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

[Matthew J. Tandy]

Let me add to my last comment. Alma was obviously judged by the members. Whether his being numbered among the unbelievers was literal (name taken off) or just the general consensus, who knows. But it was individual members who prayed for him, even as he persecuted them.

So the steps appear to be (in Alma):

1) Individual members recognize a member/former member is attempting to lead the church astray

2) Individual members make a judgment call. They may or may not take the persona side to privately discuss the issue

3) If unsuccessful and the individual members are still concerned, bring the matter up with ecclesiastical authority

4) Ecclesiastical authority investigates the matter. In doing so, such authority may be verbally assailed, usually being accused of deceiving the members, believing in silly traditions, etc.

5) Ecclesiastical authority makes a decision.

6) All faithful members pray for the individual, even if the individual continues to assault the church in other ways.

Wait... that sounds like how it works in modern!:-D

[William Schryver]

Why not? Unless we are called to such, it is is not our role.

What is not our role? What are you talking about?

[Nominee]

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.

I think that Volgadon's post #78 is good at explaining his viewpoint. I agree with what he says here.

Regards, Naomi

Edited June 7, 2012 by Nominee

[William Schryver]

Why not? Unless we are called to such, it is is not our role.

By the way, have you read Dan Peterson's MT column? What did you think about it?

Edited June 7, 2012 by William Schryver

[jwhitlock]

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.

I'm a bit confused; who on here has indicated that we should usurp the role of the bishop?

Also, WIll quoted Alma 5:57-60, in which Alma tells us as members to not allow the wolves into the fold. It would indeed appear that the admonition for the general membership to be alert for wolves is scriptural.

[cdowis]

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.

Edited June 7, 2012 by cdowis

[William Schryver]

I think that Volgadon's post #78 is good at explaining his viewpoint. I agree with what he says here.

Regards, Naomi

The question of my opening post had to do with recognizing the wolves working secretly to destroy the Church. Do you know how to recognize them? How do you go about it? What do you propose doing once you have recognized such a person?

[volgadon]

By the way, have you read Dan Peterson's MT column? What did you think about it?

Yes, I had read it. I think he has written better columns in the past.

[William Schryver]

Yes, I had read it. I think he has written better columns in the past.

No doubt you do.

[volgadon]

I'm a bit confused; who on here has indicated that we should usurp the role of the bishop?

Also, WIll quoted Alma 5:57-60, in which Alma tells us as members to not allow the wolves into the fold. It would indeed appear that the admonition for the general membership to be alert for wolves is scriptural.

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.

[volgadon]

No doubt you do.

I would reply to this post, but my sheepskin is in the wash.

[volgadon]

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.

The bolded bit is especially good.

[Nominee]

The question of my opening post had to do with recognizing the wolves working secretly to destroy the Church. Do you know how to recognize them? How do you go about it? What do you propose doing once you have recognized such a person?

I think that when you recognize the wolves working to destroy the Church you should bring your concerns to the Bishop, "stand firm, testify often of truth, and live as devote disciples."

What I am hearing Volgadon say is the same, as well as you. Am I wrong?

I think the wires got crossed but basically Volgadon has said bring your concerns to the Bishop as the members brought their concerns to Alma.

To say that we are not Alma is saying that we are not the bishop. We should not be openly confronting one another, their should be no contention among us. We should take our concerns to those who has the God-given authority to confront.

~Naomi

[volgadon]

I think that when you recognize the wolves working to destroy the Church you should bring your concerns to the Bishop, "stand firm, testify often of truth, and live as devote disciples."

What I am hearing Volgadon say is the same, as well as you. Am I wrong?

I think the wires got crossed but basically Volgadon has said bring your concerns to the Bishop as the members brought their concerns to Alma.

To say that we are not Alma is saying that we are not the bishop. We should not be openly confronting one another, their should be no contention among us. We should take our concerns to those who has the God-given authority to confront.

~Naomi

Yes, absolutely.

[Bernard Gui]

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.

Alma 30

59 And it came to pass that as he went forth among the people, yea, among a people who had separated themselves from the Nephites and called themselves Zoramites, being led by a man whose name was Zoram -- and as he went forth amongst them, behold, he was run upon and trodden down, even until he was dead.

60 And thus we see the end of him who perverteth the ways of the Lord; and thus we see that the devil will not support his children at the last day, but doth speedily drag them down to hell.

Bernard

[Bernard Gui]

Some lupine activities I've observed over the decades include subtle and outright criticism of

certain general authorities. Some targets have included Joseph Fielding Smith, Ezra Benson, Bruce

McConkie, Theodore Tuttle, Hugh Brown, and the currently favorite boogeyman Boyd Packer.

