Elder Benson Conference Talk/Report (1967)

[Ouagadougou]

Hello all!

I just read the conference talk titled "Trust Not in the Arm of Flesh" given by Elder Benson (apostle at the time) in Oct 1967.  Having read this conference talk/report, I'm shocked that some of these words came from an apostle who was supposed to be the Lord's mouthpiece at that time.  For example:

http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1569&era=yes

"There is no doubt that the so-called civil rights movement as it exists today is used as a Communist program for revolution in America just as agrarian reform was used by the Communists to take over China and Cuba."

There are other parts of this talk that I find extremely disturbing, but, even if Elder Benson was just speaking as a man (during a general conference talk), then surely his talk was still vetted/reviewed by the 1st Presidency/prophet, correct?  

Also, if prophets/apostles/leaders are fallible, then how can one truly be sure that their words/guidance (at the time it is given) is, in fact, from God?  Is this done just by the spirit?  

IMO, Elder Benson's words/guidance in this talk were disturbing and in no way from God.  As a less-active member, should I just sweep talks like this under the rug and pretend like it never happened?  

I don't mean to offend anyone here, but I'm generally curious how you reconcile and/or work through such conflicting talks/guidance.  

 

 

[mnn727]

The doctrinal tenets of any religion are best understood within a broad context, and thoughtful analysis is required to understand them. News reporters pressed by daily deadlines often find that problematic. Therefore, as the Church continues to grow throughout the world and receive increasing media attention, a few simple principles that facilitate a better understanding may be helpful:

·         Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (theHoly Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.

 

 

From: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

 

Edited November 26, 2016 by mnn727

[CV75]

47 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said:

Hello all!

I just read the conference talk titled "Trust Not in the Arm of Flesh" given by Elder Benson (apostle at the time) in Oct 1967.  Having read this conference talk/report, I'm shocked that some of these words came from an apostle who was supposed to be the Lord's mouthpiece at that time.  For example:

http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1569&era=yes

"There is no doubt that the so-called civil rights movement as it exists today is used as a Communist program for revolution in America just as agrarian reform was used by the Communists to take over China and Cuba."

There are other parts of this talk that I find extremely disturbing, but, even if Elder Benson was just speaking as a man (during a general conference talk), then surely his talk was still vetted/reviewed by the 1st Presidency/prophet, correct?  

Also, if prophets/apostles/leaders are fallible, then how can one truly be sure that their words/guidance (at the time it is given) is, in fact, from God?  Is this done just by the spirit?  

IMO, Elder Benson's words/guidance in this talk were disturbing and in no way from God.  As a less-active member, should I just sweep talks like this under the rug and pretend like it never happened?  

I don't mean to offend anyone here, but I'm generally curious how you reconcile and/or work through such conflicting talks/guidance. 

I think you’d have to poll those who heard the talk when it was given to get a most accurate sense of what was meant by, “Now there is nothing wrong with civil rights; it is what's being done in the name of civil rights that is alarming.” I think he meant to describe how a good thing was getting coopted to further evil and designing purposes of conspiring men – enough to warrant a warning from the watchtower. We’ve heard the same today from the pulpit for a couple of decades now about the Internet (a good thing) and pornography (its abuse), for example.

Yes, I think we need to use the Spirit to discern whether a General Conference speaker’s message is of God or not, to have charity and patience when we’re not sure, and faith in the Lord and the bigger picture when we are personally bothered or disturbed.

I think someone who thinks a General Conference speaker’s talk is not from God needs to assess that impression in context of his overall impression of his experience with the Restored Gospel and act on his faith according to a personal relationship with God. Hopefully he has had a friend, a responsibility and has been nurturing himself with the good word of God all along.

[mfbukowski]

56 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said:

Hello all!

