Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Unclean Deacon

'Better That One Man Should Perish Than That a Nation Should Dwindle and Perish in Unbelief'

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, pogi said:

That is a fair consideration that we have no idea what the law was in the area and the time of Nephi.   Even Welch fully acknowledges that we don't know for sure.  That solidifies my point that we can't say "it was not murder". 

I have previously conceded that point. 

I haven't been following closely, but I share not in the spirit of seeking concession/concedence, but am glad it was useful.

For the same reason, we cannot say it was murder. I think the account explains the difference nicely by using the words "kill" or "slay". Elsewhere in the Book or Mormon, "murder" is used in a moral and legal context: Alma 1:18 (there are 90 non-combat references in all, including war crimes as in Moroni 9:10, and several for power and gain, secret combinations inspired by the devil, etc.). Of course there is some overlap where "kill" might seem synonymous to "murder" (Thou shalt not kill, the Jews sought to kill Jesus, etc.), but these seem to lean toward more of a "God's law" context.

 

Edited by CV75

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, CV75 said:

For the same reason, we cannot say it was murder. 

Just to clarify, I never claimed that it was murder in Nephi's time.  

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, pogi said:

Just to clarify, I never claimed that it was murder in Nephi's time.  

Just to clarify further, God is the one who determines whether or not something is ultimately right or wrong, so regardless of any law of mortal man, God told Nephi to kill Laban so Nephi is off the hook as far as God is concerned.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/8/2020 at 2:44 PM, JamesBYoung said:

That's a great defense but not good enough.

Nephi slew a drunken, defenseless man.

 

which by definition is MURDER...

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/8/2020 at 3:27 PM, Kenngo1969 said:

And we're still applying 21st-century North American legal standards to an incident purported to have occurred in Jerusalem in 600 BCE! :rolleyes:

Oooh-kay! :unknw:

always more allowances and more conjecture required to make faith work

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, The Unclean Deacon said:

always more allowances and more conjecture required to make faith work

Of course there are, that's why it's called faith and not certainty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, ksfisher said:

Of course there are, that's why it's called faith and not certainty. 

faith is certainty, but since not all are certain, not all have faith to help them to be certain of what is true

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, The Unclean Deacon said:

always more allowances and more conjecture required to make faith work

what would it take to assure you so that you could be certain of what is true?  what if God were to assure you, personally, that something is true?  would you be certain, then, even if other people did not agree?

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Of course there are, that's why it's called faith and not certainty. 

not my point.  My point is the critical conclusion requires at every turn less allowances and less conjecture.  Almost as if the faithful position isn't true.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

That is not knowledge. It is belief. 

Not true.  Since you have obviously not had the spiritual experiences some members of our church have had, you are not in a position to judge.  Those experiences are real and not subject to the whims of the world.  Revelation is the Rock of our religion, as mentioned in the scripture.  Once one has had the proper assurances via Revelation, there is no going back on it..

Edited by mrmarklin

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, The Unclean Deacon said:

not my point.  My point is the critical conclusion requires at every turn less allowances and less conjecture.  Almost as if the faithful position isn't true.

 

All that is required is to be certain of whatever is being considered.  No assumptions. Precise language and a correct understanding of the context involved. And knowing how something actually is, or was, or will be.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, The Unclean Deacon said:

not my point.  My point is the critical conclusion requires at every turn less allowances and less conjecture.  Almost as if the faithful position isn't true.

 

You're trying to look back at an event, through your eyes and preconceptions, that the author reports to have happened over 2500 years ago and determine whether or not God was involved or not.  I don't think that's possible.  There are very few historical events you can demonstrate to have actually taken place, let alone know for a certainty whether or not the people in the events were inspired or not.  You can't know that.  The best you can do is have faith and trust in God.  It doesn't matter which law may have been broken or not.  Either Nephi was told by God to kill Laban or he wasn't.  We can't know.  The best we can do is choose to demonstrate faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

You're trying to look back at an event, through your eyes and preconceptions, that the author reports to have happened over 2500 years ago and determine whether or not God was involved or not.  I don't think that's possible.  There are very few historical events you can demonstrate to have actually taken place, let alone know for a certainty whether or not the people in the events were inspired or not.  You can't know that.  The best you can do is have faith and trust in God.  It doesn't matter which law may have been broken or not.  Either Nephi was told by God to kill Laban or he wasn't.  We can't know.  The best we can do is choose to demonstrate faith.

