Holy Ghost: Says Different Things To Different People?

[Bikeemikey]

"Can the Holy Ghost do that?"

Yes.

So the Holy Ghost is actually outcome motivated? What if the HG is more a magic 8 ball... it provides confirmation to truth and thats it. It doesn't have a stake in what we do with it.

[Alvino]

No, I am not suggesting God deceives and misleads. Words matter to me. 'Deceive' means:

"to mislead or falsely persuade others." 'Mislead' means: "to lead or guide wrongly; lead astray.

to lead into error of conduct, thought, or judgment."

But you did hint that God can tell people contradictory things as long as it is what's best for them.

No-one is being lead by God into error of conduct, thought or judgement. Completely the opposite. God is giving the right information to the right people to help them walk in correct conduct, thought or judgement. He cannot simply give the same information to all people. We are too diverse in our needs, motives and spiritual understanding.

Oh, OK. So God won't tell someone that JS was a false prophet, correct?

I again repeat that the Holy Ghost could confirm that Joseph is a true prophet to one person and not confirm it to another person. Does that mean the Holy Ghost has said "false prophet" or simply "not for you to know", I'm not privy to every spiritual communication.

You keep on evading the question. I never asked you about EVERY spiritual communication but about the principle of whether God can lie or not. Do you think the HG will ever tell someone what is actually false such that JS is a false prophet? It isn't my fault you don't even understand what the problem is.

Do you presume that if someone has a spiritual experience that contradicts yours that they are wrong? That's the key question. Are they wrong? Or have you simply been given different information to reach your greatest height?

Once again, that's not the issue. We can all agree God will tell the prophet things about the direction of the Church that He will never tell me. That's not the issue nor are those contradictions. The problem is when God supposedly tells some people one thing and other people the negation of that thing or something that implies the negation of the first. Clear?

And yet, if you read the inspired writings (our prophets tell us they are inspired) of Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism, Greek philosophy etc there will be some contradictions in them (as well as some beautiful universal similarities. The "golden rule" for example appears in nearly every culture, philosophy and theology). We shouldn't presume that the contradictions are where they have erred. I agree that there are some tenets of those faiths that I find difficult to accept and some that are applied in a way that I don't agree with. That might not mean that they are wrong though. Just not right for me.

If God needs one method/work stream for one people and a different one for another then I'm sure he has the skills to effectively do so.

Not the issue, canard.

If believing I am wrong, because it goes against what you consider to be your revealed understanding of the truth, helps you to rise to your highest, then I've no issue with that.

The issue is not whether you have a problem or not. The issue is not about what I consider to be revealed truth. The issue is whether the HG can tell us contradictory things. Can the HG tell me JS is a prophet of God and tell other people that JS is not a prophet from God?

[Alvino]

You continually think you have some objective line to truth and falsity independent of human judgement.

I don't think this because I don't have a bias against human judgement. You keep incorrectly assuming I think being able to get out of our human fallible minds is required to have knowledge or to have good justification for claiming truth. I don't.

[Brian 2.0]

What if the HG is more a magic 8 ball... it provides confirmation to truth and thats it. It doesn't have a stake in what we do with it.

I guess the question we are grappling with. If the HG is indeed a magic 8 ball, then why do so many seekers of thruth end up with so many interpretations of truth. Someone on in this thread said it well... there are really three options

1) It's really really hard to read the Magic 8 ball accurately, so people are misreading it (or lying about what the answer is) a LOT.

2) Everyone's Magic 8 ball is personalized to them so whatever answer I get on my 8 ball doesn't mean you will get that same answer when you ask the same question to your 8 ball.

3) There is no Magic 8 ball. it's more of a bowling ball and we are just applying our own thoughts and desires onto it. It's all in our head.

If it is #1, why should I feel that I have read the 8 ball accurately and all those others out there that believe something contrary have misread the 8 ball? I'm not comfortable with discounting others experiences so easily, even if they contradict my own experiences.

[Alvino]

The answers are often dependent upon the nature of question being asked. If the question is asked in a closed-ended, binary way (as I have done here), it is often answered in a binary way, or the subtle answer may be interpreted in a binary way--though not necessarily. If God is asked binary questions, and he gives a binary answer, then, as the questions I posed illustrate, the answer to each question may be yes for some people and no for others, true for some people and false for others. In other words, the binary answers may be contradictory--which is my point.

Those are not contradictions, wenglund. If you ask "Is now 9 o'clock?" and you answer "Yes" at 9 o'clock and "No" otherwise, that doesn't mean the answers are contradictory because "now" is different every time it is uttered unless they two are uttered at the same time. It's sort of like "Me". These words are said to be indexical and that is taken into account.

It would be a contradiction if a computer that is supposed to tell the truth, when asked at a given moment whether it is 9 o'clock now, answers "Yes" and "No".

Here's a reason why we don't want to accept two contradictory propositions as true: because everything becomes possible. Here's how.

