When Does God Allow People To Be Deceived?

[Bikeemikey]

O'kay, but that wouldn't resolve the aparent contradiction between Ezekiel 14:9 and Titus 1:2 (Ether 3:12, Heb. 6:18, and D&C 62:6), would it?

Is the contradiction real, or is there some legitimate way of interpreting these passages so that there's no flat out contradiction between them?

You do realize that Mormons have the get out of jail free card with the bible right - our articles of faith basically tell us it's all a bunch of scrambled up junk - hyperbole added for effect.

If the bible don't make sense then it's probably because it falls under the "as far as it is tranlsated correctly clause".

From the verse in Ezekiel god benefits from deceiving his prophets by being able to kill them - how would that be helpful for anyone? Let's just assume he does not deceive people, to think otherwise makes god an intentional excitable prophet killer.

[inquiringmind]

You do realize that Mormons have the get out of jail free card with the bible right - our articles of faith basically tell us it's all a bunch of scrambled up junk - hyperbole added for effect.

If the bible don't make sense then it's probably because it falls under the "as far as it is tranlsated correctly clause".

From the verse in Ezekiel god benefits from deceiving his prophets by being able to kill them - how would that be helpful for anyone? Let's just assume he does not deceive people, to think otherwise makes god an intentional excitable prophet killer.

Actually, I just looked the passage up in the Joseph Smith Translation (which I should have done sooner), and it reads as follows.

And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have not deceived that prophet; therefore I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.

But what about this passage?

And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the Lord; I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.

And the Lord said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner.

And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, I will persuade him.

And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also; go forth, and do so. (I Kings 22:19-22, JST.)

Does this contradict Titus 1:2, Heb. 6:18, E#ther 3:12, and D&C 62:6?

Edited June 23, 2012 by inquiringmind

[Kerry A. Shirts]

My missionaries say that if there seem to be any contradictions, the problem is in our interpretation of scripture.

I know they would disagree with you (and I think my bishop would too.)

BTW: If you believe Ezekiel 14:9 flat out contradicts Ether 3:12 (to name just one of the other passages), which passage do you personally believe is true?

Do you believe God lies, or do you believe He doesn't?.

Of course others disagree, that is their interpretation! It's not about one lying or another telling the truth, it is about the incomplete understanding of we humans to grasp the whole truth, which never will occur this side of the veil. So, we are left with human interpretation based on incomplete knowledge and various cultural trappings......

[Kerry A. Shirts]

O'kay, but that wouldn't resolve the aparent contradiction between Ezekiel 14:9 and Titus 1:2 (Ether 3:12, Heb. 6:18, and D&C 62:6) would it?

Is the contradiction real, or is there some legitimate way of interpreting these passages so that there's no flat out contradiction between them?

Why do you think all the scriptural contradictions have to be worked out in order for them to be true or accurate?

[Kerry A. Shirts]

You do realize that Mormons have the get out of jail free card with the bible right - our articles of faith basically tell us it's all a bunch of scrambled up junk - hyperbole added for effect.

If the bible don't make sense then it's probably because it falls under the "as far as it is tranlsated correctly clause".

From the verse in Ezekiel god benefits from deceiving his prophets by being able to kill them - how would that be helpful for anyone? Let's just assume he does not deceive people, to think otherwise makes god an intentional excitable prophet killer.

But the Bible teaches God is much, MUCH more than just an excitable prophet killer..... he kills men, women, children, the unborn, and even the plants and earth! According to the interpretation of the ancient writers of the Book of Joshua.

[Kerry A. Shirts]

Actually, I just looked the passage up in the Joseph Smith Translation (which I should have done sooner), and it reads as follows.

And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have not deceived that prophet; therefore I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.

Yet God himself has sent deceiving prophets if that is what the people are looking for. Consider Jeremiah's argument when he notes the prophets are prophesying falsely. Now of course, from HIS interpretation that makes them false prophets while he is the true one. And the ancient recorder of the event writes in such a fashio that Jeremiah ends up being the martyr hero........ but all scripture is interpreted by humans.......fallible, incompletely understanding humans.

[Kerry A. Shirts]

Titus 1:2 saying what God can and cannot do is itself someone's interpretation.......... it is their supposition based on their life experiences and cultural expectations of what they thought righteousness, wickedness, etc. is and was...... contradictions may occur in the Bible because ALL of their interpretations are wrong......and OURS are as well! Hence it may very well be impossible to iron out the contradictions........ so what?

