Did Nephi Commit Murder or was it self-defense?

First, I think Nephi was totally justified by the law in what he did.



I think your argument would be furthered better by bringing up the execution of children by the Israelite armies.



Then, if your friend wants to maintain that God bounds himself by the the libertarian principle of non-aggression, he would have to make the jump to what I alluded to earlier in accepting that God, as the creator of our bodies, can destroy our bodies as he wishes and our life just a property right held by God.

jvquarterback wrote:
First, I think Nephi was totally justified by the law in what he did.



I think your argument would be furthered better by bringing up the execution of children by the Israelite armies.



Then, if your friend wants to maintain that God bounds himself by the the libertarian principle of non-aggression, he would have to make the jump to what I alluded to earlier in accepting that God, as the creator of our bodies, can destroy our bodies as he wishes and our life just a property right held by God.

This is heart of the issue. It doesn't matter if Nephi was or wasn't justified by the law or not. The Spirit trumped the law. Nephi's obedience is what justified him. The law was irrelevant. Nephi was compelled by the Spirit and he listened.

SpiffCoug wrote:

First, I think Nephi was totally justified by the law in what he did.



I think your argument would be furthered better by bringing up the execution of children by the Israelite armies.



Then, if your friend wants to maintain that God bounds himself by the the libertarian principle of non-aggression, he would have to make the jump to what I alluded to earlier in accepting that God, as the creator of our bodies, can destroy our bodies as he wishes and our life just a property right held by God.

This is heart of the issue. It doesn't matter if Nephi was or wasn't justified by the law or not. The Spirit trumped the law. Nephi's obedience is what justified him. The law was irrelevant. Nephi was compelled by the Spirit and he listened.

Your friend would of course argue that the spirit doesn't trump the law, only that it guides us in keeping the law.



Your friend is really trying to answer the question of why God is right in everything he does. It is a reasonable question. Your friend thinks he has found the answer. What is your answer? You'd probably get further with him that way than any other..

SpiffCoug wrote:
As was stated earlier, the underlying principle is obedience. Nephi was obedient to promptings of the Spirit/commandment form the Lord. As such he was doing what was right and justified.



If another one of us killing a passed out drunk who had run us off his property and stolen our money (precious things), we would be wrong and unjustified.



Be obedient to the Lord. Some of us (the extremely few of us) are lucky enough to be able to get specific, arbitrary and unique commandments from the Lord/Spirt. While the rest of us get to live by the relatively more universal guidance found in the everlasting Gospel contained in the Standard Works.



Great discussion on CC by the way.



Hawk, can you tell us more about this prophet in Parowan?

I still had a problem with the term "arbitrary." to me, it connotes random/off the cuff/capricious, so I looked it up in the dictionary.

Arbitrary: 1.not fixed by rules, but left to one's judgment or choice; discretionary.

2. based on one's preference, notion, whim etc.; capricious.

3. absolute, despotic.



Having looked at it in the broader dictionary definition, I see where you use the term (and how you might understand it), and I also see more, why the term bothers me. While The Lord is certainly making judgments based on the situation at hand, and at his discretion (what I see as your apparent understanding of arbitrary), his decisions are not ever based soley on his preference, on a whim or even on any on the spot judgment. They are based on his love for us, his great plan of happiness and his pure purpose of helping us return to him; and they are always governed by eternal law. The plan for every choice, judgment and commandment He makes was laid out in the great council in heaven. While his judgments and commandments are always absolute (in their individual context), they are never despotic. We always have, as Nephi had, the choice to obey or disobey (if Nephi didn't have the choice, he would have paid the price after the first commandment was given and he hesitated).



So, after re-defining (or revisiting the definition to understand it better) the term for myself, I have to still say that it bothers me. As I see the definition, The Lord is never arbitrary, because He always works within a perfectly designed plan.



I agree with you; this has been a great discussion, and I think your posts have been very good, notwithstanding my quibbling at your semantics. Oh, and by the way, I think you're getting a lot more "specific... and unique" commandments/directives/guidance from the Lord than you are giving yourself credit for. That isn't available to just an extremely few of us, but to all of us, especially those who have received the gift of The Holy Ghost.

CougarClaw wrote:
I'm all for the obedience principle and so is he. But the argument is moot against kevin's position because he postulates that if nephi was already justified by the law of the time, then the spirit plays no pivotal role. Therefore it was not a question of obedience but one of law and justice. Laban had stolen a considerable amount from him (offense worthy of death) threatened his family (clan warfare) sent people after him(clan warfare) and the government was corrupt (vigilante justice) so Nephi, he claims, was fully justified in taking Laban's life. I'd never heard that before, and so I asked him what role the spirit had in the narrative and he said essentially nothing. The spirit can't change something from wrong to right, it had to already have been right. otherwise God changes.



