Personal Revelation

[TheSkepticChristian]

No perhaps about it.  Why would a skeptic use such a source?

 

I am skeptical of the source, but there is no evidence that contradicts that claim, so I can't be sure it is false. 

I also heard that somewhere else, I think on the PBS documentary of the MMM, I can't remember. 

 

That claim is also consistent with history, there are many crazy people that claim a "divine revelation" told them to commit an atrocity. 

Bush also received a "divine revelation" to invade Iraq.

 

The LDS church warns of false revelation. 

Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service, (2004), 89–102

 

A Word of Caution As you pray for inspiration, you should also confirm your feelings. For example, compare your decisions with the scriptures and the teachings of the living prophets. Be certain that the feelings are consistent with the assignment you have; for example, you will not receive revelation to tell a local bishop how he should perform in his calling. Discuss your decisions and conclusions with your companion, your district leader, or your mission president when appropriate. President Howard W. Hunter offered this counsel: “Let me offer a word of caution. … I think if we are not careful … , we may begin to try to counterfeit the true influence of the Spirit of the Lord by unworthy and manipulative means. I get concerned when it appears that strong emotion or free-flowing tears are equated with the presence of the Spirit. Certainly the Spirit of the Lord can bring strong emotional feelings, including tears, but that outward manifestation ought not to be confused with the presence of the Spirit itself” (The Teachings of Howard W. Hunter, 184).

[thesometimesaint]

I'll never understand why this argument gets used, yet it's trotted out all the time.  Why should the law of the land have anything to do what is moral/ethical/right/wrong in God's eyes?

 

Simply because I will not be judged by the law for my personal beliefs. I can believe anything I want. What I do because of those beliefs is another matter. IE; In the Laban/Nephi case it would have been considered self defense. Nephi obviously struggled with the idea of killing someone. So much so that many years later it still bothered him.

SEE http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705384881/Michael-R-Ash-Nephi-Laban-and-the-brass-plates.html?pg=all

Edited June 4, 2015 by thesometimesaint

[pogi]

In the Laban/Nephi case it would have been considered self defense.

 

It would have been considered self defense by whom?

 

A drunken man passed out on the ground is hardly a threat when you and your family will be leaving the city and headed for a new continent that night.

 

There is no justification for his actions if it was not from the Lord. 

 

Killing in the name of God does not have the best track record, but it is right when it is right and it is wrong when it is wrong.  Trying to legally justify it or make it appear morally decent doesn't always work.

Edited June 4, 2015 by pogi

[TheSkepticChristian]

A drunken man passed out on the ground is hardly a threat when you and your family will be leaving the city and headed for a new continent that night.

 

Laban attempted to murder (and probably did kill others). Laban was a dangerous man and a evil ruler, no one else could stop him. 

 

There is no justification for his actions if it was not from the Lord. 

 

Many would disagree, see 

 

[pogi]

Laban attempted to murder (and probably did kill others). Laban was a dangerous man and a evil ruler, no one else could stop him.

 

That is not self-defense.  He was not a threat to Nephi at the time, nor would he have been a threat to Nephi after leaving that night.  Your justification for killing him is different than self-defense.  Without authority from God or the state, I don't agree with your justification for killing a civil leader either.

Edited June 4, 2015 by pogi

[TheSkepticChristian]

That is not self-defense.  He was not a threat to Nephi at the time, nor would he have been a threat to Nephi after leaving that night.  Your justification for killing him is different than self-defense.  Without authority from God or the state, I don't agree with your justification for killing a civil leader either.

 

I did not say it was self-defense, but Laban was worst than Saddam Hussein, no one else could stop him, Laban was above the law. 

[pogi]

I did not say it was self-defense, but Laban was worst than Saddam Hussein, no one else could stop him, Laban was above the law. 

 

Without authority from the state or God, there would be no justification for killing Saddam Hussein either.  That's all I am saying.  When people justify killing based on their own judgment and authority, bad things happen.

Edited June 4, 2015 by pogi

[Brian 2.0]

Many would disagree, see 

 

 

I've watched this video, both times you have posted it, and I'm curious what exactly your point of it is?  There are two guys saying they would kill a bad man (one for free, another for money).  How does that correlated with what God's law on the matter is?

 

Coming at this another way...

