Avream Gileadi's Excommunication

[rongo]

What, exactly, was objectionable in his writings? Or, was it that he was doing paid seminars?

 

I do admire him as someone who clearly has a testimony and loves the Church. When he was excommunicated for apostasy, he utterly rejected requests that he join other excommunicated individuals in attacking the Church, and he made it clear that he had nothing to do with them. He also did everything required of him for rebaptism (within 18 months or so, I believe).

[USU78]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHgA_vNDY8s

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob5QlQq66uc

 

Have fun!

[rongo]

Fascinating! Thanks for posting that, USU78. If his thesis about the binary structure of Isaiah holds up (I haven't examined the details for myself, so I don't know), that would deal a blow to multiple Isaiah theories.

 

The two clips didn't address why he was specifically excommunicated for apostasy in 1993. Any info on that?

 

Thanks!

[USU78]

In his own write: http://avrahamgileaditestimony.blogspot.com/

Edited July 7, 2014 by USU78

[rongo]

Thanks again!

 

Very interesting. He doesn't go into any details, other than to say that there was no evidence during his disciplinary council, and that the Church from the highest levels has expunged any record of it, so his "excommunication was a non-event as far as the Church is concerned."

 

Which leaves me with my question in the OP. What were the doctrinal points in question? Does anyone know?

[Investigator]

If you really want to know, read his works, they haven't changed and you will finely be able to understand Isaiah.

[Michael Sanders]

I have greatly appreciated Gileadi's books / scholarship and his end-time scenarios concerning a Davidic Servant are intriguing. His interpretations on some of the Isaiah passages seem constrained to fit the Davidic Servant model where other interpretations are more likely as highlighted in several reviews. I don't know what the specific charges were against him, but he appears to have acted admirably. Obviously, his unorthodox views on Isaiah were problematic.

I once corresponded with some individuals who claimed to be close to the situation and they indicated that Chapter 1 in his book "The Last Days: Types and Shadows From the Bible and the Book of Mormon" was viewed unfavorably. Of course, that chapter is titled "Modern Idolatry - All Is Not Well In Zion" and warns against idolatry among the latter-day saints. if he would have written in general terms which characterizes most modern preaching he probably would have been o.k. - but he got specific.

He wrote about syncetism (i.e. the coexistence of true and false worship among the saints) and the mixing with the spirit of babylon. He bore down on the worship of images and idols (movies and television), the modern day preoccupation with "violence and sex", the love of "carnal, sensual, and devilish" rock music to the degree that there is no difference between the holy and the profane - a culture in the church that is deaf to the subtle and not-so-subtle effects of depraved music in the world that has crept into the churches, he decried the fanaticism associated with "organized sports" and the associated folly, he also identified the worship of humans (rich, famous, athletes, rock stars, movie stars, etc...), vain imaginations (i.e. those who walk after the image of their own God), nature cults, mammon, materialism, trusting in the arm of the flesh, pride, elitism/pharisaism, and ways in which we pollute the temple of God. These indictments were leveled at the Latter-Day Gentile church.

These things are hinted at in his write-up:

"Admittedly, Isaiah’s paradigm of end-time realities, while terribly indicting of those who profess to be God’s covenant people in that day, also holds out hope for those who dare to search their souls and let go of all things materialistic and ungodly."

Again, I don't know the specific charges but have always admired how he dealt with the situation.

Mike Sanders

Book of Mormon Believer

Independence, MO

[katherine the great]

Fascinating! Thanks for posting that, USU78. If his thesis about the binary structure of Isaiah holds up (I haven't examined the details for myself, so I don't know), that would deal a blow to multiple Isaiah theories.

 

The two clips didn't address why he was specifically excommunicated for apostasy in 1993. Any info on that?

 

Thanks!

Apparently the details of his excommunication are on file in Salt Lake and in his Stake President's office.

[BCSpace]

He wrote about syncetism (i.e. the coexistence of true and false worship among the saints) and the mixing with the spirit of babylon. He bore down on the worship of images and idols (movies and television), the modern day preoccupation with "violence and sex", the love of "carnal, sensual, and devilish" rock music to the degree that there is no difference between the holy and the profane - a culture in the church that is deaf to the subtle and not-so-subtle effects of depraved music in the world that has crept into the churches, he decried the fanaticism associated with "organized sports" and the associated folly, he also identified the worship of humans (rich, famous, athletes, rock stars, movie stars, etc...), vain imaginations (i.e. those who walk after the image of their own God), nature cults, mammon, materialism, trusting in the arm of the flesh, pride, elitism/pharisaism, and ways in which we pollute the temple of God. These indictments were leveled at the Latter-Day Gentile church.

 

 

That can't be it.  We've been preaching against those things, as if they existed in the Church, from the pulpit, decades before he was ex'd.

 

I myself still have a love of rock music.