This is dangerous behavior, IMO.

Bernard

Edited June 8, 2012 by Bernard Gui

[Analytics]

By the way, have you read Dan Peterson's MT column? What did you think about it?

I found Dr. Peterson’s article to be quite eloquent. Clearly, he could influence and even manipulate others by the power of his language (with the flattering words you use to describe him, I’m sure you agree). It’s not surprising that he is among the best and brightest, from the elite class of the most privileged. It isn’t surprising that he’s a beneficiary of the best education available. Of course he wouldn’t admit that he’d openly admit that his goal is to destroy the church. Maybe he hasn’t even admitted it to himself.

You certainly showered Peterson with flattering words. No doubt you feel that what you are doing is right. But are you rationalizing the fact that your flattering words open the door to iniquities forbidden by the faith of your fathers? As Ezra Taft Benson repeatedly warned, “Pride is the universal sin, the great vice. Yes, pride is the universal sin, the great vice….Pride is the great stumbling block to Zion. I repeat: Pride is the great stumbling block to Zion.”

[treehugger]

I am not a fan of witch hunts, nor a fan of one size fits all; with that "by their fruits Ye shall know them". The great danger in people taking upon themselves the mantle of weeding out the aledge tares is that those who take it upon themselves are not authorized by God to do such, which means they lack the spirit and wisdom for such a undertaking.

[SamIam]

We are informed that these apostates among the Nephites went about "secretly … seeking to destroy the church." Are there such people among us today? And, if so, in what manner are they "seeking to destroy the church" and "to lead astray the people of the Lord"? How can we recognize such people? What are their methods and techniques? Once we recognize them, what should we do to combat the things they are doing?

I think that since William’s questions are these as listed in the quote above that there is prudence in examining this line of reasoning as illustrated in the quote below:

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.

While for the purpose of cdowis’s response the use of the analogy of an ark steadier is consistent with the traditional uses of this phraseology, I have yet to see it manifest where people really understand what conditions create an ark steadier as the phrase is applied to the conditions in 1 Chronicles 13. Since it very much addresses a significant observable phenomenon of how these wolves enter in amongst the members I would like to examine this scenario in greater detail. I will forgo all of the references and attempt to keep it as short as possible.

The issue begins with the Philistines who have captured the Ark in battle from the Israelites. After 7 months the havoc that the Ark has wrecked on the people of Philistia has brought them to the point of knowing this is an extremely sacred object. Also the symbolic meaning of Philistine in scripture is along the lines of “the flesh”, or “the evil which is within” or carnal man. If you note Philistia location it is surrounded by ancient Israel at times and looks just like a pain in the side. As Israel vacillated in unrighteousness from time to time the Philistines represent their succumbing to the desires of the flesh up to the point that at one time they nearly controlled all of Israel. Even currently the Gaza strip is the same thorn in the side in the same location that it has occupied throughout history. The fleshly desires of Eli’s sons are what contribute to the loss of the Ark in the first place.

Still have this sacred object in their presence that is clearly beyond the scope of their understanding. For this cause they are cut some slack by God as they are ignorant. But as they move it around trying to circumvent its effects The Lord ratchets up the effects until finally Philistines are dying from tumors and hemorrhoids and pestilence. So they have to get rid of this and they come up with an idea. Again keep in mind their ignorance of proper procedure for handling the ark. They build a “new cart” on which to place the Ark and send it back to Israel.

When it gets there the people of Bethshemesh rejoice for the return of the most sacred artifact in all of Israel. However, the Lord immediately makes known the fact that while he will tolerate justifiable ignorance of the part of those that do not understand sacred procedure, where much is given much is expected and the Israelites cannot claim ignorance of how to honor the ark. The result 50,000 or so are struck dead for looking upon the ark.

They called the men of Kirjath-jearim, who removed the Ark to the Levite home of Abinadab where his son Eleazar was sanctified to the proper care of the Ark. Here it remained for 20 years during the final years of Saul’s reign in Israel. So for 20 years the most widespread story in all of Israel concerning the ark is it’s miraculous return to Israel in an “new cart”.

Now we move to the point of the story most use to support their use of steadying the ark. When David finally cleans up Israel after he becomes King he decides it is a good idea to renew Israel’s reverence of the Ark of the covenant. So, recollecting the ever popular story of how the cart was returned to their control he remembers it was moved in a “new cart” before so let’ do it again. So David, who genuinely is one of the most sincerely obedient of all of God’s children by his very nature, (I know he other issues) has allowed himself to become confused about sacred things by following a pattern established by those that do not understand what it is for something to be profoundly sacred. This is the first step. Next he gets two unsanctified Levites, Uzzah and Ahio, that are the brothers of the consecrated Levite, Eleazar. They lead the cart to the dancing and music of non-Levites, he employes no “door-keepers” at the front and the back of the ark, no sanctified Levites to carry the ark by the staves, and he hopes to place it in a barn.

