Nephi'S Beheading Of Laban

[Samlam]

See this is when I start to feel uncomfortable. Let's just go and kill all the people causing people to dwindle in unbelief. Let's line up the editors of MormonThink and shoot them. Then we can go and kill all the Hollywood producers. Except the guys at Pixar... they're the good guys. Once done we'd better kill all the politicians in Holland given their permissiveness. Wait... let's just wipe out the entire Dutch nation - they seem to be a bad apple in the European barrel. Who's next? People on the East Coast? I guess all liberals will have to go too.

The guy was passed out on the floor completed wasted. He wasn't going anywhere. Was a gruesome execution really needed?

I'd have to agree with QB, that's always been a scene that's made me go 'huh?'

The question is perhaps subject to the point of reference...Is this an execution for naught, or is this a judgment being delivered in the form of an execution.

[Samlam]

That and lopping their arms off.

Maybe we should switch the name from "excommunicate" to "dismember." For all sorts of reasons

As long as we don't call it a tossed salad...( I need a few more posts)

[volgadon]

The question is perhaps subject to the point of reference...Is this an execution for naught, or is this a judgment being delivered in the form of an execution.

The concern in the Nephi passage is preserving God’s chosen people (or their progenitor) from destruction. In order to do so, acts that are normally forbidden and condemned are now required and commanded.

"R. Nahman b. Isaac said: A transgression performed for the sake of heaven is better than a precept performed not for the sake of heaven.”

Jael, wife of Heber the Kenite, is famous for having slain the Canaanite general Sisera when he sought refuge in her tent. Not only might this be construed as breaking the commandment against killing, the sages sensed that something more had occurred.

“Blessed above women shall Jael be, the wife of Heber the Kenite…

R. Johanan said: [sisera] that wicked one had intercourse seven times [with Jael] at that moment, as it says: “At her feet he sunk, he fell, he lay;” etc…”

These verbs were understood as euphemisms, and their appearance for a total of sevens times meant that Jael had gone to bed with Sisera not once, but seven times.

As Rashi explained, “Blessed [is Jael] for having committed a sin for the sake of heaven in order to sap that wicked one’s strength so that she could slay him.”

“Both Tamar and Zimri committed adultery. Tamar committed adultery and gave birth to kings and prophets. Zimri committed adultery and on his account many tens of thousands of Israel perished.”

[Robert F. Smith]

Well, there is middle ground, and the majority of Mormons already inhabit that middle ground. For example, Mormons no longer officially believe that the Native Americans are, in general, Lamanites.

They never "officially" believed it, even if, "in general," Amerinds can all be considered Lamanites in the broad but non-genetic sense.

Moreover, I am unaware of a poll having been taken. I know, we can have Jay Leno go "Jaywalking" in downtown SLC, on Temple Square, to determine what the "majority" really think.

[Robert F. Smith]

The question is perhaps subject to the point of reference...Is this an execution for naught, or is this a judgment being delivered in the form of an execution.

There is an interesting account in the Babylonian Talmud, in the gemara at Berakot 58a (9:1), which Yona Fraenkel describes in Tarbiz 40:33-40 (in Hebrew). In that story, Rabbi Shela` obtains permission from non-Jewish governmental authorities to execute an errant Jew. He receives that permission and beats that errant Jew to death with a rod (qulpa').

[Calm]

According to a Jerusalem Artichoke I know

[Sleeper Cell]

Even under biblical law, vigilante killing, theft, and kidnapping was not tolerated. Civilization could not exist if it were legal to go around killing people who "deserved to die." It is the sovereign, or the judges, who make that determination.

Then the question becomes:

In ancient Israel, did the God of Israel have the legal authority to order a prophet to execute someone?

If so, then Nephi was not acting as a vigilante. He was carrying out the lawful order of a judge.

[thesometimesaint]

It wasn't self-defense. We know this because we know the exact, cold-blooded logic of balancing end versus means that went through his mind as he was debating whether to decapitate the passed-out man lying before him.

Within the culture of the time yes it was. We don't know the logic that went through his mind, all we do know is what he wrote down many years after the event. Also Nephi had no reason to believe that Laban wouldn't get to his feet and kill him with his sword. We of such modern genteel sensitivities would be agast at what was considered within acceptable conduct 3000 years ago.

