Troubles with the book of mormon! part 1. NEPHI!

[DanieltheDragon]

I made a claim that I found the book of mormon troubling. Now while I acknowledge this is purely subjective, I find it important and relevant in the discourse of religion to discuss these issues. So I will start with the beginning 1 Nephi.

In Nephi we find that his father his mother and 3 brothers must flee Israel because his father had a vision of its destruction because of the stiffneckedness of the Israeli people and their wickedness in ignoring god's laws. (which is interesting why we can suddenly ignore them now?)

Nephi was the only son of Lehi to take him seriously as the other sons murmured to their father frequently. Apparently on this expedition Nephi and his brothers Laman and Lamuel must go back and acquire brass plates(which are important cause they have the family tree on them and some of god's laws) from Labam. Labam tells them to leave his house and calls them thieves and threatens their lives. Nephi recommends they aquire the property they left behind and use that to acquire the plates. Labam steals the property and kicks them out of Jerusalem. Now Nephi is going to try one last time and this is where I find things to really get troubling.

Nephi 4:

7 Nevertheless I went forth, and as I came near unto the house of Laban I beheld a man, and he had fallen to the earth before me, for he was drunken with wine.

8 And when I came to him I found that it was Laban.

9 And I beheld his sword, and I drew it forth from the sheath

10 And it came to pass that I was constrained by the Spirit that I should kill Laban; but I said in my heart: Never at any time have I shed the blood of man. And I shrunk and would that I might not slay him.

11 And the Spirit said unto me again: Behold the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands. Yea, and I also knew that he had sought to take away mine own life; yea, and he would not hearken unto the commandments of the Lord; and he also had taken away our property.

12 And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me again: Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands;

17 And again, I knew that the Lord had delivered Laban into my hands for this cause—that I might obtain the records according to his commandments.

18 Therefore I did obey the voice of the Spirit, and took Laban by the hair of the head, and I smote off his head with his own sword.

19 And after I had smitten off his head with his own sword, I took the garments of Laban and put them upon mine own body; yea, even every whit; and I did gird on his armor about my loins.

This I find troubling for several reasons

1. Nephi did not want to kill Labam yet the Spirit of the lord continued to press him to do it.

2. This is murder to attain property that is not yours.

Additionally I have heard of this kind of dialogue before.

http://www.schizophrenic.com/content/sc ... ing-voices

Command hallucinations
Another fairly common experience with regards to the voices is that they tell the schizophrenic to do certain things. Clinically, these are referred to as “command hallucinations�, and in some cases they can cause significant problems. The voices may tell the schizophrenic to harm or kill himself/herself or to harm someone else. Because the voices seem very real, they can be very compelling, making it difficult for the schizophrenic to resist acting on the commands

It is troubling to me because the story of Nephi has some characteristics of Schizophrenia and it is celebrated as a good thing

Now Nephi being a righteous man unto the lord caught a servant fleeing

30 And it came to pass that when the servant of Laban beheld my brethren he began to tremble, and was about to flee from before me and return to the city of Jerusalem.

31 And now I, Nephi, being a man large in stature, and also having received much strength of the Lord, therefore I did seize upon the servant of Laban, and held him, that he should not flee.

32 And it came to pass that I spake with him, that if he would hearken unto my words, as the Lord liveth, and as I live, even so that if he would hearken unto our words, we would spare his life.

38 And it came to pass that we took the plates of brass and the servant of Laban, and departed into the wilderness, and journeyed unto the tent of our father.

and see how merciful Nephi is he spared him his life if he agreed to be kidnapped.


This is just the beginning and there are more troubling stories to come. This one stands out on many levels.

Question for debate:


Is the story of Nephi and Labam a troubling story?

[dianaiad]

You keep harping on the idea of the original ownership.

I think that Nephi had the right to ask...else he wouldn't have felt free to ask. Be that as it may, Nephi brought money, a great deal of it, in order to purchase those plates.

Laban not only turned him down, he kept the money and attempted to kill Nephi and his brothers.

Whatever you think about the original ownership, Laban acted dishonorably.

More than dishonorably; he was the thief he accused Nephi of being, and the only reason Nephi was not the one missing a head is because he and his two brothers managed to evade and outrun fifty of Laban's slaves/servants.

