Lying for the Lord

[Michelle]

Seriously??

This is ridiculous. Clearly there are instances in life where lying is a good thing!

If you were a German in the 1940s hiding a Jew and you were asked if you were hiding a Jew, CLEARLY the right answer would be NO!

IMO, those who seem to bring this up are really straining at gnats and do not live in the real world. There are plenty of times in the real world where telling a lie is exactly the right thing to do. Obviously, we shouldn't make a habit of it and clearly it is not an everyday occurrence.

But before we go any further in the conversation, we should all be clear that yes there are definitely instances in life where lying is the right thing to do.

The OP is about "lying for the Lord". So, context is important here. In LDS circles this reasoning has been used to say that when Joseph Smith said that he didn't practice polygamy, he was actually lying, but he was lying for the Lord so that he could protect the Church, etc. Or, it has been used to justify other instances in Church history where Church leaders have acted in less than honorable fashion and members or leaders "lied" so that they wouldn't get in to trouble with the law, etc.

I don't think lying so that you can protect innocent lives from a murderous regime is what is being discussed here.

-Finrock

No the point is that it is plainly obvious that there are times and circumstances where it absolutely is appropriate to lie.

The reason why I say this is straining at gnats is because human beings lie all the time, some big, some small. We tell our children about Santa Claus, when your 5 year old asks how are babies made we don't go into graphic detail about (or really any detail at all) about the particulars.

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie. If that is your belief than I disagree, but at least one is consistent. However, that is not the case, for those that this is a big issue for (in general)-they absolutely KNOW in their heart of hearts that they are hypocrites-which is one thing the Lord absolutely hates.

You are projecting or assuming.

My kids are never told the Santa Claus lie, or the Easter Bunny, or any other.

My kids do know how babies are made, they are answered with as much detail as they ask. I have my babies at home so they do ask.

I still disagree with lying being ok. In fact, it is my belief that all sin starts with a lie, either to oneself or another.

If someone asks a direct question, they will receive a direct answer, even if they don't like it. If they don't ask, I don't necessarily volunteer the information.

1 Nephi 14:30 And now I make an end of speaking concerning the things which I saw while I was carried away in the Spirit; and if all the things which I saw are not written, the things which I have written are true. And thus it is. Amen.

Your position worries me. How many other members believe as you do?

[Crackers]

Seriously??

This is ridiculous. Clearly there are instances in life where lying is a good thing!

If you were a German in the 1940s hiding a Jew and you were asked if you were hiding a Jew, CLEARLY the right answer would be NO!

IMO, those who seem to bring this up are really straining at gnats and do not live in the real world. There are plenty of times in the real world where telling a lie is exactly the right thing to do. Obviously, we shouldn't make a habit of it and clearly it is not an everyday occurrence.

But before we go any further in the conversation, we should all be clear that yes there are definitely instances in life where lying is the right thing to do.

The OP is about "lying for the Lord". So, context is important here. In LDS circles this reasoning has been used to say that when Joseph Smith said that he didn't practice polygamy, he was actually lying, but he was lying for the Lord so that he could protect the Church, etc. Or, it has been used to justify other instances in Church history where Church leaders have acted in less than honorable fashion and members or leaders "lied" so that they wouldn't get in to trouble with the law, etc.

I don't think lying so that you can protect innocent lives from a murderous regime is what is being discussed here.

-Finrock

No the point is that it is plainly obvious that there are times and circumstances where it absolutely is appropriate to lie.

The reason why I say this is straining at gnats is because human beings lie all the time, some big, some small. We tell our children about Santa Claus, when your 5 year old asks how are babies made we don't go into graphic detail about (or really any detail at all) about the particulars.

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie. If that is your belief than I disagree, but at least one is consistent. However, that is not the case, for those that this is a big issue for (in general)-they absolutely KNOW in their heart of hearts that they are hypocrites-which is one thing the Lord absolutely hates.

You are projecting or assuming.

My kids are never told the Santa Claus lie, or the Easter Bunny, or any other.

My kids do know how babies are made, they are answered with as much detail as they ask. I have my babies at home so they do ask.

I still disagree with lying being ok. In fact, it is my belief that all sin starts with a lie, either to oneself or another.

If someone asks a direct question, they will receive a direct answer, even if they don't like it. If they don't ask, I don't necessarily volunteer the information.

