When is it okay to contradict or disobey a prophet?

[Jason]

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.

Have you ever heard the story of the bridgeman and his son, where the bridgeman kills his son by holding down the lever that controls the tracks in order to save a train full of passengers?

Was this murder?

The Church has a position which allows abortion where the health of the mother is at stake, allowing the killing of a child to save its mother.

Is this murder?

[Jason]

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.

In Semlogo's defense, it appears that he doesn't believe those particular passages of scripture are authentic.

[Ahab]

In Semlogo's defense, it appears that he doesn't believe those particular passages of scripture are authentic.

Okay, but that's just the tip of the iceberg.

If Semlogo is 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 not only does Semlogo rule out any scripture which states God has done that in the past, but he also rules out the possibility that God would EVER actually command certain people to kill certain other people, based on his belief that God wouldn't do something like that.

[semlogo]

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-

I think that God is more moral than I am. Perhaps you disagree?

[semlogo]

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.

Honestly? Do we not know what the world "child" means now?

[semlogo]

Have you ever heard the story of the bridgeman and his son, where the bridgeman kills his son by holding down the lever that controls the tracks in order to save a train full of passengers?

Was this murder?

The Church has a position which allows abortion where the health of the mother is at stake, allowing the killing of a child to save its mother.

Is this murder?

It wasn't murder. It was a story. It never happened.

And fetuses aren't children. Let's try to focus.

[Jason]

Honestly? Do we not know what the world "child" means now?

I believe his point is that everyone is one of His children to God (and possibly even considered as children instead of adults). Asking anyone to kill anyone is therefore a parent asking one of His children to kill another.

[semlogo]

Okay, but that's just the tip of the iceberg.

If Semlogo is 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 not only does Semlogo rule out any scripture which states God has done that in the past, but he also rules out the possibility that God would EVER actually command certain people to kill certain other people, based on his belief that God wouldn't do something like that.

I never said that. I said it was exceedingly rare, with only a handful of examples. Nephi's killing of Laban being the prime example. I wouldn't have done it, though. It isn't in me. The only way I'd kill someone would be in defense of someone else, and even then, killing would be the last resort, as opposed to incapacitation.

I don't believe that there is any authentic record of God having commanded the death of a child. Which is to say, I don't believe the OT records stating the same.

[semlogo]

I believe his point is that everyone is one of His children to God (and possibly even considered as children instead of adults). Asking anyone to kill anyone is therefore a parent asking one of His children to kill another.

While adults are sometimes referred to as children, a more accurate term for our purposes is offspring or progeny. There is a difference between an adult and a child. A child is innocent. An adult is not.

[Jason]

It wasn't murder. It was a story. It never happened.

Very well. If it had happened, would it in your view be murder?

And fetuses aren't children. Let's try to focus.

If fetuses are okay to kill because they aren't children then why does the Church have a position against killing them except under certain specific circumstances?

[semlogo]

Very well. If it had happened, would it in your view be murder?

If fetuses are okay to kill because they aren't children then why does the Church have a position against killing them except under certain specific circumstances?

I'd call it neglectful parenting.

I never said it was okay to kill fetuses.

By the way, you never answered my question. Do you think God would ever command someone to rape someone else? I know it's an offensive thought, but not, I think, more offensive than imagining that God might wish for someone to kill a child.

[Ahab]

While adults are sometimes referred to as children, a more accurate term for our purposes is offspring or progeny. There is a difference between an adult and a child. A child is innocent. An adult is not.

When you say children are innocent, are you refering to how they (supposedly) don't know the difference between good and evil, or something else?

What (or Who) makes them innocent, in your perspective?

To me, innocence is all about not being responsible for something, with someone else being the one who is responsible, and I know many adults who are innocent of certain things because they weren't the ones who did those things.

Maybe instead of trying to think of an instance where God has commanded or sanctioned the killing of a child, it might be more helpful to think of some situtations where God would not condemn someone to Hell for killing a child even though someone actually did something which resulted in the death of a child.

