Differentiating Between The Spirit And Our Own Thoughts

[HappyJackWagon]

Yesterday in Gospel Doctrine class the instructor, who is a former Mission President, related a teaching he attributed to Elder Bednar. I have no way of verifying whether or not Bednar said this so I would prefer for the focus to be on the content of what was said, and not who said it.

 

It was reported that in a meeting someone asked Elder Bednar how we can differentiate our own thoughts and ideas from a prompting of the spirit. Bednar reportedly said that IF the individual desires to serve God and keep his commandments and is living worthily, there is NO DIFFERENCE between an individual's thoughts and inspiration from the spirit.

 

I was stunned when this was said and before I could come up with a question or retort the lesson had moved on. This idea seems problematic for a multitude of reasons but I want to vet the idea here a little bit before I try talking to the teacher in case I'm missing something. The problems I see with this teaching include...

 

1- It creates an unreasonable expectation of infallibility in our leaders or anyone who claims to be following the spirit. Essentially any decision, idea, doctrinal opinion, relationship advice, that pops into a leaders head would be unquestionably the word of God.

 

2- Accepting this teaching would institutionalize all kinds of false doctrines, all in the name of follwing the leader who was follwing the spirit. This already exists to an alarming extent but this teaching would punctuate the cultural expectation.

 

3- There would never be any accountability for any errors, bad advice, false teachings etc. OR it would be assumed that any error was the result of an unrighteous decision maker.

 

4- The potential for abuse would be tremendous, both intentionally and unintentionally as people follow their leaders with the expectation of infallibility.

 

Now, of course there was the caviat that this is true only  IF the individual is seeking to follow God by keeping his commandments and seeking the spirit. But as a general rule we trust and accept that our leaders are doing their best to live righteously and follow the spirit, so without evidence to the contrary we would accept EVERYTHING they say as inspired from God.

 

We can probably all think of examples when a leader (or any other person) said, did, or taught something that was wrong, even though they believed it was right. Errors happen at every level within the church, from the home to the ward to the stake to the General officers.

 

So my question is this... Is there any reason to accept this teaching that promptings of the spirit are the same thing as our personal thoughts, ideas or impressions?

[Avatar4321]

I tend to just follow Moroni's exhortation on how to know whether something is of God.

Not sure how to respond to this idea in the open because I'm not sure we have the full teaching that was given since this is a second hand teaching.

[CV75]

So my question is this... Is there any reason to accept this teaching that promptings of the spirit are the same thing as our personal thoughts, ideas or impressions?

How else do we receive promptings of the Spirit if they are not personal to our spirit?

 

Here is the setting where it was said, because I watched this awhile ago and recall him saying it:

https://www.lds.org/youth/activities/spiritual-strength/scriptures-and-prophets/face-to-face-with-elder-and-sister-bednar?lang=eng

 

I think it would be good for you to post a transcript of the quote in order to have a fair discussion.

 

But from what I recall, he did essentially say the same thing as Moroni 7:12-18. It has nothing to do with whether we think our leaders can differentiate their own thoughts and ideas from a prompting of the Spirit, only how we can. The salient points that I can pick out are:

 

• all things which are good cometh of God
• that which is of God inviteth and enticeth to do good continually
• every thing which inviteth and enticeth to do good, and to love God, and to serve him, is inspired of God.
• it is given unto you to judge, that ye may know good from evil
• the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil
• every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.
• whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.
• know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of

 

It is quite a stretch to conclude from these points that, because one uses this key to have confidence that thoughts which invite and entice him “to do good, and to love God, and to serve him” are inspired of God, and that this somehow makes him infallible.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Here is the setting where it was said, because I watched this awhile ago and recall him saying it:

https://www.lds.org/...bednar?lang=eng

 

I think it would be good for you to post a transcript of the quote in order to have a fair discussion.

Thank you for posting this. This doesn't really fit the description of the meeting the teacher said he was a part of but thank you for posting this. It gives me more insight into Bednar's thinking than what was reported by the teacher.

[Jeanne]

I have never heard of this before.  Was always taught and thought there was a difference..to hear this small still voice of confirmation.  Maybe if we just connect with our gut feelings anyway.??????

[The Nehor]

So the Holy Ghost is as messed up as I am?

