Tim Ballard

[bluebell]

57 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I get what you're after Teancum, and I agree.

IMO, the church has been negligent in not going after people like Thom Harrison, Avraham Gileadi, and Christopher Parret. They did go after Julie Rowe and eventually Chad Daybell. But they are low on the totem pole and only became the way they did because of people like Thom, Avraham and Chris. In a podcast I heard Avraham Gileadi has a book on the shelves of Deseret Book even.  These dudes are just as damaging to the church as the John Dehlin's or RFM's out there, but damaging in a far worse way. People that go off the deep end, can end up killing people who they may think are zombies, or dark people, or even killing loved ones for their own good. You don't see exLDS doing this. 

https://deseretbook.com/t/author/avraham-gileadi

I hope Smac addresses this problem, he still hasn't addressed when I asked about Tim Ballard a few comments back. 

Even Fairlds speaks up about the problem on their commentary on "Preparing a People". 

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/home-page/current-events/the-vallow-daybell-trial/preparing-a-people

Or at least addressing the problem with people being extremists in the prepper movement.

I've never heard of Harrison, Gileadi, or Parret.  What are each of them known for (other than I see that Gileadi writes a lot on Isaiah from your link, but I'm assuming there must be more to your problems with him than that).

[smac97]

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

At this point I have no desire to do a point by point response.  Your posting style is exhausting. And your hyperbole, persecution complex, overt defensiveness, repetition of the same thing over and over and over and over again is just tiresome. 

Dealing with critics and naysayers on this board since 2004 is also pretty "exhausting."  We're at a stalemate, like the trench warfare in WWI, with neither side gaining ground.  Notably, though, you and yours are the aggressors, with me pretty much always defending what you are attacking.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

And it seems to me that when it comes to Mormonism, you have a pretty thin skin.

Publicly accusing an already not-very-popular religious minority of things like "incubating" "murderers" is a pretty serious thing.

If someone came along and publicly accused you of similarly horrible things, and if you publicly spoke in defense of yourself, I don't think you would take seriously the accuser's taunt that you are being "thin-skinned."

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

That said there are  a few point I do want to make.

Fine. I concede I am disparaging and indicting Mormonism. 

Well, okay then.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

And it deserves it 

I don't think it does.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

And guess what?  I think other religions may be deserving as well.  Islam deserves it even more so. Death and killing is codified in their canon. Even if only 1% of Muslims become extremists and Islamic terrorists it is a hell of a lot of people.  Same for Mormonism. 1% is 170,000.

Well, at least you are being candid.  That's . . . something.

But you are not addressing my point (repeated several times over), which is that "most philosophical and belief systems are susceptible to substantial distortion and misuse."

By your reasoning, the entire modern medical profession should be disparaged and indicted because some few of its members, in wanton violation of their Hippocratic Oath, professional obligations, and other laws of the land, inflict injuries on their patients.

By your reasoning, all Japanese people should be disparaged and indicted because of Pearl Harbor, the Bataan Death March, the Rape of Nanking, and other WWII atrocities.

By your reasoning, all German people should be disparaged and indicted because of the Holocaust.  

By your reasoning, all American people should be disparaged and indicted because of historical mistreatment of American Indians, the annexation of Hawai'i, the My Lai Massacre, and so on.

By your reasoning, all males should be should be disparaged and indicted because some few of them commit sexual assault and other forms of violence.

By your reasoning, all Muslims should be disparaged and indicted because of 9/11 (and, more recently, 10/7).

By your reasoning, all atheists should be disparaged and indicted because of the atrocities inflicted by atheistic regimes in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, etc.

By your reasoning, all Jesus should be disparaged and indicted because some of them killed Jesus 2,000 years ago.

Your "reasoning" is not reasonable, T.  It is mired in collective guilt and prejudice.  And given what just happened on 10/7, we ought to be paying attention to, and working to overcome, sentiments which tend to precipitate such terrible things.  Collective guilt is not reasonable.  Indicting entire communities and groups because of the misconduct of some few of its members is not reasonable.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

Like it or not there is a lot of abhorrent doctrine in Mormonism.

Funny, then, that even you concede that observant Latter-day Saints, in living according to the doctrines of their faith, end up being pretty decent people, often even very good people.  You wouldn't expect that from a philosophical/religious belief system awash in "abhorrent" teachings.

In contrast, the people whose conduct you are condemning (and rightly so) are acting in violation of a variety of core tenets espoused by the Church.  Obeying the law of the land.  Listening to and following the counsel of living prophets and apostles.  Avoiding extremism.  Abstaining from violent or abuse behavior.  And so on.