Given Zoram's willingness to trade his servitude with Laban for freedom with Lehi's group, though, perhaps all those guys didn't have their hearts in the attempt.

Still....

As for you being a pacifist....

Hmmn,

Are you telling me that your problem with God..and what troubles you about the Book of Mormon, is that the God described therein wouldn't do things the way you would?

As in...you'd make a better god than God?

[Vanguard]

I made a claim that I found the book of mormon troubling. Now while I acknowledge this is purely subjective, I find it important and relevant in the discourse of religion to discuss these issues. So I will start with the beginning 1 Nephi.

In Nephi we find that his father his mother and 3 brothers must flee Israel because his father had a vision of its destruction because of the stiffneckedness of the Israeli people and their wickedness in ignoring god's laws. (which is interesting why we can suddenly ignore them now?)

Nephi was the only son of Lehi to take him seriously as the other sons murmured to their father frequently. Apparently on this expedition Nephi and his brothers Laman and Lamuel must go back and acquire brass plates(which are important cause they have the family tree on them and some of god's laws) from Labam. Labam tells them to leave his house and calls them thieves and threatens their lives. Nephi recommends they aquire the property they left behind and use that to acquire the plates. Labam steals the property and kicks them out of Jerusalem. Now Nephi is going to try one last time and this is where I find things to really get troubling.

Nephi 4:

7 Nevertheless I went forth, and as I came near unto the house of Laban I beheld a man, and he had fallen to the earth before me, for he was drunken with wine.

8 And when I came to him I found that it was Laban.

9 And I beheld his sword, and I drew it forth from the sheath

10 And it came to pass that I was constrained by the Spirit that I should kill Laban; but I said in my heart: Never at any time have I shed the blood of man. And I shrunk and would that I might not slay him.

11 And the Spirit said unto me again: Behold the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands. Yea, and I also knew that he had sought to take away mine own life; yea, and he would not hearken unto the commandments of the Lord; and he also had taken away our property.

12 And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me again: Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands;

17 And again, I knew that the Lord had delivered Laban into my hands for this cause—that I might obtain the records according to his commandments.

18 Therefore I did obey the voice of the Spirit, and took Laban by the hair of the head, and I smote off his head with his own sword.

19 And after I had smitten off his head with his own sword, I took the garments of Laban and put them upon mine own body; yea, even every whit; and I did gird on his armor about my loins.

This I find troubling for several reasons

1. Nephi did not want to kill Labam yet the Spirit of the lord continued to press him to do it.

2. This is murder to attain property that is not yours.

Additionally I have heard of this kind of dialogue before.

http://www.schizophrenic.com/content/sc ... ing-voices

Command hallucinations
Another fairly common experience with regards to the voices is that they tell the schizophrenic to do certain things. Clinically, these are referred to as “command hallucinations�, and in some cases they can cause significant problems. The voices may tell the schizophrenic to harm or kill himself/herself or to harm someone else. Because the voices seem very real, they can be very compelling, making it difficult for the schizophrenic to resist acting on the commands

It is troubling to me because the story of Nephi has some characteristics of Schizophrenia and it is celebrated as a good thing

Now Nephi being a righteous man unto the lord caught a servant fleeing

30 And it came to pass that when the servant of Laban beheld my brethren he began to tremble, and was about to flee from before me and return to the city of Jerusalem.

31 And now I, Nephi, being a man large in stature, and also having received much strength of the Lord, therefore I did seize upon the servant of Laban, and held him, that he should not flee.

32 And it came to pass that I spake with him, that if he would hearken unto my words, as the Lord liveth, and as I live, even so that if he would hearken unto our words, we would spare his life.

38 And it came to pass that we took the plates of brass and the servant of Laban, and departed into the wilderness, and journeyed unto the tent of our father.

and see how merciful Nephi is he spared him his life if he agreed to be kidnapped.


This is just the beginning and there are more troubling stories to come. This one stands out on many levels.

Question for debate:

Is the story of Nephi and Laban a troubling story?

Yes, it is. My family [(my wife & our 3 children (13, 11, & 7)] has started reading the BoM once again from the beginning and just last Sunday we came upon the very passage in question. This time, however, I thought it important to explore the potential ramifications behind what Nephi had done if for no other reason but to probe what my two eldest children are thinking. What I want to guard against is the simplistic notion that "Well, the Lord told him to do it and so it's ok" type-of-thing. I asked them about what they would think if I told them the "spirit" constrained me to take the life of another when that other person has done nothing to directly provoke a confrontation. They all unanimously answered that there would be something wrong with such an action though they were unable to better articulate the difference.