[thesometimesaint]

I guess since I am just a young cucumber and not a pickle I do not get to edit my posts. So to correct my typing I have to insert another post…oh well if it tastes like vinegar it’s good for my aging process…

This:

Nephi knows the scriptures though and three times reminds him of this set of verses:

Should have read: Nephi knows the scriptures though and three times the Spirit reminds him of this set of verses:

Nephi probably also knows where God commands to kill. Killing a person is serious business and shouldn't be undertaken without serious thought. I can well imagine the conflict within Nephi.

[Calm]

Within the culture of the time yes it was. We don't know the logic that went through his mind, all we do know is what he wrote down many years after the event. Also Nephi had no reason to believe that Laban wouldn't get to his feet and kill him with his sword. We of such modern genteel sensitivities would be agast at what was considered within acceptable conduct 3000 years ago.

Nephi likely wouldn't have known a place to hide Laban stripped, bound and gagged that would guarantee no discovery until he and his brothers were far out of town. The guy was drunk, not in a coma...there was a chance that as soon as Nephi left him, he would have regained consciousness and managed to get home before Nephi got the plates even.

Then there was the point of whether Laban was vindictive or greedy enough to order his men to search for Lehi and his family...and like someone mentioned above, I believe, there is no indication that Lehi hid where he was going. If Nephi and his brothers came back on foot and Laban had access to mounted men, the pursuers could be back at the camp before the brothers showed up to warn everyone they had to disappear.

And Laban had already shown he was not reluctant to kill to cover his own misdeeds.

Whether or not that justifies killing Laban, people must decide for himself.

[canard78]

As long as we don't call it a tossed salad...( I need a few more posts)

Nice

Go to the social and talk to yourself on the three word story for a while. You'll soon be up to 25 posts.

[rhythm]

See Article of Faith # 12: We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

Actually they are relative. We(citizens of the US) generally assume that laws against killing are moraly right. However we(citizens of the US) also allow for self defense, including actions that end in death.

We don't know to what rights the Sealing carried with it, but there is no indications that it included marriage rights. Add in that JS was also Sealed to men. The idea that it did include marriage rights becomes problematic. BY OTOH engaged in polygamy, but that was when he was outside the jurisdiction of the US.

The phrase Lying for the Lord is a pagorative devised by Anti-Mormons to impugn the motives and beliefs of the LDS. I had thought better of you.

...

I don't understand the colored text above. I'm not sure what you mean by it or how it's related to the statements immediately preceding it. Maybe you mean "rites" instead of "rights"? Even substituting that I'm still very confused as to your meaning and the logic of your statements in the context.

Also, Joseph Smith having been sealed to men is something that I have never heard before. Is there another thread where this is discussed, or can you point me in the direction of somewhere I can read more about this? Or give a short summary of what you're referring to here?

As far as the topic of this thread, Nephi killing Laban has never especially bothered me. Captain Moroni killing the king-men in Alma 51, on the other hand, strikes me as unjustified and bothers me quite a bit. Maybe after I'm no longer a newbie I can start a thread about that--or maybe such a thread already exists.

[Kenngo1969]

Even under biblical law, vigilante killing, theft, and kidnapping was not tolerated. Civilization could not exist if it were legal to go around killing people who "deserved to die." It is the sovereign, or the judges, who make that determination.

"I need to ignore everything Laban did to Nephi and his brothers [should any of that have been tolerated?] so I can superimpose my presentist mindset on an occurrence that happened ca. 600 BC! What? Welch? Larsen? [stick fingers in ears] Nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah! I can't hear you! I can't hear you! Nyah-nyah-nyah! Nephi should have simply called 911, summoned the Jerusalem City Police, and had Laban arrested! Simple!"

Sigh.

[Kenngo1969]

... Jael, wife of Heber the Kenite ... [Emphasis added by Kenngo1969, aka Ken]

I have my own tribe?! Ausgezeichnet!!! (Who knew?!!) (We have liberal entrance policies, in case anyone wants to join me! )

Edited August 8, 2013 by Kenngo1969

[Kenngo1969]

No, I think it just expresses Smith's personal philosophy, which was extraordinarily relativistic. He said, later, that he thought that moral right and wrong depends on the context, and that religious law supersedes secular law. This was part of the justification for polygamy and other extra-legal Mormon activities carried out in the name of a higher purpose, as well as "lying for the Lord." It may have even played a part in the translation of the Book of Mormon, if you assume that he was consciously aware that it was fiction (though I'm not necessarily convinced he was so aware). [Emphasis added by Kenngo1969]

Why not? You seem to be remarkably aware and assured of so many other things ... why equivocate now?