[inquiringmind]

Yet God himself has sent deceiving prophets if that is what the people are looking for. Consider Jeremiah's argument when he notes the prophets are prophesying falsely. Now of course, from HIS interpretation that makes them false prophets while he is the true one. And the ancient recorder of the event writes in such a fashio that Jeremiah ends up being the martyr hero........ but all scripture is interpreted by humans.......fallible, incompletely understanding humans.

Joseph Smith apparently believed the book of Jeremiah was scripture, included it in his Inspired Translation, and claimed to have translated it by the gift anf power of God.

You do realize that Mormons have the get out of jail free card with the bible right - our articles of faith basically tell us it's all a bunch of scrambled up junk - hyperbole added for effect.

If the bible don't make sense then it's probably because it falls under the "as far as it is tranlsated correctly clause".

From the verse in Ezekiel god benefits from deceiving his prophets by being able to kill them - how would that be helpful for anyone? Let's just assume he does not deceive people, to think otherwise makes god an intentional excitable prophet killer.

Actually, I just looked the passage up in the Joseph Smith Translation (which I should have done sooner), and it reads as follows.

And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have not deceived that prophet; therefore I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.

Notice this says that if the Prophet is deceived, it wasn't God who deceived him.

But what about this passage?

And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the Lord; I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.

And the Lord said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner.

And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, I will persuade him.

And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also; go forth, and do so. (I Kings 22:19-22, JST.)

Does this contradict Titus 1:2, Heb. 6:18, E#ther 3:12, and D&C 62:6?

Edited June 23, 2012 by inquiringmind

[Kerry A. Shirts]

Actually, I just looked the passage up in the Joseph Smith Translation (which I should have done sooner), and it reads as follows.

And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have not deceived that prophet; therefore I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.

Notice this says that if the Prophet is deceived, it wasn't God who deceived him.

But what about this passage?

And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the Lord; I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.

And the Lord said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner.

And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, I will persuade him.

And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also; go forth, and do so. (I Kings 22:19-22, JST.)

Does this contradict Titus 1:2, Heb. 6:18, E#ther 3:12, and D&C 62:6?

Sure it does......... why not? From the ancients interpretations of their historical events, they supposed it was God who sent forth the lying prophets.......from our views it couldn't possibly be God, and neither view may be accurate. We are all humans living a limited experience of knowledge and experience. Just because something is written doesn't mean it has the same meaning we assign it from our modern point of view with word definitions we think an English translation from an ancient Hebrew document ought to also mean! That is just silly to pretend it HASD to mean what *WE* assign it......

[inquiringmind]

Sure it does......... why not? From the ancients interpretations of their historical events, they supposed it was God who sent forth the lying prophets

Actually, according to Joseph Smith's inspired translation of 1 Kings 22, the prophet Micaiah claimed to be discribing a vision that God gave him, and in the vision God gave a spirit who volunteered for the job permision to go forth and deceive the evil king's prophets (but also gave Micaiah a true mssage of warning.)

Micaiah nowhere says he's giving his own interpretation of anything.

Titus 1:2 saying what God can and cannot do is itself someone's interpretation

Like Ether 3:12, and D&C 62::6 (where Joseph Smith appears to be quoting the words that the risen Christ spoke to him)?

From the ancients interpretations of their historical events, they supposed it was God who sent forth the lying prophets.......from our views it couldn't possibly be God

Why not?

You seem to be saying that you believe that God can lie?

Whatever Paul said that God can or cannot do was just his own fallible human interpretation (and, given this approach, I would presume D&C 62:6 was just Joseph's own fallible human interpretation of some vague impressions), or am I misunderstanding you?

Edited June 23, 2012 by inquiringmind

[SamIam]

Verse 9 again if when the prophet answers the question of those that come before him if he does not speak according to the law – he is deceived in the manner of Job, wherein the Lord has permitted Satan to attempt the prophets temptation.

I think I understand what you're saying here, but I'm not totally sure

The essence is that God allows all men to be tempted according to the level they should be able to manage. In Job's case God essentially lowered the "hedge" and then gave Satan conditions upon which he could exercise his new level of authorization. Job prevailed and did not succumb and sin by condemning God.

If in the case of the story line, the people who are already suffering from a deceitful desire to overlook their idolatrous acts, if these people come to the prophet and inquire of him his obligation is to respond with repent and cease their evil practices. However, he is subject to the same situation as Job. If he has ceased facing towards God and sustaining his commandments and has instead become sympathetic to their viewpoint then he is now subject to the judgements of God. If he is tempted and fails to give the correct response then he becomes guilty of the same sin as the people, as the prophet carries the burden of teaching correct principles or be held accountable. It is not that God deceived him, but that he allowed the prophet to deceive himself or be deceived by the fact that until this moment God has permitted him to think that this day would be like any other day of his recent past. He woke went about his business and returned to his bed. He is deceived in thinking that this day is the same as these before. On this day he is to be final judged according to his pattern of behavior.

