this thread I have assumed that it is in fact God speaking.

[Jason]

By that logic, all children should be killed to save them from the sins they will most certainly commit in the future.

Only if they have no choice but to commit them, and only if God confirms that the alternative is the better choice. Without those preconditions it doesn't follow.

[thesometimesaint]

Semlogo:

Are you saying that Abraham, Moses, Jonah, and Nephi were insane?

[Jason]

Or Deanna Laney.

I do not believe that God was actually speaking to Deanna Laney.

Again, how to verify that it is God speaking is something I haven't addressed in this thread.

[Thunderfire]

The fact that you said "it depends" tells me that sometimes you would follow the prophet if you thought he was wrong, and sometimes you wouldn't. Please enlighten me. You wouldn't say "it depends" unless you had specific examples. Otherwise you would have said "I don't know."

If the prophet is wrong then the teachings should not be followed whatsoever. The problem is that "we" are using our judgment to determine if they are wrong or not. It my be our judgment that is faulty. But that is why the Lord says how all his words will be confirmed through two or more witnesses. We should never "blindly" follow anyone except the Lord Jesus Christ and his personal word to you.

Now regarding the "depends aspect" on following a prophet even if you know the message is wrong. Some simply do not want to go against the system or that the issue seems so insignificant that there is no need to make "waves". At times is it easier to go with the flow (even if it eventually leads to a cliff), then go against it.

[semlogo]

Only if they have no choice but to commit them, and only if God confirms that the alternative is the better choice. Without those preconditions it doesn't follow.

None of us will ever avoid sin, no matter how hard we try. Let's all put on our white Nike shoes together!

[semlogo]

Semlogo:

Are you saying that Abraham, Moses, Jonah, and Nephi were insane?

Not at all.

I will say that the vast, vast majority of persons claiming that God ordered them to kill someone were insane. And if someone receives such an order, it's much, much more probable that he is hearing voices rather than that he has had a divine revelation.

I will also say that I don't believe that God ever wanted anyone to kill a child. If God did want that, He wouldn't be a God I'd care to associate with.

[Jason]

None of us will ever avoid sin, no matter how hard we try. Let's all put on our white Nike shoes together!

Again a mock instead of seriously considering what it is I'm actually arguing.

[Jason]

I will say that the vast, vast majority of persons claiming that God ordered them to kill someone were insane. And if someone receives such an order, it's much, much more probable that he is hearing voices rather than that he has had a divine revelation.

I would agree with you.

I will also say that I don't believe that God ever wanted anyone to kill a child. If God did want that, He wouldn't be a God I'd care to associate with.

This is where we disagree. In my opinion this is too absolute a position.

Putting any preconditions on what you will or won't do for God places your judgement of what is moral above His, and that's wrong.

[wenglund]

Not at all.

I will say that the vast, vast majority of persons claiming that God ordered them to kill someone were insane. And if someone receives such an order, it's much, much more probable that he is hearing voices rather than that he has had a divine revelation.

I can agree with this.

I will also say that I don't believe that God ever wanted anyone to kill a child. If God did want that, He wouldn't be a God I'd care to associate with.

I agree with this as a general rule. But, since God's wisdom is greater than mans, I am open to there being extremely rare exceptions where God may think it best for a child to be killed.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Ahab]

I think some people can't see the forest because of some of the trees that are in their way, so to speak.

This issue is a very simple issue, really.

Look, if we define a "prophet" as a person who actually speaks for God, rather than simply someone who someone else (other than God) says is a prophet or Prophet, the question is simply this:

Is it ever okay to contradict or disobey a prophet (or what God says through a prophet) ???

I can think of only one scenario where it would be okay, and that would be in situations where another prophet (or another person speaking for God) comes along to counter what a prophet said previously (or what God said previously through another prophet).

For example, a prophet of God (several prophets in fact) once said that we should offer animal sacrifices to atone for our sins, which was in similitude of the sacrifice of our Savior, and then another prophet came along later to tell us that was no longer necessary because our Savior came and offered the final sacrifice, in that regard.

Other than in situations like that, I can't conceive of any other time when it would be "okay" to contradict a prophet (or a person who speaks for God), and if anyone can conceive of another situation when it woud be okay, then I'd like to hear about it.

Just keep this in mind: The issue is whether or not it is okay to contradict or disobey a prophet, which is correctly defined as someone who actually speaks for God.

