How do I get better discernment?

[Shimdidly]

Although I did not vote for Obama and ultimately made the right choice writing Ron Paul on the ballot, for a while I was all ready to vote for Romney (big mistake). And had I not been better informed by some great people I might have bought ALL of Obama's lies. Even now when I watch his old speeches and his new White House podcasts it's hard NOT to think he's the most sincere, well meaning person there is! Is there a way to see behind anyone's facade? Is it in their eyes, is it the way they talk, or hold themselves?

[Quiet Cricket]

For me it is to learn what tricks of rhetoric they are using to pull you in. There are phrases they use to appeal to the most people possible without really saying anything. And over time you tend to see that every politician says the same things when the time is right.

Another thought that helps I read in None Dare Call it Conspiracy. Are politicians really so stupid that decade after decade they keep making things worse, things just keep going in the same direction? They are not that stupid, they are just lying and saying what it takes to get elected, then they do what the powers that be want them to do.

I'm sure someone has better advice, I just wanted to give my 2 cents.

[Original_Intent]

The John Birch Society really trained me to look at everything a lot more skeptically. Anything I hear on the TeeVee I ask myself - is it news or is it an editorial? If it is an editorial, what direction are they trying to move public opinion and why? Mostly the only reason I watch ANY TeeVee "news" program is to stay current on the propaganda.

I don;t think there is any trick of the eyes, body language, or anything else that gives it away. Just assume it is propaganda until you are able to independently verify otherwise.

[NoGreaterLove]

Yes absolutely. By their fruits ye shall know them. One of the largest indicators of who someone is, is determining who do they socialize with and call their friends? Who are their mentors? How were they raised?
Never listen to the words that come from their mouths, look at the fruits they bear.

[NoGreaterLove]

Take Ron Paul for instance.
How was he raised? What philosophies did his parents have? Where did he get his religious beliefs from? How about his education? Who does he consider his mentors? What does his writings say? Who does he associate with? Forget about the words that come from his mouth. Take a look at his fruits.

[britjas]

Good reply NoGreaterLove. I hadn't even thought of that before. I will be paying closer attention now.

[Rose Garden]

I like the suggestions given, but must mention the ultimate source of discernment: the Holy Ghost. How did you know to believe those who had told you about Ron Paul? How do you know whether someone's fruits are good or bad? How do you know anything that is true? Only through the Spirit.

I was one day sitting in front of the TV, here in Korea, as my husband watched. I was doing something else. All of the sudden, I felt a strange uneasiness and looked up to see a man speaking on the TV. This happened a couple more times and finally I asked my husband who it was. It was the president of Korea. I never got out of my husband what he was talking about, but if I'm judging his fruits correctly, he is very much involved in the secret combinations.

The greatest thing you can do to fix any problem you have, whether it's discernment or anything else, is to draw closer to the Spirit of the Lord.

[Amore Vero]

I agree that having the Spirit is vital to being able to discern right from wrong, truth from error & devils from saints. But gaining knowledge from the best books (like the scriptures, words of the Prophets, & other books filled with truth, like Pres. Benson's books & Elder Verlan Andersons books) is also vital.

Being able to feel that something is wrong about a situation or person is not always enough.

A study of Pride, Unrighteous Dominion, Abuse & Abusive mentalities which is the natural disposition of almost all men & many women & the cause of all evil & the character of all evil people, is also vital. Brigham Young said we need to study evil enough to know how to identify it & how it operates.

One of the very best books for this is Lundy Bancroft's book "Why does he do that?" Inside the minds of angry & controlling men." This insight can be used to discern evil & pride not only on a personal level but also on a government level. We all have learned at least some abusive tendencies or beliefs growing up in imperfect homes, that we need to identify & stop.

Until we cleanse our own soul of pride & abuse we will not be able to see or discern it well in others.

The Golden Rule is also vital to go by for discernment.

