Showing posts with label flattery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label flattery. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 21, 2016 2 comments

New Lessons from the Genesis 39 Story of Joseph and Potiphar’s Wife


The story of Joseph and Potiphar’s wife is easily boiled down to the lesson of resisting temptation of immorality with immediate flight. Sometimes it is easy to think Joseph had an easy choice or that Potiphar’s wife was completely evil from beginning to end.

However, I’ve recently come to the conclusion that the story holds insight not just from examining Joseph’s perspective, but also the perspective of Potiphar’s wife.  I think that by seeing her as an ordinary woman in need of love, we can gain additional insights about vulnerabilities to temptation.   

On the surface, Mrs. Potiphar seems like she has a wandering eye. We’ve read her this way so many times. She’s forward and vocal about what she wants, and eventually she becomes physically aggressive as well, taking hold of Joseph’s clothes to the point that he has to slide out of them to escape her.   But…at the beginning, when you read the account closely, you might see that she doesn’t even notice Joseph until after some time that he is made overseer in Potiphar’s house.  It takes time for him to even appear on her radar at all.  Potiphar notices Joseph’s abilities and virtues much faster than Mrs. Potiphar does.  Joseph finds grace in Potiphar’s sight much faster than with Mrs. Potiphar.

1 And Joseph was brought down to Egypt; and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, captain of the guard, an Egyptian, bought him of the hands of the Ishmeelites, which had brought him down thither.
2 And the Lord was with Joseph, and he was a prosperous man; and he was in the house of his master the Egyptian.
3 And his master saw that the Lord was with him, and that the Lord made all that he did to prosper in his hand.
4 And Joseph found grace in his sight, and he served him: and he made him overseer over his house, and all that he had he put into his hand.
5 And it came to pass from the time that he had made him overseer in his house, and over all that he had, that the Lord blessed the Egyptian’s house for Joseph’s sake; and the blessing of the Lord was upon all that he had in the house, and in the field.
6 And he left all that he had in Joseph’s hand; and he knew not ought he had, save the bread which he did eat. And Joseph was a goodly person, and well favoured.
7 ¶And it came to pass after these things, that his master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph; and she said, Lie with me. (Genesis 39:1-7)

So what is it that draws Mrs. Potiphar’s notice?  It’s probably a combination of factors.
First, Joseph is a goodly person and well-favoured. Some commentators point out this is similar language to how Rachel, David, and Absalom were described and say this means Joseph was good-looking.  Probably he was.  Second, he must have been pretty likable, both to the other servants and to Potiphar. (A slave certainly isn’t going to want to make enemies.) Third, he was trustworthy and successful in his work.  I also think it very likely he gave everyone an impression of care and consideration as he worked with them. 

I suspect that Mrs. Potiphar noticed his care and consideration along with all his other good traits and then by imperceptible degrees began to feel that some of that was directed specifically at her.  And how could it not be? If everything in the house had been made Joseph’s responsibility, then he probably had to do things for Mrs. Potiphar as well as her husband.  He probably served her in his usual superior fashion. For some women, service is a major love language, and it may have been Mrs. Potiphar’s. Soo.. she may have reasoned that Joseph’s exemplary service was done because he loved her.   I don’t think the trouble between them erupted in a short period of time. It could have built up over months and maybe even years. 

Further, at the same time Joseph is daily demonstrating his competence and running the household in every respect, Potiphar is doing less and less around the house until he is doing nothing. Potiphar may have been focusing more on work for Pharaoh, but to Mrs. Potiphar it would appear as though her husband had turned lazy at home.  At home, Joseph showed to greater advantage than Potiphar. It would be really hard for Mrs. Potiphar to not make comparisons between Joseph and her husband.

I notice that our record is pretty clear about Mrs. Potiphar’s feelings for Joseph, but it says nothing about how Joseph felt about her. We assume that he was completely indifferent to her. But…is anyone ever completely indifferent to someone they see every day, someone they serve, someone they try to please, someone whose material interests they are bound to do all they can to promote?

7 ¶And it came to pass after these things, that his master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph; and she said, Lie with me.
8 But he refused, and said unto his master’s wife, Behold, my master wotteth not what is with me in the house, and he hath committed all that he hath to my hand;
9 There is none greater in this house than I; neither hath he kept back any thing from me but thee, because thou art his wife: how then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God? (Genesis 39:7-9)

If this were a simple case of sexual harassment—if she liked him and he didn’t—after his first refusal, Mrs. Potiphar could simply have lowered the boom and made Joseph’s life heck with some sort of physical punishment.   I personally wonder if Joseph did at least like her, and maybe she made that first invitation because she thought he would accept easily. Maybe she thought he felt some sort of constraint and she wanted to remove it.

Incidentally, we interpret her request “Lie with me” as a direct demand for sex, but compared to “come in unto me” it seems less direct. She may have been asking him to lie next to her, but Joseph would not even do that, probably seeing it as a gateway act to the sin.  The point is, however the way she phrased her request/demand, the intention was transparent.