Take these to be true: P, ~P, Q, R, S, T.

Take X to be any proposition.

1. P (Given)

2. P V X (follows from 1 by Addition)

3. ~P (Given)

4. X (follows from 2 and 3 by Disjunctive syllogism)

That means that for every statement you want to put for X, it will turn out true if you accept one contradiction in your system.

I was fully aware of that when I asked the questions. In fact, that is why I asked certain questions. Two different people may ask the same exact question, but have different meanings in mind. If God answers the question according to what is meant, then he may give divergent, and perhaps diametrically opposing answers--which is my point.

And those are not contradictions. There is a distinction between a statement and a proposition. Different statements (in different languages using different symbols, for example) may express the same proposition. It isn't correct to say that a proposition expressed by the statement "Peter has a hat" is true and false and, thus, a contradiction, when you utter it meaning by "Peter" someone who has a hat and I utter it meaning by "Peter" someone who doesn't have a hat.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Alvino

[Brian 2.0]

Can the HG tell me JS is a prophet of God and tell other people that JS is not a prophet from God?

That is the meat of my question as well. The Santa to children is a good example of personalized curriculum.

My 3-year old son asks: Does Santa live in the North Pole with a group of elves that make presents?

I answer Yes.

My 18-year old son asks the same question.

I answer No.

My answers contradict. Plain and simple. And some would say I "lied" to my 2-year old.

When the HG is asked if JS is a prophet of God, can he say Yes to someone and No to another? And I mean literally say no. And the HG does this for the betterment of that person (i.e. the prime directive of the HG is bettering people, and that directive can actually trump truth confirmation at some points, but will eventually lead to truth confirmation).

The other option is the HG doesn't answer the question, or answers in a vague way that isn't technically a contradiction, but that has a similar effect as saying no ("your church is great. No need to leave your Protestant congregation"). That is not a contradiction, but more of an avoiding of the real question. It's like asking "do I look fat in these jeans?" to the HG. The HG smiles and says how great your new haircut is.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Brian 2.0

[canard78]

But you did hint that God can tell people contradictory things as long as it is what's best for them.

I didn't just hint at it. I said he absolutely will. But that does not mean he deceives or misleads them. Please reread my previous post on why there is a difference.

Oh, OK. So God won't tell someone that JS was a false prophet, correct?

You keep on evading the question. I never asked you about EVERY spiritual communication but about the principle of whether God can lie or not. Do you think the HG will ever tell someone what is actually false such that JS is a false prophet? It isn't my fault you don't even understand what the problem is.

Once again, that's not the issue. We can all agree God will tell the prophet things about the direction of the Church that He will never tell me. That's not the issue nor are those contradictions. The problem is when God supposedly tells some people one thing and other people the negation of that thing or something that implies the negation of the first. Clear?

I'm fine with God saying one thing to the church president but not telling me. Where did I even mention this?

Here's one:

President Kimball said Muhammad was inspired of God.

Muhammad said he was the last prophet.

Contradiction? Or simply the right information to the right people to give them the right light and knowledge to progress the best they can.

Not the issue, canard.

The issue is not whether you have a problem or not. The issue is not about what I consider to be revealed truth. The issue is whether the HG can tell us contradictory things. Can the HG tell me JS is a prophet of God and tell other people that JS is not a prophet from God?

You are making what is a broad and nuanced topic about one single question. A yes/no answer to your last question will not answer the actual question which we are trying to explore.

But if someone will progress to their highest potential by believing (for example) that Muhammad was the last true prophet and Joseph was a false one, would God do that? Most (all?) Muslims would believe this. Are they universally deceived? Our leaders teach us they are not. In fact they teach that "Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals."

God has not deceived them. He has given them the right information to fulfil their potential in life.

I know you will probably keep badgering me for a binary answer to your binary question. It is not a binary question and therefore neither is my answer. I won't keep on re-hashing this with you. I'm happy with the answers I have given.

[canard78]

That is the meat of my question as well. The Santa to children is a good example of personalized curriculum.

My 3-year old son asks: Does Santa live in the North Pole with a group of elves that make presents?

I answer Yes.

My 18-year old son asks the same question.

I answer No.

My answers contradict. Plain and simple. And some would say I "lied" to my 2-year old.

When the HG is asked if JS is a prophet of God, can he say Yes to someone and No to another? And I mean literally say no. And the HG does this for the betterment of that person (i.e. the prime directive of the HG is bettering people, and that directive can actually trump truth confirmation at some points, but will eventually lead to truth confirmation).

The other option is the HG doesn't answer the question, or answers in a vague way that isn't technically a contradiction, but that has a similar effect as saying no ("your church is great. No need to leave your Protestant congregation"). That is not a contradiction, but more of an avoiding of the real question. It's like asking "do I look fat in these jeans?" to the HG. The HG smiles and says how great your new haircut is.

I like your jeans analogy. Given all smart men do this it gets the HG off the hook. It appears, however, to be more like the Santa example.

As a parent you know that saying "yes" to the 3yo will bring more joy and excitement to Christmas. The child at 18 doesn't begrudge the changed perspective reached over time. He remembers and appreciates the magic of Christmas and intends to give the same answer to his own children.

It may be that as a parent when asked that question that you, our of conscience, answer ambiguously like "It's exciting to think of that isn't it?" Or "It must be very cold living in Lapland?" This may satisfy the morality of the apparent 'lie' but doesn't actually make a difference to the 3yo with limited understanding. He didn't hear "no, it's made up" so leaves with the understanding that you, his trusted parent, has confirmed Santa's existence and goes away happy, still enjoying the magic of Christmas.

Whether the Holy Ghost tells some people "Joseph is a false prophet" or "you don't need to follow his teachings" makes little real difference. It might satisfy the morality of some of us with our limited understanding of celestial communication, but the person is still left with the impression that Joseph is not a true prophet and therefore does not accept him and his revelations. If the individual's progress up the mountain/choice of vehicle on the path (delete metaphor as preferred) is most progressed by believing he was not a true prophet, a perfect parent would know how to communicate that.

I'm even willing to believe He would be happy with someone having no belief at all if that meant they became more charitable and progressed farther and faster towards godliness.

The HG contradicting answers question can also be simplified to:

A boy prays, shall I marry this girl. The HG says yes and he asks her.

The girl prays, shall I marry this boy, the HG says no.

Was the answer all in his head? Did he misread it? Or did the HG need to say yes to him because he could learn something from the asking? In this scenario I'd say the answer was probably a '3' scenario. Especially for the bag-o-hormones-boy.

But only probably... The problems arise when we presume that our answer (or our groups answer) is the only possible correct one and all others that oppose it are false reads or, worse, the deceit of the adversary.

[Alvino]

I didn't just hint at it. I said he absolutely will. But that does not mean he deceives or misleads them. Please reread my previous post on why there is a difference.

What post do you have in mind? I've read your posts and I don't think you are answering the issue. You have stated that there are different paths to the true Church yet and that the HG can tell people things that will drive them away from the LDS Church to fulfill other tasks that will help them reach their 'highest potential'. That doesn't answer whether God told them different true things or things that are false (along with some truths, perhaps).

I'm fine with God saying one thing to the church president but not telling me. Where did I even mention this?

I'm fine with that, too, canard. What I'm saying is that that isn't the point of disagreement. The point of disagreement is whether God can tell the prophet something true and someone else something false (such as that the LDS Church is guided by Satan, not God; or that JS was a false prophet).

Here's one:

President Kimball said Muhammad was inspired of God.

Muhammad said he was the last prophet.

Contradiction?

And this indicates to me you don't understand what a contradiction is. There is nothing contradictory about those two statements nor is that the point of contention. A contradiction would be, "President Kimball said Muhammad was inspired [by] God" and "President Kimball did not say Muhammad was inspired by God". A contradiction requires the negation of a proposition.

"Socrates is a man." The negation of that would be "Socrates is not a man" or, more precisely "It is not the case that Socrates is a man." A contradiction arises if we take both a proposition and it's negation to be true.

"Joseph Smith is a prophet of God." The negation is, "Joseph Smith is not a prophet of God" or, "It is not the case that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God." Has the HG ever revealed both of these to individuals to be true? That is the question.

Or simply the right information to the right people to give them the right light and knowledge to progress the best they can.

The HG may have given different people different right information or information that is correct. However, that isn't my question. My question is whether the HG has ever told people contradictory things.

You are making what is a broad and nuanced topic about one single question. A yes/no answer to your last question will not answer the actual question which we are trying to explore.

But I agreed that there is no problem with the HG telling people different things. I want to get more specific and ask you if, among all those different things, there are contradictory statements. Not different statements that serve particular purposes to the person that receives them, but contradictory things.

But if someone will progress to their highest potential by believing (for example) that Muhammad was the last true prophet and Joseph was a false one, would God do that?

You mean, would God tell them that JS was a false one because Muhammad was the last prophet? Right?

Most (all?) Muslims would believe this. Are they universally deceived? Our leaders teach us they are not.

No, your leaders tell you Muslims are not universally deceived (that is, deceived in most or all their beliefs), not that they are not deceived in believing God told them JS was a false prophet because Muhammad was the last prophet. Be careful, canard. The question is, are they deceived in thinking God told them Muhammad was going to be the last prophet ever? Could God really tell Muslims Muhammad was going to be the last prophet? Eyes on the prize, brother; identify the issue clearly.

In fact they teach that "Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals."

Now you are so obfuscating the issue that not only did you go astray from the issue of Muslims thinking God told them JS was a false prophet to whether Muslims are 'universally' wrong, but you here go to an even broader topic of "moral truths". Honestly, friend, you really need to focus here.