 

Take the Brass Plates out of the story for moment.  Nephi is sneaking back into town because he forgot to pack his toothbrush and stumbles into a drunken Laban on the ground -- Laban is still the same bad guy and stole Lehi's valuables earlier.  Is Nephi justified, and even required as some have said, to cut off his head before he leaves back out into the wilderness with his toothbrush?

 

Were the necessity of the Brass Plates to the future Nephite civilization the element that made killing Laban justified in God's eyes, or was Laban's killing justified because of other reasons?

[Calm]

I am skeptical of the source, but there is no evidence that contradicts that claim, so I can't be sure it is false. 

 

That sounds similar to an excuse to spread gossip....

[Brian 2.0]

Here's how I my brain used to work through the story of killing someone because you think God told you to.  Or doing anything your conscience is telling you not to do.

 

1.  I believe Action A is wrong.

2.  I believe God is telling me to do Action A.

3.  I better be sure that it's actually God, and an all-good-all-knowing God, that is telling me this and not some other source.  And it better be rock-solid surety if Action A is something pretty drastic like killing my own son.

4.  There's just no way to know with that level of surety the source

5.  So I don't do Action A.

 

I know this is me failing the test of Abraham, but to be honest... people that do pass that test, kind of scare me.

[TheSkepticChristian]

Without authority from the state or God, there would be no justification for killing Saddam Hussein either.  That's all I am saying.  When people justify killing based on their own judgment and authority, bad things happen.

 

God did tell Nephi to do that, and Nephi did nothing wrong because that guy was dangerous, and evil, and No one else could do something about it. Today people call to police when there is trouble, back in 600BC there was no police, and Laban was not going to get arrested by anyone, I think Nephi had no other option 

 

 

There is no justification for his actions if it was not from the Lord. 

 

It is not a good idea to commit an atrocity when you think God is telling you, or when you are hearing voices. 

 

 

That sounds similar to an excuse to spread gossip....

 

I think I also heard that in the PBS documentary. Why gossip? I never accused Brigham Young or the entire church. 

Edited June 5, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Here's how I my brain used to work through the story of killing someone because you think God told you to.  Or doing anything your conscience is telling you not to do.

 

1.  I believe Action A is wrong.

2.  I believe God is telling me to do Action A.

3.  I better be sure that it's actually God, and an all-good-all-knowing God, that is telling me this and not some other source.  And it better be rock-solid surety if Action A is something pretty drastic like killing my own son.

4.  There's just no way to know with that level of surety the source

5.  So I don't do Action A.

 

I know this is me failing the test of Abraham, but to be honest... people that do pass that test, kind of scare me.

 

I'm with you on the whole listening to God while he tells you to kill someone. Very scary that we trot out Abraham as some type of model when he takes his son out to sacrafice him.

 

That said, Laban was a very bad man who apparantly thought nothing of stealing and killing on a whim. It is hard to say that killing such a man would be amoral. If someone had the opportunity to kill Stalin or Hitler (extreme I know) in their sleep, I'd have a hard time calling that amoral.

[Calm]

 

I think I also heard that in the PBS documentary.

Depending on their reference, that could mean everything or nothing.  Feel free to find the information if you want to actually use it as a reference.  Otherwise it is just like repeating gossip.

 

You have not demonstrated with any reliability that those involved actually claimed revelation.  Your only reference is from a source that may not even be the actual person involved (Lee), but a ghost writer as the book was published after his death and it was known to be added to in order to increase its appeal since that is how the lawyer got paid, iirc.

[JLHPROF]

Here's how I my brain used to work through the story of killing someone because you think God told you to.  Or doing anything your conscience is telling you not to do.

 

1.  I believe Action A is wrong.

2.  I believe God is telling me to do Action A.

3.  I better be sure that it's actually God, and an all-good-all-knowing God, that is telling me this and not some other source.  And it better be rock-solid surety if Action A is something pretty drastic like killing my own son.

4.  There's just no way to know with that level of surety the source

5.  So I don't do Action A.

 

I know this is me failing the test of Abraham, but to be honest... people that do pass that test, kind of scare me.

 

That's because you are missing #6 - Produce enough faith to know of a surety  that Action A is God's will.

 

Now how exactly one goes about producing that level of faith I have no idea.  Perhaps someone can tell me.

I know a mustard seed size faith could move a mountain, I would imagine it could also determine if Action A is God's will.

Never met anyone with that much faith (although my wife's grandmother probably comes close).

[Brian 2.0]

That's because you are missing #6 - Produce enough faith to know of a surety that Action A is God's will.