It is interesting that Joseph’s refusal emphasizes 1) the trust put in him by Potiphar, 2) his status in Potiphar’s household, 3) how nothing had been kept back from him except her because she was already married, and 4) the sin it would be against God. He recognizes his privileged place and doesn’t want to ruin it.  He’s full of reasons. It’s like he was ready. Like he’d already had to start convincing himself. Like he’d already had practice talking to himself about it.

Also interesting is that he sees Mrs. Potiphar as one who has been “kept back” from him.  I have to wonder if he would say she had been “kept back” from him unless he had wanted her on some level and pondered the situation deeply.  There is something here that reminds me of the story of Adam and Eve who could eat any fruit except that which had been forbidden, while Satan tried to make the forbidden fruit seem the most attractive.  

Ultimately, Joseph’s deepest commitment was to God, and that gave him the motivation to resist.

Once Mrs. Potiphar speaks and he refuses, Joseph seems to have realized that he needed to guard himself.

And it came to pass, as she spake to Joseph day by day, that he hearkened not unto her, to lie by her, or to be with her. (Gen. 39:10)

Mrs. Potiphar was thoroughly infatuated. She couldn’t leave him alone, but indulged herself by speaking to him day by day, which would be very wearing over time for him. We don’t know whether she kept repeating the request that he lie with her or whether she merely made herself as charming as possible.
  
Joseph, on his part, seems to have used his status in the household to manufacture safety measures for himself. It is hard to imagine how he could get away with straight ignoring her to her face, but he had other options. It is likely he gave himself lots of things to do to keep out of her way, that he took other servants with him so he was never alone with her, and he sent messengers to her instead of talking to her himself. He was a slave, so he couldn’t just change jobs to a different household. So he had to find creative ways to isolate himself from her.

Sadly, she seems to have misunderstood.  (And I have to wonder if she had nothing meaningful to occupy her time and attention to keep her from thinking so much about him.)  It is possible she thought that the people always with him and the constant work kept him from expressing his true feelings for her.  So she set up what she thought was the perfect situation.

And it came to pass about this time, that Joseph went into the house to do his business; and there was none of the men of the house there within. (v11)

Hmmm. No one is there in the house except Joseph and Mrs. Potiphar for some reason. Astonishing coincidence. All the servants are off skylarking except for Joseph, who is intent on his task list.  It sounds like Mrs. Potiphar has sent everyone away.

And she caught him by his garment, saying, Lie with me: and he left his garment in her hand, and fled, and got him out. (v12)

This time she is more forceful in her invitation, grabbing onto his clothes, perhaps hoping some violent passion would get the message across that she was ready and willing.

Joseph would not have felt he needed to guard himself if he didn’t feel vulnerable, and without those precautions, he must have been suddenly afraid, maybe not of her, but of himself. So in the heat of the moment of ambush, he doesn’t say anything—he already said his say earlier.  If he was unsure of his strength to resist, touching her would be last thing he’d want to do for any reason, so grappling with her to get his clothes out of her clutches would be out of the question.   Better to forget his dignity, leave them behind, and run.

I have to wonder where he went or how long he stayed away or what he thought would happen afterward.

Mrs. Potiphar, for her part, starts spreading lies about Joseph and gets him in trouble. For the longest time, I thought it was very peculiar that she accuses him of rape and then Potiphar only threw him in jail. Joseph is a slave. A high status slave, yes, but still a slave. It would be more believable for him to be executed. And perhaps the Lord protected him that way.

But recently, I noticed something peculiar in Mrs. Potiphar’s story she tells about Joseph. She tells things one way to the men of her house, and another way to Potiphar.

To the men of her house she says, “See, he hath brought in an Hebrew unto us to mock us; he came in unto me to lie with me, and I cried with a loud voice: And it came to pass, when he heard that I lifted up my voice and cried, that he left his garment with me, and fled, and got him out.” (v14-15)

To Potiphar, she says, The Hebrew servant, which thou hast brought unto us, came in unto me to mock me: And it came to pass, as I lifted up my voice and cried, that he left his garment with me, and fled out. (v17-18)

Notice that not only does she make Joseph the bad guy, but also Potiphar for bringing Joseph into the household. This is another indication that she’s become distanced from Potiphar over this time. Also, when she talks to the men of the household, she makes it out that Joseph has not just mocked her, but mocked them too. (She’s trying to turn the men of the house against Joseph first and Potiphar secondarily.) Then when she talks to Potiphar, she only says that Joseph mocked her.  

Another thing that is peculiar, is that Mrs. Potiphar places emphasis in a peculiar place in her accusation. There’s the rape part, but then there’s the detail that she cried and then Joseph left his clothes and fled.  It almost seems like she is making a bigger deal over the lie that he left her crying than the lie that he raped her. But why? What is going on here?

Mrs. Potiphar is accusing Joseph of being unfeeling and uncaring. “He did it to mock me,” she says to her husband. “He saw me crying and he just left.