And so there you have it. This passage and almost countless others in both the BoM & Bible present these kinds of dilemmas. The always salient question - among many salient questions - is whether the "lens" of 21st century man can appreciate the realities of those who lived so many years before us. I tell my wife continually that were I to walk in the shadow of any one of the great Biblical prophets for just a day I would probably be revolted by the customs and many of the beliefs they carried. Does my revulsion therefore prove they were wrong to have these customs/beliefs? Is it possible the "spirit" would constrain mankind to take action way back then that the sprit would not constrain a modern day man to do? A believer has to grapple with these issues. They must not go unaddressed and I certainly don't want my children carrying many of the more simple-minded beliefs that many of my fellow Christian brothers have.

By the same token and though I welcome a more critical-minded inquiry into these troubling passages, your commentary about why God simply doesn't "fix it" ironically sounds like many a Christian who claims "God did it" when trying to explain an event they can't understand. Is it really that simple?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 21 by dianaiad]

Again its not about being a better god. I don't believe in gods to begin with. Take this story for isntance lets say everything you argued is true and to the point.

Why kill Laban if he was drunk and passed out in the street why not just bind and gag him take his armor and continue the story as is. This would not change the outcome one iota except Nephi would not have beheaded someone.


Secondly I harp on the ownership because that is an issue Laban accuses Nephi and his brothers of being theifs and was right Nephi killed him and stole his plates. Also if Laban was to be the record keeper it was not his to give. He was keeping the record to the jewish people Nephi's money was bribery.

Also a dishonest act does not necessitate cold blooded murder.

Are you telling me that your problem with God..and what troubles you about the Book of Mormon, is that the God described therein wouldn't do things the way you would?

As in...you'd make a better god than God?

I don't need to be a better god to decided if an action is immoral or not. Would you make a better president than Obama? I disagree with the actions of Obama and Bush and their track record on war and the use of drones is deplorable but I can admit I probably would not be a better president. I can't manage what would need to be done, I can still disagree with them and I can still find their actions immoral and I would probably still vote for someone else.

Yes I am a pacifist, and yes the actions contained in the bible are offensive to me. The stories depicted therein are troubling to an individual such as myself. Why is that so hard to understand. The stories are written by people who celebrate violence, I mean just a few posts ago you were cheering for a man to be beheaded. Does that not strike you as a bit odd?

Is this story like baseball 3 strikes and your out( I mean murdered). Why not ask for a copy of the plates why not ask to transcribe them? Why not tie up Laban and steal the plates he was drunk and passed out it would not have been hard to do. No instead we get a beheading. Seems good ole Joseph Smith new exactly what his readers expected.

Also here is another important facet of the story it is written through the lens of Nephi not anyone else. Have you read accounts of death row inmates as the recount why they are there in the first place? They sound earily familiar to this story and that disturbs me.

[dianaiad]

[Replying to post 21 by dianaiad]

Again its not about being a better god. I don't believe in gods to begin with. Take this story for isntance lets say everything you argued is true and to the point.

Why kill Laban if he was drunk and passed out in the street why not just bind and gag him take his armor and continue the story as is. This would not change the outcome one iota except Nephi would not have beheaded someone.


Secondly I harp on the ownership because that is an issue Laban accuses Nephi and his brothers of being theifs and was right Nephi killed him and stole his plates.

Not if he left the money behind, he didn't.

As well, I submit that, since Laban was dishonorable enough to not only keep the money but also attempt to kill Nephi, that he was not worthy of keeping the plates. As well, since the reason Lehi left is because he was warned about the disaster about to happen to the Jews, that the plates were in better hands with Lehi than with Laban.

If, as seems at least possible because Nephi first asked for the plates without offering to pay, and because he actually DID come to Laban openly and ask for them, the presumption is that he had the right to do so. If he hadn't had the right to ask for them, it would have been rather idiotic of him to do that.

It seems that, if Nephi didn't have the right to those plates, or have an ownership interest, that he would have brought money the first time.