 

Wikipedia reports this:

 

 

Avraham Gileadi

Avraham Gileadi is a Hebrew scholar and literary analyst who is considered theologically conservative. Following his 1981 Ph.D. in Ancient Studies from Brigham Young University, he published a new interpretive translation of the Book of Isaiah in 1988, and a study of its eschatological prophesies in 1991. Mormon scholars including Hugh Nibley, Truman G. Madsen and Ellis Rasmussen praised his work, but his argument that the Isaiah prophesies pointed to a human "Davidic king" who would emerge in the last days, apart from Jesus Christ, was controversial, and his second book was pulled from the shelves by its publisher, LDS Church-owned Deseret Book.^[7] The reasons for his excommunication on September 15 are unclear. According to Margaret Toscano (whose husband was among the September Six and who would also later be excommunicated), Gileadi's "books interpreting Mormon scripture challenged the exclusive right of leaders to define doctrine",^[8] a characterization that Gileadi himself disputes.^[9] The church afterwards reversed its disciplinary action against him and expunged it from the church's records, meaning it was to be officially regarded as having never happened.^[9] Gileadi is currently an active member of the church.^[10][11] He has continued to write books on Isaiah, including The Literary Message of Isaiah (2002) and Isaiah Decoded: Ascending the Ladder to Heaven (2002).

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Six#Avraham_Gileadi

 

Edited July 8, 2014 by BCSpace

[Okrahomer]

For what it's worth, Avraham Gileadi's wife was my freshman English professor at BYU. She was without doubt one of the finest teachers I've ever known. She motivated me (and I'm sure many others) to improve writing skills; but even more significantly, she taught that good writing requires a willingness to be introspective and self-critical--a process that inevitably leads to revelation. There was no overt effort to preach to us that I recall, but her teaching played an integral role in my understanding of the life-long process of spiritual rebirth. I will forever be grateful for the opportunity to have been her student.

[rongo]

Investigator:

If you really want to know, read his works . . .

 

I have. That's just it. I don't see anything in his works that were objectionable or actionable; hence my question about what was seen to be apostate.

 

katherine the great:

Apparently, the details of his excommunication are on file in Salt Lake and in his stake president's office.

 

Are they? There are multiple mentions of it being "expunged," meaning that record-wise, it is as if it never happened (as opposed to simply being remanded via re-baptism).

 

Naturally, we wouldn't have access (or shouldn't have access) to the minutes and documents of his disciplinary council.

 

I find it to be *very* significant that he was re-baptized (relatively quickly) without having to change anything in his written works (which don't appear to have objectionable material). That would seem to support the Church deeming it never to have happened as an anomalous outlier.

[wenglund]

Since the details of A.G's excommunication are private (not a matter of public record), both as a matter of practice by the Church and presumably in accordance with A.G's wishes, and since for all intense and purposes A.G's "excommunication was a non-event as far as the Church is concerned," I don't know that the question in the OP can be rightly answered, let alone whether there would be any value derived in speculating upon it a decade or so after the fact. Non-issues are...well...non-issues.

 

I must admit, though, that I had taken A.G.'s course on the Old Testament back in the 1980's, and found it wonderfully enlightening, and a way of having been taught after the manner of the Jews, and so A'G's excommunication struck me at the time as somewhat perplexing, though he handled it with grace (in contrast to the other parties in the so-called October Seven) and ultimately it became inconsequential.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[rongo]

Yeah, I'm just curious, Wade.

 

The important thing is that he has a testimony, loves the Church, and is committed to the gospel

[Duncan]

Investigator:

 

 

I have. That's just it. I don't see anything in his works that were objectionable or actionable; hence my question about what was seen to be apostate.

 

katherine the great:

 

 

Are they? There are multiple mentions of it being "expunged," meaning that record-wise, it is as if it never happened (as opposed to simply being remanded via re-baptism).

 

Naturally, we wouldn't have access (or shouldn't have access) to the minutes and documents of his disciplinary council.

 

I find it to be *very* significant that he was re-baptized (relatively quickly) without having to change anything in his written works (which don't appear to have objectionable material). That would seem to support the Church deeming it never to have happened as an anomalous outlier.

 

 

I honestly would be surprised if the local copy would even be around anymore, given it's a stake in Utah which probably has a few more councils than other non Utah stakes would have

Edited July 8, 2014 by Duncan

[The Nehor]

If you really want to know, read his works, they haven't changed and you will finely be able to understand Isaiah.

 

Wow, Jesus told people to read Isaiah back right after his death. What a shame God waited so long to send this fellow so we could finally understand what we were reading. Shame about those people who read it in advance and missed the whole point and wasted their time.

[CMZ]

She motivated me (and I'm sure many others) to improve writing skills; but even more significantly, she taught that good writing requires a willingness to be introspective and self-critical--a process that inevitably leads to revelation.