What is going on in her head? Mrs. Potiphar, having been previously convinced that Joseph loved her, was shocked to learn by his hasty departure that he actually did not want to have sex with her. (He’d told her before, but she had believed his caring acts of service more than his verbal denial.) So, after his speedy exit, she would think back on all the things she remembered him doing for her and say to herself, Soo…that nice thing he did for me wasn’t love? This other thing wasn’t love? And that? And that? And that? (ad nauseum) and she’d ask herself, Then why did he do all that stuff at all? She’d conclude, He must have been messing with me, trying to make a fool of me for his own amusement.  (Of course, Joseph hadn’t been doing that. She had just allowed her own heart to deceive her.)

But then, she would reason, If his care for me was an act, then what about his care for anyone else in the household? Is that an act too? It made her doubt Joseph’s care for all the other servants as well.  When she told the servants, “He’s mocking us,” she meant, “He messed with me, and he’s been messing with you too.  He just pretends to love us.” Along with rape, she represents Joseph to the other servants and to Potiphar as a manipulator and a sociopath, someone who acts like they care, but doesn’t. And rapist sociopaths are dangerous, even if they are good estate managers, so Potiphar would think taking Joseph out of society (putting him in jail) would prevent him from “using” other people.

But why would she claim Joseph raped her if he didn’t? She’s been infatuated with him for so long, so why accuse him of something like that? She may have reasoned, If he doesn’t really care about me the way I do about him, then keeping him around is going to be torture. I can’t see him day after day. I can’t do this any more.  I have to get rid of him somehow.  But Joseph hadn’t done anything wrong to justify his removal, and everyone knew he was a great manager, so she couldn’t accuse him of mismanagement. Thus, she had to make up something awful enough to get him out of the way, but I can’t see her wanting to get him killed.  Yes, the false accusation was very wrong, but she probably felt she couldn’t explain the real problem to her husband, having already emotionally distanced herself from him.

Joseph may have seen the imprisonment as a welcome separation and a relief. We have no record that he fought the accusation.

So with this view of the story, it is no longer about the exceptionally virtuous man who dares to defy the power of the EVIL WOMAN.  With a sympathetic view of both Joseph and Mrs. Potiphar, assuming that both were trying to do the best they could to meet their needs and live according to their respective lights, we can learn a lot about the real vulnerabilities of men and women, about the conditions of close association that can create temptation over time, about misunderstandings and assumptions that make things worse, and even about the kind of drastic measures that might be taken to keep oneself safe.

We see that both Joseph and Mrs. Potiphar were vulnerable, and their close proximity over a long period of time put them in a pressure-cooker of temptation. 

Joseph would be tempted by the way Mrs. Potiphar respected him and the way she tried to make herself so sexually available. Mrs. Potiphar would be tempted by Joseph’s good looks, competence, caring, and attention.  The happy thing is that Joseph had the integrity to keep both himself and Mrs. Potiphar from sinning. And for all the awful injustice Mrs. Potiphar perpetrated upon Joseph, it’s possible she deserves at least a small bit of credit for having the guts to effect their final separation. (If she didn’t call for some sort of change, who would? Joseph couldn’t; he was a slave. Potiphar wouldn’t; he profited from Joseph’s management.)

It is possible that the Lord allowed Joseph to be tested this way as preparation for making him Pharaoh’s right hand man. That power as second-to-Pharah would have such great privileges and opportunities to indulge any kind of appetite that it could destroy anyone who wielded it unless they were committed to living a moral life. Joseph was undeniably faithful in management, but could he keep his integrity and purity even in a position of power, even in a foreign country, even if propositioned directly? 

Yes he could. He proved it in this refiner’s fire that was not of his choosing.

Lessons from Joseph for men:
·      Your exemplary service may be mistaken by women for secret love and admiration. (Serve well anyway. You only have control over yourself, not how people interpret your actions.)
·      When inappropriate interest arises in you, remind yourself of all the reasons you have to resist.  Remember the trust others have in you, and commit that you will never let them down. Give your love of God your highest allegiance.
·      If a married woman expresses blatant interest, give a firm “No” with all your reasons.
·      Guard yourself. Keep busy and keep people around you. Don’t be alone with that woman.
·      The measures you take to guard yourself may not be appreciated or even understood by that woman. If she is not as committed to purity as you, she may come to the point of deliberately trying to defeat your safety measures. You must be prepared to run. And dignity be hanged.
·      If you can do anything to move out of her range of influence, do so.

Lessons for women from Mrs. Potiphar’s mistakes:
·      If a man periodically in your service seems to be extra helpful, don’t jump to the conclusion that means he likes/loves you. (Today media is so sexualized that to avoid the assumption is counter-cultural, but it can be done. Hang on to humility, and don’t flatter yourself.)
·      Even if you get a pretty strong like/love vibe from that man, don’t say anything to him about it or do anything that might show you notice.
·      Don’t compare that man to your husband; it’s unfair. Chances are you’ll be comparing one man’s strengths with another man’s weaknesses.
·      Don’t seek out more opportunities to be with that man. 
·      Don’t create opportunities for physical or emotional closeness with him.
·      Don’t allow yourself to be alone with him.
·      If you can do anything fair to move out of his range of influence, do so.

Universally helpful principles:
Do not betray the trust others have put in you.
Love the Lord the most.