But he didn't. He only brought money the second time, and he came openly both times; he only brought money because Laban refused him...and that came as a bit of a shock.

Now i don't know about you, but if you are expecting to be given the plates without having to pay for them...or, if you wish, bribe the keeper...then there is a presumption of right that must be considered.

Vanguard brought something up, too, that must also be considered, and which I have also brought up. We live in a very different culture and society today.

WE have access to cops and courts...and because we have access to cops and courts, we can afford to be more judgmental of those who take the law and justice into their own hands.

But in Nephi's situation, there were no other hands in which to place justice.

As for 'tying him up and taking his clothes?"

perhaps....but think about what Laban would have done had that been the choice. Think about how Laban had already sent all his servants after Nephi to try to kill him. Think about how this time, Laban would most likely have sent at least that many after Nephi and the entire family.

Was it something one would have to do now?

No, probably not.

Was there a choice for Nephi, given all that was at stake?

probably not.

Also if Laban was to be the record keeper it was not his to give. He was keeping the record to the jewish people Nephi's money was bribery.

Also a dishonest act does not necessitate cold blooded murder.

"Dishonest act?"

How about attempted murder, and the really good odds that an armed force would be sent after the family?

Are you telling me that your problem with God..and what troubles you about the Book of Mormon, is that the God described therein wouldn't do things the way you would?

As in...you'd make a better god than God?

I don't need to be a better god to decided if an action is immoral or not. Would you make a better president than Obama?

Yes, actually, I would. Pretty much anybody would, except perhaps Harry Reid or Barbara Boxer.

I disagree with the actions of Obama and Bush and their track record on war and the use of drones is deplorable but I can admit I probably would not be a better president. I can't manage what would need to be done, I can still disagree with them and I can still find their actions immoral and I would probably still vote for someone else.

Yes I am a pacifist, and yes the actions contained in the bible are offensive to me. The stories depicted therein are troubling to an individual such as myself. Why is that so hard to understand. The stories are written by people who celebrate violence, I mean just a few posts ago you were cheering for a man to be beheaded. Does that not strike you as a bit odd?

Is this story like baseball 3 strikes and your out( I mean murdered). Why not ask for a copy of the plates why not ask to transcribe them?

ARE YOU KIDDING?

Technological issues alone would preclude this. What, you expect perhaps Nephi to whip out his smartphone and take a bunch of pictures?

Great googly moogly.

Why not tie up Laban and steal the plates he was drunk and passed out it would not have been hard to do. No instead we get a beheading. Seems good ole Joseph Smith new exactly what his readers expected.

Also here is another important facet of the story it is written through the lens of Nephi not anyone else. Have you read accounts of death row inmates as the recount why they are there in the first place? They sound earily familiar to this story and that disturbs me.

The bible ia a record of religious beliefs, and of physical events, some of which can be verified. One can argue that this event happened...but didn't mean what the writers thought it meant. Or didn't happen quite the way it is presented...but there is an actual history to it apart from any divine revelation that is contained in it.

The Book of Mormon, however, is a 'binary set." That is, it's either true or it's made up entirely. By 'true,' I don't mean that the writers of it didn't misinterpret what happened, or didn't understand everything, or put old names on new plants....but if it is true, then it is ALSO a pretty much true account of Deity and His dealings.

Or it's fiction.

If it's true, then Nephi's account of having to struggle and make that decision is as he claimed it is. If it's not, then the entire event simply did not happen, and the story is fiction.

Either way you have to deal with it as Nephi claims: the Holy Spirit told him how to deal with it, and Nephi didn't like it any better than you do.

No schizophrenia. No mental illness. Nephi was told that this was the only way. It COULD be, as I speculate, that had Nephi only bound Laban that, upon getting free, Laban would have sent a bunch of soldiers to attack and kill the entire family.

He had already sent a bunch of people to kill Nephi when Laban already had both the plates and all Lehi's wealth. What do you think he would have done to Nephi and his family if Nephi actually got away with the plates?

You may think that Nephi should have waited for a year or so to get a copy of those plates, or had someone copy and fax them to him, sue him in court or call the cops, but y'know what?

those options weren't available to him.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 24 by dianaiad]

ARE YOU KIDDING?

Technological issues alone would preclude this. What, you expect perhaps Nephi to whip out his smartphone and take a bunch of pictures?

