2005-12-26 10:25:00
Lisa writes:
jj wrote that "perfect logic will never lead to a wrong conclusion"
so is this correct:
joseph smith taught that all little children who die before the age of accountability will be saved in the celestial kingdom of heaven.
so if i truly love my children, it is logical that i will kill them before they reach that age. this is the true ultimate sacrifice, for i guarantee their salvation but it cost me eternity in hell.
The Secret Wife. That's an interesting handle. It makes the imagination run wild.
You are giving a concrete challenge. This is what I am looking for to illustrate my point.
Unfortunately many people in the past have actually used such flawed logic and killed their children and loved ones. Their warped reasoning has lead them to kill children to either insure their salvation or to save them from a spouse or poor circumstances in this life.
Everyone with an ounce of soul contact knows this is wrong and a greater than Joseph Smith said:
Matt 18:5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. Matt 18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
It is certainly an offense to a child to kill him.
That said, let us examine your statement and see if perfect (or even reasonable) logic was used.
"Joseph Smith taught that all little children who die before the age of accountability will be saved in the celestial kingdom of heaven."
The first step in logic (as I see it) is to examine the premise, for even Joseph Smith said that if we start wrong we will end wrong.
It appears that you are just assuming this is a true statement. Why? And if children are saved in the Celestial kingdom then how long will this salvation last? Will it just last until a time comes to reincarnate again on the earth?
We all realize that mortal experience is extremely valuable. Perhaps the loss of this experience is a greater detriment to the child than the benefit of an unknown period in the celestial kingdom.
Perhaps Joseph was just completely wrong or there was a great gap in presenting the complete picture.
What does logic tell us is right about the statement?
It is this: That it would be wrong to condemn a child to hell when he didn't even realize he did anything wrong.
BUT, this is not enough to conclude you are doing a child a favor by denying him the joys of life and sending him to the other worlds in his innocence.
Your conclusion from the iffy premise says: "So if I truly love my children, it is logical that I will kill them before they reach that age. This is the true ultimate sacrifice, for I guarantee their salvation but it cost me eternity in hell."
Logic tells us that you do not know you are doing them more good than harm. What are the drawbacks of a forced derailment of the path of the soul? Mormonism doesn't address this and with this gap in knowledge it would be illogical to take the life of a child.
What do we know for sure about the importance of a child's life?
We know this, that God placed in adults, especially parents, a natural instinct to protect children and preserve their lives.
In addition God has placed in each of us a natural instinct to preserve our own lives.
Obviously this instinct is in place because nature dictates that it is better to live to the natural end of our lives than to artificially end them.
Conclusion: Based on what is most probably correct your statement is far from perfect reason or use of logic.
Part of the secret of success in life is to eat what you like and let the food fight it out inside. Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
Copyright © 2005 by J J Dewey, All Rights Reserved