Wednesday, April 20, 2016 4 comments

Some thoughts about Amalickiah’s flattery and the dangers of “awesome”

-->
4 And Amalickiah was desirous to be a king; and those people who were wroth were also desirous that he should be their king; and they were the greater part of them the lower judges of the land, and they were seeking for power.
5 And they had been led by the flatteries of Amalickiah, that if they would support him and establish him to be their king that he would make them rulers over the people. (Alma 46:4-5)

This bit about Amalickiah flattering the lower judges struck me recently after I had gone in for jury duty and seen some of the court proceedings involved.  The point that suddenly stuck out to me in the above verses was that these lower judges were there to settle petty disputes in particular regions. Cases they could not settle would have to be sent to higher judges.

So here we essentially have a group of judges who were aspiring for position beyond their expertise, hoping to acquire it by appointment rather than by gradual accumulation of experience and skill.  By promising them future ruling positions, Amalickiah implicitly flattered them into thinking they were ready for the big time, ready to deal with the hard cases when they most likely weren’t.  But in their unprepared state, they would have made a mess of the Nephite justice system.

I think this tells us something about flattery. It is the voice that suggests we possess skills we don’t really have and are ready for greater responsibility when we really aren’t.  Those who follow the flattery and pursue where the rewards aren’t deserved are set up for humiliating, soul-destroying failure.  That’s what Satan wants. He wants to humiliate and crush us by using our ambitions and aspirations against us.  Flattery is how he starts that, so we have to watch out for flattery.

Here’s a question for you to think about—in the context of the above, what do you think is the spiritual difference between humility and humiliation?

**

Also connected with this, I want to say a word about the dangers of “awesome” as an overused compliment when we want to say we approve in some manner.

The problem is when messaging of “you are awesome” is thrown around, it becomes increasingly easy to internalize it and believe that not only was the performance awesome, but oneself is awesome in every way, and there is no need for repentance or improvement.  In short, it is too easy for it to feed vanity and pride.  

For us to see past this messaging, we need to have a pretty conscious awareness of all the ways we still need to improve, and we have to have a clear-eyed view of what good was actually done that brought out the approval or admiration.  But if we don’t have that in the first place, how are we to get it without more detailed feedback?  When we need real encouragement, detailed proportionate praise is much more useful.

Suppose I do my duty and then someone tells me I am awesome.  How can I take that at face value?  I know I did just my duty.  Am I to understand that doing one’s duty is so rarely seen that it must be commented on and praised?  I sure hope not.  But if doing one’s duty is widespread, then how were my actions extraordinary?  I have no way of knowing unless more detailed feedback is given.  It would be much more in proportion and helpful to say, “It makes me happy to see you do your duty” or “You’re doing a good job” or even “You’ve been diligent.”

“You are awesome” may seem like a harmless verbal tic of a compliment, but when we remember Nephite history and the trouble that flattering words caused by leading people astray, we see the long-term effects. Consider that pride ultimately was what led to the Nephites’ final destruction, and then these overstated compliments and affirmations can be seen for what they are—a gateway drug.

Since it is likely that this trend of overstating the awesome will not end soon, we need to be aware of it and put in place mental safeguards to keep perspective. We can remind ourselves we are doing our duty. We can remember that we or others may not be in the best position to judge our performance; if it were looked at more closely it might be barely adequate instead of “awesome.”  We can remind ourselves that others may be gushing or flattering us.

So don’t reflexively call people awesome. Use your creativity and fashion more precise ways to express your approval and compliments. Your words will actually mean more to people.
Thursday, July 10, 2014 0 comments

Judges 17-18: When there was no king in the land


The text of Judges 17-21 repeats several times that at this time there was no king in the land and everyone did what was right in his own eyes.  The stories are meant to show the kinds of things theat were going on because there was no formalized system of meting out justice to offending groups or powerful individuals or even to corrupted religious leaders.  When the offenders were too many, it required the collective will of the people to get together and fight to set it right.  That required a leader people could get behind, preferably one who had been chosen and raised up by God.

It was probably hard to tell when it was appropriate to rise up and do this, so the people would seek out more efficient ways of administering justice to larger groups and powerful individuals, someone who would have power to call on and command an army so that things wouldn’t get so bad that the whole society had to destroy a town for some terrible atrocity the town committed against visitors, like in Judges 19-20.

Ultimately, the deeper message isn’t “this is the terrible state of society that doesn’t have a king,” but instead “this is the terrible state of society that doesn’t have God as their king.”

In Judges 17-18 we get a story about some powerful individuals and the religious error they perpetuate because of their riches.

It starts with an Ephraimite named Micah who steals 1100 shekels from his mother.  This is an immense sum of money, and since his mother had intended to dedicate it to the Lord (though in the wrong way) that indicates there is still plenty of money left afterward, so theirs must be a powerful family.

If you read through Judges17 and Judges 18, you’ll find so many instances of breaking commandments that it is almost like a game to find them all.  So let’s play.