God has not deceived them. He has given them the right information to fulfil their potential in life.

Has God deceived them in telling them JS was a false prophet and that Muhammad was going to be the last prophet? Forget about all the vague and broad issues of "moral truths" or the correctness of the universality of their beliefs. I'm asking you a very straightforward question.

I know you will probably keep badgering me for a binary answer to your binary question.

Oh, so you can easily say that "they are not universally wrong" or "they have many moral truths", and that seems pretty binary given the even broader questions "Are Muslims universally wrong?" and "Do Muslims have many moral truths?", yet you shy away from saying whether they are wrong in believing God told them Muhammad was the last prophet or that JS was a false prophet, huh?

[canard78]

What post do you have in mind? I've read your posts and I don't think you are answering the issue. You have stated that there are different paths to the true Church yet and that the HG can tell people things that will drive them away from the LDS Church to fulfill other tasks that will help them reach their 'highest potential'. That doesn't answer whether God told them different true things or things that are false (along with some truths, perhaps).

I'm fine with that, too, canard. What I'm saying is that that isn't the point of disagreement. The point of disagreement is whether God can tell the prophet something true and someone else something false (such as that the LDS Church is guided by Satan, not God; or that JS was a false prophet).

And this indicates to me you don't understand what a contradiction is. There is nothing contradictory about those two statements nor is that the point of contention. A contradiction would be, "President Kimball said Muhammad was inspired [by] God" and "President Kimball did not say Muhammad was inspired by God". A contradiction requires the negation of a proposition.

"Socrates is a man." The negation of that would be "Socrates is not a man" or, more precisely "It is not the case that Socrates is a man." A contradiction arises if we take both a proposition and it's negation to be true.

"Joseph Smith is a prophet of God." The negation is, "Joseph Smith is not a prophet of God" or, "It is not the case that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God." Has the HG ever revealed both of these to individuals to be true? That is the question.

The HG may have given different people different right information or information that is correct. However, that isn't my question. My question is whether the HG has ever told people contradictory things.

But I agreed that there is no problem with the HG telling people different things. I want to get more specific and ask you if, among all those different things, there are contradictory statements. Not different statements that serve particular purposes to the person that receives them, but contradictory things.

You mean, would God tell them that JS was a false one because Muhammad was the last prophet? Right?

No, your leaders tell you Muslims are not universally deceived (that is, deceived in most or all their beliefs), not that they are not deceived in believing God told them JS was a false prophet because Muhammad was the last prophet. Be careful, canard. The question is, are they deceived in thinking God told them Muhammad was going to be the last prophet ever? Could God really tell Muslims Muhammad was going to be the last prophet? Eyes on the prize, brother; identify the issue clearly.

Now you are so obfuscating the issue that not only did you go astray from the issue of Muslims thinking God told them JS was a false prophet to whether Muslims are 'universally' wrong, but you here go to an even broader topic of "moral truths". Honestly, friend, you really need to focus here.

Has God deceived them in telling them JS was a false prophet and that Muhammad was going to be the last prophet? Forget about all the vague and broad issues of "moral truths" or the correctness of the universality of their beliefs. I'm asking you a very straightforward question.

Oh, so you can easily say that "they are not universally wrong" or "they have many moral truths", and that seems pretty binary given the even broader questions "Are Muslims universally wrong?" and "Do Muslims have many moral truths?", yet you shy away from saying whether they are wrong in believing God told them Muhammad was the last prophet or that JS was a false prophet, huh?

Your latest post has been such a bad mash-up of my response on the topic that I'm really not sure you're closely following the things I'm saying. I've tried every which way to describe my perspectives to you. If there is fault in the message delivery, I'll bear that in mind for the next time. But I'm not going to re-repeat my responses all over again.

[wenglund]

I know you agree with this, as we've had a meeting of the minds on it earlier. And I thought this is what Wade was getting at in his OP but in reading his past comments and his agreement with Ahab I think they are saying that the HG does NOT give contradictory messages, only "seemingly contradictory" messages.

That is correct. I think there is a point at which in saying certain things the end may not justify the means (particularly when the means may be against the end) and God may cease to be God. I am comfortable with some seeming contradictions coming from God in some cases, but not with literal contradictions, since literal contradictions may qualify as ungodly lying. (I say "ungodly lying" because I believe there are certain situations where lying is morally imperative and godly, though other circumstances where lying is morally repugnant and ungodly, and I think that literal contradictions may fall into the later category, though I am still open to seeing it otherwise).

Do questions like "Is the Book of Mormon true?" and "Is the LDS Church true" fall into the category where "yes" and "no" answers from God would be literally contradictory and morally repugnant and ungodly? Well, even thought the word "true" may be somewhat nebulous, and mean different things to different people, and is thus open to seeming contradictions, in my heart and mind I belove such questions are of such simplicity and of such importance, that God would not literally contradict himself. He may seemingly contradict himself with other more open questions, but not all questions.