In his context of universal law, the argument is fairly logical -- it has to be. if Nephi had a commandment changed, like I believe he did, then it disproves his Universal law theory which is why I brought it up in the first place. I just disagree that Nephi was justified in killing Laban even in under their laws, but that is a harder argument to win.

Not changed, overridden- by a higher law. Although you will never change his mind, because he seems to be in extremist tunnelvision thinking mode. We are bound by earthly law, both the law of the land and the law of the lord. There is universal law. It is called eternal law, and it can only be invoked by The Lord's specific command for a specific situation. His point, not yours, is moot.

arbitrary could also be referring to how we view it, which is without a perfect view of the grand plan. God knew why he wanted Penguins. Doesn't mean I can't laugh at them in the meantime.

SpiffCoug wrote:
This is heart of the issue. It doesn't matter if Nephi was or wasn't justified by the law or not. The Spirit trumped the law. Nephi's obedience is what justified him. The law was irrelevant. Nephi was compelled by the Spirit and he listened.

This is my point exactly. While we are bound by earthly law, the spirit always trumps earthly law with eternal law, which justifies and sanctifies our actions when we are commanded by the spirit, thus making earthly law irrelevant.

CougarClaw wrote:
arbitrary could also be referring to how we view it, which is without a perfect view of the grand plan. God knew why he wanted Penguins. Doesn't mean I can't laugh at them in the meantime.

I understand, and I think that's how Spiff is viewing it. That doesn't make The Lord arbitrary, it makes our view arbitrary, but again, I realize that I am only quibbling at semantics.



By the way, I have really enjoyed this thread. Thanks. There is nothing like a good gospel discussion, especially a civil one.

jvquarterback wrote:

jvquarterback wrote:
First, I think Nephi was totally justified by the law in what he did.



I think your argument would be furthered better by bringing up the execution of children by the Israelite armies.



Then, if your friend wants to maintain that God bounds himself by the the libertarian principle of non-aggression, he would have to make the jump to what I alluded to earlier in accepting that God, as the creator of our bodies, can destroy our bodies as he wishes and our life just a property right held by God.

This is heart of the issue. It doesn't matter if Nephi was or wasn't justified by the law or not. The Spirit trumped the law. Nephi's obedience is what justified him. The law was irrelevant. Nephi was compelled by the Spirit and he listened.

Your friend would of course argue that the spirit doesn't trump the law, only that it guides us in keeping the law.



Your friend is really trying to answer the question of why God is right in everything he does. It is a reasonable question. Your friend thinks he has found the answer. What is your answer? You'd probably get further with him that way than any other..

Good points.

BBP wrote:

As was stated earlier, the underlying principle is obedience. Nephi was obedient to promptings of the Spirit/commandment form the Lord. As such he was doing what was right and justified.



If another one of us killing a passed out drunk who had run us off his property and stolen our money (precious things), we would be wrong and unjustified.



Be obedient to the Lord. Some of us (the extremely few of us) are lucky enough to be able to get specific, arbitrary and unique commandments from the Lord/Spirt. While the rest of us get to live by the relatively more universal guidance found in the everlasting Gospel contained in the Standard Works.



Great discussion on CC by the way.



Hawk, can you tell us more about this prophet in Parowan?

I still had a problem with the term "arbitrary." to me, it connotes random/off the cuff/capricious, so I looked it up in the dictionary.

Arbitrary: 1.not fixed by rules, but left to one's judgment or choice; discretionary.

2. based on one's preference, notion, whim etc.; capricious.

3. absolute, despotic.



Having looked at it in the broader dictionary definition, I see where you use the term (and how you might understand it), and I also see more, why the term bothers me. While The Lord is certainly making judgments based on the situation at hand, and at his discretion (what I see as your apparent understanding of arbitrary), his decisions are not ever based soley on his preference, on a whim or even on any on the spot judgment. They are based on his love for us, his great plan of happiness and his pure purpose of helping us return to him; and they are always governed by eternal law. The plan for every choice, judgment and commandment He makes was laid out in the great council in heaven. While his judgments and commandments are always absolute (in their individual context), they are never despotic. We always have, as Nephi had, the choice to obey or disobey (if Nephi didn't have the choice, he would have paid the price after the first commandment was given and he hesitated).



So, after re-defining (or revisiting the definition to understand it better) the term for myself, I have to still say that it bothers me. As I see the definition, The Lord is never arbitrary, because He always works within a perfectly designed plan.



I agree with you; this has been a great discussion, and I think your posts have been very good, notwithstanding my quibbling at your semantics. Oh, and by the way, I think you're getting a lot more "specific... and unique" commandments/directives/guidance from the Lord than you are giving yourself credit for. That isn't available to just an extremely few of us, but to all of us, especially those who have received the gift of The Holy Ghost.