When the Latter-day Saints do what their faith asks of them, they are - in the main - happy and healthy and contributing members of society.  When the Latter-day Saints go against what their faith asks of them, they can end up doing some pretty bad things.

You don't seem to dispute this stuff, but you insist on characterizing the Church is some of the worst possible terms.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

You point out a few of the more awful and odd ones that have been repudiated. Well wonderful  Yet they were taught by so called prophets, seers and revelators. So either they were really from God and the current leaders are wrong or they were not from God and prior leaders as well as current leaders were and are not prophets, seers and revelators.

There is a third option.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

So yes I am criticizing Mormonism.

And you are doing so by accusing us of "incubat{ing}" atrocities.

And objecting to such disparagements is, in your view, being "thin-skinned."

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

And I am happy to criticize many or most others as well. 

And yet, you don't.

I invite you to consider why you don't.  Might it be that you refrain because you are listening to your better angels?  And if so, what might those better angels have to say about the terrible things you so regularly say against your former faith and its adherents?

Might it be that life is short, and time is to precious to spend on venting anger and venom and condemnation against entire populations of communities because some of their members engage in misconduct?  That such ugly habits might, in the end, become an exhausting and embittering and soul-destroying enterprise?

Mormon 9:31 is coming to mind quite a bit these days for me.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

Call me a pearl clutcher and feel free to cry me a river about my years of criticism, my nastiness and offensiveness if you wish.

In the space of a day or so you went from "No I am not attempting to indict the Church" to "Fine. I concede I am disparaging and indicting Mormonism."

That's an improvement, but we're still left with the main unfortunate thing, which is you passing judgment on, disparaging, indicting, condemning an entire religious community because some few of its members have gone off the rails. 

Collective guilt is a dangerous and unhealthy thing.  Indicting a religious community where some of its members have, by disregarding and disobeying its central tenets, done horrible things, is unfair and unreasonable.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

I think it is well deserved. 

Well, okay.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

I am reaching a point where I agree with Christopher Hitchens on the deleterious impacts of religion in general.

While at the same time acknowledging that observant Latter-day Saints tend to lead pretty decent, perhaps even what could be termed "exemplary," lives.

Proceed as you see fit, of course.  In considering the legacy of Mr. Hitchens' generalized sentiments, I hope you give some consideration to the extensive rebuttal commentary from Daniel C. Peterson on his blog (here), which includes dozens, perhaps hundreds, of links to stories styled as entries in the "Christopher Hitchens Memorial 'How Religion Poisons Everything' File©" (DCP has a mildly sardonic sense of humor).  The links are to news items about the Church and its members, in large and small ways, serving other people (mostly people who are not members of the Church), and also to various scholarly materials about the physical and mental and emotional benefits of religiosity (including, but not limited to, the Church).

Of all the communities in the world, you have chosen to indict and condemn the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, whose good works and efforts are amply attested to in the voluminous links above.  I hope in time you can turn away from the selective misanthropy or whatever it is that drives such animosity, and at least find some level of détente relative to your former faith and its adherents.  And then, maybe with more time, you could even come to see that its virtues and strengths outweigh its failures and weaknesses.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

I do commend the current LDS leader for attempting to combat extremism in their ranks.  You have proved my wrong there.  But it does not seem effective.

Kinda hard to gauge the effectiveness of the Church in persuading its members to not do something.  If those efforts are made, and if they are successful, how would you know it?

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

No once again this is not a to disparage the majority of the members of the church who are good and decent people. The question then becomes is their religion needed to be  good and decent people?  Who knows. 

I do.  From personal experience, from observations, from the data - both systemic and anecdotal.

Again, take a look at the news items that DCP has accumulated as a rebuttal to Mr. Hitchens.  How likely is it that the substantial goodness and decency of observant Latter-day Saints have nothing to do with their being observant Latter-day Saints?

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

But the  doctrine of mormonism is chock full of weirdness that can be taken to extremes. That is what I condemn.  Such things in other religions should be equally condemned. Same for any harmful ideology. Hopefully that clarifies one question you ask many times above regarding the Latter-day Saint People vs the doctrine of Mormonism.  And it does not mean ALL the doctrine of Mormonism.