[Duncan]

I have heard this before. I heard it maybe 2 years ago from a sister missionary, she figured whatever she did was "the Lord's errand" so it was good. Problem was she sent home more companions than she had baptisms.......... I think Terryl Givens has a similar idea in his "the God who weeps" but I don't have the book handy

[Avatar4321]

So the Holy Ghost is as messed up as I am?

No one is that bad:)

[Ahab]

Basically any good idea is a God-inspired idea.

All good things come from God.

You might as well ask how any person can know when something is good, and not just something that seems good to them.

Well, when you have a good idea, God inspired it, and it's good whether you have it or God has it. The point is simply to get good ideas, and to know who has them.

[Duncan]

Basically any good idea is a God-inspired idea.

All good things come from God.

You might as well ask how any person can know when something is good, and not just something that seems good to them.

Well, when you have a good idea, God inspired it, and it's good whether you have it or God has it. The point is simply to get good ideas, and to know who has them.

 

 

the problem gets into what is good vs. what is good for others or society, morality etc. In other words you may think it's good and right to murder someone because of XYZ but others may not think so.

[HappyJackWagon]

Basically any good idea is a God-inspired idea.

All good things come from God.

You might as well ask how any person can know when something is good, and not just something that seems good to them.

Well, when you have a good idea, God inspired it, and it's good whether you have it or God has it. The point is simply to get good ideas, and to know who has them.

Ahab, I kind of understand what you're saying, but the problem is often times things aren't 100% good and 100% bad.

 

For example it used to be that Bishops would freely give marriage advice to couples, sometimes even recommending a couple divorce or not divorce. I believe they had good intentions and may have been following good principles to the best of their ability yet ended up doing damage to famlies who followed their "inspired counsel."  There are so many examples of good intentions and bad results that it's hard to see how anything viewed as a good idea could truly be claimed as inspiration from God. Would God then be responsible for bad results?

 

And the question remains, how do we differentiate the will of God as inspired by the spirit versus our own thoughts, reasoning, desires, hopes, expectations, knowledge, philosophy etc. Simply saying that if we are striving to be faithful then our thoughts are inspired of God can result in some pretty horrendous behavior, such as the seminary teacher who sacrificed his son, Abraham style, because the spirit told him to. http://www.upi.com/Archives/1982/01/28/A-Logan-man-pleaded-innocent-by-reason-of-insanity/6102381042000/

Edited August 3, 2015 by HappyJackWagon

[jkwilliams]

Ahab, I kind of understand what you're saying, but the problem is often times things aren't 100% good and 100% bad.

 

For example it used to be that Bishops would freely give marriage advice to couples, sometimes even recommending a couple divorce or not divorce. I believe they had good intentions and may have been following good principles to the best of their ability yet ended up doing damage to famlies who followed their "inspired counsel."  There are so many examples of good intentions and bad results that it's hard to see how anything viewed as a good idea could truly be claimed as inspiration from God. Would God then be responsible for bad results?

 

And the question remains, how do we differentiate the will of God as inspired by the spirit versus our own thoughts, reasoning, desires, hopes, expectations, knowledge, philosophy etc. Simply saying that if we are striving to be faithful then our thoughts are inspired of God can result in some pretty horrendous behavior, such as the seminary teacher who sacrificed his son, Abraham style, because the spirit told him to. http://www.upi.com/Archives/1982/01/28/A-Logan-man-pleaded-innocent-by-reason-of-insanity/6102381042000/

It's a good question. Sometimes it doesn't seem like a good idea at all (Nephi and Laban, Abraham and Isaac, Jonah and Nineveh, Joseph Smith and his wives). It would be nice to be able to say that people know the difference between their own thoughts and inspiration, but history is littered with examples of people who got it wrong (the Laffertys, Jim Jones, and so on). When I was elders quorum president many years ago, I had a neighbor who decided that his main focus needed to be to get in tune with the spirit so he could know for himself what God wanted him to do. He quit his job, neglected his wife and kids, and sat around all day with his nose in the scriptures. I had a PPI with him, and I felt inspired to tell him that if he didn't stop looking inward and start paying attention to those around him, he was going to lose everything he had. In retrospect, that should have been obvious to everyone, as he was burning bridges with everyone, especially his family. His wife divorced him, and he severely damaged his relationships with his parents, siblings, and children. In his mind, he was following the spirit. To me and everyone else, he had just turned inward and selfishly ignored everyone else.

[Ahab]

One good way to test whether or not an idea is a good/God idea is to think about what is or may be good/godly about it and also what If anything there is or may be seen as something that is bad/opposed to God about it.