Now how exactly one goes about producing that level of faith I have no idea. Perhaps someone can tell me.

I know a mustard seed size faith could move a mountain, I would imagine it could also determine if Action A is God's will.

Never met anyone with that much faith (although my wife's grandmother probably comes close).

Sadly most people that do claim to have achieved #6 are often seemed a little "nuts" and their Actions A are nutty at best and reprehensible at worse... which only goes back to prove #4.

[TheSkepticChristian]

  Your only reference is from a source that may not even be the actual person involved (Lee), but a ghost writer as the book was published after his death and it was known to be added to in order to increase its appeal since that is how the lawyer got paid, iirc.

 

I will look for references when I have the time, I am busy at this moment, but I admit I could be wrong.

 

I like it when people are skeptical and demand evidence 

Edited June 5, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Kenngo1969]

... Killing in the name of God does not have the best track record, but it is right when it is right and it is wrong when it is wrong.  Trying to legally justify it or make it appear morally decent doesn't always work.

It depends on how determined one is to view an event that occurred circa 600 BCE through a 21st-century, "enlightened," presentist lens.  That's why the links I posted earlier are such valuable contributions to the discussion.  It's a pity they're being ignored ... uhhh ... again. 

Edited June 5, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[hagoth7]

In Exodus, in the chapter right after the ten commandments, it says:

 

12. He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.

13. And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand, then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee.

14. But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile, thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die.

 

Compare Deuteronomy 19 for places of sanctuary, in the case of justified manslaughter, where the one who committed manslaughter (but not murder) could flee for protection.

Nephi was provided a place to flee. (A new land.)

 

At the end of 1 Nephi 3, an angel promised Nephi and his brothers that God would deliver Laban into their hands. Then, in the next chapter, when Laban is actually delivered into Nephi's hands as promised, and the Spirit told Nephi to slay Laban, Nephi recoiled at the thought. The spirit then instructed Nephi twice, reminding him that Laban had been "delivered into [his] hands."  It would appear that either Nephi was familiar with the Law, and needed or a reminder/confirmation that this general exception to taking life provided in the Law applied to his case now, or it could be that the Spirit simply filled in on what Nephi didn't know.  I suspect it was the former.

 

So the Spirit didn't tell Nephi to break the Law. Instead, the Spirit confirmed and clarified what Nephi's standing was within the Law.

Edited June 5, 2015 by hagoth7

[The Nehor]

It is not a good idea to commit an atrocity when you think God is telling you, or when you are hearing voices. 

 

Then when am I allowed to commit atrocities?

[Gray]

In Exodus, in the chapter right after the ten commandments, it says:

 

12. He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.

13. And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand, then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee.

14. But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile, thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die.

 

Compare Deuteronomy 19 for places of sanctuary, in the case of justified manslaughter, where the one who committed manslaughter (but not murder) could flee for protection.

Nephi was provided a place to flee. (A new land.)

 

At the end of 1 Nephi 3, an angel promised Nephi and his brothers that God would deliver Laban into their hands. Then, in the next chapter, when Laban is actually delivered into Nephi's hands as promised, and the Spirit told Nephi to slay Laban, Nephi recoiled at the thought. The spirit then instructed Nephi twice, reminding him that Laban had been "delivered into [his] hands."  It would appear that either Nephi was familiar with the Law, and needed or a reminder/confirmation that this general exception to taking life provided in the Law applied to his case now, or it could be that the Spirit simply filled in on what Nephi didn't know.  I suspect it was the former.

 

So the Spirit didn't tell Nephi to break the Law. Instead, the Spirit confirmed and clarified what Nephi's standing was within the Law.

 

NRSV translation:

 

"Whoever strikes a person mortally shall be put to death. ¹³ If it was not premeditated, but came about by an act of God, then I will appoint for you a place to which the killer may flee. ¹⁴ But if someone willfully attacks and kills another by treachery, you shall take the killer from my altar for execution."