[semlogo]

Again a mock instead of seriously considering what it is I'm actually arguing.

It was so extreme and ridiculous that it didn't merit serious consideration. You're talking about murder in the name of God, for the purpose helping little kids go to heaven. Which, if I'm not mistaken, was exactly the motivation of that woman I mentioned. Take a step back and think about that.

[semlogo]

I would agree with you.

This is where we disagree. In my opinion this is too absolute a position.

Putting any preconditions on what you will or won't do for God places your judgement of what is moral above His, and that's wrong.

Hypothetical: do you think that God would ever order a person to rape someone else? Why or why not?

I'm not putting my judgement of what is moral above his. On the contrary, I'm assuming that God's morality is superior to mine. That being the case, He wouldn't stoop to doing something that is beneath MY inferior morals.

[elguanteloko]

Once I was sure that's what he really wanted - yes. Why? Because I know my dad to be a righteous person who would never ask me to do something morally wrong, especially not on a matter of life or death.

Again, trust.

granted. however, the problem with God is that you do not know God to be a righteous God since you never know His reasons to act. If you know your father liked to kill people for fun (you know his reasons) then when he tells you to kill a child you would not do it since you consider his reasons unjust. With God you never know His reasons to act. You can't know if He is indeed good in the first place so that you can trust Him as (or more) you trust your father because you know he will not do something unjust.

Well, they don't exist very long, because God tends to destroy them by one method or other when they get to that point rather than send them more sons and daughters to be irretrievably corrupted.

..do you know of any society like that ever existed?

Could they have?

Moses' concern seems to be that the Israelites could not in fact have re-educated them without becoming corrupt themselves.

it does not seem justified to kill children just because they are going to grow in a dysfunctional (Israelite of the time) family.

Were the Israelites actually capable of showing the compassion this would take towards defeated enemies? Remember that the Israelites were not necessarily righteous - just more righteous than the Midianites.

the Israelites were righteous enough to let them live. But let's assume they were going to make them slaves for life, was it better to kill them when they were small children instead?

Are you sure that it's so very far from my precondition? What exactly is known about the state of the Midianites at the time?

you tell me. you are the one who justifies killing their children.

Trust. As I've already said many times, it's an issue of trust.

...

The scriptures disagree with you. Abraham's obedience was counted as righteousness. And you misunderstand me. I don't think the right reason to obey God is to avoid missing blessings, but that is an obvious consequence of not obeying Him.

you mentioned it as a reason to obey so I attacked it. if you had a better reason to obey you should have mentioned it. as with Abraham, I never said that God did not count his act as righteousness. I am saying I see no reason to count that as righteousness.

It isn't really the case that only God can determine what is moral in every circumstance - we have some capacity to do so - it's just that when we disagree with God on what is moral He is correct, because He has a far greater capacity to discern the full consequences of any action than we do. And when it comes to determining whether it is right to kill someone then God is the only authority who we can trust to make this judgement correctly.

thus, He establishes morality. I am not saying that He imposes His morality upon us (although in a sense He does).

I would prefer to say that I am willing to do whatever God commands, even if I don't understand why He is commanding it at the moment, because I trust Him and believe He will never ask me to do wrong.

...

It appears you don't really believe that He may in fact have a superior understanding of the consequences of your actions than you do. Since He has told you that He does in fact have that understanding it would appear you don't in fact trust His word on the subject.

this is what I think: If I tell my son to obey something but he thinks what I am doing is wrong and has good reasons to believe what I am asking of him to be wrong and he disobeys me (assuming he is sincere) then I would never count his disobedience as bad. It does not matter if God is right and I disobey Him since my intentions are good and I seriously attempt to act and think to what I consider is the best.

Again, verification that it is actually God speaking is something I have completely left out of consideration. For purposes of this thread I have assumed that it is in fact God speaking.

yeah, I have been assuming this also. No problem.

[Jason]

It was so extreme and ridiculous that it didn't merit serious consideration. You're talking about murder in the name of God, for the purpose helping little kids go to heaven. Which, if I'm not mistaken, was exactly the motivation of that woman I mentioned. Take a step back and think about that.

No, I am specifically not talking about murder. Murder is, as I explained earlier, a morally-charged word. It is always wrong.

Therefore God cannot command anyone to murder, and if a murder has actually occurred then we can be assured that God had nothing to do with it.

You seem to think that killing a child must always be murder. Must it?