I'd be doing some serious thinking and praying if I ever got the idea that it would be a good/godly idea to kill somebody. It would most likely seem like a very bad idea that I would not think God had given to me, but then again, there are some good/godly reasons to kill somebody, in some situations.

Nothing wrong with pondering an idea for a while before deciding how to act in response to the idea. Or at least I don't think there is anything wrong with pondering and thinking before acting. Maybe I should check with God again in each and every situation to see if or how long he wants me to think about something before responding.

[Ahab]

the problem gets into what is good vs. what is good for others or society, morality etc. In other words you may think it's good and right to murder someone because of XYZ but others may not think so.

I don't place much importance in polls of public opinions. On most if not every issue there are people who are for it while there are also people who are against it. And the majority isn't always right about everything either. So I look for good ideas, whether or not they are popular ideas. Ideas that God would think of as good ideas, considering all of the circumstances that I am and can become aware of.

[CV75]

And the question remains, how do we differentiate the will of God as inspired by the spirit versus our own thoughts, reasoning, desires, hopes, expectations, knowledge, philosophy etc. Simply saying that if we are striving to be faithful then our thoughts are inspired of God can result in some pretty horrendous behavior, such as the seminary teacher who sacrificed his son, Abraham style, because the spirit told him to. http://www.upi.com/Archives/1982/01/28/A-Logan-man-pleaded-innocent-by-reason-of-insanity/6102381042000/

I think we can learn from others’ sad experience.

 

“And he spake plainly unto them, that he had been deceived by the power of the devil. …And he said: I fear lest I have committed the unpardonable sin, for I have lied unto God; for I denied the Christ, and said that I believed the scriptures; and they truly testify of him. And because I have thus lied unto God I greatly fear lest my case shall be awful; but I confess unto God. (Jacob 7).”

 

“I always knew that there was a God. But behold, the devil hath deceived me; for he appeared unto me in the form of an angel …and he taught me that which I should say. And I have taught his words; and I taught them because they were pleasing unto the carnal mind; and I taught them, even until I had much success, insomuch that I verily believed that they were true; and for this cause I withstood the truth, even until I have brought this great curse upon me. (Alma 30).”

 

According to these examples, some who think, claim or are "simply saying" they are following righteous promptings and lie, deceive, employ carnal means, withstand the truth or avoid or oppose their priesthood leaders’ counsel are themselves lying or deceived. They would only admit this at that point where prevention is possible (2 Nephi 26:11).

 

When push comes to shove, no one can pretend he can’t tell the difference, or that he can’t help what he believes or chooses to do, etc. It will always be between God and the individual, which is why we can differentiate only for ourselves and about what we perceive others doing (and rightly so only within our stewardship), but not for others.

 

Just as Moroni 7, these scriptures are to be applied personally by the accountable. Sadly there are cases where people are not accountable for their actions. Accountable people lack agency through wickedness, and unaccountable people lack agency through overpowering developmental, mental and physical conditions of their fallen flesh or other external factors imposing upon and coercing them unawares.

[jkwilliams]

I think we can learn from others’ sad experience.

 

“And he spake plainly unto them, that he had been deceived by the power of the devil. …And he said: I fear lest I have committed the unpardonable sin, for I have lied unto God; for I denied the Christ, and said that I believed the scriptures; and they truly testify of him. And because I have thus lied unto God I greatly fear lest my case shall be awful; but I confess unto God. (Jacob 7).”

 

“I always knew that there was a God. But behold, the devil hath deceived me; for he appeared unto me in the form of an angel …and he taught me that which I should say. And I have taught his words; and I taught them because they were pleasing unto the carnal mind; and I taught them, even until I had much success, insomuch that I verily believed that they were true; and for this cause I withstood the truth, even until I have brought this great curse upon me. (Alma 30).”

 

According to these examples, some who think, claim or are "simply saying" they are following righteous promptings and lie, deceive, employ carnal means, withstand the truth or avoid or oppose their priesthood leaders’ counsel are themselves lying or deceived. They would only admit this at that point where prevention is possible (2 Nephi 26:11).

 

When push comes to shove, no one can pretend he can’t tell the difference, or that he can’t help what he believes or chooses to do, etc. It will always be between God and the individual, which is why we can differentiate only for ourselves and about what we perceive others doing (and rightly so only within our stewardship), but not for others.