--Micah stole 1100 shekels from his mom. (theft)
--He restored the 1100 shekels without adding the fifth part, according to the Law of Moses. (That he restored them at all indicates he was more afraid of her cursing him than of how the evil deed would spiritually affect him.)
--His mother completely dedicated the 1100 shekels to the Lord, but it was to make a graven image with.
--They use 200 shekels to make the graven image.
--Micah had a house of gods with idols and an ephod (priestly robe?)
--Micah had consecrated one of his own sons to be a priest, yet Micah doesn’t have authority.  (He’s an Ephraimite, not a Levite.)
--Next we get a Levite who is looking for a place.  This man is “out of Bethlehem-judah of the family of Judah,” yet he is a Levite?  How can a descendent of Judah be a Levite?  (Hint: He can’t.  He’s breaking the Law of Moses, taking the office to himself.)
--Micah hires the “Levite” to be his priest, paying him an allowance, room, board, and clothing.  Helloooo priestcraft!
--Micah consecrates the “Levite,” yet he doesn’t have authority to do so.
--Micah bears testimony, saying, “Now know I that the Lord will do me good, seeing I have a Levite to my priest.”   (Sounds like a false testimony, huh?)

In the next chapter, we see Micah is himself not immune to being despoiled and suffering injustice, though in a larger perspective it is kind of a poetic justice.  The Lord can’t allow him to rest comfortably in this situation.

The tribe of Dan decides to go look for another inheritance they can actually conquer and they send out some spies to find land.  The spies run into Micah’s priest, the “Levite” and find out he’s priesting for Micah.  For some bizarre reason, they take it for granted that he’s legitimate and ask him to inquire of the Lord for them if they will succeed in their mission.  The “Levite” tells them they will.

They find a nice defenseless land in Laish and gather a strike force to take it.  On the way there, they pass Micah’s place again and decide to steal all Micah’s shrine stuff.  When the “Levite” objects, they recruit him with the argument that it would clearly be better for him to be priest for a tribe than to be priest to a single man, rich as that man might be. (Yup, priestcraft is for sale to the highest bidder.)  Put that way, the “Levite” becomes okay with their theft of Micah’s religious accoutrements, since it will ultimately benefit him.

Micah, however is understandably not okay with this and gathers a group of men together to help him protest.

The next verses are too fascinating not to reproduce.

23 And they cried unto the children of Dan. And they turned their faces, and said unto Micah, What aileth thee, that thou comest with such a company?
 24 And he said, Ye have taken away my gods which I made, and the priest, and ye are gone away: and what have I more? and what is this that ye say unto me, What aileth thee? (Judges 18:23-24)

The idea of a man protesting because someone forcibly took away his gods highlights the ridiculousness of idol worship.  A true God can’t be stolen.

Micah’s sentiment “What have I more?” is commendable in its devotion, but it is wrongly applied to idols.  As a rich man, he may have felt that his shrine and his priest were the all-important part of his life, but even so he set his heart on tangible things that were of no real value because they were, after all, counterfeits for the real God.

In a way, Micah’s predicament can challenge us to look at our lives to see if we set our hearts on something tangible that would make us completely bereft if it were taken away.  I have often wondered how I would act if my blog were taken away.  Would I feel I couldn’t be good and serve God without it?  If we’re released from a highly visible calling, do we feel we can’t worship and serve God anymore?  I have heard at least one woman share that she saw raising her children as the way she worships God and when her children left home she felt completely at sea.  (Naturally, an empty nest will make a great void in the home, heart, and schedule, but is raising children the only way to serve God?  It’s not.  But I will also acknowledge it takes some painful time to figure out what to meaningfully fill that empty schedule with instead.)

Okay, so Micah had major problems in his life and he didn’t even know it.  Just about everything he did was wrong, but let’s try to look and see if we can derive something good from his experience.

I thought about Micah and I asked myself, “What would have cleaned up this situation?”

I realized that the best thing would have been for Micah to have his own copy of the scriptures—the Law of Moses—and read them every day.  If he was reading every day, he would have discovered all the commandments he was breaking, and if he were honest in heart, he would have realized he needed to repent and keep them.

That’s the neat thing about reading the scriptures every day.  We may be making all kinds of mistakes too, but if we read our scriptures every day with an honest heart, we will find out what we are doing wrong, which gives us an opportunity to repent through Christ’s atonement and learn to keep the commandments.

I don’t know if Micah had his own copy of the scriptures.  He was rich enough that he could have paid for his own copy to be made.  But I feel very thankful that we live in an age when every person can have their very own copy of the scriptures and read them every day.