1 Nephi 14:30 And now I make an end of speaking concerning the things which I saw while I was carried away in the Spirit; and if all the things which I saw are not written, the things which I have written are true. And thus it is. Amen.

Your position worries me. How many other members believe as you do?

I never taught lies to my kids either, like Santa Claus, because I want them to believe me when I teach them about Jesus and other important things. Integrity is important.

[Michelle]

The OP is about "lying for the Lord". So, context is important here. In LDS circles this reasoning has been used to say that when Joseph Smith said that he didn't practice polygamy, he was actually lying, but he was lying for the Lord so that he could protect the Church, etc. Or, it has been used to justify other instances in Church history where Church leaders have acted in less than honorable fashion and members or leaders "lied" so that they wouldn't get in to trouble with the law, etc.

I don't think lying so that you can protect innocent lives from a murderous regime is what is being discussed here.

-Finrock

No the point is that it is plainly obvious that there are times and circumstances where it absolutely is appropriate to lie.

The reason why I say this is straining at gnats is because human beings lie all the time, some big, some small. We tell our children about Santa Claus, when your 5 year old asks how are babies made we don't go into graphic detail about (or really any detail at all) about the particulars.

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie. If that is your belief than I disagree, but at least one is consistent. However, that is not the case, for those that this is a big issue for (in general)-they absolutely KNOW in their heart of hearts that they are hypocrites-which is one thing the Lord absolutely hates.

You are projecting or assuming.

My kids are never told the Santa Claus lie, or the Easter Bunny, or any other.

My kids do know how babies are made, they are answered with as much detail as they ask. I have my babies at home so they do ask.

I still disagree with lying being ok. In fact, it is my belief that all sin starts with a lie, either to oneself or another.

If someone asks a direct question, they will receive a direct answer, even if they don't like it. If they don't ask, I don't necessarily volunteer the information.

1 Nephi 14:30 And now I make an end of speaking concerning the things which I saw while I was carried away in the Spirit; and if all the things which I saw are not written, the things which I have written are true. And thus it is. Amen.

Your position worries me. How many other members believe as you do?

I never taught lies to my kids either, like Santa Claus, because I want them to believe me when I teach them about Jesus and other important things. Integrity is important.

Exactly.

[mgridle1]

Seriously??

This is ridiculous. Clearly there are instances in life where lying is a good thing!

If you were a German in the 1940s hiding a Jew and you were asked if you were hiding a Jew, CLEARLY the right answer would be NO!

IMO, those who seem to bring this up are really straining at gnats and do not live in the real world. There are plenty of times in the real world where telling a lie is exactly the right thing to do. Obviously, we shouldn't make a habit of it and clearly it is not an everyday occurrence.

But before we go any further in the conversation, we should all be clear that yes there are definitely instances in life where lying is the right thing to do.

The OP is about "lying for the Lord". So, context is important here. In LDS circles this reasoning has been used to say that when Joseph Smith said that he didn't practice polygamy, he was actually lying, but he was lying for the Lord so that he could protect the Church, etc. Or, it has been used to justify other instances in Church history where Church leaders have acted in less than honorable fashion and members or leaders "lied" so that they wouldn't get in to trouble with the law, etc.

I don't think lying so that you can protect innocent lives from a murderous regime is what is being discussed here.

-Finrock

No the point is that it is plainly obvious that there are times and circumstances where it absolutely is appropriate to lie.

The reason why I say this is straining at gnats is because human beings lie all the time, some big, some small. We tell our children about Santa Claus, when your 5 year old asks how are babies made we don't go into graphic detail about (or really any detail at all) about the particulars.

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie. If that is your belief than I disagree, but at least one is consistent. However, that is not the case, for those that this is a big issue for (in general)-they absolutely KNOW in their heart of hearts that they are hypocrites-which is one thing the Lord absolutely hates.

You are projecting or assuming.

My kids are never told the Santa Claus lie, or the Easter Bunny, or any other.

My kids do know how babies are made, they are answered with as much detail as they ask. I have my babies at home so they do ask.

I still disagree with lying being ok. In fact, it is my belief that all sin starts with a lie, either to oneself or another.

If someone asks a direct question, they will receive a direct answer, even if they don't like it. If they don't ask, I don't necessarily volunteer the information.