[inquiringmind]

final judged

Final judged?

You mean if he fails this test, and doesn't give the right answer, they'll be no possibility of repentance here or hereafter?

Edited June 23, 2012 by inquiringmind

[SamIam]

Scripture contradicts itself all over the loving place.......what's such a surprise about that? It's written by men with fallible minds. When God speaks to them, it is STILL written by men and women with fallible minds and a limited perception of reality. EVERYTHING is interpretation from a limited cultural view, therefore, scripture does contradict itself.........

My missionaries say that if there seem to be any contradictions, the problem is in our interpretation of scripture.

I know they would disagree with you (and I think my bishop would too.)

BTW: If you believe Ezekiel 14:9 flat out contradicts Ether 3:12 (to name just one of the other passages), which passage do you personally believe is true?

Do you believe God lies, or do you believe He doesn't?.

I am way behind in preparing my lesson for Sunday, but I just feel the need sustain your instincts inquiringmind. If this is the Kerry Shirts of barnyard(??) professor then I am frankly shocked by his lack of scriptural insight and attitude towards scripture. It is irreverent for my tastes. I have yet to find a genuine contradiction in scripture that was not understandable once one grasped correct principles. I use the process I outlined in my post and it may takes months to ferret out the matter but in the end I have always been fortunate to find inspired insight after I paid the price in study and pondering and seeking the spirit.

One of the most difficult is Joseph of Egypt. If he marries Potiphera's daughter, Asanath and Potiphera is an Egyptian priest and she is a daughter of Egypt and thus of the presumed lineage of Canaan, how are Ephraim and Manasseh able to be the firstborn heirs of Joseph and adopted to Jacob if they are of the forbidden parentage of a Canaanite mother? By a surface read it violates key facets of the Abrahamic covenant. However, if one puts the effort into the process it all works out and is exactly according to the principles of God. But that is for another day. You are correct to be wary...

[TAO]

I think God allows Satan to attempt to deceive people. I think that this happens sometimes in these scenarios:

1) Trials (of our faith, and more)

2) Opposition (because without it, life wouldn't be a struggle)

and

3) When we refuse to listen to him. (And this is the one that's very much one's own fault)

[TAO]

Final judged?

You mean if he fails this test, and doesn't give the right answer, they'll be no possibility of repentance here or hereafter?

No, only that we will be responsible for it, if it isn't fixed by the end.

[Kerry A. Shirts]

Actually, according to Joseph Smith's inspired translation of 1 Kings 22, the prophet Micaiah claimed to be discribing a vision that God gave him, and in the vision God gave a spirit who volunteered for the job permision to go forth and deceive the evil king's prophets (but also gave Micaiah a true mssage of warning.)

Micaiah nowhere says he's giving his own interpretation of anything.

Like Ether 3:12, and D&C 62::6 (where Joseph Smith appears to be quoting the words that the risen Christ spoke to him)?

Why not?

You seem to be saying that you believe that God can lie?

Whatever Paul said that God can or cannot do was just his own fallible human interpretation (and, given this approach, I would presume D&C 62:6 was just Joseph's own fallible human interpretation of some vague impressions), or am I misunderstanding you?

No, now yer gettin it amigo! EVERYONE'S teachings....written or spoken are interpretations from a limited human view and understanding....even revelations directly to an individual is then interpreted through that human limited fallible mind........ God may very well or may well not be able to do a whole horde of things we have no idea about, its God we're thinking about here. What I understand is......based on suppositions, ideals, ideologies etc., there are things that we humans cannot comprehend God doing or not doing, but this is not "truth," it is interpretation....... one of the most powerful books I have ever read in my life on this theme is by none other than the very excellent LDS author Grant Hardy in his magnificently eye opening book "Understanding the Book of Mormon," Oxford University Press, 2010.....now this.......THIS BOOK is what we OUGHT to be studying in Sunday School and Priesthood meetings, not the tripe and swill we keep hearing year after year and had memorized by the time we all were deacons. THIS IS VITALLY IMPRESSIVE INFORMATION. Grant Hardy.....don't take my interpretational word for it, get the book and see for yourself.......I give it seriously only 6 stars. Considering the scale only tops out at 4......well, do the math, grab your extra change and purchase this book and READ IT..... LEARN IT.........