Wednesday, December 4, 2013 0 comments

Cunning Devices of Amalickiah

-->
Yea, we see that Amalickiah, because he was a man of cunning device and a man of many flattering words, that he led away the hearts of many people to do wickedly; yea, and to seek to destroy the church of God, and to destroy the foundation of liberty which God had granted unto them, or which blessing God had sent upon the face of the land for the righteous’ sake. (Alma 46:10)

Cunning device mentioned here, but not elaborated on at all, beyond mentioning flatteries.  It is as though Amalickiah was suspected to have been part of some sort of chicanery, but he did not seem obviously connected to it except in trying to take advantage of it by riding a tide of public feeling.
Perhaps we must look to Alma 47 (the story of betrayal and murder among the Lamanites) for a sample of the kind of cunning device that Amalickiah may have used among the Nephites.  Since Amalickaih was leading away church members and lower judges, he may have staged situations to make it look like church members following him were better than those who didn’t or priests and teachers in the church.  He may have staged court cases to make it look like the lower judges were wiser and fairer than the higher judges of the land.  Or perhaps Amalickiah used some sort of staged atrocity to put the church in a bad light.  Perhaps he used some sort of false flag attack on his people, framing the church and bringing the free government into disrepute to make it look as though choosing him as a leader was the only rational choice. 
Under the supposition that Amalickiah tried to make the church look bad, Captain Moroni would have to do something to demonstrate that the church was not responsible.  The Title of Liberty would make obvious to everyone what values the church members espoused. 
The words of those wanting to maintain that title as they rent their clothes and made a covenant was very specific—“We covenant that we will be destroyed if we fall into transgression.”  The covenantal acceptance of destruction as a penalty for sin seems very strange… unless you see it in the context of a group publicly declaring under oath that they had nothing to do with some evil act that may have been attributed to them.  This oath would also make Amalickiah’s followers doubt the justice of their own cause, especially if their arguments were based on supposition that the church and the free government were bad.
Saturday, January 28, 2012 6 comments

The unflattering truth about flattery


For it came to pass that they did deceive many with their flattering words, who were in the church, and did cause them to commit many sins; therefore it became expedient that those who committed sin, that were in the church, should be admonished by the church. (Mosiah 26:6)
Recently when I was reading this verse, the word “flattery” jumped out at me. I’m not sure why. But suddenly I had a lot of questions about it. I asked myself:
  • What is flattery?
  • Why is flattery bad?
  • What makes flattery different from real praise?
  • What are the consequences of flattery, either giving it or receiving it?

I went looking for more information in the scriptures about incidents of flattery to see if I could find specific examples and consequences and characteristics of flattery.

The Book of Mormon has a number of examples of flattery. There was Sherem who “had a perfect knowledge of the language of the people; wherefore, he could use much flattery, and much power of speech, according to the power of the devil.” (Jacob 7:4) Then there was Alma the Younger, who, before his conversion:
“did speak much flattery to the people; therefore he led many of the people to do after the manner of his iniquities. And he became a great hinderment to the prosperity of the church of God; stealing away the hearts of the people; causing much dissension among the people; giving a chance for the enemy of God to exercise his power over them. (Mosiah 27:8-9)
The people of King Noah fell into wickedness because of flattery.
Yea, and they also became idolatrous, because they were deceived by the vain and flattering words of the king and priests; for they did speak flattering things unto them.” (Mosiah 11:7)

Other people mentioned in the Book of Mormon who led people away with flattery were Korihor (Alma 30), Amalickiah (Alma 46:7), kingmen (Alma 61:4), Gadianton (Helaman 2:5) and the wicked Jacob (3 Nephi 7:12).
There are some examples in the scriptures of people using flattery. First, in the Book of Daniel:
6 Then these presidents and princes assembled together to the king, and said thus unto him, King Darius, live for ever.
7 All the presidents of the kingdom, the governors, and the princes, the counsellors, and the captains, have consulted together to establish a royal statute, and to make a firm decree, that whosoever shall ask a petition of any God or man for thirty days, save of thee, O king, he shall be cast into the den of lions.
8 Now, O king, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not.
9 Wherefore king Darius signed the writing and the decree. (Daniel 6:6-9)
The Babylonian princes used flattery to trick the king into making this decree. Can you see how it would have flattered the king? (“We all have consulted together on this. We all want this for you. We only want to ask things of you rather than anyone else, even God.”)

Another example of flattery is in the Book of Mormon when King Noah’s people bring Abinadi to King Noah for judgment. After accusing Abinadi of speaking evil about King Noah, they end with:
13 And now, O king, what great evil hast thou done, or what great sins have thy people committed, that we should be condemned of God or judged of this man?
14 And now, O king, behold, we are guiltless, and thou, O king, hast not sinned; therefore, this man has lied concerning you, and he has prophesied in vain.
15 And behold, we are strong, we shall not come into bondage, or be taken captive by our enemies; yea, and thou hast prospered in the land, and thou shalt also prosper.
16 Behold, here is the man, we deliver him into thy hands; thou mayest do with him as seemeth thee good. (Mosiah 12:13-16)
The people flatter the king that he hasn't done any great evil, that he has prospered and will continue to prosper, and that he can do whatever seems good to Abinadi. The people also flatter themselve, saying that they have not committed any great sins, that they are strong, and that they will not be brought into bondage or captivity by their enemies.

After looking at some of these things, I started to realize that flattery causes a ton of problems in the Book of Mormon. We talk about the pride cycle a lot, but I’m starting to see that often flattery (either from one's self or from others) puffs up the pride, but flattery is almost never discussed! So it behooves us to gain a better understanding of what is flattery and what it is not so we can learn to avoid being flattered or flattering others.

