LDS Freedom Forum

Don't worry, it's not racial

There are no such things as gray areas, there is only black and white, right and wrong. When you get right down to principle, gray disappears. That's why there is so much confusion in the world today, we don't understand the principles. Gray only exists in our own paradigms.

I wasn't worrying about racial. I'm saying I disagree about the "black and white" that many of us see the world as. We look at the world from a human perspective, which is extremely limited compared to how God sees the world. What might seem "black and white" to one person may not be to someone else. I have a very big problem with the "black and white" that you're talking about.

Haha, I know you weren't talking about racial matters, I was just messing around.

We actually agree and there really isn't a problem, I'll explain. God sees things how they are, in fact D&C 93 says that truth is knowledge of things as they are. So if we don't see things as they are we are not seeing the truth. This proves the point that yes, ALL things are truly black and white, you can't have something that is part good and part evil. You can't have something made up of both light and dark. All things are independent in the spheres that God has placed them, even truth (D&C 93). Sure, we all see things differently because of our own limited perspectives but if we will each get off our high horse and all look down at the core principles, we will all see that things really are either black or white. The way we perceive truth does not change truth.

5tev3,
How do you see injunctions like "thou shalt not kill", "For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife", and "concubines he shall have none"?

Do you consider these principles?

I'm curious about how you explain exceptions to the commandments (Nephi, Jacob, Abraham) - whether you see commandments are "principles" or as something else. (Just for clarity, I'm not asking to start a debate or some combative conversation - I'm sincerely just curious )

Thanks,
MnG

That's a very good question, actually; I'm glad you brought it up.

For "thou shalt not kill (murder)" the principle is that life is sacred and man is not to take the life of another without authorization from the one who gave the life to begin with. God HAS commanded to kill, many times. "Thou shalt not kill" is clearly a commandment that is in opposition with what God commanded Nephi to do. So it appears that commandments are not principles, they can be I suppose, but not in every case. Commandments determine how we govern ourselves according to the principles.

God is in control of life and he sets the conditions. God has said that it is ok to kill to save our own lives or to protect our liberties. So the principle would be that life may only be taken when authorized by God. These authorizations may be found in scripture and through the words of modern prophets.

As for plural marriage, the same would apply. The rule seems to be one man, one woman unless God allows otherwise for any number of reasons such as a trial of his people, or to raise up posterity. The principle is that marital arrangements consist of at least one male and 1+ females. The number of females is variable depending on the purposes of God.

So take any question and you can find an appropriate answer if you understand the principle.

1. "Is abortion wrong?" The church has stated that abortion is allowed in situations of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. So in that case, abortion is not wrong on principle. To snuff out the life of a child because it is not convenient for you is wrong because it doesn't meet the requirements that God has set forth. I cannot kill my neighbor because he talks too much and it's inconvenient for me, but I can kill him if he has a gun pointed at me and is threatening to take my life.

Once we have discovered the principle, we can then seek to understand the commandments surrounding the principle and we will understand the appropriate manner in which to act. A black and white solution can be found to any situation; in the words of the hymn Choose the Right, "There’s the right and the wrong to ev’ry question".

Great explanation 5tev3!

Well, to add to what ChemtrailWatcher is saying, the problem in society and the world as a whole is where go for the SOURCE of our principles and how they are interpreted. Most of our conversations today in major media are not on any principles at all except for the priciples of the flesh and desires of man.

We have a hard time finding answers to topics when each of us subscribes to a different set of principles. However, seeking after principles, we can more often than not find the truth. Let's say you have a religious person and an atheist. Both can agree that life is unique in the universe. We have looked all around our solar system and universe and we don't see life anywhere else so we can agree that it is unique. Should human life specifically, as a type of life unique among all other life be preserved then? Yes.

Should one person take another person's life?

If one person is trying to destroy the life of another, you could reason that this person has violated the rule that life is sacred and has thus forfeited the protection of that rule for himself making it ok for the life that is being threatened to take the life of the attacker in order to preserve it's own being.