[Jason]

I'd call it neglectful parenting.

So you concede the point that killing a child is not always murder.

I never said it was okay to kill fetuses.

Very well. Is it murder to kill a fetus in order to save its mother? If not, then this appears to be another situation where an innocent life can be destroyed without calling it wrong.

By the way, you never answered my question. Do you think God would ever command someone to rape someone else?

Actually I did answer this question in my post #170.

[elguanteloko]

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.

so, since some of His reasons we judge to be correct therefore ALL His reasons must be correct, right?

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.

how do you know if God is good in the first place if you don't know His reasons to act? you seem to believe that since His ultimate stated purpose seems good then all His methods must be good... that does not follow at all.

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.

how do you know they were like the societies you described? just because God killed them? you are starting to go in circles, Jason.

Dysfunctional is an understatement.

Apparently yes, since Moses ordered it so.

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.

so, you first give me reasons why God ordered the killing of the Midianite babies (they lived in a society were the only way out for them was to be killed) but when I ask you "how do you know this?" you tell me "because God did it" then I ask you "why did God do it?" and then you tell me "because that was the best way out" then I ask you "how do you know?" then you tell me "because God did it"... do you see you are going in circles?

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

I don't know, but I know what I would do in such a case.

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

as when the Gov. establishes a law. you can break it and do things your way but you will suffer the consequences.

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?

why did they not wrestle with God? Just because He is very powerful does not mean it is correct for you to follow Him without trying to convince Him or without fighting for what you think is correct.

[Jason]

so, since some of His reasons we judge to be correct therefore ALL His reasons must be correct, right?

how do you know if God is good in the first place if you don't know His reasons to act? you seem to believe that since His ultimate stated purpose seems good then all His methods must be good... that does not follow at all.

Tell me - do you in fact believe that God is secretly evil and is leading us into immorality, or are you arguing a point you don't actually believe?

how do you know they were like the societies you described? just because God killed them? you are starting to go in circles, Jason.

so, you first give me reasons why God ordered the killing of the Midianite babies (they lived in a society were the only way out for them was to be killed) but when I ask you "how do you know this?" you tell me "because God did it" then I ask you "why did God do it?" and then you tell me "because that was the best way out" then I ask you "how do you know?" then you tell me "because God did it"... do you see you are going in circles?

Yes, it is somewhat circular. Is there a problem with that?

Given God's character, and the fact that He did order the deaths of the Midianite babies through Moses, how do you resolve the paradox?

I don't know, but I know what I would do in such a case.

And if God disagrees with your judgement I am prone to give God more credit than you. Sorry.

as when the Gov. establishes a law. you can break it and do things your way but you will suffer the consequences.

When I say "God does not establish morality" I mean that God did not invent what is good and evil. The good and evil consequences of our actions are usually simply a result of our having done good or evil, not of God actively rewarding or punishing. There are instances where God punishes or rewards, but morality is not arbitrary and God does not control it. He acts in accordance with it and has a deeper understanding of it than we currently do.

[semlogo]

Actually I did answer this question in my post #170.

Sorry, I missed that. So what you're saying is God could command it, but it wouldn't be rape because that's a morally-charged term. Is that right?

It sounds to me like your God is pretty amoral. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[semlogo]

So you concede the point that killing a child is not always murder.

Very well. Is it murder to kill a fetus in order to save its mother? If not, then this appears to be another situation where an innocent life can be destroyed without calling it wrong.

I don't concede that at all. The dad didn't kill the child. He allowed him to die. It's a parable of the Savior. The Father didn't kill Christ, after all.

The fetus in question is going to die regardless. It's a nonsensical question.

[Jason]

Sorry, I missed that. So what you're saying is God could command it, but it wouldn't be rape because that's a morally-charged term. Is that right?

No, I said that God cannot command rape because rape is by definition wrong, and God will not command any immoral thing.