[NoGreaterLove]

I like the suggestions given, but must mention the ultimate source of discernment: the Holy Ghost. How did you know to believe those who had told you about Ron Paul? How do you know whether someone's fruits are good or bad? How do you know anything that is true? Only through the Spirit.

Agreed. But gifts from God must be cultivated and are activated by action. One can not expect to have the gift of discernment about a political canidate just for the asking. We are expected to do our part. Once we have done the homework, then the Holy Ghost can confirm or deny our decision.
You took no thought, save it were to ask me?

[LukeAir2008]

Take Ron Paul for instance.
How was he raised? What philosophies did his parents have? Where did he get his religious beliefs from? How about his education? Who does he consider his mentors? What does his writings say? Who does he associate with? Forget about the words that come from his mouth. Take a look at his fruits.

You can't discern a person by looking at their past. You discern a person by looking at what they are now. Alma had been a wicked apostate. Later an angel testified that he was a holy man. Which reference point do you go on? Elder Richard G Scott gave financial support to Mitt Romney's campaign. Was he inspired to do that or did he just trust that because Mitt is LDS he must be the best candidate. Maybe the more holy a person is the more they look for the good in others and overlook their weaknesses.

Your motives for why you want to discern others will depend on whether you're able to. And you will never discern anything until you are cleansed every whit from iniquity. 3 Nephi 8:1

[Amore Vero]

Maybe the more holy a person is the more they look for the good in others and overlook their weaknesses.

The more holy a person is the more they can see the weaknesses in others & do not support their evil, while they pray for them & help them to repent.

[NoGreaterLove]

You can't discern a person by looking at their past.

Alma's past included repentance, a change of heart. His fruits became fruits of the spirit. I would look at those fruits that he now brings forth as an indicator. If he told me he had repented, but still brought for bad fruits, I would not believe him. I still stand behind my belief that you look at past behavior which can include repentance.

[ithink]

Although I did not vote for Obama and ultimately made the right choice writing Ron Paul on the ballot, for a while I was all ready to vote for Romney (big mistake). And had I not been better informed by some great people I might have bought ALL of Obama's lies. Even now when I watch his old speeches and his new White House podcasts it's hard NOT to think he's the most sincere, well meaning person there is! Is there a way to see behind anyone's facade? Is it in their eyes, is it the way they talk, or hold themselves?

It's not the sincerity, the eyes, the tone, or their comportment. It is in strictly what they say. What you say, what anyone says, what any human being says, must be carefully analyzed and either accepted or rejected for what it is based on whether it is true or not. This trumps names, titles, lineage, and any other form of authority. The only exception is Jesus Christ himself, himself being not fully human, whose word is just accepted as is without question. All others are subject to errors and will err from time to time.

[leeuniverse]

All the above suggestions are good, but they are not the KEY way to learn discernment.

The way to learn discernment and actually be accurate, rather than relying on simply your own intellect, that is how learned you think you are of someone, is rather than being consumed in your own life, is to start OBSERVING people.

Because of my interest in Law Enforcement at the very young age of 6, I started observing people, and experiencing life with them, all classes of people, the rich, the poor, the gangster, the stuck up, the jock, the religious, the non-religious, the rocker, etc. etc. You observe their behaviors, their words, inflections, their body, the light in their eyes, their heart, etc. Of course, when you are older it might be harder to do this as well, you will often have to do it from a distance, so you likely won't be as good. But, this is how you learn discernment.

By the way, your discernment about Romney is "wrong", the same way anti-mormons are wrong about mormons and liberals are wrong about conservatives. In other words, you shouldn't believe everything you read. Also, your discernment is flawed to actually think Ron Paul was the best choice. The top choices of the last election were Romney, Huckabee, Thompson, Guiliani, and then Ron Paul. Ron Paul is good in a lot of ways, but he doesn't have the presence, and has too many nutty ideas simply going to far with things. I mean, a man that doesn't have the moral character to recognize the threat of fanatical Islam to the world and thus us, to not want to take the fight to them, to help the good people fight against them, and help destroy the ideology, simply IS NOT morally qualified to be President.