[inquiringmind]

So you're saying I didn't misunderstand you, right?

You do believe that God can lie?

[SamIam]

Final judged?

You mean if he fails this test, and doesn't give the right answer, they'll be no possibility of repentance here or hereafter?

Again short on time , but in scripture there are final judgement scenarios throughout. They follow a very precise pattern. Off of the top of my head, Baalaam is one. Laben is another, Abinidi is a third. Without proper development I will very quickly summarize. I can develop later if this does not come off gracefully. The pattern is Laman asks for plates Laban calls him a robber and then decrees that a robber deserves death. They gather their wealth and bring it to Laban and he covets it and becomes a robber. As he has judged so is he judged when Nephi shows up finds him drunk and God has Nephi render the judgement that Laban has decreed that he deserves for being a robber.

I call these judgement scenarios and the Balaam and Abindi are two more that are equally clear. Others are not so clear but these teach you the patterns of God. This is his process and so If the scriptures should render a story line that is not so clear because you know God's methods and his heart in matters like these you know he has followed his process precisely according to the patterns of judgement.

So in the case above if the Lord makes the decree that the prophet will be slain if he gives the wrong answer it is because the prophet has previously proven his heart already and by this time he is ripe for judgement upon his final failure that confirms who he really is. The scriptures do not take the time to develop each and every scenario to fulness but they always provide sufficient examples that you can get to know the character of God and because he has said he is unchanging you can learn to believe his is consistent. It is part of learning to trust the Lord.

[Kerry A. Shirts]

So you're saying I didn't misunderstand you, right?

You do believe that God can lie?

I believe that whatever is said about God anywhere is an interpretation.....I have no idea until I actually meet Him again for the first time what he is capable of doing and not doing. I am aware of certain human philosophical logical interpretations and issues in trying to figure things out about God, but the ground fundamental truth eludes us until we actually get back to God..... whenever that will be.....or if God decides yeah, 2,000 years has been quite a helluva wait for so many billions of my kids, perhaps I ought to be a better parent and at least visit them once in a while.......and thus comes back.......

[inquiringmind]

Again short on time , but in scripture there are final judgement scenarios throughout. They follow a very precise pattern. Off of the top of my head, Baalaam is one. Laben is another, Abinidi is a third. Without proper development I will very quickly summarize. I can develop later if this does not come off gracefully. The pattern is Laman asks for plates Laban calls him a robber and then decrees that a robber deserves death. They gather their wealth and bring it to Laban and he covets it and becomes a robber. As he has judged so is he judged when Nephi shows up finds him drunk and God has Nephi render the judgement that Laban has decreed that he deserves for being a robber.

I call these judgement scenarios and the Balaam and Abindi are two more that are equally clear. Others are not so clear but these teach you the patterns of God. This is his process and so If the scriptures should render a story line that is not so clear because you know God's methods and his heart in matters like these you know he has followed his process precisely according to the patterns of judgement.

So in the case above if the Lord makes the decree that the prophet will be slain if he gives the wrong answer it is because the prophet has previously proven his heart already and by this time he is ripe for judgement upon his final failure that confirms who he really is. The scriptures do not take the time to develop each and every scenario to fulness but they always provide sufficient examples that you can get to know the character of God and because he has said he is unchanging you can learn to believe his is consistent. It is part of learning to trust the Lord.

So Balaam and Laban were sons of perdition?

And the prophet pictured in Ezekiel 14 would be an sop too?

[Kerry A. Shirts]

So in the case above if the Lord makes the decree that the prophet will be slain if he gives the wrong answer it is because the prophet has previously proven his heart already and by this time he is ripe for judgement upon his final failure that confirms who he really is. The scriptures do not take the time to develop each and every scenario to fulness but they always provide sufficient examples that you can get to know the character of God and because he has said he is unchanging you can learn to believe his is consistent. It is part of learning to trust the Lord.

Actually we do not get to know the Lord through reading snippets of patterns in scripture whatsoever. What we do get is an interpretation and pattern developed by a human mind somewhere, and somewhen. Reading someone's ancient interpretation of events as they either were told about them or experienced them is not even the same as getting to know the Lord for oneself......... I'm not trying to be argumentative, just stating a rather obvious.............as I interpret it.......