[Jason]

Hypothetical: do you think that God would ever order a person to rape someone else? Why or why not?

No. Like murder, rape is a morally-charged term, and always immoral.

God has commanded people to have children with other people they might not have otherwise considered (Hagar, for example).

I'm not putting my judgement of what is moral above his. On the contrary, I'm assuming that God's morality is superior to mine. That being the case, He wouldn't stoop to doing something that is beneath MY inferior morals.

Yes you are. You are judging a specific action as being always immoral irregardless of what God thinks on the matter (since we have scriptural evidence that He has on occasion commanded this particular act). Therefore you see your moral judgement as superior to God's.

[semlogo]

No, I am specifically not talking about murder. Murder is, as I explained earlier, a morally-charged word. It is always wrong.

Therefore God cannot command anyone to murder, and if a murder has actually occurred then we can be assured that God had nothing to do with it.

You seem to think that killing a child must always be murder. Must it?

It's amazing that anyone in a civilized society even has to ask this question. Of course killing a child is always murder. I am honestly flabbergasted that you think this is in question.

Perhaps this will help you out. One of the old temple recommend interview questions:

http://byteline.blogspot.com/2007/03/temple-recommend-questions.html

"Have you committed murder by shedding innocent blood, or consenting thereto?"

[Jason]

granted. however, the problem with God is that you do not know God to be a righteous God since you never know His reasons to act.

It's also untrue that we never know God's reasons to act. For one thing, He has told us what his ultimate purpose is. We may not know his reasons behind specific actions, but we can trust Him because we know what many of His reasons are and what His ultimate purpose is. For another, He may very well explain it to us.

But if He does not expalin his reasons to us (likely because we can't understand them) that is no excuse to distrust Him. It is God we are speaking of, not some fallible human being.

..do you know of any society like that ever existed?

The society before the Flood. The Jaredites at the end of the Book of Ether. The Nephites at the end of the Book of Mormon.

it does not seem justified to kill children just because they are going to grow in a dysfunctional (Israelite of the time) family.

Dysfunctional is an understatement.

the Israelites were righteous enough to let them live. But let's assume they were going to make them slaves for life, was it better to kill them when they were small children instead?

Apparently yes, since Moses ordered it so.

you tell me. you are the one who justifies killing their children.

Very well. Since God ordered their destruction yes - they were a society of the type I am speaking of. Since this is the only real piece of evidence we have about the Midianite culture it will serve.

you mentioned it as a reason to obey so I attacked it. if you had a better reason to obey you should have mentioned it. as with Abraham, I never said that God did not count his act as righteousness. I am saying I see no reason to count that as righteousness.

Why do you suppose God did, in fact, count it thusly?

thus, He establishes morality. I am not saying that He imposes His morality upon us (although in a sense He does).

Perhaps you should explain more clearly what you mean by "establishes morality".

this is what I think: If I tell my son to obey something but he thinks what I am doing is wrong and has good reasons to believe what I am asking of him to be wrong and he disobeys me (assuming he is sincere) then I would never count his disobedience as bad. It does not matter if God is right and I disobey Him since my intentions are good and I seriously attempt to act and think to what I consider is the best.

Yet this approach would not have worked for Abraham. Or Nephi. And it didn't work for Jonah.

Perhaps there is something wrong with it then?

[wenglund]

It's amazing that anyone in a civilized society even has to ask this question. Of course killing a child is always murder. I am honestly flabbergasted that you think this is in question.

Not all of civilized society think in such black/white, absolutist terms. As Jason intimated, I think you may be projecting your own limited world view onto God--making him into your own image, rather than he making you into his image. Such is the very definition of idolotry.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Avatar4321]

I'm not commanded to obey the Prophet. I'm commanded to obey the Lord. When the Prophet speaks the Word of The Lord as a Prophet, we are to follow. If he isn't, then we aren't.

[Ahab]

It's amazing that anyone in a civilized society even has to ask this question. Of course killing a child is always murder. I am honestly flabbergasted that you think this is in question.

What are your standards for determining when someone is a "child" ?

Now try to imagine God answering that question as he tells you who he considers to be a child, and even one of his own children, and then tell me when you think God ever considers it to be his will to kill anyone.

And btw, if you're going to say something like it's never God's will for anyone to kill anyone else, not even in self defense or in defense of others, then you have a LOT of explaining to do to help all of us understand why God has sometimes actually commanded certain people to kill certain other people.