Great googly moogly.

Google scribes. Nephi appears to be literate also perhaps he could have copied them down.

Again there were alternatives.

Ancient Jerusalem may not have had a police force but they did have a court system. If Laban was in violation he could have been tried in the Jewish courts. This would seem to be Bluethread's area of expertise perhaps we could get him to chime in?

Regardless of whose rightful ownership of the property or Laban's actions. Here is what did transpire

1. Nephi murdered Laban in cold blood aided by god

2. Nephi stole the plates

I don't envy your position being forced to justify theft and murder. The fact is this story is offensive to my morals. If it doesn't bother you more power to you but it bothers me. I have said all I am going to say on the subject. As I don't agree with your reasoning on the matter. You seem intent on keeping Nephi blameless no matter what, and that's fine.

What is curious though through all of this you say god didn't want to violate free will.

BUT, he did violate Laban's free will. He admitted as much when he claimed to have delivered Laban into Nephi's hands. If it was laban's choice to get drunk and stumble into the street god could not have had a hand in it. Only if god violated Laban's free will.

God will violate your free will to kill but he rarely violates free will to save. That is kind of a troubling message.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 22 by Vanguard]

Is the story of Nephi and Laban a troubling story?

Yes, it is. My family [(my wife & our 3 children (13, 11, & 7)] has started reading the BoM once again from the beginning and just last Sunday we came upon the very passage in question. This time, however, I thought it important to explore the potential ramifications behind what Nephi had done if for no other reason but to probe what my two eldest children are thinking. What I want to guard against is the simplistic notion that "Well, the Lord told him to do it and so it's ok" type-of-thing. I asked them about what they would think if I told them the "spirit" constrained me to take the life of another when that other person has done nothing to directly provoke a confrontation. They all unanimously answered that there would be something wrong with such an action though they were unable to better articulate the difference.

And so there you have it. This passage and almost countless others in both the BoM & Bible present these kinds of dilemmas. The always salient question - among many salient questions - is whether the "lens" of 21st century man can appreciate the realities of those who lived so many years before us. I tell my wife continually that were I to walk in the shadow of any one of the great Biblical prophets for just a day I would probably be revolted by the customs and many of the beliefs they carried. Does my revulsion therefore prove they were wrong to have these customs/beliefs? Is it possible the "spirit" would constrain mankind to take action way back then that the sprit would not constrain a modern day man to do? A believer has to grapple with these issues. They must not go unaddressed and I certainly don't want my children carrying many of the more simple-minded beliefs that many of my fellow Christian brothers have.

By the same token and though I welcome a more critical-minded inquiry into these troubling passages, your commentary about why God simply doesn't "fix it" ironically sounds like many a Christian who claims "God did it" when trying to explain an event they can't understand. Is it really that simple? Think

I appreciate the objective look at the story and I can certainly understand yours and Dianiads position on the matter. Why I don't buy the old customs vs new customs is precisely because of the supernatural element to it. You have an Immortal supreme being that is supposedly the fountain of all morality. Yet this god engineered this situation to transpire the way it did. Its not the peoples customs that is specifically the issue it is the actions of god himself that create additional problems.

There are other ancient cultures that don't feel the need to lop off peoples heads on a whim. In fact even within this story there were alternatives that were simply left off the table. Even Nephi recognized it was wrong. YET god commanded it. God ordered it to be done. That is evil in my opinion. You have an all powerful god and the only way he could get some brass plates to be secured by Nephi was through cold blooded murder. That is an issue I have with the story.

[dianaiad]

[Replying to post 24 by dianaiad]

ARE YOU KIDDING?

Technological issues alone would preclude this. What, you expect perhaps Nephi to whip out his smartphone and take a bunch of pictures?

Great googly moogly.

Google scribes. Nephi appears to be literate also perhaps he could have copied them down.

Again there were alternatives.

Ancient Jerusalem may not have had a police force but they did have a court system. If Laban was in violation he could have been tried in the Jewish courts. This would seem to be Bluethread's area of expertise perhaps we could get him to chime in?

Regardless of whose rightful ownership of the property or Laban's actions. Here is what did transpire

1. Nephi murdered Laban in cold blood aided by god

He did kill the man, yes.

2. Nephi stole the plates.

No, he did not.