 

This is interesting because nowadays there is a rampant and thorough and utter refusal on the part of many to be willing to correct their own writing. And when you say anything about it people are ready to nail you to the wall for being "snooty." We have lost the concept that the purpose of proper spelling, grammar and punctuation is so that one can convey their thoughts accurately and have strangely replaced it with the idea that their usage could only be to arrogantly show how much better you are than other people. Hadn't thought of improper spelling, grammar and punctuation blocking revelation before but I can see that now that the point has been made.

Edited July 8, 2014 by CMZ

[rongo]

Duncan:

 

Yeah, we typically didn't keep disciplinary council records when I was a bishop (they were destroyed when no longer needed) ---- unless I was working with someone. You can always order them for your members, of course, if needed.

 

It makes me wonder if AG's bishop ordered them, if there are any. "Expunged" and "as if it never happened" sounds to me like there are no more records of it --- a complete "non-event."

[jmhughes]

Brother Gileadi is a former member of an Orem ward I just moved from.  I'm a late comer when it comes the Bro. Gileadi, and it was not much more than a year ago that I started reading his books and working through his lessons on his website.  Right when I was in the thick of his publications, he came back and visited the ward on Fast Sunday.  He bore a magnificent testimony that I will always cherish.  At the time we had just moved from Idaho and my son was a senior in High School and was having a very hard time.  I wanted to meet him and shake his hand and when I did, he asked me about my son.  Apparently he had been watching us.  He basically chased down my son bore him another short testimony and both me and my son have something significant to cherish and remember.  

 

As for his excommunication, he gets very frustrated at the misinformation that gets tossed around.  He just got caught up in with a group intellectuals who were also peers; which is more of the reason behind his excommunication than anything else.  He, nor those members of the ward that know him so well have ever considered him excommunicated.  Some use this unfortunate event to somehow discredit him, but I've been nothing but impressed.  I also saw him again two weeks ago when we went back to that ward for a missionary farewell.  He will always be one of my favorites.

 

One insight that he has that others don't, which is why I think he understands Isaiah so well, is because of all the time he spent in Jerusalem prior to his joining the LDS church.  He spent so much time the studying with the Rabi's that he was adopted in as a full Jew.  Not just  a convert to Judaism, a full on cultural Jew.  Then once he got a hold of the Book of Mormon and realized how much of it related to what he already knew, he was baptized; in Jerusalem, no less.

Edited July 8, 2014 by jmhughes

[Duncan]

Duncan:

 

Yeah, we typically didn't keep disciplinary council records when I was a bishop (they were destroyed when no longer needed) ---- unless I was working with someone. You can always order them for your members, of course, if needed.

 

It makes me wonder if AG's bishop ordered them, if there are any. "Expunged" and "as if it never happened" sounds to me like there are no more records of it --- a complete "non-event."

 

dunno! a copy for sure would be somewhere in some pile or something in SLC, but like any archives, they probably don't go ripping through that stuff unless someone needed it, which now that he has been baptized no one would, it's probably collecting dust along with the Sunday School minutes of April 7, 1968 of the Saskatoon 1st Branch! hahahahaha!

[daz2]

Elder Jeppsen apparently was pretty involved in the excommunication, and his daughter discusses it at http://mormonstories.org/christine-jeppsen-clark-daughter-of-general-authority-malcolm-jeppsen/

[USU78]

Elder Jeppsen apparently was pretty involved in the excommunication, and his daughter discusses it at http://mormonstories.org/christine-jeppsen-clark-daughter-of-general-authority-malcolm-jeppsen/

 

Appeals to authority and gossip all wrapped up with a pretty little bow on top.

[Tacenda]

Thanks again!

Very interesting. He doesn't go into any details, other than to say that there was no evidence during his disciplinary council, and that the Church from the highest levels has expunged any record of it, so his "excommunication was a non-event as far as the Church is concerned."

Which leaves me with my question in the OP. What were the doctrinal points in question? Does anyone know?

I've been listening to the most recent Mormon Stories podcast with the daughter of the SP that was involved, Elder Jeppson. Maybe she'll give some insight about it, I've only gone through about two of the podcasts so far. ETA: oops, I guess her father was a GA at the time he was involved in the excommunication, and that is the controversy of the situation, which explains why she & John bring it up I guess. ETA again, it's discussed in the third podcast. Edited July 8, 2014 by Tacenda

[rongo]

Well, from what was posted in that link, I think all we're going to get is more of the same: "The chapter was obviously false doctrine."

 

But what in the chapter was objectionable?

 

It looks like there isn't anything public that is specifically mentioned. Maybe not anything in private, either . . .

[gtaggart]

Appeals to authority and gossip all wrapped up with a pretty little bow on top.

 My thoughts exactly. 

[Damien the Leper]

As the excommunication was expunged, it shows how ill informed those who excommunicated him were for doing so. But the church leaders and local leaders are just men. They make mistakes but it is good to correct them and their actions.

Edited July 8, 2014 by Valentinus