So, how do I explain the supposed divergence in answers from the HG to those simple and important questions? Keep in mind that we are talking about very rare exceptions. Only a relative small portion of the world is aware of the restored gospel, and fewer still are open to missionary discussions, and even fewer still are willing to pray about the "truth" of what they have heard, and from my experience most of the tiny few receive a "yes" answer. Of the nominal few who receive a "no" answer, I suspect that either they didn't correctly interpret the answer, or they imposed on their own mind the answer, or they are lying, or they correctly interpreted the answer but the answer wasn't contradictory.

I suspect the latter to predominate--at least it did in my mission. Of the hundreds of people I taught, only one received a negative answer to his prayer. He was an Evangelical minister, and upon praying whether the Church was true or not, he received the answer that he was to continue with his ministry. In other words, the negative answer to his prayer wasn't "no, the Church isn't true," but a non-contradictory answer to the "yes": answer most others have received.

This makes sense to me because if God is directing people to other paths for their own good, then I think it is unlikely that he would inspire them to take the missionary discussion or pray about the truth of the Church. There are much better ways to direct them elsewhere than bringing them to the point where he may need to literally contradict himself and possibly lie.

In short, for the most part I agree with canard78. However, I disagree with him in regards to certain questions, and I draw the line at at those questions and literal contradictions.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 16, 2013 by wenglund

[Brian 2.0]

Alvino,

I think Canard has made himself quite clear on this, at least from what I've read. Yes, the HG can give contradictory information, even saying that JS is not a prophet, but he only says that because telling the pray-er JS in not a prophet is actually the best way to help that person become more Christlike and move them more towards God. So while the HG is providing contradictory information to people, the HG is never "misleading" anyone, rather is always leading them correctly and as fast as possible back to God using different paths.

I don't want to put words into his mouth but I've stated things like this in my posts and Canard has given an unequivocal "yes" to my statements, so I'm not sure why you think he's dodging questions.

I'm am trying to figure out if the OP (Wade) was trying to say that or if it was something different since he always speaks of "seemingly" contradictory revelation. It seems that he may be in more of the camp that the HG does NOT provide contradictory information but could still encourage different paths (i.e. The HG would never tell someone that JS is Not a prophet, but may tell someone to not join the church and stay in their congregation. Technically not a contradiction).

Either way, the outcome is the same (the person doesn't join the church). So, it's sort of up to you to believe what method the HG was using: The "Santa" example of outright contradiction. Or the "do I look fat in these jeans" example of wording the answer in such a way that does not provide a contradiction.

[Brian 2.0]

Wade, just posted the above before I saw your reply. You probably answered my question. Reading now.

[mfbukowski]

I hope I am missing the point... but it seems like some on this thread are saying that God will tell one person the Book of Mormon is true and another person that it is not true! This goes against everything I have ever learned in the Church. I suppose Moroni's promise is meaningless? That is my only argument here.

Well then it's a strawman because as far as I can tell no one is saying that.

First of all we are taught that the Holy Ghost gives a "stupor of thought" if what we are thinking is wrong- the problem with that is of course there may be many reasons we get a stupor of thought, including being on drugs, not being ready, not being sincere- a whole host of things which could cause such a thing. The HG does not give a testimony of a negative- He only gives testimonies of correct principles.

All I am talking about here is that someone could have a "true testimony" of attending say, the Salvation Army if one was a drunk on skid row who never knew Christ. If it is the salvation army who finds you and leads you closer to Christ, one could have a true testimony that God wants you to join that church- because they present the most light you have ever experienced in your life. Perhaps such a person could later be converted to belief in the BOM etc- because that is the path God MOST wants them on. So there are different paths some with more light than others. All I am saying is that the HG could indeed call you to a path with greater light, even if it is not the one with the greatest light.

I was not saying that the HG would tell someone that the BOM was "wrong"- just that he might confirm a path with more light than the one we are on. That's all I have been saying.

This looks awfully like a straw man argument. I never said God did not inspire others of other faiths, I simply said that when the fulness of the Gospel is presented God will not deny His word. (Proof text: Moroni 10:3-5)

No disagreement.

If someone said that God told them that the Book of Mormon was not true,I would say it is closer to choice 1. Either they are deceived, mistaken, or lying. I would not say the Holy Ghost revealed that to them. Only that person knows their real motives and only God can judge their intent... But God would never deny the truth of the Book of Mormon.

No disagreement.

Now this is insulting,

My genuine apologies.

... Again that is my problem, I understand people are at different levels of readiness, but that does not mean that God is going to testify against His Church.