If by that you mean all we can do is take God's word for what he tells us, then I agree with most of what you are saying. But that is a way to gain knowledge. We don't have to have been a witness of past events in person. We can know that God knows what happened and believe what he tells us based on the fact that he knows the truth of what happened, which is why we call him God.

Edited by Ahab

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, mrmarklin said:

Not true.  Since you have obviously not had the spiritual experiences some members of our church have had, you are not in a position to judge.  Those experiences are real and not subject to the whims of the world.  Revelation is the Rock of our religion, as mentioned in the scripture.  Once one has had the proper assurances via Revelation, there is no going back on it..

Sorry, but you don't know my experiences, so even by your own standard, you cannot say what position I am in.

Here's another way to ponder what knowledge means: I agree that people know about their experiences which they believe are divine. That, however, is not the same as divine knowledge. 

You can test this by examining people's testimonials about their experiences, including those who say they know God.

If you believe the sincerity of all these people, all throughout the world and history, how do they all know what they say they know of God?

I'm not trying to play gotchya, so I'll just conclude by answering the question. Of course feel free to answer it yourself if you wish:

The answer is that you or I or noone can know who "knows." The reason is that using "know" in this context is incorrect usage of the word. People may know how they feel about God, they may know what they believe, they may know about their experiences they belief are with the divine. But that is not "knowing" God. It is personal interpretation at its very best. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

You're trying to look back at an event, through your eyes and preconceptions, that the author reports to have happened over 2500 years ago and determine whether or not God was involved or not.  I don't think that's possible.  There are very few historical events you can demonstrate to have actually taken place, let alone know for a certainty whether or not the people in the events were inspired or not.  You can't know that.  The best you can do is have faith and trust in God.  It doesn't matter which law may have been broken or not.  Either Nephi was told by God to kill Laban or he wasn't.  We can't know.  The best we can do is choose to demonstrate faith.

Does the Book of Mormon really ask the reader to take it all on faith? 

I mentioned the title page upthread. Again:

From the believing perspective, it might be good to recall the title page of the Book of Mormon:

"And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ."

And so it would follow that those who published it did not intend for us to consider it all good as a foregone conclusion. We can reasonably say, that would-be disciples are expected to study out the words intellectually and spiritually, with all the faculties at their command, using the gifts they possess to seek the goodness and truth in the words.

From a secular perspective, I would say that similar expectations can be put to any reader. Indeed all readers are invited by Moroni to do this.

I would echo 2 Nephi 2:18-26 to say that we're to do more than experience good and evil but learn to distinguish good from evil. This is a concept I still believe in.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Ahab said:

Just to clarify further, God is the one who determines whether or not something is ultimately right or wrong, so regardless of any law of mortal man, God told Nephi to kill Laban so Nephi is off the hook as far as God is concerned.

I already clarified that too. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, The Unclean Deacon said:

which by definition is MURDER...

Now you are in for it. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

Not true.  Since you have obviously not had the spiritual experiences some members of our church have had, you are not in a position to judge.  Those experiences are real and not subject to the whims of the world.  Revelation is the Rock of our religion, as mentioned in the scripture.  Once one has had the proper assurances via Revelation, there is no going back on it..

And those who have had revelation that does not support your experiences are still real and not subject to the whims of the world.

Revelation needs to be consistent, the revelations of the common folk are not binding on anyone else.  Yes, Nephi can be questioned as to the authority to execute a drunken defenseless man.  Did God tell Nephi to slay Laban.  Nephi said He did.

