Atop Mount Sanai God
delivered 10 commandments to Moses, which were as rigid and unyielding as the
tablets they were written on. The
commandments represent God’s law, the breaking of which results in sin and
spiritual death. Over and over again we
see people in the scriptures meeting their demise for breaking the
commandments. Clearly, the law of God is
no joke. With any rule, the first
question many of us will ask is: what are the exceptions? Are there times when breaking a commandment
is justified, given the right circumstances?
In The Book of Mormon, one of the first stories we come
across is of Nephi being commanded to slay Laban. Nephi, an Israelite, was undoubtedly aware of
the commandment not to kill and initially displayed a negative reaction to
God’s order. Nephi began to reason
whether or not Laban’s death was justified: he had after all, sought to kill
his family, stolen his father’s possessions, and refused to relinquish his hold
over the brass plates which Nephi had been commanded to retrieve. In the end, however, it wasn’t his own
justification that motivated him to decapitate his foe, but the persistent
reassurance of the Spirit. Case in
point: God has complete flexibility to alter his commands to accomplish His
designs, but it is certainly not our prerogative
to decide when God’s commandments apply.
In the Church I have seen a trend where members aren’t
forthcoming with potential investigators about some of the deeper doctrines of
the kingdom. The fear seems to be that
nonmembers are not ready for deep doctrine and will recoil away from the Church
if faced with it. While this is a valid
concern, it pales in comparison to the liability of new members realizing after
the fact that they’ve been kept in the dark.
I’ve even seen members blatantly dismiss direct questions in the name of
“milk before meat”. Don’t get me wrong,
I do believe in teaching the basics first since it’s an order prescribed by
scriptures like Isaiah 28:9-10 and 2 Nephi 28:30, but I have to voice my concern when we pretend the
meat doesn’t exist. The meat of the
gospel should be a natural evolution in our teaching, but by sweeping it under
the rug we foster distrust between ourselves and our investigators, we impede
the Spirit of truth from bearing its witness, and we break God’s commandment
not to bear false witness [to] our neighbors.
Let us remember the 13th article of faith: We believe in
being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men…
Failing to explain the full reach of Mormon doctrine only leads to the belief, for the investigator or by then member, that they had been lied to or that things were hidden that they would have wanted to know before committing to the Church and that can bring on a crisis of faith witch could lead to the member leaving the Church. Better to be truthful and explain things that could later cause someone to feel betrayed.
ReplyDeleteAdam and Eve were the first to face such a dilemma. They were given a "do" commandment and a "don't" commandment and could not keep the "do" without breaking the "don't". When they didn't keep the "don't", there were consequences which included being able to keep the "do" commandment, along with death and sin, the Atonement of Jesus Christ and the potential for eternal life. Later on, Nephi wrote, "O wretched man that I am...nevertheless I know in whom I have trusted."
ReplyDeleteI see it from the other side. It is not that members are not forthcoming about the doctrine of the church but that they tend to teach things that are the imaginations of men as doctrine. This is not a church of deep doctrine. In truth the doctrine is very plain. 3 Nephi 11:40 teaches us that teaching more or less than what is the doctrine is not of God.
ReplyDeleteThere is only one place in the church where Gospel meat is discussed and that is the temple. Everything else is milk or the interpretations of men. That being said what are you referring to as the deeper doctrines of the kingdom. I also have to add in if it does not pertain to salvation then it is not doctrine. Some example of this that I have heard people discussing as doctrine: Where is Kolob, What happened to the city of Enoch, and Where is the sword of Laban. People have theorized on the answers to these questions and have passed those theories on as doctrine when they are not.
Long response short: There is no "Doctrine" that should not be taught. There are teachings that people pass on as doctrine that are really just the teachings of men related to scripture. True doctrine is plain and will only upset those who do not want to follow those teachings.