Principles of government are the same. Here are some principles of man's rights as taught by Thomas Paine:

"Natural rights are those which always appertain to man in right of his existence. Of this kind are all the intellectual rights, or rights of the mind, and also all those rights of acting as an individual for his own comfort and happiness, which are not injurious to the rights of others."

"Civil rights are those which appertain to man in right of his being a member of society. Every civil right has for its foundation some natural right pre-existing in the individual, but to which his individual power is not, in all cases, sufficiently competent. Of this kind are all those which relate to security and protection."

Take any law back to these fundamental principles and you can see if it is good or not. Ezra Taft Benson's talk on the proper role of government has incredibly simple principles that almost anyone can agree on.

But we will not always agree. There will always be a battle between right and wrong and it is the duty of those that know the right principles to fight to keep them in their proper place. If war happened in heaven to preserve these principles, we should expect no less here or anywhere else.

Thanks for the response 5tev3.

It's similar to what I've read in other discussions on the topic. Like you I see a difference between principles and precepts.

MercynGrace wrote:5tev3,
How do you see injunctions like "thou shalt not kill", "For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife", and "concubines he shall have none"?

Do you consider these principles?

I'm curious about how you explain exceptions to the commandments (Nephi, Jacob, Abraham) - whether you see commandments are "principles" or as something else. (Just for clarity, I'm not asking to start a debate or some combative conversation - I'm sincerely just curious )

Thanks,
MnG

Thou shall not kill has been interpreted to mean thou shall not murder.

1. Thou shall not kill: some say this should read "thou shalt not murder". Murder = shed innocent blood. The Book of Mormon says:

Alma 48:14 "Now the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives."

Jews were given many commandments to enforce capital punishment. However, that said, killing at all for any reason has consequences and should be avoided if at all possible. If we were righteous we wouldn't be put in the situation where this was necessary.

Mosiah 7:25 "For if this people had not fallen into transgression the Lord would not have suffered that this great evil should come upon them. But behold, they would not hearken unto his words; but there arose contentions among them, even so much that they did shed blood"

2. Thou shalt have one wife: Directly after that, the Book of Mormon says:

Jacob 2:30 "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things."

And there are specific cases where the Lord has commanded otherwise for a specific purpose.

Exodus 21:10 "If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish."

Mark 10:11 "And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her."

The Hebrew for "put away" is "shalach" which means to separate without divorcing. Or in other words, this means to divorce and not continue to pay her support. So, if a man has remarried and is not paying child support, in a way this is committing adultery. This is why the church requires these obligations be paid to be temple worthy.

davedan wrote:1. Thou shall not kill: some say this should read "thou shalt not murder". Murder = shed innocent blood. The Book of Mormon says:

Alma 48:14 "Now the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives."

Jews were given many commandments to enforce capital punishment. However, that said, killing at all for any reason has consequences and should be avoided if at all possible. If we were righteous we wouldn't be put in the situation where this was necessary.

ya, that dang Nephi was so unrighteous, which is proven by the fact that he was "put in the situation" where he had to kill Laban

davedan wrote:Mosiah 7:25 "For if this people had not fallen into transgression the Lord would not have suffered that this great evil should come upon them. But behold, they would not hearken unto his words; but there arose contentions among them, even so much that they did shed blood"

2. Thou shalt have one wife: Directly after that, the Book of Mormon says:

Jacob 2:30 "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things."

And there are specific cases where the Lord has commanded otherwise for a specific purpose.

davedan wrote:Exodus 21:10 "If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish."

Mark 10:11 "And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her."

The Hebrew for "put away" is "shalach" which means to separate without divorcing. Or in other words, this means to divorce and not continue to pay her support. So, if a man has remarried and is not paying child support, in a way this is committing adultery. This is why the church requires these obligations be paid to be temple worthy.