I’m going to do something that I don’t often do, which is resort to the wisdom of the great thinkers of the world, who have watched flattery in action and have written about it. If you want to read the whole 6 pages of quotes from Giga Quotes, you can, but I have gathered, organized, and paraphrased for you the best ones from there that I could find.


First, we must define flattery and praise. Praise encourages us to good works, but flattery makes us stubborn in our vice(1).

Flattery is poisonous, whether given to a king or his people(2). When it is loved too much, we lose our internal strength to feel satisfaction without it, and then we find ourselves dependent on others to give it to us(3). Flattery serves all the vices(4). It takes advantage of our foibles, fosters our errors, and contains no advice to annoy us with the truth(5). Flattery tends to ensnare. It puffs up our imaginations, strokes our vanity, and makes us become over-fond of ourselves(6). It corrupts both the giver and the receiver(7), and it fosters pettiness in both. Both the giver and receiver hope to deceive the other, but neither is fooled(8). Flattery makes a person think that he is what he is not, and it squelches honest desire to improve by making a person think that he can be admired without actually doing something to merit admiration(9). Even truly wise people can be dazzled and intoxicated by flattery, and over the process of time, geniuses can be degraded into pits of lies by giving flattery(10). Anyone who likes to be flattered will eventually pay for it with a painful, late repentance(11). Flattery can even choke our resolutions and prevent us from doing better things (12). Flattery is like someone spitting on your face to try to clean it(13). If we feast on flattery, we will need more and more, until we will only be pleased with the person who can flatter us the most(14).

The love of flattery is the most pernicious disease of the mind(15). If we are much flattered, we soon learn to flatter ourselves(16). The arch-flatterer is our self(17).

We are blinded by our self-love from seeing our true character, so our self-flattery prepares us to accept flattery from others to confirm our own ideas(18). Self-flattery causes us to rebel against our better judgment, and if we flattery ourselves, we have no chance against the flattery of others(19). But if we don’t flatter ourselves, then flattery from others won’t harm us (20) because we will recognize it for what it is. Flattery is especially agreeable to our faults and unknown character flaws. Idiots will love you if you flatter them on their understanding(21). If you don’t care about true honors, you won’t be misled by fake ones(22).

A flatterer is difficult to distinguish from a friend because they are so obedient and will immediately protest their loyalty. Just as wolves look similar to dogs, flatterers look like friends(23). It isn’t really affection when flatterers caress(24). Flattery grows like friendship, and puts on a show of friendship, but has different fruits(25). Flattery is the worst and most treacherous way of showing we like someone. (26)

Flatterers are the worst kind of enemies(27), “thieves in disguise” (28), and the worst kind of traitors, because they will never correct us, they will make our vices and follies seem good so that we never discover the difference between good and evil, thus strengthening our foibles and encouraging us in all kinds of evil works(29). They will go so far as to praise an ignorant person’s conversation and an ugly person for their good looks(30). Flatterers actually dislike those they flatter and think themselves better than the people they profess to admire(31). A flatterer will expect you to give him advantages, and if you don’t, he will then tarnish your reputation where he once burnished it(32). If ever you find yourself about to flatter someone, think about whether your flattery is worth having(33).

We might think we hate flattery, but often we just hate the way it was given(34). Careless flattery may exhaust you as you try to believe it(35). It is a more sincere compliment to just let a person talk and while we listen(36), give our implicit assent(37), imitate them(38), or act what we feel(39). It is flattering to think that we are worth flattering(40). We may be flattered when someone ridicules our rivals or enemies to us(41). We may be flattered by one who tells us that they know we hate flattery(42).

Who can be flattered? Rulers are poisoned by it(43), but societies also have their flatterers(44). Any of us would be as corrupted as rulers are if we were as exposed to flatterers as they are(45). Rich men despise too much flattery, but hate those who never flatter him(46). Flattery is food at the courts of kings and rulers(47). Women love to be praised for beauty(48), and none are truly immune from flattery if they think their ugliness can be compensated for by their figure or their attitude(49). Even the firmest women will give in to well-timed, skillful flattery(50).

Giving just praise is paying a debt, but flattery is like a surprise gift(51). Flattering is easy, but giving genuine praise is hard(52). Don’t praise people in order to be praised yourself; people see through it and you won’t get any praise worthwhile from it(53). Don’t overpraise people, since it is then a shame to see their actions contradicting the honor you’ve given(54).

Flattery is easy to swallow, but truths about ourselves we seem to only be able to take little by little(55). If we want everyone to speak the truth, we have to learn to hear the truth too(56).

Flattery is hurtful to the innocent unsuspecting person. Rejecting it gives sadness, and accepting it leads to downfall(57). The only way to take flattery is to take it as a warning and an indication of exactly where you lack(58). Honesty needs no disguise or decoration(59).