 

Just as Moroni 7, these scriptures are to be applied personally by the accountable. Sadly there are cases where people are not accountable for their actions. Accountable people lack agency through wickedness, and unaccountable people lack agency through overpowering developmental, mental and physical conditions of their fallen flesh or other external factors imposing upon and coercing them unawares.

 

I don't think there has to be a lot of pretending. As I said earlier, a lot of misery has been brought into the world by people who sincerely believed they were following God and/or the Spirit. I had an experience years ago that made me realize how easy it is to mistake our feelings for the spirit. I got a call one day from the stake executive secretary saying that the stake president wanted to talk to me. Immediately, I knew I was going to be called as elders quorum president. Before I had a chance to say anything, my wife said, 'You're going to be called as elders quorum president." And I was. A few years later, our bishop announced that he was moving out of the ward. My wife and I again had the same impression, only this time it was that I would be called as bishop, a thought that was terrifying to me. The high priests group leader also told me he felt impressed that I would be the bishop. They called someone else. Which was the spirit? Were both? Neither?

[mfbukowski]

The problem here is thinking there is an objective standard of truth and goodness against which we measure a particular case.

I think Elder B was saying that the spirit communicates with us situationally telling us what action is best for each of us in a given situation. If we are worthy and trying to seek the spirit we will make right choices.

As always, it comes down to objective good and evil vs the right choice for now. We can only know the latter anyway, so there is nothing to differentiate

[mfbukowski]

I don't think there has to be a lot of pretending. As I said earlier, a lot of misery has been brought into the world by people who sincerely believed they were following God and/or the Spirit. I had an experience years ago that made me realize how easy it is to mistake our feelings for the spirit. I got a call one day from the stake executive secretary saying that the stake president wanted to talk to me. Immediately, I knew I was going to be called as elders quorum president. Before I had a chance to say anything, my wife said, 'You're going to be called as elders quorum president." And I was. A few years later, our bishop announced that he was moving out of the ward. My wife and I again had the same impression, only this time it was that I would be called as bishop, a thought that was terrifying to me. The high priests group leader also told me he felt impressed that I would be the bishop. They called someone else. Which was the spirit? Were both? Neither?

So now you are a literalist because it suits your purposes?

[jkwilliams]

So now you are a literalist because it suits your purposes?

Please clarify what you mean.

[HappyJackWagon]

The problem here is thinking there is an objective standard of truth and goodness against which we measure a particular case.

I think Elder B was saying that the spirit communicates with us situationally telling us what action is best for each of us in a given situation. If we are worthy and trying to seek the spirit we will make right choices.

As always, it comes down to objective good and evil vs the right choice for now. We can only know the latter anyway, so there is nothing to differentiate

It doesn't need to be based on an objective standard of truth but the result should yield some good fruit. If it yields bad fruit then we would have to accept that the spirit directed a behavior that resulted in bad fruit. If heeding the spirit legitimately yielded bad fruit, then why trust the spirit?

[mfbukowski]

It doesn't need to be based on an objective standard of truth but the result should yield some good fruit. If it yields bad fruit then we would have to accept that the spirit directed a behavior that resulted in bad fruit. If heeding the spirit legitimately yielded bad fruit, then why trust the spirit?

Again you are assuming that the Spirit gives us objective truth independent of circumstances. The Spirit gives us what we need to learn regardless of if we see it as good or bad as in the moment. Think of Adam and Eve and the fall. Was the fall a good thing or a bad thing? It depends on how you look at it.

[jkwilliams]

Again you are assuming that the Spirit gives us objective truth independent of circumstances. The Spirit gives us what we need to learn regardless of if we see it as good or bad as in the moment. Think of Adam and Eve and the fall. Was the fall a good thing or a bad thing? It depends on how you look at it.

 

 No, I'm not saying that or assuming that. I'm just saying that in those two experiences, I don't know whether it was the spirit both times, one time, or neither. 

[mfbukowski]

No, I'm not saying that or assuming that. I'm just saying that in those two experiences, I don't know whether it was the spirit both times, one time, or neither.

and the spirit taught you to stop guessing about what callings you would receive and be obedient to God's will.

[mfbukowski]

Incidentally that first reply was not for you anyway.

[jkwilliams]

and the spirit taught you to stop guessing about what callings you would receive and be obedient to God's will.

 

Or not. I don't know, honestly.