1 Nephi 14:30 And now I make an end of speaking concerning the things which I saw while I was carried away in the Spirit; and if all the things which I saw are not written, the things which I have written are true. And thus it is. Amen.

Your position worries me. How many other members believe as you do?

You are twisting my words, I never said that lying is okay, I said that in certain circumstances it may be okay-big, big difference.

Sorry, you are the one who isn't looking at the scriptures, there are plenty of scriptural examples of individuals "lying for the Lord".

Again, in general individuals who insist on not "lying" about Santa Clause, or any other very harmless endeavor are deceiving themselves and in general are hypocrites.

I've never said that "lying is good"-I don't believe that at all-period. I do believe that in life, in some instances it is simply better to keep your mouth shut or tell a lie. I don't teach my kids to lie and I severely discipline them if they do.

However, again it is the EXACT same principle as killing. If someone enters your house uninvited and threatens bodily harm you have the absolute right to kill them. We make exceptions for the act of killing another human being-which is extremely tragic, therefor logically we should make exceptions for lying-which is much less painful than killing.

I do hope that if you are this "letter to the law" like in lying, that you are the "letter to the law" in killing another human being-otherwise you are a hypocrite.

I hope you have committed in your mind and heart that you would never harm, maime,or kill another human being. If you would kill another human being in certain instances, yet you would NEVER lie, then you are a hypocrite. Because clearly to end someone's life is of way, way more consequence than telling a lie.

[Finrock]

The OP is about "lying for the Lord". So, context is important here. In LDS circles this reasoning has been used to say that when Joseph Smith said that he didn't practice polygamy, he was actually lying, but he was lying for the Lord so that he could protect the Church, etc. Or, it has been used to justify other instances in Church history where Church leaders have acted in less than honorable fashion and members or leaders "lied" so that they wouldn't get in to trouble with the law, etc.

I don't think lying so that you can protect innocent lives from a murderous regime is what is being discussed here.

-Finrock

No the point is that it is plainly obvious that there are times and circumstances where it absolutely is appropriate to lie.

The reason why I say this is straining at gnats is because human beings lie all the time, some big, some small. We tell our children about Santa Claus, when your 5 year old asks how are babies made we don't go into graphic detail about (or really any detail at all) about the particulars.

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie. If that is your belief than I disagree, but at least one is consistent. However, that is not the case, for those that this is a big issue for (in general)-they absolutely KNOW in their heart of hearts that they are hypocrites-which is one thing the Lord absolutely hates.

That might be your point but not the OPs point. Nobody is hung up on your point. But your free to make your point and argue it all day long.

-Finrockl

No it's at the heart of the issue. If one decides that at points and times in our life it might be necessary and good to lie then the next question becomes when is it appropriate. Well, the when it is appropriate is obviously when the Spirit directs us to, aka "lying for the Lord".

In general it is very, very hard to actually tell a convincing lie, if you learn to read body language it becomes pretty obvious when someone is very uncomfortable with their answer (it doesn't mean they are lying, just that they are uncomfortable with the response they gave).

Actually, lying to protect innocent people from a murderous regime is different than " lying for the Lord" so that you can protect an institution or a person from shame, legal ramifications, to hide errors, and to maintain the good name of the Church. Its different than lying about history by changing it K that you can delete out things that are uncomfortable. All of these things have been justified by stating or believing one is lying for the Lord. Its like the ace in the hole for cultist.

So you have your point, which has nothing to do with the OP accept its about lying, and then there is the point at hand.

-Finrock

[mgridle1]

The OP is about "lying for the Lord". So, context is important here. In LDS circles this reasoning has been used to say that when Joseph Smith said that he didn't practice polygamy, he was actually lying, but he was lying for the Lord so that he could protect the Church, etc. Or, it has been used to justify other instances in Church history where Church leaders have acted in less than honorable fashion and members or leaders "lied" so that they wouldn't get in to trouble with the law, etc.

I don't think lying so that you can protect innocent lives from a murderous regime is what is being discussed here.

-Finrock

No the point is that it is plainly obvious that there are times and circumstances where it absolutely is appropriate to lie.

The reason why I say this is straining at gnats is because human beings lie all the time, some big, some small. We tell our children about Santa Claus, when your 5 year old asks how are babies made we don't go into graphic detail about (or really any detail at all) about the particulars.