Agreed

Please show where I stated this? I never said that they did not have some light. What I said was that God will not testify against His own word. In the absence of the fulness of the Gospel he does guide people to whatever light and knowledge they are willing to receive. I did not speak against this (neither against the "proof text" siting President Kimball and President Ucdorf)

Apologies- a misunderstanding I guess.

My contention is that God would NEVER tell anyone that the Book of Mormon is not true. He will never do that.

Agreed.

[mfbukowski]

So the Holy Ghost is actually outcome motivated? What if the HG is more a magic 8 ball... it provides confirmation to truth and thats it. It doesn't have a stake in what we do with it.

I don't worship a magic 8 ball, I worship a Heavenly Father who knows and cares about his children and guides them to the path they need to get closer to him.

[Brian 2.0]

Well then it's a strawman because as far as I can tell no one is saying that.

Well... I actually am saying that as a option so I think he was referring to my posts.

I don't worship a magic 8 ball, I worship a Heavenly Father who knows and cares about his children and guides them to the path they need to get closer to him.

And the position I'm positing of contradictory information given from the HG still satisfies this definition.

[mfbukowski]

The issue is not whether you have a problem or not. The issue is not about what I consider to be revealed truth. The issue is whether the HG can tell us contradictory things. Can the HG tell me JS is a prophet of God and tell other people that JS is not a prophet from God?

Oh come on! Basic doctrine- the HG does not confirm negatives. He tells you when you are on the right path- not confirming you are on the wrong path

D&C 9

8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must cask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.

9 But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong; therefore, you cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.

[wenglund]

Wade, just posted the above before I saw your reply. You probably answered my question. Reading now.

I have made some important edits to that post. Hopefully you caught them as well.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[canard78]

Alvino,

I think Canard has made himself quite clear on this, at least from what I've read. Yes, the HG can give contradictory information, even saying that JS is not a prophet, but he only says that because telling the pray-er JS in not a prophet is actually the best way to help that person become more Christlike and move them more towards God. So while the HG is providing contradictory information to people, the HG is never "misleading" anyone, rather is always leading them correctly and as fast as possible back to God using different paths.

I don't want to put words into his mouth but I've stated things like this in my posts and Canard has given an unequivocal "yes" to my statements, so I'm not sure why you think he's dodging questions.

I'm am trying to figure out if the OP (Wade) was trying to say that or if it was something different since he always speaks of "seemingly" contradictory revelation. It seems that he may be in more of the camp that the HG does NOT provide contradictory information but could still encourage different paths (i.e. The HG would never tell someone that JS is Not a prophet, but may tell someone to not join the church and stay in their congregation. Technically not a contradiction).

Either way, the outcome is the same (the person doesn't join the church). So, it's sort of up to you to believe what method the HG was using: The "Santa" example of outright contradiction. Or the "do I look fat in these jeans" example of wording the answer in such a way that does not provide a contradiction.

Thanks Brian,

To clarify, yes I do think God can communicate with many people in such a way that they are left with different, seemingly contradicting positions. But I also don't think it's quite as a black and white as Alvino wants me to make it. He keeps on insisting on me saying 'yes' or 'no' to his question. It doesn't have to be so simplistic.

Let me give a personal example:

- My wife believes Joseph was a false prophet and probably a fraudster. She has moved away from her Mormon beliefs and barely has a belief in any meaningful deity. Since stopping LDS activity her life is better. She serves more. She is happier. She is developing her personal talents and abilities more quickly. She is climbing the mountain by a different path, but still climbing up. She is still on the path towards godliness but is using a different (but personally more effective) vehicle. The difference is tangible.

- I believe Joseph is not a false prophet. I believe he is a true prophet, though my perspectives on what that means may be slightly different to the orthodox Mormon view. I continue to embrace his big-picture view of eternal plan and the scriptures he was used to deliver. I consider my life to be better when I embrace them.

- My daughter believes Joseph to be a true prophet in the straight and simple way that we have taught her from the church curriculum. This helps her accept and adopt the principles of the gospel in the simple manner that is helpful to her and her learning process.

So... I consider him a true prophet. My wife considers him a false prophet. I see the hand and influence of God (I assume via the Holy Spirit) in both of our lives. I don't fully know the messages my wife received from the heavens to help her reach the conclusions she has. But I do not believe she has been deceived or mislead. It might appear be a contradiction. But I'm comfortable with the outcome.

[mfbukowski]

I don't think this because I don't have a bias against human judgement. You keep incorrectly assuming I think being able to get out of our human fallible minds is required to have knowledge or to have good justification for claiming truth. I don't.

That's because you talk as if truth is some objective thing out there- some great dualistic divide independent of linguistic propositions. Truth is a property of a given proposition within a context- that's all it is. It always depends on what is meant, not some grand floating vision of TRVTH in the sky. You say an awful lot about truth without saying what you mean by it.

[mfbukowski]

I know you will probably keep badgering me for a binary answer to your binary question. It is not a binary question and therefore neither is my answer. I won't keep on re-hashing this with you. I'm happy with the answers I have given.