He PAID for the plates. Laban agreed to the deal, then reneged on the deal, stealing Nephi's goods and refusing to hand over what those goods paid for.

Nephi did not take the payment back. He took that for which he had paid.

....and if you think Lehi or Nephi had any access to any court system active at the time, you absolutely have NOT read the story.

I think we've run this one into the ground.

I think that Nephi had a crisis of conscience over this, but...perhaps because God knew what Laban would do if he were allowed to live...Nephi killed Laban.

Understanding the context and the entire story of what Lehi and his family were going through at the time, what Laban could have (and given what he did do, probably would have) done, I doubt that Nephi had a whole lot of choice there.

Cold blooded? Not even close.

Unavoidably practical? Probably.

You don't like it.

I get that.

What would you have done if you were Nephi, you had just given everything your rather wealthy family owned to a man in return for the history of your family, and that man had not only taken your money and refused to give you the plates, but sent men after you to kill you?

What would you have done, in that situation, when you really did have no recourse to courts? (and read the book if you think for one minute that Lehi and Nephi had any recourse whatsoever to any courts).

What would you have done, in that situation, if you knew that, if you got what you paid for by sneaking in and taking it, Laban would send a pretty good, armed force (the book says that Laban could 'command fifty') against you, your parents and your entire family--a family which numbered a good bit less than fifty?

I might well have done what Nephi did. Only I wouldn't have had quite such a crisis of conscience over it.

Indeed, daniel....your insistence that Lehi and Nephi could have gone to a court is about as complete a bit of evidence as I can think of that you have not, after all, read the book.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 27 by dianaiad]

I am beginning to think that you haven't read the book

1. You claimed Laban was not the owner of the brass plates and Lehi was the proper owner

1 Nephi 5:16 proves this entirely false Laban was the keeper of the plates

2. You claim that Laban accepted the deal to take the money for the plates

I am calling you out on this chapter and verse please. Nothing else will suffice.


1 Nephi 3:24 they offer the money for the plates

1 Nephi 3:25 Laban steals their money

THERE IS NO MENTION that he accepted their offer


Yes I read the book and in reading it I get it the Jewish people were wicked and ignored the prophets etc etc. The problems I have is that they didn't even try.

I will consult with blue thread as he is very familiar with Jewish law and how it was carried out in antiquity to settle this issue if it was possible that they could have done so.

Indeed, daniel....your insistence that Lehi and Nephi could have gone to a court is about as complete a bit of evidence as I can think of that you have not, after all, read the book.

You don't need any evidence for that you have already made up your mind on that matter, it seems your frustrated I get it. My sense of morality conflicts with the story as it is written. Just because I can imagine different possibilities and you can't doesn't mean I didn't read the story.

Like I said earlier the only way for me to prove that I have read the story is if I read it out loud to you over skype. I am willing to do this. You know my position on the matter I don't like the inference that I lied. I am willing to put this behind us I will read the entire book of mormon to you over skype or youtube however you prefer if it will end this diatribe about me not having read it.


Just answer this one question Dianiad,

Do you think I am being truthful when I say I have read the book of mormon?

that will answer everything I need to know.

[dianaiad]

<snip to here>



Just answer this one question Dianiad,

Do you think I am being truthful when I say I have read the book of mormon?

that will answer everything I need to know.

I accept your word that you have read the Book of Mormon.

However, you need to look up the difference between exegesis and eisegesis.

The first is what everybody is supposed to do: that is, exegesis is when you read a text for what's actually in it; getting the information out of it.

the second, eisegesis, is when you take your own opinions, outlooks and prejudices and read INTO a text stuff that just ain't there.

For instance; your idea that Lehi, who had pretty much been mocked out of his land and dwelling place, leaving all that he owned behind him, and ending up camped in a tent out in the wilderness somewhere in anticipation of the destruction of Israel and all he held dear, would, OF COURSE, be able to go to the courts of the time and get those plates.

Given that Nephi had tried everything else; simply asking as if he had the right to ask (and it seems odd that he would march into Laban's tent and simply ask for them if he didn't believe he had the right to ask) and giving Laban all his wealth in return for those plates;.....

does it seem reasonable to you that, if he had any other recourse, he would DO the money thing?

And yes, taking and keeping the money meant to pay for something IS agreeing to the arrangement. It only becomes theft if the thing for which the money was paid is not delivered to the purchaser.

