The Nephites
democracy was constantly threatened by men who would be kings and people who
wanted kings. I feel like there is no parallel in the history of our free
government. But I also think that in times of trouble, people could be tempted
to want stronger centralized leadership, like FDR running and winning the
presidency for 4 terms during WWII. I feel like sometimes I take our free government
for granted, and don’t realize how easily it could all be lost.
It seems so
wicked that king-men were glad when the Lamenites were coming and wouldn’t help
defend their country. It is probably the same wickedness that ever wants
revenge when we are angry, or withholding help from people we don’t like or
disagree with.
Was Moroni’s
action right in compelling them to take up arms? When I was younger I used to
hear the argument a lot about not taking away people’s agency. This seems like
a crazy thing to do, but do the ends sometimes justify the means? Or was it not
wrong or weird at all, and it only seems like it to me?
While the
Nephites were busy fighting with themselves the Lamenites came and took the city
of Moroni and killed a lot of people. The Nephites had been so successful when
they were united and righteous, and then they lost that help when they were
fighting each other. I can see that the Lord could not be here helping our
family when we were fighting this morning. Even if the Holy Ghost had been
trying to talk to me, I never would have been able to hear him over my own
anger and yelling. At that point it didn’t matter who was doing wrong things
(all of us, but way more me in the yelling) but it mattered that with the
contention we couldn’t have divine protection.
Teancum’s ability
to murder the king in his sleep goes to show again that the devil will not
support you in the end.
No comments:
Post a Comment