"… He Did Go About Secretly … Seeking To Destroy The Church …"

[Matthew J. Tandy]

I just want to point out that, generally speaking, once everyone's views were fleshed out, it turns out that Volgadon, Will Schryver, Zerinus, Storm Rider, etc all agreed on the basic principles of how to handle wolves in sheep clothing. The confusion over be like Alma appears to mainy have been about whether or not that example extended to exercising the authority which Alma held, which it seems no one here believes it does.

It's good to point out that most of the initial perceived conflicts have been resolved and we find ourselves brothers in Christ.

[Nominee]

I didn't mean that he would literally lose or forego his authority. I meant that as far as his interactions relative to the other posters are concerned, he would be operating on the same level as the rest of them. That would be especially true if he were operating in anonymity. If he declared his identity then things might be different. But there is no way he can command authority while at the same time acting in anonymity.

You shouldn't have needed to explain this over again. You did an excellent job explaining it the first time! I tried to give you a much deserved point for that post but it turns out I have none to offer at the moment. I'll get back to it.

[sethpayne]

Personally, I don't believe in the kind of "God" who would kill people for most of the reasons given in the propagandistic nationalistic fictions contained in the Old Testament. Christ brought the sword of truth, the Good Word which defeats death. If one person is authorized to take away someone else's life merely because they claim they are a false teacher, then upon the same principle anyone is authorized to take away the life of every false teacher, and where would be the end of blood, and who would not be the sufferer? But no one is authorized to take away life because of a difference of religion, which all laws and governments ought to tolerate, right or wrong.

So as far as Uzzah the Ark-Steadier goes, even if we do grant for the sake of argument the existence of the kind of God who smites people down for their errors, in context, I think Uzzah is actually guilty of a rather different sin.

Jeremy,

Thank you for sharing your blog post. A very interesting read and a unique take on the OT story. Your point about how the story is centered on the scriptures is especially compelling. You have inspired me to go back and study this text in detail.

Seth

Edited June 8, 2012 by sethpayne

[Craig Paxton]

I am personally familiar with several individuals who are no longer believers in the restored gospel, and yet, for a variety of reasons, they are still "active" in the Church. More often than not, the stake president and bishop and others are aware of their status as unbelievers. What the stake presidents, bishops, and others are often not aware of is that these unbelieving members engage in what is typically called "fifth-columnist" behavior, both within their wards and stakes and also anonymously on blogs and LDS-related message boards. They are often known for their eloquence ("a man of many words") and are quite often very popular, even among those who are faithful Saints ("[he] did speak much flattery to the people"). If confronted (as many have noted above) they take great offense at being characterized as "wolves in sheep's clothing" ("I am no devil, for there is none"). They also consistently reassure everyone around them that they have a sincere desire to see the Church prosper--but they believe it must abandon the errors of its past, etc.

Anyway, there is much more I desire to say on this topic, but my time is limited today. I will try to post again later this evening ...

Paranoia [ˌpærəˈnɔɪ.ə] (adjective: paranoid [ˈpærə.nɔɪd])1. is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself. (e.g. "Everyone is out to get me.") Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia. 2. baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

Paranoia [ˌpærəˈnɔɪ.ə] (adjective: paranoid [ˈpærə.nɔɪd])1. is a thought process believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs, or beliefs of conspiracy concerning a perceived threat towards oneself. (e.g. "Everyone is out to get me.") Making false accusations and the general distrust of others also frequently accompany paranoia. 2. baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others.

Craig, stop trying to stir the pot. Will says he knows these people and knows that the leadership knows their non-believing status. It is fully possible he knows one or two who engage in subversive activity.

For the record, I personally know several people exactly like this. It's not paranoia, it's reality. It is different than imagining things about someone who says something in church you don't agree with.

Paranoia may include however believing that the experiences of others are the ravings of a lunatic because they don't meld well with your own views.

[Senator]

I will give an interesting account on this matter. One of the three individuals in this account yet lives and I will not use his name. But the other is passed away and his identity is important to the story so you can get the sense of the voice.. the booming, authoritative voice -- involved.

One day, in a meeting of the 12 and the First Presidency and some other General Authorities, President Kimball fully and entirely tore Bruce R. McConkie up one side and down the other. My friend who witnessed this, and knew some of the details of the matter, felt that this hazing was entirely unjustified and in error. But Bruce McConkie just stood there and took it.

Later, my friend (who told this story on himself by the way) went to Elder McConkie and said "Bruce, that was wrong. I am on your side in this".

Bruce boomed out and called my friend by his first name saying "________, If you are on the my side then you are on the President Kimball's side. It is an unwise and unrighteous steward who cannot stand the rebuke of the Lord's anointed prophet. "

Was there afterwards an increase of love shown forth?

[Senator]

Jeremy,

Thank you for sharing your blog post. A very interesting read and a unique take on the OT story. Your point about how the story is centered on the scriptures is especially compelling. You have inspired me to go back and study this text in detail.

Seth

Indeed.

It's also interesting the differences between your response, and Wades.

[Craig Paxton]

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

Actually this entire thread reminds me of "1984" and the thought police...some in this thread have even suggested turning other members of their ward in to their bishops for comments they make at church? Are you all being serious? This is crazy talk...and it is because of group control thinking like this that former believers like myself want little or nothing to do with the church.

Is there no one here with alittle sanity and will stand up to this kind of crazy talk?

[Deborah]

For the record, I personally know several people exactly like this. It's not paranoia, it's reality. It is different than imagining things about someone who says something in church you don't agree with.

As do I, and in my own family. Several members have apostatized because they believe the church itself has strayed from the teachings primarily of Brigham Young.They believe that there have been no true prophets since polygamy was stopped. Yet some of these family members continue to go to church. I asked my BIL why and he said because he needs to keep teaching the truth which is in his mind is continually quoting Brigham Young and preaching to people. Others post really hateful things against the church on blogs and even facebook, all the time pretending they are the true believers and doing what God has told them to do. Oh, and some of them still acting like believers to their church friends; my nephew takes pride in the many people he has led away including his family members.

Edited June 8, 2012 by Deborah

[Craig Paxton]

I have problem with members taking their concerns to the bishop/branch president. That is scriptural.THat is wha the people of Ammon did. Acting as Alma in the case of Korihor, that is, deciding an individual's status in the church and acting pitiless towards him, that is wrong. That is overstepping our boundaries.

OK there is some sanity ....

Sorry for a string of random comments...I'm trying to catch up on this thread

[Nominee]

some in this thread have even suggested turning other members of their ward in to their bishops for comments they make at church? Are you all being serious?

CFR. I have been following the entire thread and I just don't recall this be brought forward as a suggestion. Especially not by ALL of us. I think as Mr. Tandy expressed ~ everyone here is in agreement for the most part even if the wires did get crossed here and there. And what you are claiming is not what I hear being agreed upon. So without all the extra words describing how you took one thing to mean another, could you clarify in which posts all or even one of us crazy talkers have suggested turning other members of their ward in to their bishops?

edit: Maybe by "for comments they make at church" you mean secretly seeking to destroy the church?

~ Naomi

Edited June 8, 2012 by Nominee

[Deborah]

Actually this entire thread reminds me of "1984" and the thought police...

Who's paranoid here?

As someone said we aren't talking about some misinformed people spreading misinformation but about true apostates who have declared their animosity to the church in other venues and yet pretend to be faithful members in good standing while leading others away.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

In my opinion, one of the best replies yet on this thread. I probably bring up this topic (of finding fault in our leaders--local and general) at least once a month in my gospel doctrine classes. I have long observed that finding fault with the Church and its leaders is the prime indicator of apostasy.

That was essentially what I said on the first page. Of course I didn't link it to apostasy but generally speaking, I have found those that try to destroy the church are apostates. However not all apostates want to destroy the church.

[Craig Paxton]

Willy, don't flatter yourself. You are not a wolf in sheep's clothing. You long ago set aside any pretense of being a sheep. You are just an ordinary apostate; nothing more and nothing less. They come a dime a dozen. No one would ever look at your and think, "Now there is a wondreful example of a disciple of Jesus Christ." That is what is needed to be a wolf in sheep's clothing. It is a poser, a false person. You are not false; you continously wave your colors for all to see.

I just hope that you can look yourself in the mirror and be proud of the type of person you have become. It is not pretty.

LOL... Feel better? Are you enjoying the view from your Rameumptum...but I'm thinking that the thin air is getting to you...it may be time to come down and mix with the little people..

Oh and honestly I have no problem at all looking at myself in the mirror each and everyday...I have a clear conscience towards all men

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Actually this entire thread reminds me of "1984" and the thought police..

Rofl.

Craig you are a riot.

[Buzzard]

As do I, and in my own family. Several members have apostatized because they believe the church itself has strayed from the teachings primarily of Brigham Young.They believe that there have been no true prophets since polygamy was stopped. Yet some of these family members continue to go to church. I asked my BIL why and he said because he needs to keep teaching the truth which is in his mind is continually quoting Brigham Young and preaching to people. Others post really hateful things against the church on blogs and even facebook, all the time pretending they are the true believers and doing what God has told them to do. Oh, and some of them still acting like believers to their church friends; my nephew takes pride in the many people he has led away including his family members.

That's why the temple recommend question about "sympathy with groups". I've known more than one person who has questioned why this question is asked. While there might be other groups not in harmony with the church, most of the time, this question is directed towards those who would continue or condone the practice of plural marriage. It's still a fairly large issue within the church, especially in some parts of Utah.

[DBMormon]

We could simplify some parts of this thread this way by saying that each of us have a point of view and when most of us encounter folks from a different perspective we feel they don't understand the real mormonism. And we see others who are different as a threat. Either they are too conservative/fundamental (not polygamous) LDS and we see them as blind to the real Mormonism or they are too liberal in their mormonism and we see this group as trying to sabotage the religion we were raised in and trying to force it to change. I think both sides need to take a step back and say Mormonism is complicated..... very complicated, and there is no perfect faithful way to assimilate all of it. Way to complicated for me to navigate without huge struggles, growth, increased understanding, shelving some issues, having to alter your perception on others. Having considered all of this it puts a lot deeper view of Lehi's vision of the tree of Life and the mist, spacious building, the river, all the trials and challenges for those holding to belief.

[Craig Paxton]

CFR. I have been following the entire thread and I just don't recall this be brought forward as a suggestion. Especially not by ALL of us. I think as Mr. Tandy expressed ~ everyone here is in agreement for the most part even if the wires did get crossed here and there. And what you are claiming is not what I hear being agreed upon. So without all the extra words describing how you took one thing to mean another, could you clarify in which posts all or even one of us crazy talkers have suggested turning other members of their ward in to their bishops?

edit: Maybe by "for comments they make at church" you mean secretly seeking to destroy the church?

~ Naomi

I hate doing you home work for you...but if you insist...

Here's you CFR

I had a SS teacher who was teaching "on the edge". I simply went to the SS president, told him what was going on, and left it to him how to handle it.

The ark steadiers are the leaders of the church -- bishop, stake president, general authorities. My job is to "steady" myself, my family and those over whom I have a responsibility. Also, perhaps, to let the leaders know of situations were they may not be aware. In the case of Alma II, it is likely that the church members made his father aware of the situation, and he handled it by giving it to Heavenly Father.

And, yes, if the SS teacher continued with such teachings, I would simply find somewhere else to attend SS -- e.g. Gospel Essentials.

And...

You acted properly, though I think I would have gone to the bishop, whose duty is to ensure the doctrinal purity of what is taught in the ward.

So this suggestion of turning members in took off from this point from about comment #106 on...until finally some poster pointed out the lunicy of doing this (me)...guess you missed it.

I guess the old addage..."Every Member a Missionary" can be replaced with "Every Member a Thought Policeman"...cuz we really don't want independant unapproved thinking going on now do we...

Edited June 8, 2012 by Craig Paxton

[Nominee]

We could simplify some parts of this thread this way by saying that each of us have a point of view and when most of us encounter folks from a different perspective we feel they don't understand the real mormonism. And we see others who are different as a threat. Either they are too conservative/fundamental (not polygamous) LDS and we see them as blind to the real Mormonism or they are too liberal in their mormonism and we see this group as trying to sabotage the religion we were raised in and trying to force it to change. I think both sides need to take a step back and say Mormonism is complicated..... very complicated, and there is no perfect faithful way to assimilate all of it. Way to complicated for me to navigate without huge struggles, growth, increased understanding, shelving some issues, having to alter your perception on others. Having considered all of this it puts a lot deeper view of Lehi's vision of the tree of Life and the mist, spacious building, the river, all the trials and challenges for those holding to belief.

I respect your opinion but disagree. Heavenly Father has made is extremely simple and easy to understand. Anyone can know right from wrong. We even has the Holy Spirit of God to help us along. Also, we aren't discussing misunderstandings, we are talking about out and out "I know a better way" or/and "The church is wrong."

Sin is complicated. The gospel of Jesus Christ is pure and simple.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

There is a major difference between the book 1984 and the Church.

The people in 1984 were forced to believe a certain way by nature of simply being born, were monitored in every moment of their lives, and were killed after being made an example of. They had no choice.

In the LDS Church (or any faith) it is a voluntary organization based upon a decision to adhere to the tenants of the faith. When those tenants are openly or secretly ridiculed, or even when a member starts teaching something like "As we all know, Kolob is the moon" (yes, I was in a Priesthood class where the instructor said this), then it behooves the members to bring the issue up first with the individual. If that fails, then with the Bishop, and let the Bishop handle it from there. Maintaining certain purity in key doctrines and weeding out the simply bizarre before it takes root is important to do. And we don't kill people for being in rebellion to the teachings... well.. not yet at least.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

I respect your opinion but disagree. Heavenly Father has made is extremely simple and easy to understand. Anyone can know right from wrong. We even has the Holy Spirit of God to help us along. Also, we aren't discussing misunderstandings, we are talking about out and out "I know a better way" or/and "The church is wrong."

Exactly, this thread isn't about those who are simply wierd, nless they are teachers and teaching something out there. This is about those who are the "wolves in sheep's clothing", the people who are actively but discretetly working against the church. That some on the thread have tried to conflate it with anyone who even comments out of the bounds of orthodxy is silly.

[Nominee]

I hate doing you home work for you...but if you insist...

Here's you CFR

So this suggestion of turning members in took off from this point from about comment #106 on...until finally some poster pointed out the lunicy of doing this...guess you missed it.

Thank you. You make my point. We are not just discussing random comments made by members. And is the 'poster pointing out the lunicy' Volgadon? I don't know that he would agree with you. But you probably know this. Only real point to make here is that you are taking a conversation about those who actively seek to lead members astray and seek to destroy the church and responding as if we are discussing generally good faithful members with a loose tongue.

[Storm Rider]

Thank you. You make my point. We are not just discussing random comments made by members. And is the 'poster pointing out the lunicy' Volgadon? I don't know that he would agree with you. But you probably know this. Only real point to make here is that you are taking a conversation about those who actively seek to lead members astray and seek to destroy the church and responding as if we are discussing generally good faithful members with a loose tongue.

It is that really the typical behavior of the disgruntled and bitter? They seek for anything to support their perspective, ignore everything else to the contrary, and then harp on it like it is the core issue of the Church. It is impossible for these individuals to see themselves; they are so wrapped upon in THEIR view point, THEIR desires, that it is impossible for them to be logical or even close to taking a rational review of a topic. It has become so banal that it is just sad, and they think they are so sophisticated.

[wenglund]

I think you are using "false teacher" in an exceptionally broad fashion, rendering it almost meaningless.

And, I think you are nit-picking the term in a way that misses my general point. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Craig Paxton]

Thank you. You make my point. We are not just discussing random comments made by members. And is the 'poster pointing out the lunicy' Volgadon? I don't know that he would agree with you. But you probably know this. Only real point to make here is that you are taking a conversation about those who actively seek to lead members astray and seek to destroy the church and responding as if we are discussing generally good faithful members with a loose tongue.

Well...I want to make this point very very clear....I give my 100% endorsement of members monitoring and policing the random comments of other members, teachers and priesthood leaders to make sure that every comment or thought expressed is pure, orthodox and church approved. I also completely endorse members turning in these "other members" to their priesthood leaders for corrective doctrinal therapy and if needed church discipline for having unapproved thoughts.

I think that I will also take the opportunity cede defeat to the orthodox posters of this board who have carried the day and won the argument…every member needs to be on guard against heterodoxy in the church. Every member needs to worry about what their neighbor believes and thinks and make certain that those beliefs are all in conformity with approved beliefs. You never really know who that wolf in sheep’s clothing really is lurking in the shadows or maybe even sitting next to you in Sunday school class seeking to destroy the church from within. Those evil free thinkers need to be rooted out and exposed….and who better to do it than you….you noble discerners of orthodoxy.