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie. If that is your belief than I disagree, but at least one is consistent. However, that is not the case, for those that this is a big issue for (in general)-they absolutely KNOW in their heart of hearts that they are hypocrites-which is one thing the Lord absolutely hates.

You are projecting or assuming.

My kids are never told the Santa Claus lie, or the Easter Bunny, or any other.

My kids do know how babies are made, they are answered with as much detail as they ask. I have my babies at home so they do ask.

I still disagree with lying being ok. In fact, it is my belief that all sin starts with a lie, either to oneself or another.

If someone asks a direct question, they will receive a direct answer, even if they don't like it. If they don't ask, I don't necessarily volunteer the information.

1 Nephi 14:30 And now I make an end of speaking concerning the things which I saw while I was carried away in the Spirit; and if all the things which I saw are not written, the things which I have written are true. And thus it is. Amen.

Your position worries me. How many other members believe as you do?

I never taught lies to my kids either, like Santa Claus, because I want them to believe me when I teach them about Jesus and other important things. Integrity is important.

Seriously . . .oh my goodness you people. What killjoys. Kids act, play dress-up imagine things ALL THE TIME. I guess every time your kids pretended to be a pirate you told them to stop b/c that's a lie!

Kids have a incredible imagination-that's why Santa Claus is so awesome for them. Kids eventually grow up and realize look make-believe is just that make-believe . . .but nooo not to you folks . . .oh my goodness make-believe it's a LIE!!!!! therefore can't do it.

What a messed up world we live in. Parents don't want to play make-believe with their kids b/c it might "damage" them, yet they feel perfectly fine in indulging them in clearly deluded fantasies like they are a boy trapped in a girls body.

[mgridle1]

No the point is that it is plainly obvious that there are times and circumstances where it absolutely is appropriate to lie.

The reason why I say this is straining at gnats is because human beings lie all the time, some big, some small. We tell our children about Santa Claus, when your 5 year old asks how are babies made we don't go into graphic detail about (or really any detail at all) about the particulars.

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie. If that is your belief than I disagree, but at least one is consistent. However, that is not the case, for those that this is a big issue for (in general)-they absolutely KNOW in their heart of hearts that they are hypocrites-which is one thing the Lord absolutely hates.

That might be your point but not the OPs point. Nobody is hung up on your point. But your free to make your point and argue it all day long.

-Finrockl

No it's at the heart of the issue. If one decides that at points and times in our life it might be necessary and good to lie then the next question becomes when is it appropriate. Well, the when it is appropriate is obviously when the Spirit directs us to, aka "lying for the Lord".

In general it is very, very hard to actually tell a convincing lie, if you learn to read body language it becomes pretty obvious when someone is very uncomfortable with their answer (it doesn't mean they are lying, just that they are uncomfortable with the response they gave).

Actually, lying to protect innocent people from a murderous regime is different than " lying for the Lord" so that you can protect an institution or a person from shame, legal ramifications, to hide errors, and to maintain the good name of the Church. Its different than lying about history by changing it K that you can delete out things that are uncomfortable. All of these things have been justified by stating or believing one is lying for the Lord. Its like the ace in the hole for cultist.

So you have your point, which has nothing to do with the OP accept its about lying, and then there is the point at hand.

-Finrock

No it has everything to do with it. Clearly you can't see what I'm talking about. Sorry, I don't feel like engaging with people who can't elevate their thinking. Thanks for playing.

[Crackers]

No the point is that it is plainly obvious that there are times and circumstances where it absolutely is appropriate to lie.

The reason why I say this is straining at gnats is because human beings lie all the time, some big, some small. We tell our children about Santa Claus, when your 5 year old asks how are babies made we don't go into graphic detail about (or really any detail at all) about the particulars.

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie. If that is your belief than I disagree, but at least one is consistent. However, that is not the case, for those that this is a big issue for (in general)-they absolutely KNOW in their heart of hearts that they are hypocrites-which is one thing the Lord absolutely hates.

You are projecting or assuming.

My kids are never told the Santa Claus lie, or the Easter Bunny, or any other.

My kids do know how babies are made, they are answered with as much detail as they ask. I have my babies at home so they do ask.

I still disagree with lying being ok. In fact, it is my belief that all sin starts with a lie, either to oneself or another.

If someone asks a direct question, they will receive a direct answer, even if they don't like it. If they don't ask, I don't necessarily volunteer the information.