Bravo. That's my issue with him here also.

[canard78]

From the "stuffing a turkey" thread that started this one, Duncan offered the following wonderful insight (I've invited the stragglers over to this thread):

very true but thank heavens for the next life! Elder Orson F. Whitney said, “God is using more than one people for the accomplishment of his great and marvelous work. The Latter-day Saints cannot do it all. It is too vast, too arduous, for any one people.” So, personally I see The Gospel and the Church, to borrow an analogy from Truman Madsen, as a visiting Caesar-many roads to and from Rome but there is only one way to get in and see Caesar. Everyone will have the opportunity to accept or reject the Gospel plan, however and whenever it is presented to them

More of the quote is here:

“Perhaps the Lord needs such men on the outside of His Church to help it along,” said the late Elder Orson F. Whitney of the Quorum of the Twelve. “They are among its auxiliaries, and can do more good for the cause where the Lord has placed them, than anywhere else. … Hence, some are drawn into the fold and receive a testimony of the truth; while others remain unconverted … the beauties and glories of the gospel being veiled temporarily from their view, for a wise purpose. The Lord will open their eyes in His own due time. God is using more than one people for the accomplishment of His great and marvelous work. The Latter-day Saints cannot do it all. It is too vast, too arduous for any one people. … We have no quarrel with the Gentiles. They are our partners in a certain sense.” (Conference Report, April 1928, p. 59.)

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1972/07/civic-standards-for-the-faithful-saints?lang=eng

The whole talk from President Benson is worth reading.

How does God go about veiling their eyes temporarily from view for a wise purpose? He might do it by giving them the impression (through the holy ghost) that Joseph was not a true prophet. Or He might be more sophisticated than that. He is, after all, I believe, the master communicator. If that leads to answers that are limited understanding see as a contradiction, then so be it.

[mfbukowski]

What post do you have in mind? I've read your posts and I don't think you are answering the issue. You have stated that there are different paths to the true Church yet and that the HG can tell people things that will drive them away from the LDS Church to fulfill other tasks that will help them reach their 'highest potential'. That doesn't answer whether God told them different true things or things that are false (along with some truths, perhaps).

You really don't understand that truth and falsity is contextual- there are no "true things". What theory of truth do you subscribe to? You seem to have taken logic 101 and not much more.

Sorry folks, I guess I have to post this again-

[media=]

Edited April 16, 2013 by mfbukowski

[Lightbearer]

Fantastic examples.

Lightbearer. Before trying to answer your questions again, I'm going to refer you to Wade eloquent post above. As he points out, it's far more nuanced than black and white thinking.

The answer to the question of 'would God give different answers to the question of the Book of Mormon' is yes, if it's more 'express' (D&C 19:7).

Nuanced! Oh I should have known. Sorry, that just an easy way to build a straw man argument. Remove the possibility that someone could be "wrong" and you have universal utopia... We are all right! Or perhaps it is "right for us" but not everyone. Sounds a lot like "it really does not matter what church you belong to, as long as you believe in Christ" oh wait a second what of the Muslims? The Buddhists? The Hindu's? What about the worshippers of idols? Let's not leave out the Atheists... they are good too! Yes the Black and white thinking gets in the way of those who want to say: "there is no sin, whatever a man does is no crime" Sure let us eat, drink and be merry! And if we die all will be well with us. There is no God today or if so He is the "unknown god"!

Let's take an extreme example. Mother Teresa. She is held up as a model of compassion and service throughout the world and inspired others to do the same. We presume she never asked in prayer about the BoM. But if she had, what would God have been best answering? She was better placed to fill the measure of her creation and mortal probation as a non-Mormon. Apparently for 99% of people it's the same case. Not simply through some unfortunate twist of birth or fate. But by design.

Yes lets take her for an example. She was a model of compassion and service and inspired many to do the same. How can we judge her? How can we be so sure she would not have embraced the restored Gospel with gladness? I do not condemn her good works, but could that excuse a person from attending to the ordinances that God has provided if it were made available? You are assuming a lot. The spirit world is not to give people a "second chance" because God botched it up in mortality! It is for those who would have received it with all their hearts it they had the chance in this life. The reason we do baptism for the dead is not to thwart people's agency, it is to make the Gospel available to ALL! Some circumstances make it impossible for some to get that chance in this life. Yes God does give each person what they are capable of receiving, but they still have the choice. When I was a young naive missionary I thought if I could show anyone that the Gospel was true then they should accept it. I soon learned that it does not work that way. First it is the spirit that teaches we are only the instrument God uses to proclaim His truth. Also I learned that if that person being taught did not receive it by the spirit then most often it did not happen. Also there is the unthinkable truth that not everyone WANTS THE TRUTH! That is why they harden or allow their hearts to be hardened against the restored Gospel of Christ. Traditions of their fathers and transgression take away light and truth.