[cdowis]

That and lopping their arms off.

Maybe we should switch the name from "excommunicate" to "dismember." For all sorts of reasons

Brilliant.

[cdowis]

Also, Joseph Smith having been sealed to men is something that I have never heard before. Is there another thread where this is discussed, or can you point me in the direction of somewhere I can read more about this? Or give a short summary of what you're referring to here?

This was in a time when vicarious sealing was not very well understood, and lots of people were being sealed to the prophets == JS probably had hundreds of women sealed to him vicariously.

Anyway this practice was stopped, as we now have a better understanding of the concept of the sealing line.

Edited August 8, 2013 by cdowis

[rhythm]

This was in a time when vicarious sealing was not very well understood, and lots of people were being sealed to the prophets == JS probably had hundreds of women sealed to him vicariously.

Anyway this practice was stopped, as we now have a better understanding of the concept of the sealing line.

I know Joseph Smith was sealed to several women, but my question was if he was sealed to men also.

[cdowis]

I know Joseph Smith was sealed to several women, but my question was if he was sealed to men also.

Yes, for the same reason that I am sealed to my father. At that time the saints did not fully understand the concept of the sealing line.

Edited August 8, 2013 by cdowis

[Calm]

I know Joseph Smith was sealed to several women, but my question was if he was sealed to men also.

Yes, men are sealed to men now btw as fathers and sons.

Sealings weren't seen in quite the same way, it wasn't until late 1800s that a revelation was received that instructed the Church to start sealing people to their own parents and not to church leaders.

Edited August 8, 2013 by calmoriah

[rhythm]

Oh ok. Interesting. Sorry to sidetrack the thread. I'm still confused on post #114, but after reading again it seems like the poster was implying that Joseph Smith being sealed to several women could be seen as an example of religious law superseding secular law. I can't tell if the poster is implying that although Joseph Smith was sealed to various women, he didn't engage in polygamy and thus was not in violation of the law? and seemingly equating the father-son sealing to the husband-wife sealing? Anyway, I'll just disregard that post as it seems irrelevant and hard to follow--just seeing "marriage" and "sealed to men" in close proximity had me scratching my head for a minute.

I am of course familiar with the fact that children are sealed to parents, but thinking about it now I can't recall the specific ordinance or means this is done for the dead or for parents who were not previously sealed to each other before their children were born (i.e. how this is done for those not "born in the covenant"). (not asking for an answer to that question)

Carry on.

[volgadon]

As far as the topic of this thread, Nephi killing Laban has never especially bothered me. Captain Moroni killing the king-men in Alma 51, on the other hand, strikes me as unjustified and bothers me quite a bit. Maybe after I'm no longer a newbie I can start a thread about that--or maybe such a thread already exists.

Happy to oblige. http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/61497-captain-moroni-and-the-king-men/

[thesometimesaint]

(Imagine this said in a sing-song voice - almost like 'bing-bong): Nonsense.

Even an apostle disagrees with you:

http://www.pbs.org/m...ws/holland.html

Just because you find no middle ground doesn't mean others can't.

I have no problem with an Apostle disagreeing with me, or I with them.

[Cobalt-70]

In ancient Israel, did the God of Israel have the legal authority to order a prophet to execute someone?

No. YHWH did not, himself, have any legal authority, nor did any of the other Hebrew gods. To the extent that a prophet of YHWH was able to convince a judge or king that his god, or some other god, had revealed to him that a person was worthy of death, the king or judge would still require the testimony of a second witness.

[Cobalt-70]

Within the culture of the time yes it was. We don't know the logic that went through his mind, all we do know is what he wrote down many years after the event. Also Nephi had no reason to believe that Laban wouldn't get to his feet and kill him with his sword. We of such modern genteel sensitivities would be agast at what was considered within acceptable conduct 3000 years ago.

Even if the Laban strory were actually a historical event in 600 BC Jerusalem, you would have to assume that over the course of several decades, Nephi would have added, not subtracted, justifications for his murder. Memory and time adds justification and rationalization, which is why Joseph Smith's later stories of the First Vision are more elaborate and rational than the earlier ones.