1 Nephi 14:30 And now I make an end of speaking concerning the things which I saw while I was carried away in the Spirit; and if all the things which I saw are not written, the things which I have written are true. And thus it is. Amen.

Your position worries me. How many other members believe as you do?

I never taught lies to my kids either, like Santa Claus, because I want them to believe me when I teach them about Jesus and other important things. Integrity is important.

Seriously . . .oh my goodness you people. What killjoys. Kids act, play dress-up imagine things ALL THE TIME. I guess every time your kids pretended to be a pirate you told them to stop b/c that's a lie!

Kids have a incredible imagination-that's why Santa Claus is so awesome for them. Kids eventually grow up and realize look make-believe is just that make-believe . . .but nooo not to you folks . . .oh my goodness make-believe it's a LIE!!!!! therefore can't do it.

What a messed up world we live in. Parents don't want to play make-believe with their kids b/c it might "damage" them, yet they feel perfectly fine in indulging them in clearly deluded fantasies like they are a boy trapped in a girls body.

Imaginative play, make-believe, dress-up, creativity, etc. are highly encouraged in my home, and are a completely separate thing from lying to a child about the existence of Santa Claus. Surely you can see the difference between the two. One is creative, imaginative play based in honesty (i.e., the child knows what is real and what is not, but is free to explore, imagine and create), the other is just a lie. I'm sorry, the kid playing dress-up knows he's not actually a pirate. How can I expect my child to believe what I teach him about Jesus if I lied to him about Santa? It is quite a leap to call me a killjoy. Why would you make such a presumption? We play dress-up, we imagine, we create. I also would never indulge gender delusions. You have no idea who I am; why make such wild presumptions?

[Finrock]

That might be your point but not the OPs point. Nobody is hung up on your point. But your free to make your point and argue it all day long.

-Finrockl

No it's at the heart of the issue. If one decides that at points and times in our life it might be necessary and good to lie then the next question becomes when is it appropriate. Well, the when it is appropriate is obviously when the Spirit directs us to, aka "lying for the Lord".

In general it is very, very hard to actually tell a convincing lie, if you learn to read body language it becomes pretty obvious when someone is very uncomfortable with their answer (it doesn't mean they are lying, just that they are uncomfortable with the response they gave).

Actually, lying to protect innocent people from a murderous regime is different than " lying for the Lord" so that you can protect an institution or a person from shame, legal ramifications, to hide errors, and to maintain the good name of the Church. Its different than lying about history by changing it K that you can delete out things that are uncomfortable. All of these things have been justified by stating or believing one is lying for the Lord. Its like the ace in the hole for cultist.

So you have your point, which has nothing to do with the OP accept its about lying, and then there is the point at hand.

-Finrock

No it has everything to do with it. Clearly you can't see what I'm talking about. Sorry, I don't feel like engaging with people who can't elevate their thinking. Thanks for playing.

The issue isn't that I can't see it, its that your argument is fallacious. Your are talking about X and the OP is talking about Y.

You don't need to apologize. The issue here isn't about me not being able to elevate my thinking. The issue is that your argument is bunk.

How often have we seen in Church history where leaders and members said that when they taught their kids about Santa Claus they were lying for the Lord? Or are you really arguing that you were lead by the Holy Ghost to lie about Santa Claus to your kids? I don't see any instance in the Church where lying for the Lord had anything to do with petty and inconsequential things like Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, etc.

Your position hinges on this little falsehood that you stated some posts ago:

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie.

People can and in fact they do have issue with "lying for the Lord" as a way to justify changing Church history (for example) and still think its appropriate to lie to Nazis so they don't murder an innocent family. You asserting MUST in all caps doesn't make it so. This conditional statement isn't an axiom or some foregone conclusion. Your assertion doesn't establish your conclusion. So here you are making this nonsensical argument based on this fallacious premise of yours and that is why you are making your point, which is one thing, and the OP is talking about something else.

-Finrock

[Finrock]

It is quite a leap to call me a killjoy. Why would you make such a presumption? We play dress-up, we imagine, we create. I also would never indulge gender delusions. You have no idea who I am; why make such wild presumptions?

He's making it personal because his argument sucks so bad. Take these personal jabs at you for what they are: a sign of the weakness of his position. If this were a contest, it means you're winning.

-Finrock

[Baurak Ale]

It really comes down to covenants.