[Maedros]

A revelation to kill someone will come to us as it did for Nephi - but like what CV75 said - knowing your purpose is vital. For instance I was in a situation where I was being mugged by guys with knives and I resisted so they began stabbing me all over so I grabbed a knife from one of the assailants and stabbed one of them in the neck and the other in the shoulder and picked up a brick and bashed the others face, eventually someone saw and came to my aid and they fled. I don't know if any of them died and it makes little difference to me - I would've killed them without a second thought because my life is valuable to me, I have a wife and children who depend on me and since I was not guilty of the first offence, neither the second, I was not going to allow myself to be slain by my enemies. In that verse in Alma the Lord reveals to us when killing someone is justified and I don't know of anyone who is capable of fighting and did not when their lives or the lives of their loved ones was at risk. No revelation was needed because the law was clear on the matter - in Nephi's case the law was not clear because Laban was drunk but the fact of the matter is that whether he was drunk or sober, he was still evil and fully ripe - Laban's drunkenness and seemingly defenseless state was an act of mercy to him and to Nephi, to reduce the stress that slaying him would put on Nephi and to save Laban from pain. In the situation where I was mugged my purpose was clear: I wanted to live so no revelation was needed there about whether to kill or not to kill - it was clear: fight or die. In this world good must fight evil - physically fight evil because the power of evil manifests in a physical way and for some of us who are always at risk we don't need a special revelation. I think that Satan is actively engaged in the work of death and destruction - his hand is in every death, every pain, every suffering - he is the force behind everything bad thing in this world including decay. I believe that the war in heaven wasn't just a war of words but a war of powers and that the casting of Satan out of heaven was done with a moving force where the power of God was demonstrated. I imagine him being cast out in a way that Odin cast out Thor in the movie. "You are unworthy of these realms, you're unworthy of your title, you are unworthy of the loved ones you have betrayed...I therefore take from you your power and in the name of my father and his father before I [Elohim Lord of Hosts]: cast you out! Imagine that!

[Buckeye]

A revelation to kill someone will come to us as it did for Nephi - but like what CV75 said - knowing your purpose is vital. For instance I was in a situation where I was being mugged by guys with knives and I resisted so they began stabbing me all over so I grabbed a knife from one of the assailants and stabbed one of them in the neck and the other in the shoulder and picked up a brick and bashed the others face, eventually someone saw and came to my aid and they fled. I don't know if any of them died and it makes little difference to me - I would've killed them without a second thought because my life is valuable to me, I have a wife and children who depend on me and since I was not guilty of the first offence, neither the second, I was not going to allow myself to be slain by my enemies. In that verse in Alma the Lord reveals to us when killing someone is justified and I don't know of anyone who is capable of fighting and did not when their lives or the lives of their loved ones was at risk. No revelation was needed because the law was clear on the matter - in Nephi's case the law was not clear because Laban was drunk but the fact of the matter is that whether he was drunk or sober, he was still evil and fully ripe - Laban's drunkenness and seemingly defenseless state was an act of mercy to him and to Nephi, to reduce the stress that slaying him would put on Nephi and to save Laban from pain. In the situation where I was mugged my purpose was clear: I wanted to live so no revelation was needed there about whether to kill or not to kill - it was clear: fight or die. In this world good must fight evil - physically fight evil because the power of evil manifests in a physical way and for some of us who are always at risk we don't need a special revelation. I think that Satan is actively engaged in the work of death and destruction - his hand is in every death, every pain, every suffering - he is the force behind everything bad thing in this world including decay. I believe that the war in heaven wasn't just a war of words but a war of powers and that the casting of Satan out of heaven was done with a moving force where the power of God was demonstrated. I imagine him being cast out in a way that Odin cast out Thor in the movie. "You are unworthy of these realms, you're unworthy of your title, you are unworthy of the loved ones you have betrayed...I therefore take from you your power and in the name of my father and his father before I [Elohim Lord of Hosts]: cast you out! Imagine that!

 

Wow. With that introduction, all I can say is "welcome to the board!" I hope you enjoy your stay. 

 

Be careful of getting in knife fights with Daniel2. He grew up on military bases. Duncan, he's Canadian, so you can probably take him. And HappyJackWagon too.

[JLHPROF]

I think that Satan is actively engaged in the work of death and destruction - his hand is in every death, every pain, every suffering - he is the force behind everything bad thing in this world including decay.

 

Welcome to the board!

But I don't believe this to be correct.

 

I do not believe Satan has a hand in every death or every pain.  I believe they are part of the mortal experience as established by God himself.  Man is quite capable of causing death and pain while in mortality all on his own with no assistance from the adversary.  That's part of being a fallen creature.  And death (in some form) is a required part of entry into eternal life and progression.  The fall was always the plan.

 

But I am certainly not downplaying the adversary's influence either.  He causes no end of pain and trial for mankind too.