I just read the conference talk titled "Trust Not in the Arm of Flesh" given by Elder Benson (apostle at the time) in Oct 1967.  Having read this conference talk/report, I'm shocked that some of these words came from an apostle who was supposed to be the Lord's mouthpiece at that time.  For example:

http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1569&era=yes

"There is no doubt that the so-called civil rights movement as it exists today is used as a Communist program for revolution in America just as agrarian reform was used by the Communists to take over China and Cuba."

There are other parts of this talk that I find extremely disturbing, but, even if Elder Benson was just speaking as a man (during a general conference talk), then surely his talk was still vetted/reviewed by the 1st Presidency/prophet, correct?  

Also, if prophets/apostles/leaders are fallible, then how can one truly be sure that their words/guidance (at the time it is given) is, in fact, from God?  Is this done just by the spirit?  

IMO, Elder Benson's words/guidance in this talk were disturbing and in no way from God.  As a less-active member, should I just sweep talks like this under the rug and pretend like it never happened?  

I don't mean to offend anyone here, but I'm generally curious how you reconcile and/or work through such conflicting talks/guidance.  

 

 

He's a human being and we have to verify every statement by our own testimonies.

Seems pretty simple to me.

Every scripture cam through the brain of a human being.  Have you ever seen God's handwriting?  Why is it a problem?  

As adults we have to put away the things of childhood.  

[JAHS]

Part of the problem we have sometimes is unfairly expecting perfection from Church leaders. Even divinely called prophets are still mortal human being subject to errors. God does not completely take over a prophets mind and cause him to do and say everything perfectly. And as with any other sometimes disturbing things past church leaders have said, you to have to take into account the time, culture, and conditions of the church and world at the time it was said. We cannot pass judgment on things that were said in the past using our 21st century experience and criteria. I don't just sweep it under the rug, I just think, well I guess you had to be experiencing life at that time it was said to understand why it was said. When confronted with something questionable a past church leader has said, I always refer to what our current prophet says on the subject and go with that. God will not hold the individual members responsible for following something incorrectly said by the current prophet.

[Ouagadougou]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

He's a human being and we have to verify every statement by our own testimonies.

Seems pretty simple to me.

Every scripture cam through the brain of a human being.  Have you ever seen God's handwriting?  Why is it a problem?  

As adults we have to put away the things of childhood.  

Why is it a problem?  Have you read the talk in its entirety?  

It's problematic because you have an apostle of the Lord telling thousands (essentially millions) of people that the Civil Rights Movement is a false/communist plot at a General Conference.  First of all, it is considered "scripture" according the the source below:

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-the-living-prophets-student-manual/chapter-6-general-conference?lang=eng

"The Words of the Prophets Delivered through the Spirit during General Conference Are Latter-day Scripture."

Secondly, the Civil Rights Movement lead by MLK was one of the most important movements, IMO, during the last century here in the US, because it helped African Americans and others tremendously.  In retrospect, the Church and Elder Benson were on the wrong side of history.  

Are we to believe that this was God's will to tell us (via Elder Benson) that the 
Civil Rights movement was "false solicitude?"  If prophets/apostles cannot properly convey God's word (because of the way their brains work), then why should we put any trust in what they have to say?

"Such timely counsel could help save our country from Communism, as the same masters of deceit are showing the same false solicitude for the unfortunate in the name of civil rights."

Thirdly, if we are counseled to heed the words of the prophets/apostles, then I don't know how one can argue that Elder Benson was correct in his conference talk; his words made me feel the opposite of what I understand to be the spirit.  

Edited November 27, 2016 by Ouagadougou

[Ouagadougou]

1 hour ago, mnn727 said:

The doctrinal tenets of any religion are best understood within a broad context, and thoughtful analysis is required to understand them. News reporters pressed by daily deadlines often find that problematic. Therefore, as the Church continues to grow throughout the world and receive increasing media attention, a few simple principles that facilitate a better understanding may be helpful:

·         Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (theHoly Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.

 

 

From: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

 

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-the-living-prophets-student-manual/chapter-6-general-conference?lang=eng

"The Words of the Prophets Delivered through the Spirit during General Conference Are Latter-day Scripture."