I don't really know what this means.  Conclusory denigrations like "chock full of weirdness that can be taken to extremes" do not illuminate, particularly given all the good that the Church does, and given that the the "taken to extremes" thing is something the Church is encouraging its members not to do.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

Does familiarity breed contempt? Maybe? I am most familiar with Mormonism and I think I have a pretty good grasp of the LDS canon, history and doctrine from inception to today. Likely better than most of the member sitting in the pews on Sunday. Not as much as some. Maybe not as much as you.  But it is what I know and lived most of my life. It is the religion that has had the largest impact on me for both good and ill.  It is still the religion I have the most interest in. So sure. It makes sense I am more familiar, and in your words, hold more contempt towards some of it than I do any other. 

If the Church was the terrible and malignant community you seem to want it to be, if it was inducing people into debaucheries and depravities and atrocities, I could understand you feeling "contempt" for it.  As it is, though, I don't get the junction between you being familiar with the Church and you "hold{ing} more contempt" for it, particularly given, as you seem to acknowledge, that the doctrines of the Church, when observed and followed in day-to-day living, tend to create pretty good people.  And as DCP has amply noted above, the Church is also doing a lot of good in the world.

I respectfully submit that the Church's virtues far outweigh its flaws. 

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

That should not be surprising. Same for you really. Do you spend time on Catholic, Islamic or Protestant message boards defending those ffaiths?  I think not.

I do not see much symmetry between what you do and what I do.  I am not interested in publicly disparaging and insulting other religious groups.  As far as defending religious groups, much of what I say on this board can be applied ecumenically, and many of the above links from DCP also demonstrate the merits and virtues of other religious groups.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

Regarding sexual abuse no that was not the point of my posts.  Sexual abuse is certainly an abusive thing.  But I don't find those in our faith tradition, or any other, justifying abuse based on doctrine (other than perhaps some using plural marriage as an excuse the perpetrate sexual abuse.  The secular persons you brought up in relation to sexual abuse, I don't think there abuse is rooted in their ideology. I think they are simply acting evilly and badly.

So religionists are motivated by their worldview, but humanists are not?  How do you figure?

When a Latter-day Saint engages in sexual misconduct, he has to either A) substantially distort B) disregard, and/or act in violation of the doctrines and teachings of the Church.

Conversely, observant Latter-day Saints who do not engage in sexual misconduct are, I think, often deliberately acting in accordance with the doctrines and teachings of the Church.

Meanwhile, the central premises of a humanist worldview often involves things like A) God does not exist, B) nor does sin, C) "morality" is whatever the individual wants it to be, and D) there are no real consequences for our actions because when we die, we just end up as worm food.  So isn't it possible that such a dissolute and unprincipled worldview might induce its adherents into thinking they can get away with it?

I think worldviews and moral frameworks matter.  And I think the worldview and framework espoused by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is pretty darn good.  Great, even.  Wonderful, even.

All the more tragic, then, to see some Latter-day Saints misuse and distort and abuse these precepts.  But when and if that happens, I don't see how you can blame the Church for it. 

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

Are our exchange acrimonious?  Perhaps to some extent. It is the nature of such things. I expect you will continue to defend and be offended by pretty much anything negative that is said about the Church.

I'm often indifferent to disparagements about the Church.  Publicly accusing us of incubating murders and other atrocities was, and is, beyond the pale of civil discourse, and manifestly beneath you.

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

I expect I will continue to find things to criticize.  And so it is.  I would still hope though that we could have a sandwich and a diet coke together someday.

Sure!  Are you in Utah?  Let's talk by private message.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited November 1, 2023 by smac97

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

IMO, the church has been negligent in not going after people like Thom Harrison, Avraham Gileadi, and Christopher Parret. T

They have gone after a number of people though who were quite big in the circle like Mike Stroud and Rock Waterman (he may have resigned before he got booted).  There were others like Rob Fotheringham who were gaining in popularity.  Phil Davies is gone as well.  Eric Smith got booted when Julie Rowe did.

[Tacenda]

25 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I've never heard of Harrison, Gileadi, or Parret.  What are each of them known for (other than I see that Gileadi writes a lot on Isaiah from your link, but I'm assuming there must be more to your problems with him than that).

Thom Harrison: therapist, according to hearsay was a therapist for the church, also mentor to Jodi Hildebrandt, Tim Ballard, Chad & Lori Daybell etc. He is "Spencer" in the book "Visions of Glory". Tim Ballard said Thom said he would become the president of the church, president of the USA, etc. 

From one of Tim's victims on what Thom told Tim:

“He also had told me to read this book it was called Visions of Glory and that he had met with the man who wrote it before he had died. His name was Tom Harrison, and that Tom had told him lots of visions that he had had that actually had Tim in them.”

“He said that Tim would be a prophet of the LDS church one day that he would be the President of the United States.”

