(September 19, 2015)
I have
noticed, from discussions with people online, that when they resist the Gospel
so much of their effort is spent on engaging the mechanism rather than the
message. In this chapter, we have an
example of this (they won’t believe because there is only one witness).
Recently
I have been put into a position where I am struggling with something that was
handled in a manner that seems clearly biased.
I disagree with the outcome, and I take a good portion of my
disagreement in the outcome from the unreliable mechanism that undergirded the outcome. Reading this chapter, though, and thinking
things through I began to worry whether I was doing the same thing.
But an
understanding of proper mechanisms for the delivery of information is not an idle
concern. If it were, the Lord would not
consider himself bound by the law of witnesses (for example). I think the greater flaw in the people in
this chapter was not that they didn’t believe Alma because he was but a single witness, but
rather that this was merely an excuse for them to ignore the presentation of
their sins. When a second witness spoke,
they didn’t suddenly reconsider their position – they found a new reason to
disbelieve.
In the
end, I think that is the difference between my situation and theirs. I have tried to get a fair and unbiased
resolution of the matter I am dealing with – and if that unbiased handling of
the matter were to occur (even if the result is the same), I am prepared to
accept it. While I believe both the
procedure and result were deeply flawed, I am not using my problems with the
procedure to justify ignoring the result.
Instead, I look at the flaws in the procedure and leading to a flawed
result. Were the proper procedures
followed and the same result to come about, I would accept that result – and would
consider it a blessing because it would give me direction and confidence in the
result. Therein is the difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment