zerinus Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 The impression I get is that such people claim to carry out a successful masquerade at church but give vent to their true stand when they can do it under cover of anonymity, as on the Internet.How long they can carry this on, or how truthful they are being about their reported double-life, I can't say.That is the only outlet that would be available to them; in which case their sphere of influence is going to be very limited. How many Church members go on the Internet to debate or dialogue with such people? Those few who do (like us) will be smart enough to see through their craft; and their tactics usually does not go unchallenged. And still I don't think that they can lead a double life in the Church for long. The strain will be harder for them to bear than for the Church.
mapman Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) So in your mind, Bishops and Stake Presidents are destroying the Church? Really?That's not what I was talking about, as my later posts make very clear. Bishops and stake presidents are supposed to be guided by the Spirit when making decisions about discipline anyways, so it's still God making the judgment. What I think is harmful to the Church is when people accuse their brothers or sisters of being wolves and attack them when it isn't their place to make such judgments. Edited June 7, 2012 by mapman
volgadon Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 The Lord himself, through His prophets, has already called upon all the Elders of Israel to awaken to the enemies in our midst.I would also recommend D&C 101:43-62.I would recommend these verses from Alma 1.21 Now there was a strict law among the people of the church, that there should anot any man, belonging to the church, arise and persecute those that did not belong to the church, and that there should be no persecution among themselves. 22 Nevertheless, there were many among them who began to be proud, and began to contend warmly with their adversaries, even unto blows; yea, they would smite one another with their afists. 23 Now this was in the second year of the reign of Alma, and it was a cause of much affliction to the church; yea, it was the cause of much trial with the church. 24 For the hearts of many were hardened, and their names were ablotted out, that they were remembered no more among the people of God. And also many bwithdrew themselves from among them.Contention and persecution can only result in affliction to the church and its members, as well as leading down the path to apostasy. There is a gentler, meeker approach which draws you closer to Christ.25 Now this was a great trial to those that did stand fast in the faith; nevertheless, they were asteadfast and immovable in keeping the commandments of God, and they bore with bpatience the persecution which was heaped upon them.It is not for us to "show no pity to the wolf." If we do correct our brothers, it is with an increase of love shown immediately afterwards. Going back to the example of Korihor, the people of Ammon didn't take things into their own hands, "showing no pity to the wolf," but took him to Alma, their priesthood leader, if you will. 3
mapman Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) The Lord himself, through His prophets, has already called upon all the Elders of Israel to awaken to the enemies in our midst.I would also recommend D&C 101:43-62.None of the scriptures you cited mention elders. I've always been taught that the watchmen refer to the prophets and apostles, which seems like a reasonable reading to me, so I don't know why you think that elders have been called to find wolves in sheep's clothing. I wasn't told that when I was ordained an elder. Edited June 7, 2012 by mapman 1
zerinus Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 Based on some things I've recently read, I suspect such people would try to gain positions in the Church where they could influence the thinking of others, such as teaching, and then look for opportunities to go off-manual and inject their own "gospel hobbies" and spin on things.To be most effective, they would have to couch their teachings in scripture, so that's the first thing I would look for.Any Mormon worthy of the name would be able to discern and see though that without difficulty.
volgadon Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 None of the scriptures you cited mention elders. I've always been taught that the watchmen refer to the prophets and apostles, which seems like a reasonable reading to me, so I don't know why you think that elders have been called to find wolves in sheep's clothing. I wasn't told that when I was ordained an elder.We obviously missed the memo.
jwhitlock Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 Going back to the example of Korihor, the people of Ammon didn't take things into their own hands, "showing no pity to the wolf," but took him to Alma, their priesthood leader, if you will.This is a good point. I don't think anyone is talking about taking things into their own hands; however, it is appropriate to identify such wolves and bring them to the attention of church leaders. 1
Nominee Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 I would recommend these verses from Alma 1.Contention and persecution can only result in affliction to the church and its members, as well as leading down the path to apostasy. There is a gentler, meeker approach which draws you closer to Christ.It is not for us to "show no pity to the wolf." If we do correct our brothers, it is with an increase of love shown immediately afterwards. Going back to the example of Korihor, the people of Ammon didn't take things into their own hands, "showing no pity to the wolf," but took him to Alma, their priesthood leader, if you will.Ooooooh. Now I understand where you were coming from with the previous "you are not Alma" post. I didn't understand that at all first time around. Thank you, for offering this more detailed expression; A great post.~ Naomi 1
ERayR Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 edit: l should add that one would not ness. need to be prominent in the church by calling or family but be known and have a likable and engaging personality.~ NaomiOr an impassioned plea to make thee church more popular with the rest of the world. Wouldn't it be nice if our neighbors liked us? All we have to do is change the outdated policy of_____.
ERayR Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 So, this is not in reference to very open anti-Mormon activity, but rather members working "secretly" within the church, itself? Active members?Do you think like on the internet or discussion boards? Maybe.
Log Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) Does one need to be in a leadership position to point out that certain positions tend to undermine, or are otherwise inimical to the faith, including those things which tend to vitiate trust in the leadership? I could have sworn each endowed member is outfitted to wield the macuahuitl of justice in defense of virtue and truth. Edited June 7, 2012 by Log
Nominee Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 Or an impassioned plea to make thee church more popular with the rest of the world. Wouldn't it be nice if our neighbors liked us? All we have to do is change the outdated policy of_____.I can't understand how anyone in the church, living the gospel, could think we should change anything. My cup is truly overflowing because of the restored church and the fullness of the gospel in my life. My eyes well up with tears in a moment just thinking about how blessed I am to have this life. I love the church! And... I want to climb on a soapbox and scream from a mountain top right now. I'd give anything for everyone to feel the love I have for Heavenly Father and the Church of Jesus Christ. Thank you, GOD!, for what I have!!! 3
ERayR Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 I can't understand how anyone in the church, living the gospel, could think we should change anything. My cup is truly overflowing because of the restored church and the fullness of the gospel in my life. My eyes well up with tears in a moment just thinking about how blessed I am to have this life. I love the church! And... I want to climb on a soapbox and scream from a mountain top right now. I'd give anything for everyone to feel the love I have for Heavenly Father and the Church of Jesus Christ. Thank you, GOD!, for what I have!!!Yes an emphatic yes but there is at least two threads in the last week urging changes to increase the popularity of the church with the world.
Nominee Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 Yes an emphatic yes but there is at least two threads in the last week urging changes to increase the popularity of the church with the world.I know, I read those as well but... baffles the mind! The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is AWESOME! MY GOD IS AWESOME! AWESOME! 1
cinepro Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 (edited) Do you think like on the internet or discussion boards? Maybe.Internet discussion groups aren't "the church". Edited June 7, 2012 by cinepro
William Schryver Posted June 7, 2012 Author Posted June 7, 2012 Does one need to be in a leadership position to point out that certain positions tend to undermine, or are otherwise inimical to the faith, including those things which tend to vitiate trust in the leadership? I could have sworn each endowed member is outfitted to wield the macuahuitl of justice in defense of virtue and truth.It would seem that we have not only elevated the concepts of "tolerance" and "diversity" to the status of top shelf cultural virtues, but we have done so even at the expense of virtue itself.One of the foremost ideological imperatives of the wolves among us is that the Church (and the Saints of which it is constituted) must "adapt" ourselves to the changing world in which we live--and that adaptation must take the form of learning to be tolerant of wickedness. Or, if the word "wickedness" is too "hard" for us, then we must permit its meaning to be redefined. This is precisely what Korihor was talking about when he spoke of "the foolish traditions of our fathers." 1
cinepro Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 I can't understand how anyone in the church, living the gospel, could think we should change anything. My cup is truly overflowing because of the restored church and the fullness of the gospel in my life. My eyes well up with tears in a moment just thinking about how blessed I am to have this life. I love the church!I'm not sure what you mean. Are you talking about the Church in 1840, 1895, 1920, 1955, 1985, or 2012? Because the Church changes all the time.
volgadon Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 Why on earth would you say this unkind and uncalled for remark?Read Will's response to me, then tell me he isn't suggesting we act like Alma did.
William Schryver Posted June 7, 2012 Author Posted June 7, 2012 By the way, just in case any of you missed it, or failed to read it yet, here is the link to Dan Peterson's column in today's Mormon Times. I highly recommend it.
Matthew J. Tandy Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 The people, individuals in the church, are the ones who identified Korihor. They accused him and they brought him to Alma's attention, who otherwise may not have become intimate anytime soon with what Korihor was doing. Only those around Korihor who were not convinced by his flattery knew. They did however not appear to contend heavily with him, but the modern analogy would be they tried to reason with him, no luck, and then they took the matter up with the Bishop. The Bishop then took it up to the Stake President and a council was held. So the final judgment rests with the Priesthood leadership, but the initial judgment and accusation rested with everyday members of the church. 3
William Schryver Posted June 7, 2012 Author Posted June 7, 2012 Read Will's response to me, then tell me he isn't suggesting we act like Alma did.Yes, indeed. I would that we all act as did Alma. Why not?
volgadon Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 Yes, indeed. I would that we all act as did Alma. Why not?Why not? Unless we are called to such, it is is not our role.
volgadon Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 The people, individuals in the church, are the ones who identified Korihor. They accused him and they brought him to Alma's attention, who otherwise may not have become intimate anytime soon with what Korihor was doing. Only those around Korihor who were not convinced by his flattery knew. They did however not appear to contend heavily with him, but the modern analogy would be they tried to reason with him, no luck, and then they took the matter up with the Bishop. The Bishop then took it up to the Stake President and a council was held. So the final judgment rests with the Priesthood leadership, but the initial judgment and accusation rested with everyday members of the church.I'm perfectly fine with that. Bringing your concerns to the bishop is a proper response. I am worried about people thinking we should abrogate that role unto ourselves in a wolf hunt. 1
Nominee Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 I'm not sure what you mean. Are you talking about the Church in 1840, 1895, 1920, 1955, 1985, or 2012? Because the Church changes all the time.Well, as I am 40 years old this year, my post is referring to 2012. I was not around to fill my cup in 1840. That said, I love the history! I believe each prophet to be a true prophet chosen and prepared by God, and not just guys who happen to live in Utah and know the right people. I believe that each action the church has taken since the beginning of the restoration has been inspired and served great purpose, even the controversial ones.~ Naomi
Recommended Posts