[inquiringmind]

I believe that whatever is said about God anywhere is an interpretation.....I have no idea until I actually meet Him again for the first time what he is capable of doing and not doing. I am aware of certain human philosophical logical interpretations and issues in trying to figure things out about God, but the ground fundamental truth eludes us until we actually get back to God..... whenever that will be.....or if God decides yeah, 2,000 years has been quite a helluva wait for so many billions of my kids, perhaps I ought to be a better parent and at least visit them once in a while.......and thus comes back.......

If "whatever is said about God anywhere is an interpretation (and, as you said elsewhere, a fallible interpretation), what 's the point of scripture, living prophets, or even personal revelation?

All of it is fallible, all of it can be misunderstood, and we wont really know anything "until we actually get back to God...whenever that will be."

Why go to prieswthood classes, or relief society meetings, or (if you're an investigator) talk to missionaries?

Edited June 23, 2012 by inquiringmind

[SamIam]

Actually we do not get to know the Lord through reading snippets of patterns in scripture whatsoever. What we do get is an interpretation and pattern developed by a human mind somewhere, and somewhen. Reading someone's ancient interpretation of events as they either were told about them or experienced them is not even the same as getting to know the Lord for oneself......... I'm not trying to be argumentative, just stating a rather obvious.............as I interpret it.......

You have just tossed out stricture 4 of Lecture 3 of the Lectures on Faith. And you do it so casually and with total disregard for the fact that you are asking us to somehow find some way of politely reconciling you with the words of prophets. If man cannot come to a knowledge of “a CORRECT idea of his {GOD} character, perfections and attributes” then you have condemned the capacity of man to have faith in Him according to the scriptures and Lectures on Faith. You have condemned man to never be able to stand in his presence as is one of the objectives of lectures on faith. In what world do you think that even remotely makes any sense what so ever. What is not obvious to you is that you are in opposition to principles that are true and correct as taught by prophets. Why? Why risk being marginalized for failing to even come close to correct principles that my 12 year old son could refute (hyperbole for emphasis of how far off you are painting yourself to be.) You discount entirely that anyone can know truth, that the Holy Ghost exists as a guide and instructor and unifier in thought and understanding of the saints. In the immortal words of President Uctdorf – Stop It. I’m feeling embarrassed for you.

Someone earlier asked concerning Ether 3:12 . The verse before it is the question that Christ asks all who would enter his presence. “Believest thou the words I shall speak” If you answer that question according to the pattern you outline above you fail. The Brother of Jared answers in the affirmative Yea Lord, for thou are a God of Truth and canst not lie”. The brother of Jared has just affirmed that I know you, I have studied I have prayed until the point came that I have had conversations with you. After many conversations and continued study in the spirit the point comes that he can say I know of your character, attributes and perfections and they are such that you my Lord could never lie to me and I know it. I don’t know how you are going to get around the simplicity of these observations but I am sure it will become painfully obvious at some point…

[Kerry A. Shirts]

If "whatever is said about God anywhere is an interpretation (and, as you said elsewhere, a fallible interpretation), what 's the point of scripture, living prophets, or even personal revelation?

All of it is fallible, all of it can be misunderstood, and we wont really know anything "until we actually get back to God...whenever that will be."

Why go to prieswthood classes, or relief society meetings, or (if you're an investigator) talk to missionaries?

Because its by associating with our fellows that friendships, love, betrayals, hate, envy, strife......i.e., LIFE happens...... hence the association with fellow humans working it all out together is the best thing..........

[Kerry A. Shirts]

You have just tossed out stricture 4 of Lecture 3 of the Lectures on Faith. And you do it so casually and with total disregard for the fact that you are asking us to somehow find some way of politely reconciling you with the words of prophets. If man cannot come to a knowledge of “a CORRECT idea of his {GOD} character, perfections and attributes” then you have condemned the capacity of man to have faith in Him according to the scriptures and Lectures on Faith. You have condemned man to never be able to stand in his presence as is one of the objectives of lectures on faith. In what world do you think that even remotely makes any sense what so ever. What is not obvious to you is that you are in opposition to principles that are true and correct as taught by prophets. Why? Why risk being marginalized for failing to even come close to correct principles that my 12 year old son could refute (hyperbole for emphasis of how far off you are painting yourself to be.) You discount entirely that anyone can know truth, that the Holy Ghost exists as a guide and instructor and unifier in thought and understanding of the saints. In the immortal words of President Uctdorf – Stop It. I’m feeling embarrassed for you.

Yes, I can see that is how you interpret what I say.......... I shall leave you to reflect on your interpretation of others interpretations........ no need to feel embarrassed for me, I am in the process of interpreting things out for myself as you are......