Romney and Allen West need to be our next Pres & VP.
Ron Paul would be good as a part of the cabinet to work on the things he's good at, but that is it.

[Shimdidly]

Even "terrorists" that we've been conditioned to fear have rights. The sun rises on the righteous and the wicked. Rapists and murderers have the right to a speedy and fair trial and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. It's all part of the lynch-mob-democracy-two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner being prescribed to us. I just watched a Romney speech that basically said, "double Guantanamo, no constitutional rights for 'terrorists'". A standing ovation followed. The majority agrees--yeah we all think he did it. Innocent till proven guilty by trial of peers and rule by law, nah let's lynch 'em.

[ithink]

All the above suggestions are good, but they are not the KEY way to learn discernment.

The way to learn discernment and actually be accurate, rather than relying on simply your own intellect, that is how learned you think you are of someone, is rather than being consumed in your own life, is to start OBSERVING people.

Because of my interest in Law Enforcement at the very young age of 6, I started observing people, and experiencing life with them, all classes of people, the rich, the poor, the gangster, the stuck up, the jock, the religious, the non-religious, the rocker, etc. etc. You observe their behaviors, their words, inflections, their body, the light in their eyes, their heart, etc. Of course, when you are older it might be harder to do this as well, you will often have to do it from a distance, so you likely won't be as good. But, this is how you learn discernment.

By the way, your discernment about Romney is "wrong", the same way anti-mormons are wrong about mormons and liberals are wrong about conservatives. In other words, you shouldn't believe everything you read. Also, your discernment is flawed to actually think Ron Paul was the best choice. The top choices of the last election were Romney, Huckabee, Thompson, Guiliani, and then Ron Paul. Ron Paul is good in a lot of ways, but he doesn't have the presence, and has too many nutty ideas simply going to far with things. I mean, a man that doesn't have the moral character to recognize the threat of fanatical Islam to the world and thus us, to not want to take the fight to them, to help the good people fight against them, and help destroy the ideology, simply IS NOT morally qualified to be President.

Romney and Allen West need to be our next Pres & VP.
Ron Paul would be good as a part of the cabinet to work on the things he's good at, but that is it.

Moral character will only take you so far. If you don't have the right knowledge, you will come under the power of some other entity with more knowledge. In Romney's case, he's either the most inept candidate, or near to it, or he is so co-opted he cannot be considered to be the moral choice. I think he's a mixture of both. I would fear a mainstream mormon president more than any other tyrant. If you read the book of mormon, you'll see the worst offenders were not the purely wicked, but those who knew better but didn't act like it. If Joseph Smith were alive today, there is no way he would vote for Romney. Not a chance. You go think about why.

[iamse7en]

How to get better discernment is a very difficult question. I would say, just keep close to the Spirit of God and remain educated.

I was a Romney supporter in '08, but have since seen the light. I have not become more spiritual or gained better power of discernment, but I studied the issues and learned more about economics and war. Since becoming a huge fan of Ron Paul, I've since said, "I would be okay with Romney as President." However, as a faithful LDS, I now fear this situation. Romney clearly is a big-government neoconservative who doesn't follow "the constitution the tradition of our founding fathers." He will have the power to assassinate people without trial and be in charge of these immoral wars of death and destruction. He will continue these wars and not reduce the size of government. As people who believe limited government, the Constitution, national DEFENSE (not offense), LDS should fear that Romney will improperly represent us. I do not want my faith associated with tyranny and war.

Now, I do think Romney is sincere. I know people who know him well - and they say he is a good man with a good heart. I trust their discernment, but that does not mean he will be a good president who will "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution." I think I can now say I hope he loses. I will be voting for or writing in Ron Paul's name no matter what happens, but I do not want Romney to win... someone else will probably be even worse for the country, but at least he won't represent my faith. What do you guys think?

[leeuniverse]

Even "terrorists" that we've been conditioned to fear have rights. The sun rises on the righteous and the wicked. Rapists and murderers have the right to a speedy and fair trial and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. It's all part of the lynch-mob-democracy-two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner being prescribed to us. I just watched a Romney speech that basically said, "double Guantanamo, no constitutional rights for 'terrorists'". A standing ovation followed. The majority agrees--yeah we all think he did it. Innocent till proven guilty by trial of peers and rule by law, nah let's lynch 'em.

You are confusing two different things, which is why your judgment is wrong about the issue and him.
Constitutional rights are not the same as having a trial in which evidence and testimony is presented by both sides. Those in Guantanamo, whom no more information is needed DO have trials you know. The evidence is presented, they can defend themselves, and then they are convicted if guilty.

You clearly know nothing about standard wartime legal methodology.
Are you really so ignorant that you wish to apply constitutional law to war combatants???
These aren't citizens of the United States. They are war combatants who were caught in the act of war against others. Or are you saying the Nazi's shouldn't have had War Tribunals against them either???

[Shimdidly]

There's a lot I don't know and admittedly I probably jumped into what you said hastily. I'm coming from the standpoint that a lot of the people in Guantanamo are innocent (I understand some are guilty as well). Whether guilty or not, what goes on there is very inhumane. If we expect to keep our rights and be treated decently, we should at very least treat others with common decency, even our enemies. Remember the Nephites had no desire to harm or to avenge the Lamanites, and on many occasions they let them go free on an oath that they would fight no more.

[serenitylala]

Although I did not vote for Obama and ultimately made the right choice writing Ron Paul on the ballot, for a while I was all ready to vote for Romney (big mistake). And had I not been better informed by some great people I might have bought ALL of Obama's lies. Even now when I watch his old speeches and his new White House podcasts it's hard NOT to think he's the most sincere, well meaning person there is! Is there a way to see behind anyone's facade? Is it in their eyes, is it the way they talk, or hold themselves?

Ask the Lord every night in prayer for the "gift of discernment".

That is truthfully the only way that you will aqcuire a real way to discern. You can study things until you are blue in the face but there are always going to be new circumstances and new people come into the situation that all your reading and all your researching won't prepare you for.

[leeuniverse]

There's a lot I don't know and admittedly I probably jumped into what you said hastily. I'm coming from the standpoint that a lot of the people in Guantanamo are innocent (I understand some are guilty as well). Whether guilty or not, what goes on there is very inhumane. If we expect to keep our rights and be treated decently, we should at very least treat others with common decency, even our enemies. Remember the Nephites had no desire to harm or to avenge the Lamanites, and on many occasions they let them go free on an oath that they would fight no more.

Several problems with what you have stated.
First, almost know-one at Guantanamo are innocent. In fact, almost all who "have" been released have returned to their terrorism and killing Americans. Second, almost nothing that occurs their is "inhumane". They are well fed, get plenty of exercise, and all kinds of other crazy things that even American prisoners don't often get (though can't remember specifics at the moment).

I've actually listened to and watched interviews with various politicians, rights groups, and even Commanders and former personnel at Guantanamo, and they all paint a very different story, a well detailed and factual story of what actually occurs there, and it's not the story liberals and liberal media has promoted. Do you know where they are getting their information? They are getting it from liberal attorney's who are their trying to get those criminals free, those attorney's are told false story's by the inmates, and then the liberal media just laps it up as if it's the actual truth. Who are you going to believe, criminals and Muslims who have it as their actual ideology to in fact lie if it promotes Islam and destroys the infidel, or the many people and groups that I've stated who tell a different story, but that story isn't promoted save in some independent conservative media such as talk radio or a little on Fox News etc.???

Fanatical Islam has no "oath" when it concerns the infidel, other than to do whatever is necessary including lying in order to further Islam and serve Allah.