All of these issues are expressedly forbidden in transporting the Ark. So, David has allowed those who are the enemies of God, who have no clue about sacred matters, to start him on a path of multiple egregious offenses to God because they created a “new cart”. I keep “new cart” in quotes because it represents so much more than a cart. By analogy it represents the repackaging of sacred ordinances and performances to a level that is adequate for the ignorant to get away with because they fall somewhat outside of the immediate judgments of God to a substandard that those who should know better will be judged harshly for in forgetting the nature of the divine gifts they forgetfully denigrate in corruption. Uzzah is not the first offense in this scenario, he is the final offense in this scenario. He is in a place he should absolutely not be, unsanctified, leading the ark, which is on a cart on the way to a barn and he, completely in breach of all sacred protocol, reaches up to steady the ark. He pays the price not of ignorance but of arrogance and presumption. He serves as the poster child for all of those who with him that day forgot to consider how God wants things done.

David repents and corrects each of the offenses I have outlined in 1 Chronicles 15. However, in one of the most poignant acknowledgments he states the following.

1 Chronicles 15:12-13

12 And said unto them, Ye are the chief of the fathers of the Levites: sanctify yourselves, both ye and your brethren, that ye may bring up the ark of the Lord God of Israel unto the place that I have prepared for it.

13 For because ye did it not at the first, the Lord our God made a breach upon us, for that we sought him not after the due order.

…sought him not after the due order…When we wonder how those amongst us lead astray members of the church we need only look at the most prominent examples of our current crisis. Amongst us are those that do not realize what they do and others that take advantage of this to yoke them, like oxen to a cart, to their cause. But for brevity let’s just look at the sacred ordinance of marriage. God ordained the conditions of marriage in the beginning as a union for all eternity. It is one of the most, if not the most sacred ordinance in all of religious practice.

However, over time people have forgotten the sacred nature of marriage and they have constructed several “new carts” with which to deliver the less sacred perspectives they feel are suitable for their lifestyles and living priorities. The real grief is like David some very good minded members have forgotten the “due order” of marriage. They have become sympathetic to the justifications of those less educated in things sacred and they have become the saints in our midst that lead astray the other saints. They play their mistaken rhetoric about how we shouldn’t define the standards for other lifestyles and it is hurtful and we should be fairer. In this manner they reach ever upward, fingers outstretched, arms extending near to full length and they attempt to be in position to steady what they perceive is an ark at risk. This same scenario is repeated over and over for each different perspective - lifestyles, priesthood, men and woman roles etc- that the members of the church should be able to clearly recognize as unacceptable according to the standards that God expects of his children. Some in the church are convinced that we should move the “new cart” along its way with all of its adulterated contents and yet one wonders at what point in time the fingers and the arms will reach full stretch in their effort to steady the ark and finally the last tolerable offense will be measured and judgment meted against the Uzzah’s who forgot to sanctify themselves and seek the Lord after “the due order” as He has defined it.

Edited June 8, 2012 by SamIam

[CASteinman]

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.

How do you know it is not their place?

[CASteinman]

Any Mormon worthy of the name would be able to discern and see though that without difficulty.

Perhaps, if that is true, there are not all that many Mormons worthy of the name. But I don't think that your rule is right. Many good people are trusting.

[CASteinman]

Read Will's response to me, then tell me he isn't suggesting we act like Alma did.

Wow. And that's a bad thing where you are from? "Would God that ALL the Lord's people were Prophets". Inciting people to behave as Prophets is, in my book, not bad. Nor in the Church, where they are regularly held up as examples to follow.

[volgadon]

Wow. And that's a bad thing where you are from? "Would God that ALL the Lord's people were Prophets". Inciting people to behave as Prophets is, in my book, not bad. Nor in the Church, where they are regularly held up as examples to follow.

Should we all go right now to dedicate temples, set apart bishops, and recieve binding revelations for the entire church?

[CASteinman]

Why not? Unless we are called to such, it is is not our role.

CFR -- Modern Scripture or a modern Apostle or Prophet.

[CASteinman]

Should we all go right now to dedicate temples, set apart bishops, and recieve binding revelations for the entire church?

No, but we were not talking about priesthood ordinances. By bringing that up, you are conflating the issue of authority to perform priesthood ordinances under priesthood direction vs the authority to judge the teachings and efforts by other members.

That conflation will lead you to be confused on what is right and what is wrong.