Really that manner of man ?

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
User avatar
SmallFarm
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4643
Location: Holbrook, Az
Contact:

Re: Really that manner of man ?

Post by SmallFarm »

There's a difference between condemning an act as sin and condemning a person committing that act. One we are commanded to do, the other we should avoid unless directly guided by God to do so.

log
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2077
Location: The Fireplace of Affliction

Re: Really that manner of man ?

Post by log »

SmallFarm wrote:There's a difference between condemning an act as sin and condemning a person committing that act. One we are commanded to do, the other we should avoid unless directly guided by God to do so.
The example of Nephi and Laban complicates that position - or, at least, it ought to complicate it.

User avatar
SmallFarm
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4643
Location: Holbrook, Az
Contact:

Re: Really that manner of man ?

Post by SmallFarm »

log wrote:
SmallFarm wrote:There's a difference between condemning an act as sin and condemning a person committing that act. One we are commanded to do, the other we should avoid unless directly guided by God to do so.
The example of Nephi and Laban complicates that position - or, at least, it ought to complicate it.
The example of Nephi and Laban validates my position, perhaps you have misunderstood me... Or do I misunderstand you? :-\

log
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2077
Location: The Fireplace of Affliction

Re: Really that manner of man ?

Post by log »

SmallFarm wrote:
log wrote:
SmallFarm wrote:There's a difference between condemning an act as sin and condemning a person committing that act. One we are commanded to do, the other we should avoid unless directly guided by God to do so.
The example of Nephi and Laban complicates that position - or, at least, it ought to complicate it.
The example of Nephi and Laban validates my position, perhaps you have misunderstood me... Or do I misunderstand you? :-\
Let's find out.

(Que Rod Sterling impression): You're invisible, standing in a dark alleyway in ancient Jerusalem close to midnight. You watch as a drunk, armed, and armored nobleman stumbles his way down the cobblestone path, eventually falling to his face and snoring. Striding towards you is a large, muscular teenager, who turns into the alleway, pulls up short, draws the nobleman's sword, admires it for a few seconds, then stares thoughtfully at the man lying in his drink on the ground. You see the wheels of thought turning in his head, and then behold in horror as the youth pulls the drunk's head off the ground by the hair, and proceeds to relieve him of all the cares upon his shoulders (or, alternatively, "gives him the closest, and last, shave of his life").

Clearly, this was murder most foul - an act of treachery. The commandment says, "Thou shalt not kill." You have entered the Judgement Zone.

So, how do you judge that act?

User avatar
SmallFarm
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4643
Location: Holbrook, Az
Contact:

Re: Really that manner of man ?

Post by SmallFarm »

I would judge the act itself as evil but would reserve (or try to reserve) judgement of the the person committing it to God, unless called to stand in judgement against him. At least that would be my ideal I would try to hold myself to, though I would probably fail.

log
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2077
Location: The Fireplace of Affliction

Re: Really that manner of man ?

Post by log »

Now, perhaps one may appreciate why there is no commandment to condemn acts, nor men.
Doctrine and Covenants 121:16
16 Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel against mine anointed, saith the Lord, and cry they have sinned when they have not sinned before me, saith the Lord, but have done that which was meet in mine eyes, and which I commanded them.

Post Reply