We are judged according to our knowledge and our actions in such a way that someone who kills in self defense is generally considered justified, but if that same person had made a covenant never to take up arms to harm another person again and then did the same the consequences would be worse for them (as with the Anti-Nephi-Lehites for example). If you have made a covenant to never lie, it will be better that you never lie again, and the Lord will bless you for it and hopefully prosper you when successfully tested; whereas lying may be a guiltless option for another who has not made the same covenant, to whom the Lord’s prospering may come in another way.

So the question is, have you made a covenant not to lie, specifically?

With my children my law is this: do not lie, unless I tell you to. If they will obey this command until I give them further instructions, they will be blessed.

[mgridle1]

You are projecting or assuming.

My kids are never told the Santa Claus lie, or the Easter Bunny, or any other.

My kids do know how babies are made, they are answered with as much detail as they ask. I have my babies at home so they do ask.

I still disagree with lying being ok. In fact, it is my belief that all sin starts with a lie, either to oneself or another.

If someone asks a direct question, they will receive a direct answer, even if they don't like it. If they don't ask, I don't necessarily volunteer the information.



Your position worries me. How many other members believe as you do?

I never taught lies to my kids either, like Santa Claus, because I want them to believe me when I teach them about Jesus and other important things. Integrity is important.

Seriously . . .oh my goodness you people. What killjoys. Kids act, play dress-up imagine things ALL THE TIME. I guess every time your kids pretended to be a pirate you told them to stop b/c that's a lie!

Kids have a incredible imagination-that's why Santa Claus is so awesome for them. Kids eventually grow up and realize look make-believe is just that make-believe . . .but nooo not to you folks . . .oh my goodness make-believe it's a LIE!!!!! therefore can't do it.

What a messed up world we live in. Parents don't want to play make-believe with their kids b/c it might "damage" them, yet they feel perfectly fine in indulging them in clearly deluded fantasies like they are a boy trapped in a girls body.

Imaginative play, make-believe, dress-up, creativity, etc. are highly encouraged in my home, and are a completely separate thing from lying to a child about the existence of Santa Claus. Surely you can see the difference between the two. One is creative, imaginative play based in honesty (i.e., the child knows what is real and what is not, but is free to explore, imagine and create), the other is just a lie. I'm sorry, the kid playing dress-up knows he's not actually a pirate. How can I expect my child to believe what I teach him about Jesus if I lied to him about Santa? It is quite a leap to call me a killjoy. Why would you make such a presumption? We play dress-up, we imagine, we create. I also would never indulge gender delusions. You have no idea who I am; why make such wild presumptions?

Dude, that is easy. Seriously if you can't teach your children the difference between Santa Claus and Christ and how one is fake and one is not then I can't help you, b/c clearly that means you have absolutely 0 clue on how to actually teach your children.

I mean it is quite easy to do and if you can't do that, then quite honestly your faith in Christ is pitiful.

And I'll tell you why, Santa Claus comes around once a year for a couple weeks at best. Yet Christ should be ever present-if you think that indulging your child in Santa Claus from ages 0-10 for 2-4 weeks out of the year is going to destroy their faith in Christ, then you are not practicing your religion at all. My family reads scriptures every day, we pray every day, we go to Church on Sunday, we do all we can to obey God and when we mess up we repent. That's a 24-7, 356 days out of the year thing . . .not just a 2-4 weeks for a day here and a day there thing. If the kids as they grow up can't figure out which is false and which is true then they probably ain't that smart.

It is a killjoy. Santa Claus has been around for a very, very long time and at no point in the past several hundred years that Santa Claus has been around has anyone seriously suggested that teaching little children about Santa Claus will weaken their faith in Christ. If that were the case then our grandparents should have been atheists-but they weren't and had stronger faith than today's wuss generation.

[mgridle1]

It is quite a leap to call me a killjoy. Why would you make such a presumption? We play dress-up, we imagine, we create. I also would never indulge gender delusions. You have no idea who I am; why make such wild presumptions?

He's making it personal because his argument sucks so bad. Take these personal jabs at you for what they are: a sign of the weakness of his position. If this were a contest, it means you're winning.

-Finrock

Says the guy who just likes to say "that's not logical" to anything that he doesn't agree with.