After reading all the quotes for writing that distillation, I was particularly inspired by the one that spoke about how we only sip little by little truths we find bitter. I felt inside myself that I was one who could only sip difficult truths about myself little by little…and sometimes not at all. So I decided to pray that I would be able to learn the truth. It wasn’t long before the Holy Ghost revealed to me a difficult truth about myself and how I had been treating my husband that evening. Having prayed to receive the truth, I was able to recognize my fault and repent. I asked my husband for forgiveness as well and our relationship became stronger.

The Holy Ghost does not flatter us. It will always tell us the truth and if we are looking for flattery, we will not welcome the Holy Ghost very well when we most need its correction.

Also, I appreciated learning what the difference is between flattery and real praise. Real praise is appreciative of goodness, and can even edify and encourage toward greater goodness.

About a week ago, when I was getting ready to have my personal journal printed as a book, I was reading through it and found so many instances when I speculated freely and enthusiastically about the direction I thought my life was going to go. Well, the way that my life actually went was quite different. I was quite embarrassed that my big dreams and schemes hadn’t come to fruition. It made me feel like I wasn’t to be trusted to dream for myself. But after having read and studied what flattery is and why it is dangerous, I now realize that a good portion of my dreaming must have been self-flattery—being puffed up in the vain imaginations of my heart. I have yet to learn the difference between dreaming that leads to real accomplishment over the long term and dreaming that is simply stroking my own ego. (I suppose I will have to pray to learn to discern the difference.)

Just to give you an example of the self-flattery of which I have been capable…. Last week I visited my old stake to play piano accompaniment for a woman from my previous ward. She happens to be the stake president’s wife. I told her about my blog post “25 Things I’ve learned about being a ward organist” because I thought she would enjoy it; she is also an organist. She expressed interest. I promised her I would send her a copy in the mail. The next day, as I was preparing to send her the copy, I imagined her enjoying it. Then I imagined her handing it to her husband (the stake president) and him getting enjoyment out of it. Then I imagined him reading bits and pieces of it over the pulpit in their next stake conference to break the ice. (He’s known for his humorous talks..) The idea that one of my blog posts could and might be used in stake conference gratified my vanity and I puffed myself up a bit on that one…

Yes, that is a sample of the self-flattery of which I am capable. It’s enough to make a person puke. THANKFULLY, somehow in the above instance, I realized what I was doing, and worked hard to scale back my pleasant imaginations to just entertaining the stake president’s wife. And I worked to acknowledge to myself that though my list of 25 things I’ve learned as a ward organist is mildly funny, there was no guarantee it would be shared with anyone else at all, and probably it wasn’t particularly appropriate material for any talk in church.

Have you caught yourself flattering yourself or others? How do you tell the difference between flattery and real praise? What do you do to praise people instead of flattering them?

Notes
(1) Louis XVI
(2) Dr. John Wolcot (used pseudonym Peter Pindar)
(3) Oliver Goldsmith
(4) Cicero (Marcus Tllius Cicero)
(5) Moiere (pseudonym of Jean Baptiste Poquelin)
(6) Jeremy Collier
(7) Edmund Burke
(8) Charles Caleb Colton
(9) Samuel Johnson
(10) Samuel Johnson
(11) Lat., Qu se laudari gaudent verbis subdolis, Sera dant peonas turpes poenitentia.] - Phaedrus (Thrace of Macedonia), Fables (I, 13, 1)
(12) Matthew Prior
(13) Edward Young, Love of Fame (satire I, 1. 755)
(14) Oliver Goldsmith, Retaliation (1. 109)
(15) Sir Richard Steele
(16) Samuel Johnson
(17) Francis Bacon
(18) Plutarch
(19) Sir Richard Steele
(20) Francois Duc de la Rochefoucauld
(21) Henry Fielding
(22) Thomas Babington Macaulay
(23) Sir Walter Raleigh
(24) Letitia Elizabeth Landon (Mrs. George MacLean)
(25) Socrates
(26) Jonathan Swift
(27) Tacitus (Caius Cornelius Tacitus) Agricola (XLI)
(28) William Penn
(29) Sir Walter Raleigh
(30) Juvenal, Satires (III, 86)
(31) Marcus Antonius
(32) Moslih Eddin Saadi
(33) Samuel Johnson
(34) Fr., Francois Duc de la Rechefoucauld, Maximes (329)
(35) Wilson Mizner
(36) Joseph Addison
(37) William Hazlitt
(38) Charles Caleb Colton
(39) Madame Suzanne Curchod Necker
(40) George Bernard Shaw, John Bull’s Other Island
(41) Charles Caleb Colton
(42) William Shakespeare
(43) Michel Eyquem de Montaigne
(44) Marquis de Mirabeau, Victor de Riquetti
(45) Michel Eyquem de Montaigne
(46) Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord
(47) Frances Beaumont
(48) Samuel Johnson
(49) 4th Earl of Chesterfield, Philip Dormer Stanhope
(50) George Lillo
(51) Samuel Johnson
(52) Jean Paul Friedrich Richter (used ps. Jean Paul)
(53) Thomas Fuller
(54) Owen Felltham
(55) Denis Diderot
(56) Samuel Johnson
(57) Walter Savage Landor
(58) Martin Farquhar Tupper
(59) Thomas Otway