“He told me that he also had another psychic friend, one here in Utah that she would tell him things like who his partners should be.”

Christopher Parret: He started the Avow movement. https://www.abysmal.com/product/DV-II.html

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2020/08/06/idaho-man-charged-hiding-remains-had-links-apocalyptic-church

Avraham Gileadi: Wiki has more info on him, plus this podcast will tell you what you need to know. Their teachings have caused so much damage, IMO. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HtoFogOWbY

I'm tending my granddaughter and she is napping, I can't make a peep, therefore lots of time to sit in my recliner and google. But that's nothing new. 

[Calm]

22 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

also mentor to Jodi Hildebrandt, Tim Ballard, Chad & Lori Daybell etc.

As in he knew them personally and had talks with them?  If not, then he might have been a role model or inspiration, but not a mentor.

Tim Ballard is a liar.  The person reporting what Ballard said is also wrong unless Thomas Harrison has died.  John Pontius died.

I don’t think Harrison is blameless in this.  When Visions of Glory started to have problems, he blamed it on Pontius and Pontius’ estate (which is his wife, maybe adult kids as far as I know), washed his hands of it and put up a do not disturb sign as far as I can tell rather than taking any personal responsibility and trying to actually counteract the momentum.

But I think we should be accurate in what we accuse people of and provide documentation, not speculation.  And unless we have someone else reporting they heard Harrison tell Ballard this and not that Ballard was the only source, I don’t buy it.

This is online and is what I draw my conclusion from.  It was in 2014 and Visions of Glory is still causing issues 9 years later.  He could have done much more, still could.

 

Quote

March 23, 2014
LDS Disciplinary Council for Thom Harrison
Regarding Visions of Glory
To whom it may concern and my Priesthood Leaders, After meeting with my Stake President on this 23 day of March 2014, I write this letter to disclose my feelings and present opinions of the book Visions of Glory which was published by
Cedar Fort Publishing company in December of 2012.
I disclose that I am Spencer. The person whom the majority of this account is written about. I've been asked to discuss the origins and my present feelings associated with this book. I first met John Pontius via person who I met when she was in her youth. She and John's daughter had moved into the same ward in Colorado. She thought he and I had shared many similar experiences from our mutual ears of illness and my three near-death experiences and that it
would be "good for us to meet." After our first meeting, I was pleased to speak with John, an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who had the capacity to talk openly about these things we had in common, which much of these things I had kept to myself for a number of years. It was refreshing to be able to speak openly of these things with him. Shortly after our first meeting, John suggested that these experiences should be written down even if it were just for my posterity. This concept was initially contrary to everything I had been taught and had read
about regarding the sharing of sacred experiences with others. We continued to talk, and I began to see the possible purpose in having this record for my family. John was a published author of many books dealing with LDS church topics. John assisted me by sharing his insights into the things I spoke with him about. Many of these experiences I shared with him, I had had and seen when I was very ill over a projected period of time. In hindsight, I see far more clearly that it would have been better to follow the council of Elder Neal Maxwell-a member of our ward-when he said to me, "Brother Thom, do not try to interpret these things or read into them." He counseled me that I should wait to see and
experience these things in the proper timing of the Lord. It was not until I attended a leadership meeting at my stake center when I heard our present prophet Thomas S. Monson tell us, all priesthood leadership, that we needed to share more openly our testimonies and special sacred experiences with our friends, families, and fellow saints on social media and in writing to strengthen one another, and by that which we have experienced. After hearing this counsel, only then did I start to think that maybe John Pontius was right and that I should express these experiences to strengthen those who might read of
these things that it might remind them that God cares for each of us and is mindful of us.
 