[mgridle1]

No it's at the heart of the issue. If one decides that at points and times in our life it might be necessary and good to lie then the next question becomes when is it appropriate. Well, the when it is appropriate is obviously when the Spirit directs us to, aka "lying for the Lord".

In general it is very, very hard to actually tell a convincing lie, if you learn to read body language it becomes pretty obvious when someone is very uncomfortable with their answer (it doesn't mean they are lying, just that they are uncomfortable with the response they gave).

Actually, lying to protect innocent people from a murderous regime is different than " lying for the Lord" so that you can protect an institution or a person from shame, legal ramifications, to hide errors, and to maintain the good name of the Church. Its different than lying about history by changing it K that you can delete out things that are uncomfortable. All of these things have been justified by stating or believing one is lying for the Lord. Its like the ace in the hole for cultist.

So you have your point, which has nothing to do with the OP accept its about lying, and then there is the point at hand.

-Finrock

No it has everything to do with it. Clearly you can't see what I'm talking about. Sorry, I don't feel like engaging with people who can't elevate their thinking. Thanks for playing.

The issue isn't that I can't see it, its that your argument is fallacious. Your are talking about X and the OP is talking about Y.

You don't need to apologize. The issue here isn't about me not being able to elevate my thinking. The issue is that your argument is bunk.

How often have we seen in Church history where leaders and members said that when they taught their kids about Santa Claus they were lying for the Lord? Or are you really arguing that you were lead by the Holy Ghost to lie about Santa Claus to your kids? I don't see any instance in the Church where lying for the Lord had anything to do with petty and inconsequential things like Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, etc.

Your position hinges on this little falsehood that you stated some posts ago:

Those who are hung up on this MUST believe that in NO circumstances EVER is it EVER appropriate to lie.

People can and in fact they do have issue with "lying for the Lord" as a way to justify changing Church history (for example) and still think its appropriate to lie to Nazis so they don't murder an innocent family.
-Finrock

Okay, so you do believe that in some instances it is not only appropriate but morally right to lie. Good we can finally agree on something.

Next question, how do you decide when it is appropriate to lie or not to lie?

[Finrock]

It is quite a leap to call me a killjoy. Why would you make such a presumption? We play dress-up, we imagine, we create. I also would never indulge gender delusions. You have no idea who I am; why make such wild presumptions?

He's making it personal because his argument sucks so bad. Take these personal jabs at you for what they are: a sign of the weakness of his position. If this were a contest, it means you're winning.

-Finrock

Says the guy who just likes to say "that's no logical" to anything that he doesn't agree with.

Sorry, I don't feel like engaging with people who can't elevate their thinking.

Didn't you say that? I guess you didn't mean it or maybe you were lying for the Lord? Actually, it looks like you just wanted to get a little personal jab in there because your argument is so poor. I can understand why your resorting to personal comments. Its all you've got here. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Lol!

Your argument fails because your premise is bogus. I don't agree with your argument because its bunk and I demonstrated it.

In case you missed it the first time:

Its a false dichotomy and its irrelevant to the question at hand. A person can be against "lying for the Lord" and because they are against lying for the Lord it doesn't mean that they MUST, by logical necessity, also not be OK with lying to protect innocent people from Nazis. Nothing inconsistent there because the quality of one is greater than the other. Lying so that you can protect a leader from shame is qualitatively and morally different than lying so as to protect a family from Nazis. Lying so that you can make the Church look good is qualitatively and morally different from lying to protect an innocent person from a murderer. What I am saying is axiomatic. Clearly one is moral while the other is not. It is self-evident.

-Finrock

[Crackers]

I never taught lies to my kids either, like Santa Claus, because I want them to believe me when I teach them about Jesus and other important things. Integrity is important.

Seriously . . .oh my goodness you people. What killjoys. Kids act, play dress-up imagine things ALL THE TIME. I guess every time your kids pretended to be a pirate you told them to stop b/c that's a lie!

Kids have a incredible imagination-that's why Santa Claus is so awesome for them. Kids eventually grow up and realize look make-believe is just that make-believe . . .but nooo not to you folks . . .oh my goodness make-believe it's a LIE!!!!! therefore can't do it.

What a messed up world we live in. Parents don't want to play make-believe with their kids b/c it might "damage" them, yet they feel perfectly fine in indulging them in clearly deluded fantasies like they are a boy trapped in a girls body.