I can agree with your redefinition/restatement.

jvquarterback wrote:
Your friend would of course argue that the spirit doesn't trump the law, only that it guides us in keeping the law.



Your friend is really trying to answer the question of why God is right in everything he does. It is a reasonable question. Your friend thinks he has found the answer. What is your answer? You'd probably get further with him that way than any other..

The answer to that is that God became God by perfect obedience. He didn't get there by being more powerful than the law, He got there by learning to use the law by obeying it. Just like any athlete, musician, tradesman or anybody else who became proficient at something, He got there by practicing the rules of the game. He remains God by perfect obedience to eternal law. He is right in everything he does because it is in accordance with eternal law. It isn't universal law that somehow fits every situation and every law that has been given to mortal beings, it is eternal law that governs the universe and can be invoked at the appropriate times to override earthly law. When invoked, all earthly law concedes to it, not the other way around. It is never secondary, never irrelevant. It is always supreme. It is why you and I, when we give a blessing, annoint with oil and place our hands on a person's head, but The Savior tells somebody to get up and walk, places mud made from spittle on a person's eyes to make him see, or just passes healing on to someone who touches the hem of his garment. We are governed by the earthly law that The Lord has given us, while he was always connected directly to eternal law, even while on the earth.

BBP wrote:

By the way, I have really enjoyed this thread. Thanks. There is nothing like a good gospel discussion, especially a civil one.

It's civil because the only counter-argument is being vicariously presented and the rest of us are simply evaluating why it's wrong. It's always easy to agree, when we all can point at something and say "WRONG". Now, if we were to bring this guy to the thread....

CougarClaw wrote:

By the way, I have really enjoyed this thread. Thanks. There is nothing like a good gospel discussion, especially a civil one.

It's civil because the only counter-argument is being vicariously presented and the rest of us are simply evaluating why it's wrong. It's always easy to agree, when we all can point at something and say "WRONG". Now, if we were to bring this guy to the thread....

We'd all yell, "GET HIM!!!!!"



And thus would end the days of Kevin.

CougarClaw wrote:

By the way, I have really enjoyed this thread. Thanks. There is nothing like a good gospel discussion, especially a civil one.

It's civil because the only counter-argument is being vicariously presented and the rest of us are simply evaluating why it's wrong. It's always easy to agree, when we all can point at something and say "WRONG". Now, if we were to bring this guy to the thread....

Mostly true, but I have done a little counter arguing, which might have offended Spiff, if he wanted to take offense.

SpiffCoug wrote:
We'd all yell, "GET HIM!!!!!"

All together now...

BBP wrote:

Your friend would of course argue that the spirit doesn't trump the law, only that it guides us in keeping the law.



Your friend is really trying to answer the question of why God is right in everything he does. It is a reasonable question. Your friend thinks he has found the answer. What is your answer? You'd probably get further with him that way than any other.

The answer to that is that God became God by perfect obedience. He didn't get there by being more powerful than the law, He got there by learning to use the law by obeying it. Just like any athlete, musician, tradesman or anybody else who became proficient at something, He got there by practicing the rules of the game. He remains God by perfect obedience to eternal law. He is right in everything he does because it is in accordance with eternal law. It isn't universal law that somehow fits every situation and every law that has been given to mortal beings, it is eternal law that governs the universe and can be invoked at the appropriate times to override earthly law. When invoked, all earthly law concedes to it, not the other way around. It is never secondary, never irrelevant. It is always supreme. It is why you and I, when we give a blessing, annoint with oil and place our hands on a person's head, but The Savior tells somebody to get up and walk, places mud made from spittle on a person's eyes to make him see, or just passes healing on to someone who touches the hem of his garment. We are governed by the earthly law that The Lord has given us, while he was always connected directly to eternal law, even while on the earth.

You don't think Kevin's argument fits that description? I think that is actually a good way to rephrase Kevin's words.

His argument fits in some ways, but is backwards in some ways. He would argue that the spirit (purveyor of eternal law) is irrelevant. I would argue that it is ultimately relevant, and the relevant entity in this case. Eternal law supersedes physical law only under direction of the spirit, and when the spirit is directing, nothing else has vital relevance.

Let's listen...or read what a few FARMS boys had to say about this.



The Death of Laban



Killing Laban: The Birth of Sovereignty in the Nephite Constitutional Order



Legal Perspectives on the Slaying of Laban



Before we are so quick to judge whether Nephi was right in what he did, we need to understand not only the text, but the context in which the slaying of Laban was done. A Methodist minister from England, Margaret Barker, wrote an excellent paper on text and context: Text and Context - Margaret Barker, 2002