If it is considered "latter-day scripture," then it would be false scripture, unless one agrees with what Elder Benson had to say in his talk, which I hope is not the case.

[Ouagadougou]

24 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Part of the problem we have sometimes is unfairly expecting perfection from Church leaders. Even divinely called prophets are still mortal human being subject to errors. God does not completely take over a prophets mind and cause him to do and say everything perfectly. And as with any other sometimes disturbing things past church leaders have said, you to have to take into account the time, culture, and conditions of the church and world at the time it was said. We cannot pass judgment on things that were said in the past using our 21st century experience and criteria. I don't just sweep it under the rug, I just think, well I guess you had to be experiencing life at that time it was said to understand why it was said. When confronted with something questionable a past church leader has said, I always refer to what our current prophet says on the subject and go with that. God will not hold the individual members responsible for following something incorrectly said by the current prophet.

So, if prophets have "said something incorrectly" and we follow them in their counsel (and they were/are wrong), then that means they can lead us astray, correct?  

Perhaps we need to redefine "prophet, seer, and revelator." 

[Ouagadougou]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

I think you’d have to poll those who heard the talk when it was given to get a most accurate sense of what was meant by, “Now there is nothing wrong with civil rights; it is what's being done in the name of civil rights that is alarming.” I think he meant to describe how a good thing was getting coopted to further evil and designing purposes of conspiring men – enough to warrant a warning from the watchtower. We’ve heard the same today from the pulpit for a couple of decades now about the Internet (a good thing) and pornography (its abuse), for example.

 

Yes, I think we need to use the Spirit to discern whether a General Conference speaker’s message is of God or not, to have charity and patience when we’re not sure, and faith in the Lord and the bigger picture when we are personally bothered or disturbed.

 

I think someone who thinks a General Conference speaker’s talk is not from God needs to assess that impression in context of his overall impression of his experience with the Restored Gospel and act on his faith according to a personal relationship with God. Hopefully he has had a friend, a responsibility and has been nurturing himself with the good word of God all along.

 

I, in no way, think Elder Benson's talk is from God or inspired by God.  Do you?  

[bluebell]

To be fair, the communist party did like to use civil rights to get a toe hold in capitalist countries. It was well known, and one of the reasons the American government liked to get involved when people civil rights issues caused unrest in other countries in the 1960s. 

 

[cinepro]

 

 

2 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

 

"There is no doubt that the so-called civil rights movement as it exists today is used as a Communist program for revolution in America just as agrarian reform was used by the Communists to take over China and Cuba."

 

 

 

 

 

Why do you assume he was wrong?

Relevant NPR story:

How 'Communism' Brought Racial Equality To The South

Quote

Tell Me More continues its Black History Month series of conversations with a discussion about the role of the Communist Party. It was prominent in the fight for racial equality in the south, specifically Alabama, where segregation was most oppressive. Many courageous activists were communists.

With 50 years of perspective (and PR) on the movement, I'm not saying Benson was necessarily right.  But as an ultra-conservative anti-communist who was involved in government for decades, it's easy to see how his view on the matter might have gotten blown a little out of proportion.  It was probably impossible for him to see "just a little communist involvement" as being inconsequential to the greater good of the civil rights movement (which wasn't a topic Church leaders were known for being "progressive" towards anyway).  So it's probably best to view his comment deep in the context of the era in which it was made, and with the acknowledgement that there was some history of communist involvement with the movement.

 

Edited November 27, 2016 by cinepro

[mfbukowski]

44 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said:

Why is it a problem?  Have you read the talk in its entirety?  

It's problematic because you have an apostle of the Lord telling thousands (essentially millions) of people that the Civil Rights Movement is a false/communist plot at a General Conference.  First of all, it is considered "scripture" according the the source below:

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-the-living-prophets-student-manual/chapter-6-general-conference?lang=eng

"The Words of the Prophets Delivered through the Spirit during General Conference Are Latter-day Scripture."

