A Willingness to be Wrong

Nephi’s example underscores the importance of accepting the possibility that your understanding of what God wants is wrong. Nephi demonstrated this humility when he was willing to accept God’s command to slay Laban despite it contradicting his understanding of God’s commandments. He taught that we should not “set aside” God’s counsel on account of our “supposing [we] know of [ourselves].” (2 Nephi 9:28.) In other words, we ought to be willing to be wrong, and willing to have God correct us.

A proper response to an invitation from another to consider a different point of view should always be met with patient, unbiased consideration. Joseph displayed this attitude throughout his life, despite continuously accruing evidence that he knew more about God than anyone alive at the time.

Some respond to an invitation to consider a new point of view with anger:

And it came to pass as he began to expound these things unto them they were angry with him, and began to mock him; and they would not hear the words which he spake....And it came to pass that they saw that the people would harden their hearts, therefore they departed and came over into the land of Middoni. And they did preach the word unto many, and few believed on the words which they taught. (Alma 21:10,12.)

Should you find yourself getting angry at such an invitation, it should serve as a signal that you have cut yourself off from the learning process, and have become one who thinks they are wise (see 2 Nephi 9:29, 42).

Anger is never a result of rational consideration of evidence. It causes God to withdraw the opportunity to learn more. We are taught plainly that we are not excused to become angry even when the novel position we are invited to consider is that our presumed righteous behavior is actually sin.¹

Consider that the mission of prophets is to call men to repentance. Therefore, we ought not to take offense at supposed messengers when they come calling us to repentance. We ought to expect it. We ought to thank them for it, because their works are good. It is the response of the offended, and not the message of the preacher, that is wicked.

For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good. (2 Ne 28:20.)

Brigham Young gave a particularly good example of a righteous reaction to a new candidate truth. He said he welcomed anyone who thought they could prove his beliefs incorrect:

I will tell you who the real fanatics are: they are they who adopt false principles and ideas as facts, and try to establish a superstructure upon a false foundation...If our religion is of this character we want to know it; we would like to find a philosopher who can prove it to us. (Brigham Young, JD 13:270.)

He was not alone. It seemed early Mormons had studied both their own positions and the alternatives enough to be confident in their choice to the point of not fearing opposing argument:

...convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the Word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflection that you have been instruments in the hands of God of redeeming your fellow beings from the darkness which you may see enveloping their minds. (Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, pp. 15-16.)

This is perhaps not surprising, as all of the early brethren were converts to the restoration, and had to have at one point been willing to listen to opposing views in order to have accepted the gospel. In today’s church, where almost half of members inherit the faith of their parents, this is not the case.