Edited by JamesBYoung

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, The Unclean Deacon said:

how did all the marsupials band together and make the trip united as one?  the flood is absurd for literally a 100 reasons
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

Or the plagues on Egypt, including the one that resulted in the origination of the Passover?

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, pogi said:

Just to clarify, I never claimed that it was murder in Nephi's time.  

OK. Just for fun, building my earlier post on how the three words are used / what they mean in the Book of Mormon: "kill" appears 20 times in the Book of Mormon, "murder" 90 times, and "slay" 263 times.

- kill and slay appear together in the same verse only once (God kills with nature, man slays with the sword).

- slay and murder appear together only twice,. In each instance, slay is used in a battle context and murder is used in a sin context.

- never do the three words appear in the same verse.

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, CV75 said:

OK. Just for fun, building my earlier post on how the three words are used / what they mean in the Book of Mormon: "kill" appears 20 times in the Book of Mormon, "murder" 90 times, and "slay" 263 times.

- kill and slay appear together in the same verse only once (God kills with nature, man slays with the sword).

- slay and murder appear together only twice,. In each instance, slay is used in a battle context and murder is used in a sin context.

- never do the three words appear in the same verse.

If slaying is only used in reference to war, why was it used when Nephi killed Laban?

Slay and murder are used synonymously in these verses:

Quote

 

24 Now when the Lamanites saw this they did forbear from slaying them; and there were many whose hearts had swollen in them for those of their brethren who had fallen under the sword, for they repented of the things which they had done.

25 And it came to pass that they threw down their weapons of war, and they would not take them again, for they were stung for the murders which they had committed; and they came down even as their brethren, relying upon the mercies of those whose arms were lifted to slay them.

Alma 24

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

The story does not give me any problems.  Laban does not sound like a good steward of the plates.  He probably was more of a horder than faithfully teaching the people the truth from the plates.  Lehi family needed the plates far more than Laban needed them.  Nephi has enough troubles with his brothers.  He does not need to deal with a bunch of men sent by Laban to get the plates back.  I think the Lord looks at the entire picture.  Jerusalem is running out of time.  If the plates stay, they get lost or destroyed.  Laban probably is going to die soon with the destruction of Jerusalem.  God gives us our agency but we should not think that we can frustrate the designs of God.  We can not hold up what he wants done.  Perhaps the Lord would would not have instructed Nephi to kill Laban if Laban would have let the matter go and not gone after Nephi and the plates.  The Lord knows what Laban would do if he had the chance.  This is not a story of Nephi killing an innocent man but an obstacle being removed.

Edited by carbon dioxide

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, let’s roll said:

Saying we can’t know for certain places a limit on what God can share with us and how it is shared. I’m not aware of any evidence He has accepted that limitation.  To the contrary, I believe there’s evidence that there is no such limitation.

Besides that, this statement of hers can be seen to apply to all knowledge claims and epistemology in general.

It really doesn't say anything.

I will quote her and change one word which changes the context, to  make my point. Regarding say, physics one might say

"We may want to tap into the "real", we may sincerely believe we have done so, but we cannot know for certain"

Our level of knowledge of anything is always changing.

There is no such a limit on knowledge in general.

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

This is not a story of Nephi killing an innocent man but an obstacle being removed.

God made the Israelites get lost in the desert for 40 years, he couldn’t have caused Laban’s men to get lost or lose the trail of Lehi?  The same God who put a deep sleep over the captors of the Nephites, allowing them to escape without shedding blood, could have done the same to Laban and his men.   If this is simply a story about getting the plates, then it seems there are much less drastic measures that could have been taken.  There has to be more to the story.

”It is better that one man should perish...”. The answer must lie in that moral of the story somewhere, but it is mysterious to me.  It almost sounds like the Spirit is making Laban a type of Christ - but that just seems messed up.  Did it have to be an either or scenario? Was there really no other way?  

Edited by pogi

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...