Secondly, the Civil Rights Movement lead by MLK was one of the most important movements, IMO, during the last century here in the US, because it helped African Americans and others tremendously.  In retrospect, the Church and Elder Benson were on the wrong side of history.  

Are we to believe that this was God's will to tell us (via Elder Benson) that the 
Civil Rights movement was "false solicitude?"  If prophets/apostles cannot properly convey God's word (because of the way their brains work), then why should we put any trust in what they have to say?

"Such timely counsel could help save our country from Communism, as the same masters of deceit are showing the same false solicitude for the unfortunate in the name of civil rights."

Thirdly, if we are counseled to heed the words of the prophets/apostles, then I don't know how one can argue that Elder Benson was correct in his conference talk; his words made me feel the opposite of what I understand to be the spirit.  

Have YOU read this?  This is an official statement by the church, I have added emphasis to draw your attention to parts you should actually read!!  Note that conference talks are not even mentioned!!

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

• Quote

   

  • Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency(the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.
  • Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice. The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center. This is especially common among reporters or researchers who rely on how other Christians interpret Latter-day Saint doctrine.
  • .......
  • Because different times present different challenges, modern-day prophets receive revelation relevant to the circumstances of their day. This follows the biblical pattern(Amos 3:7), in which God communicated messages and warnings to His people through prophets in order to secure their well-being.  In our day, President Gordon B. Hinckley (1910-2008) has repeatedly emphasized the importance of the family in our increasingly fractional society. In addition, the Church does not preclude future additions or changes to its teachings or practices. This living, dynamic aspect of the Church provides flexibility in meeting those challenges.  According to the Articles of Faith, “We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.”
  • Latter-day Saints place heavy emphasis on the application of their faith in daily life. For example, the active participation of Latter-day Saints in their community and worldwide humanitarian programs reflects concern for other people. As Jesus Christ declared, “By their fruits ye shall know them.”
  • Individual members are encouraged to independently strive to receive their own spiritual confirmation of the truthfulness of Church doctrine. Moreover, the Church exhorts all people to approach the gospel not only intellectually but with the intellect and the spirit, a process in which reason and faith work together.

   

  Here are other shocking facts!!!

• We used to believe in polygamy!!!!   Did you know that????

• We used to believe Blacks should not have the priesthood!!!!   Did you know that????

• We no longer hold these beliefs!!!  Did you know that???

This is a non-issue.

We have had probably HUNDREDS of threads on this kind of topic around here over the years

This is a single statement by a leader who was not even the prophet at the time.  It is his personal opinion.

This is not about core doctrine, and is not binding on the church nor should it be considered as such.

These statements are no longer relevant to our day, any more than polygamy or the policy on the Priesthood is.

Our doctrine can be changed to meet present circumstances.

We MUST confirm each doctrine through our own testimonies.

 

a non-issue.  

 

[Calm]

Why do you assume his talk was vetted?

They don't vet them now from what has been reported, there were some apostles that didn't keep to their talks or didn't prepare a set speech in the past so no vetting there either (think Legrand Richards if you are young and having a hard time imagining it)

 

Edited November 27, 2016 by Calm

[mfbukowski]

AND by the way I was a communist in 1967.

He was right.

[Glenn101]

43 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said:

I, in no way, think Elder Benson's talk is from God or inspired by God.  Do you?  

I do not know. But before you pass judgment, maybe you should do some research on the topic. I do not want to stir up a civil rights controversy here. But as Bluebell noted above, the Communist were wont to use popular movements of the time in different countries to promote their agenda. How much influence they had in the Civil Rights movement in the U.S. is unclear at this time, but there was an FBI investigation into those matters. Unfortunately, J.Edgar Hoover had gone overboard in some of those investigations, especially as to the activities of Dr. Martin Luther King. Dr. King's friendship with Stanley  Livingstone, a member of the American Communist Party up to about 1957. Levison was an active participant and was instrumental in helping get the Souther Leadership Congress afloat financially. His activities and close association with Doctor King were viewed with deep suspicion by Hoover and many others. Then Apostle Benson's statement was given with that information in view, and maybe more, given his past connections with the government as a former Secretary of Agriculture.