If Nephi had taken all the money along with the plates, that would have made him the thief. Since he did not, Nephi was not guilty of theft.

You might find Nephi's story 'troubling.'

Go ahead.

I believe that you are practicing eisegesis here; reading into the events of that time all the cultural baggage and resources you have NOW.

And that is a mistake.

[Vanguard]

[Replying to post 22 by Vanguard]

Is the story of Nephi and Laban a troubling story?

Yes, it is. My family [(my wife & our 3 children (13, 11, & 7)] has started reading the BoM once again from the beginning and just last Sunday we came upon the very passage in question. This time, however, I thought it important to explore the potential ramifications behind what Nephi had done if for no other reason but to probe what my two eldest children are thinking. What I want to guard against is the simplistic notion that "Well, the Lord told him to do it and so it's ok" type-of-thing. I asked them about what they would think if I told them the "spirit" constrained me to take the life of another when that other person has done nothing to directly provoke a confrontation. They all unanimously answered that there would be something wrong with such an action though they were unable to better articulate the difference.

And so there you have it. This passage and almost countless others in both the BoM & Bible present these kinds of dilemmas. The always salient question - among many salient questions - is whether the "lens" of 21st century man can appreciate the realities of those who lived so many years before us. I tell my wife continually that were I to walk in the shadow of any one of the great Biblical prophets for just a day I would probably be revolted by the customs and many of the beliefs they carried. Does my revulsion therefore prove they were wrong to have these customs/beliefs? Is it possible the "spirit" would constrain mankind to take action way back then that the sprit would not constrain a modern day man to do? A believer has to grapple with these issues. They must not go unaddressed and I certainly don't want my children carrying many of the more simple-minded beliefs that many of my fellow Christian brothers have.

By the same token and though I welcome a more critical-minded inquiry into these troubling passages, your commentary about why God simply doesn't "fix it" ironically sounds like many a Christian who claims "God did it" when trying to explain an event they can't understand. Is it really that simple? Think

I appreciate the objective look at the story and I can certainly understand yours and Dianiads position on the matter. Why I don't buy the old customs vs new customs is precisely because of the supernatural element to it. You have an Immortal supreme being that is supposedly the fountain of all morality. Yet this god engineered this situation to transpire the way it did. Its not the peoples customs that is specifically the issue it is the actions of god himself that create additional problems.

There are other ancient cultures that don't feel the need to lop off peoples heads on a whim. In fact even within this story there were alternatives that were simply left off the table. Even Nephi recognized it was wrong. YET god commanded it. God ordered it to be done. That is evil in my opinion. You have an all powerful god and the only way he could get some brass plates to be secured by Nephi was through cold blooded murder. That is an issue I have with the story.

From what I can gather of your position, isn't "the supernatural element" in it regardless of whether Nephi believed he was inspired or whether he was actually deceived? You seem to be arguing a much larger and more important point than focusing on the actions of one young man in a book that is replete - similarly to the Bible - with morally challenging positions. Isn't your position ultimately that if the Christian God were the moral standard (according to what you think that should be) and if he were indeed all powerful, how could he tolerate any kind of immoral actions on the part of mankind and still be considered the standard? That if God simply kept mankind out of all these sticky wickets by pulling a "goddidit" every time trouble was brewing then at least he'd show he were really that moral standard?

Your argument does not appear to be about Nephi, or Saul of Tarsus, or Noah, or any number of other men who made questionably immoral decisions - according to the moral palate of 21st century secular man - but rather an argument against the notion of an all-powerful, all moral, and all loving God tolerating anything that appears to run contrary to these qualities. And that, Dthed, is quite an entirely different conversation...

As an aside though related to your comment about "old customs vs. new customs", CS Lewis in Mere Christianity quotes another man challenging CS by asking "'Three hundred years ago people in England were putting witches to death. Was that what you call the Rule of Human Nature or Right Conduct?' But surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. For if we did - if we really thought there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather, surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did. There is no difference of moral principle here: the difference is simply about matter of fact. It may bed a great advance in knowledge not to believe in witches: there is no moral advance in not executing them when you do not think they are there. You would not call a man humane for ceasing to set mouse-traps if he did so because he believed there were no mice in the house."