Forgive me, but you really need to educate yourself much further on these issues before you judge swallowing the ignorant liberal line as too many do, like anti-mormons do about mormonism. The soldiers and otherwise at Guantanamo are professionals, are professional soldiers and guards. I'm also a former Marine, so I know our standards. A little water-boarding of a couple of high value targets which ended up saving American and other innocent lives, and some idiot soldiers playing tiddlywinks and "embarrassing" some prisoners once doesn't translate into the entire American Military as somehow being "inhumane" or braking moral and common decency rules. To think such is no different than anti-mormons painting all of mormonism as racist simply because Brigham Young or a couple of others made a few ethno-centrist and maybe racist by our standards remarks (others as well being misrepresented).

You need to learn to explore EVERYTHING that people say, to find out if there is another side and/or more facts and information. Because you will learn, especially when it concerns liberals or anti-mormons, they don't tell the truth in anything they say. They use a little truth to tell great lies about issues, about conservatives, and with anti-mormons about mormons and mormonism. I'm an expert on both of these things, and they are exactly the same, all from the same wicked source.

[moonwhim]

There's a lot I don't know and admittedly I probably jumped into what you said hastily. I'm coming from the standpoint that a lot of the people in Guantanamo are innocent (I understand some are guilty as well). Whether guilty or not, what goes on there is very inhumane. If we expect to keep our rights and be treated decently, we should at very least treat others with common decency, even our enemies. Remember the Nephites had no desire to harm or to avenge the Lamanites, and on many occasions they let them go free on an oath that they would fight no more.

Several problems with what you have stated.
First, almost know-one at Guantanamo are innocent. In fact, almost all who "have" been released have returned to their terrorism and killing Americans. Second, almost nothing that occurs their is "inhumane". They are well fed, get plenty of exercise, and all kinds of other crazy things that even American prisoners don't often get (though can't remember specifics at the moment).

I've actually listened to and watched interviews with various politicians, rights groups, and even Commanders and former personnel at Guantanamo, and they all paint a very different story, a well detailed and factual story of what actually occurs there, and it's not the story liberals and liberal media has promoted. Do you know where they are getting their information? They are getting it from liberal attorney's who are their trying to get those criminals free, those attorney's are told false story's by the inmates, and then the liberal media just laps it up as if it's the actual truth. Who are you going to believe, criminals and Muslims who have it as their actual ideology to in fact lie if it promotes Islam and destroys the infidel, or the many people and groups that I've stated who tell a different story, but that story isn't promoted save in some independent conservative media such as talk radio or a little on Fox News etc.???

Fanatical Islam has no "oath" when it concerns the infidel, other than to do whatever is necessary including lying in order to further Islam and serve Allah.

Forgive me, but you really need to educate yourself much further on these issues before you judge swallowing the ignorant liberal line as too many do, like anti-mormons do about mormonism. The soldiers and otherwise at Guantanamo are professionals, are professional soldiers and guards. I'm also a former Marine, so I know our standards. A little water-boarding of a couple of high value targets which ended up saving American and other innocent lives, and some idiot soldiers playing tiddlywinks and "embarrassing" some prisoners once doesn't translate into the entire American Military as somehow being "inhumane" or braking moral and common decency rules. To think such is no different than anti-mormons painting all of mormonism as racist simply because Brigham Young or a couple of others made a few ethno-centrist and maybe racist by our standards remarks (others as well being misrepresented).

You need to learn to explore EVERYTHING that people say, to find out if there is another side and/or more facts and information. Because you will learn, especially when it concerns liberals or anti-mormons, they don't tell the truth in anything they say. They use a little truth to tell great lies about issues, about conservatives, and with anti-mormons about mormons and mormonism. I'm an expert on both of these things, and they are exactly the same, all from the same wicked source.

leeuniverse, I am glad to hear that you are an expert.......so when are you going to present us with evidence to back up your assertions?