At this point, all of this is past history and I feel it should be left in the past. Former President Benson was a really good man as was Doctor King. They both had flaws and those flaws will be judged by God, not us.

Glenn

[JAHS]

1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said:

So, if prophets have "said something incorrectly" and we follow them in their counsel (and they were/are wrong), then that means they can lead us astray, correct?  

Perhaps we need to redefine "prophet, seer, and revelator." 

The reason why we have 15 prophets seers and revelators is so that very thing cannot happen. They all must agree on doctrine that is meant for the entire church or it does not become doctrine. Ezra Taft Benson was not the head prophet of the church when he said that, and apparently what he said did not concern the others enough to have what he said rescinded. 

[Ouagadougou]

14 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Have YOU read this?  This is an official statement by the church, I have added emphasis to draw your attention to parts you should actually read!!  Note that conference talks are not even mentioned!!

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

• Here are other shocking facts!!!

• We used to believe in polygamy!!!!   Did you know that????

• We used to believe Blacks should not have the priesthood!!!!   Did you know that????

• We no longer hold these beliefs!!!  Did you know that???

This is a non-issue.

We have had probably HUNDREDS of threads on this kind of topic around here over the years

This is a single statement by a leader who was not even the prophet at the time.  It is his personal opinion.

This is not about core doctrine, and is not binding on the church nor should it be considered as such.

These statements are no longer relevant to our day, any more than polygamy or the policy on the Priesthood is.

Our doctrine can be changed to meet present circumstances.

We MUST confirm each doctrine through our own testimonies.

 

a non-issue.  

 

So if the church used to believe and practice such things (polygamy, blacks and the priesthood and the list goes on) -- but they (prophets/apostles) were wrong/mistaken -- then that means it was false doctrine or doctrine just changes to meet societal expectations.  Either way, my original question was:

"If prophets/apostles/leaders are fallible, then how can one truly be sure that their words/guidance (at the time it is given) is, in fact, from God?  Is this done just by the spirit?" 

 

 

Edited November 27, 2016 by Ouagadougou

[Ouagadougou]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

Why do you assume his talk was vetted?

They don't vet them now from what has been reported, there were some apostles that didn't keep to their talks or didn't prepare a set speech in the past so no vetting there either (think Legrand Richards if you are young and having a hard time imagining it)

 

I was asking if his talk was vetted; I do not know how how that process works, but I would hope talks get vetted in some manner. 

[rodheadlee]

3 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

Hello all!

I just read the conference talk titled "Trust Not in the Arm of Flesh" given by Elder Benson (apostle at the time) in Oct 1967.  Having read this conference talk/report, I'm shocked that some of these words came from an apostle who was supposed to be the Lord's mouthpiece at that time.  For example:

http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1569&era=yes

"There is no doubt that the so-called civil rights movement as it exists today is used as a Communist program for revolution in America just as agrarian reform was used by the Communists to take over China and Cuba."

There are other parts of this talk that I find extremely disturbing, but, even if Elder Benson was just speaking as a man (during a general conference talk), then surely his talk was still vetted/reviewed by the 1st Presidency/prophet, correct?  

Also, if prophets/apostles/leaders are fallible, then how can one truly be sure that their words/guidance (at the time it is given) is, in fact, from God?  Is this done just by the spirit?  

IMO, Elder Benson's words/guidance in this talk were disturbing and in no way from God.  As a less-active member, should I just sweep talks like this under the rug and pretend like it never happened?  

I don't mean to offend anyone here, but I'm generally curious how you reconcile and/or work through such conflicting talks/guidance.  

 

 

I'm curious, did you live through this era? 

FYI there were 159 race riots in the summer of 1967. If you didn't live through this era I can give you more history of the era.