Imaginative play, make-believe, dress-up, creativity, etc. are highly encouraged in my home, and are a completely separate thing from lying to a child about the existence of Santa Claus. Surely you can see the difference between the two. One is creative, imaginative play based in honesty (i.e., the child knows what is real and what is not, but is free to explore, imagine and create), the other is just a lie. I'm sorry, the kid playing dress-up knows he's not actually a pirate. How can I expect my child to believe what I teach him about Jesus if I lied to him about Santa? It is quite a leap to call me a killjoy. Why would you make such a presumption? We play dress-up, we imagine, we create. I also would never indulge gender delusions. You have no idea who I am; why make such wild presumptions?

Dude, that is easy. Seriously if you can't teach your children the difference between Santa Claus and Christ and how one is fake and one is not then I can't help you, b/c clearly that means you have absolutely 0 clue on how to actually teach your children.
Teaching them the difference is exactly what I was doing. One is real, one is fake. Did you even read what I wrote? You are the one suggesting that it is okay to blur the line by teaching that both of them are real, not me.
I mean it is quite easy to do and if you can't do that, then quite honestly your faith in Christ is pitiful. Where are you even getting these thoughts?

And I'll tell you why, Santa Claus comes around once a year for a couple weeks at best. Yet Christ should be ever present-if you think that indulging your child in Santa Claus from ages 0-10 for 2-4 weeks out of the year is going to destroy their faith in Christ, then you are not practicing your religion at all. My family reads scriptures every day, we pray every day, we go to Church on Sunday, we do all we can to obey God and when we mess up we repent. That's a 24-7, 356 days out of the year thing . . .not just a 2-4 weeks for a day here and a day there thing. If the kids as they grow up can't figure out which is false and which is true then they probably ain't that smart. Yes, even most pitifully stupid children will eventually figure out that Santa is fake. I just don't want to be the parent that lied to them about it. (My children aren't stupid, BTW. They are quite bright and well adjusted, and they love Christmas, go figure.) If you want to teach your kids that Santa is real, go for it. I don't really care or even judge you for it.

It is a killjoy. Santa Claus has been around for a very, very long time and at no point in the past several hundred years that Santa Claus has been around has anyone seriously suggested that teaching little children about Santa Claus will weaken their faith in Christ. If that were the case then our grandparents should have been atheists-but they weren't and had stronger faith than today's wuss generation. I don't believe a belief in Santa weakens one's faith in Christ. I simply want my children to be able to believe that I am being truthful with them in all things to the best of my ability, so that they can feel confident in trusting me and in the things I teach them. That's it. I don't care if other parents do the same or not, and I am not trying to kill your joy in Christmas, which possibly centers more on a belief in Santa than in a desire to celebrate the birth of Christ, based on your comments here.

[Finrock]

Dude, that is easy. Seriously if you can't teach your children the difference between Santa Claus and Christ and how one is fake and one is not then I can't help you, b/c clearly that means you have absolutely 0 clue on how to actually teach your children.

Sheesh, you really want us to know how weak your position is.

You realize your insults aren't saying anything about Crackers, right? You acting dishonorably only makes you look bad.

I mean it is quite easy to do and if you can't do that, then quite honestly your faith in Christ is pitiful.

Sheesh, you really want us to know how weak your position is.

You realize your insults aren't saying anything about Crackers, right? You acting dishonorably only makes you look bad.

-Finrock

[mgridle1]

You folks really need to get a grip:
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/12/what ... e?lang=eng

"I have noticed that those who say they don’t want Santa in Christmas because he is a lie—a fictional character—seem to overlook another deception of a sort. That is, they overlook the fact that the Lord was not born on December 25; he was born on April 6, in the springtime “beauty of the lilies.” So maybe we shouldn’t be celebrating anything on December 25."

Hypocrisy, that is exactly what I'm talking about.

[Crackers]

You folks really need to get a grip:
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/12/what ... e?lang=eng

"I have noticed that those who say they don’t want Santa in Christmas because he is a lie—a fictional character—seem to overlook another deception of a sort. That is, they overlook the fact that the Lord was not born on December 25; he was born on April 6, in the springtime “beauty of the lilies.” So maybe we shouldn’t be celebrating anything on December 25."

Hypocrisy, that is exactly what I'm talking about.

No hypocrisy or ignorance on my part, and I never said that I don't want "Santa" to be a part of Christmas. Thanks for trying to cast aspersions.