So if I had a person ask me as a missionary or as just a member of the Church would God ever deny His word? Would He tell one that it is true and another that it is not true? NO WAY! If you will permit I will offer a "proof text" to support my opinion:

"Behold, my brethren, he that prophesieth, let him prophesy to the understanding of men; for the Spirit speaketh the truth and lieth not. Wherefore, it speaketh of things as they really are, and of things as they really will be; wherefore, these things are manifested unto us plainly, for the salvation of our souls. But behold, we are not witnesses alone in these things; for God also spake them unto prophets of old. But behold, the Jews were a stiffnecked people; and they despised the words of plainness, and killed the prophets, and sought for things that they could not understand. Wherefore, because of their blindness, which blindness came by looking beyond the mark, they must needs fall; for God hath taken away his plainness from them, and delivered unto them many things which they cannot understand, because they desired it. And because they desired it God hath done it, that they may stumble." (Book of Mormon | Jacob 4:13-14)

At first one might think that this states that God will lie... but on closer examination it was because of the individual's own blindness. They wanted to be blinded and thus God works according to their desires. Why do you think a third of God's children followed Satan? Was it because God wanted them to? No it was because of their own agency! So it is in this life. We must choose to believe, that is what Elder Holland was talking about this conference. If we want the Gospel to be false we will find it. Not because God told them that but because they listen to the wrong spirit. Satan is our adversary and he never leads anyone back to the father, in fact he tries to harden peoples heart and blind their minds so they will not believe or will only believe so much but no further. As long as we are in the flesh there is no "lost cause" and the spirit will reveal the truth to a willing mind and a sincere heart. The reason we are blessed with General Conference twice a year is so that not only the Church can hear the voice of living prophets and apostles but so the world can!

As for other churches and religions having some truth, of course but I also suggest there is a lot in those churches that are not true and not pleasing to God or why would he restore the church?

One more piece of Black and White thinking:

"HEARKEN, O ye elders of my church, and give ear to the voice of the living God; and attend to the words of wisdom which shall be given unto you, according as ye have asked and are agreed as touching the church, and the spirits which have gone abroad in the earth. Behold, verily I say unto you, that there are many spirits which are false spirits, which have gone forth in the earth, deceiving the world. And also Satan hath sought to deceive you, that he might overthrow you. Behold, I, the Lord, have looked upon you, and have seen abominations in the church that profess my name. But blessed are they who are faithful and endure, whether in life or in death, for they shall inherit eternal life. But wo unto them that are deceivers and hypocrites, for, thus saith the Lord, I will bring them to judgment. Behold, verily I say unto you, there are hypocrites among you, who have deceived some, which has given the adversary power; but behold such shall be reclaimed; But the hypocrites shall be detected and shall be cut off, either in life or in death, even as I will; and wo unto them who are cut off from my church, for the same are overcome of the world. Wherefore, let every man beware lest he do that which is not in truth and righteousness before me." (Doctrine and Covenants | Section 50:1-9)

I believe this scripture has everything to do with what we are discussing in this thread, any spirit that says that Jesus Christ is accursed is not of God, in like manner any spirit that teaches that Joseph is a false prophet is not of God! Any spirit that would deny the Book of Mormon and the living prophet is not of God!

[thesometimesaint]

I had initially intended to start this thread for PoisonWell's benefit. However, since s/he has voluntarily left the building in a huff, I will use this thread to respond to a similar tangential question posed to me by bcuzbcuz on the other thread, and to explore more in-depth the tangential comments leading up to his question. He asked:

The answer, I believe, was hinted at by Canard78 and perhaps others who spoke of "individualized curriculum," To me, God, in his infinite love and wisdom, knows what is best for each of his children and how we best may grow and develop towards our best selves, as we may be so inclined. He understands that his different children may have different learning styles, different aptitudes, different inclination, and different circumstances, etc.. And, as such, it may necessitate guiding some of his children onto different paths and at different rates of progression and so forth.

We, as parents and teachers, or as children and students, may see the wisdom in this. As one who has several mild/moderate learning disabilities, and who has taught special education, I have seen first-hand that not all students learn well under the somewhat one-size-fits-all approach of public education. My mind processes information differently and at a different rate than most other students, and so I didn't progress as well as them in at school, though I found ways to educate myself in order to compete.

And, not everyone is cut out for college and graduate school or corporate management. Believe it or not, some people these days are so much more happy and fulfilled in their homeless and beggarly lives than they would be working 8 - 5 and owning a palatial home.

In short, as I understand things, God has made his children the priority, and not his educational system (the sabbath is for man, and not man for the sabbath). As such, the path he guides them towards, is the path he believes is best for them and the best they may be willing and able to travel, which necessitates revealing different things to different people.

I view this as how God has always been, and he changes not in this respect. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

What think ye?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

We shouldn't let the perfect become the enemy of the good.