Edited November 27, 2016 by rodheadlee

[mnn727]

2 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-the-living-prophets-student-manual/chapter-6-general-conference?lang=eng

"The Words of the Prophets Delivered through the Spirit during General Conference Are Latter-day Scripture."

If it is considered "latter-day scripture," then it would be false scripture, unless one agrees with what Elder Benson had to say in his talk, which I hope is not the case.

I have underlined the important part.

Also, were you alive and an adult during that time? I remember race riots and looting during that time - somewhat similar to what is happening today.

Edited November 27, 2016 by mnn727

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said:

So if the church used to believe and practice such things (polygamy, blacks and the priesthood and the list goes on) -- but they (prophets/apostles) were wrong/mistaken -- then that means it was false doctrine or doctrine just changes to meet societal expectations.  Either way, my original question was:

"If prophets/apostles/leaders are infallible, then how can one truly be sure that their words/guidance (at the time it is given) is, in fact, from God?  Is this done just by the spirit?"

Prophets/apostles are not infallible.  They are men like everyone else.  They have just been given higher callings and doing the best they can with it.   Also there is no indication that polygamy or the priesthood ban was wrong.  Practices change from time to time.  The Church has never apologized for polygamy nor should it.   The Church has not apologized for the priesthood ban though many views regarding the reasoning for the ban where in error.  

How does one know if something that is said by prophets/apostles, right.  Your job is to get your own testimony of it.  To one that might be through fasting and prayer.  To another it might be by studying the scriptures and other things.  Whatever a particular individual uses to gain to gain a testimony on things should be done.  If is far better to have a testimony on an issue rather than to be a blind follower.  Those with a testimony are the ones committed to the issue while those that are not do not have as much a firm commitment. 

[sunstoned]

3 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

I, in no way, think Elder Benson's talk is from God or inspired by God.  Do you?  

Of course not.  In hind sight it is just embarrassing and shows just how far off the mark some leaders can go.

[Scott Lloyd]

5 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

Hello all!

I just read the conference talk titled "Trust Not in the Arm of Flesh" given by Elder Benson (apostle at the time) in Oct 1967.  Having read this conference talk/report, I'm shocked that some of these words came from an apostle who was supposed to be the Lord's mouthpiece at that time.  For example:

http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1569&era=yes

"There is no doubt that the so-called civil rights movement as it exists today is used as a Communist program for revolution in America just as agrarian reform was used by the Communists to take over China and Cuba."

There are other parts of this talk that I find extremely disturbing, but, even if Elder Benson was just speaking as a man (during a general conference talk), then surely his talk was still vetted/reviewed by the 1st Presidency/prophet, correct?  

Also, if prophets/apostles/leaders are fallible, then how can one truly be sure that their words/guidance (at the time it is given) is, in fact, from God?  Is this done just by the spirit?  

IMO, Elder Benson's words/guidance in this talk were disturbing and in no way from God.  As a less-active member, should I just sweep talks like this under the rug and pretend like it never happened?  

I don't mean to offend anyone here, but I'm generally curious how you reconcile and/or work through such conflicting talks/guidance.  

 

 

Has Elder Benson's contention ever been disproven? That is, has it been definitively shown that communist revolutionaries did not try to co-opt the civil rights movement to serve their own political agenda?  

Most people alive today are too young to have lived through the Cold War and don't understand the tensions that were pervasive back then. I'm old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis. I was too young to understand what was going on, but the doomsday sense that was in the air is vivid in my memory. Our school lunchroom, in the basement of our building, was a designated nuclear fallout shelter. I still remember the yellow civil defense sign in the stairway going down to it    

And what gives you the idea that General Conference talks were "vetted" by the Church president? That doesn't happen today; what makes you think it happened back then? 

Edited November 27, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

I was asking if his talk was vetted; I do not know how how that process works, but I would hope talks get vetted in some manner. 

Why would you hope that? 

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

AND by the way I was a communist in 1967.

He was right.

I thought so. 

Thanks for that confirmation.