God apparently can command some people to have offspring with some other people, however, with Hagar as a prime example.

[Jason]

I don't concede that at all. The dad didn't kill the child. He allowed him to die. It's a parable of the Savior. The Father didn't kill Christ, after all.

That's why it's not an exact analogy, becuase the bridgeman does actively kill his son by holding down the lever and allowing the train to run over him. If the bridgeman had not acted then his son would live but the people on the train would have died.

My point stands. You can agree that there are circumstances where killing a child is not murder.

The fetus in question is going to die regardless. It's a nonsensical question.

Not in all circumstances.

How about in situations of rape? The fetus is not going to die in that case, yet the Church will accept an abortion of a fetus that is the result of a rape. Is it murder?

[semlogo]

No, I said that God cannot command rape because rape is by definition wrong, and God will not command any immoral thing.

God apparently can command some people to have offspring with some other people, however, with Hagar as a prime example.

Is rape more wrong than murder?

Did Abraham force himself on Hagar?

[semlogo]

That's why it's not an exact analogy, becuase the bridgeman does actively kill his son by holding down the lever and allowing the train to run over him. If the bridgeman had not acted then his son would live but the people on the train would have died.

I see. I didn't get that before. Then yes, he murdered his son. I'm not sure why you're trying to get some kind of victory from this though - it has nothing to do with real life. He should have been watching his son more carefully, anyway.

Not in all circumstances.

How about in situations of rape? The fetus is not going to die in that case, yet the Church will accept an abortion of a fetus that is the result of a rape. Is it murder?

It would depend on when the abortion was performed. A ball of cells isn't a person. It only has the potential to become one.

[Jason]

Is rape more wrong than murder?

Marginally no. Rape is a lesser sin than murder according to scripture, but not by much.

Did Abraham force himself on Hagar?

Good question. What do you think?

Note that Hagar doesn't seem to have been free to make up her mind who she married.

[Jason]

I see. I didn't get that before. Then yes, he murdered his son. I'm not sure why you're trying to get some kind of victory from this though - it has nothing to do with real life. He should have been watching his son more carefully, anyway.

So since you view it as murder, if you were in the bridgeman's place, and your son somehow got out despite your having kept a closer eye on him, would you not hold down the lever, save your son, and kill everyone on the train?

It would depend on when the abortion was performed. A ball of cells isn't a person. It only has the potential to become one.

Then why does the Church object to aborting these balls of cells except in cases of rape, incest, or the health of the mother?

[elguanteloko]

Tell me - do you in fact believe that God is secretly evil and is leading us into immorality, or are you arguing a point you don't actually believe?

if I believed God was evil then that opinion would be lacking the same support as saying that He is good.

Yes, it is somewhat circular. Is there a problem with that?

depends if you want to follow a line of thought that does not make any sense. wait.. that sounded horribly condescending. I guess if we want to be as correct as possible in our beliefs we should avoid logical fallacies.

Given God's character, and the fact that He did order the deaths of the Midianite babies through Moses, how do you resolve the paradox?

I would say that I don't know God's character in the first place. He told Moses to do something horrible and Moses obeyed... too bad for him. I would not do it if I absolutely believe it is wrong. How can a just God punish someone for following the best that person can possibly see?

And if God disagrees with your judgement I am prone to give God more credit than you. Sorry.

lol. I guess you would.

When I say "God does not establish morality" I mean that God did not invent what is good and evil.

then we were talking about different things. let's just forget about this one since we both agree God did not create good or evil.

The good and evil consequences of our actions are usually simply a result of our having done good or evil, not of God actively rewarding or punishing.

this is pretty questionable.

There are instances where God punishes or rewards, but morality is not arbitrary and God does not control it. He acts in accordance with it and has a deeper understanding of it than we currently do.

...

[Jason]

if I believed God was evil then that opinion would be lacking the same support as saying that He is good.

That doesn't really answer my question.