It was at this time that I also read Elder Melvin Ballard's experience with a personal visitation of Christ and also ready of Elder Haight's story of seeing Christ in Gethsemane. I prayed extensively about this and after these experiences believing maybe the Brethren had relaxed their views reviewing disclosure, I agreed to disclose a portion of these things to John and go forward from there in association with what would become of these communications. I knew that John had terminal cancer and he would leave my life as quickly as he had come into it. In
hindsight, I believed John would pass away before this book would ever see the light of day. After 50 hours of meeting with John Pontius, he asked if he could share some chapters of what we had written with his publisher Cedar Fort. He did so, and they were reluctant to publish them, stating there would not be an audience for such a story. They told John that if they did publish the book, they would start with about 550 copies of the manuscript, however, they did
not think there would be a market for this book. I believed them, and after consulting with John about his thinking knowing that this was their business, not mine and they must be familiar with what sells and what does not sell -I believed it best if maybe a few copies would sell, and John would have his last wish before
departing this life from the complications associated with his terminal intestinal cancer. John had a blogspot (UnBlogMySoul) where I believed a few of his faithful members would read such a book as this. It would be a flash in the pan and then done. John continued to work on the book and sent me manuscripts and edits to comment on. We were doing this all electronically and I believed he was receiving all of my comments and changes as I sent them. I surprisingly learned after his death in December of 2012, when I was finally given a copy of the published book, that many of my corrections and the entire last editing of Visions of Glory had not either been received by the publisher or that John, in his profound state of illness in those last few weeks of his suffering, did not include. Realizing after reading the published book for the first time that this was a joint effort, and I would estimate that a third of the book was John's interpretation of what I had seen or experienced, or even that more of the content of the book was the facility that an author needed to use in placing these experiences into a context and storyline scenario. John Pontius also added to the book things which I had seen
and experienced which were different from that which I had experienced.
 

 

 

Quote

have no need nor do not want to give the impression that I am throwing John Pontius under the bus, however, I can only be responsible to that which I actually related to him and experienced for myself. The remainder is John's work, capacity for writing, and his placing my experiences into an appropriate context and storyline. From the start, I do not or have not seen myself or Visions of Glory the book as attempting to speak for the Church or saying that this is in any way doctrinal or a true account of what we as a people have in store for us. It was and is an experience given to me alone. It is not meant to be generalized in what will happen to the Church or people as a whole. I believe much of it is a metaphor or analogy and should be seen as such. It is and has been just what I saw-my own experience. Not always depicted as I saw or experienced it, but more as a writer would take a story and try to flesh it out for the
reading public. At this time in my life, I wish I would have kept it all to myself; that Visions of Glory was just the experiences that one man had and that no one else had ever read this account. It has caused me great grief, despair, family discord, public ill treatment, derision, and criticism. I have learned that when we have cast sacred things before the masses that they turn and rend
you. And that rending is very severe. There are doctrinal incorrect aspects of the book; some being my perception and some being errors in the transmission of the work; some out of my or John's misinterpretations of what was being said or what was shown to me. It is difficult for two minds to have complete accuracy in trying to explain what was seen into words that convey the true meaning of what
was shown. It is my intent to not speak of this account any further, other than this letter. I do not have the rights to this work. They belong to the Pontius family, so I have no power to stop the printing of this book. Under no circumstance did John or I ever mean to conspire, deceive, acquire gain from these sacred things. Our hope was to lift, bless, and bring people to Christ. If asked about this work, I will give those who inquire a copy of this letter. I will not give firesides or presentations regarding this book. I hold my membership of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as my most prized possession. I apologize for any injury or misunderstanding this has caused the church, my family or any individual associated with this
book. I am sorry for any offense this has caused any member.
Sincerely,
Thomas G. Harrison

 

Edited November 1, 2023 by Calm

[smac97]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

IMO, the church has been negligent in not going after people like Thom Harrison, Avraham Gileadi, and Christopher Parret.

Thom Harrison apparently apologized in 2014:

Quote

Seems like this sort of thing should count for something.  Do you concur?

As for Avraham Gileadi, perhaps his writings do merit some attention from his local leaders.  I haven't read his stuff.

Regarding Christopher Parret, I think his conduct relative to AVOW may well need to be addressed (I don't know much about it), but that's a matter for his local leaders.

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

They did go after Julie Rowe and eventually Chad Daybell.

"They" being . . . the bishop of Julie Rowe and the stake president of Chad Daybell (probably).

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

But they are low on the totem pole and only became the way they did because of people like Thom, Avraham and Chris. In a podcast I heard Avraham Gileadi has a book on the shelves of Deseret Book even.  

These dudes are just as damaging to the church as the John Dehlin's or RFM's out there, but damaging in a far worse way. People that go off the deep end, can end up killing people who they may think are zombies, or dark people, or even killing loved ones for their own good.

Well, let's pump the brakes a bit.  That Daybell and Vallow went off the deep end is terrible, but it's not a pattern or systemic.

I agree with the generalized sentiment that the Church needs to take its mandates regarding membership seriously, but I don't think every form of zealotry is of equal moral weight.  Someone may well become overly occupied with emergency preparedness, but that doesn't justify throwing him into the same category as murderers and adulterers.

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

You don't see exLDS doing this. 

We don't?  No former (or lapsed) Latter-day Saint has ever done something terrible?

Mark Hofmann?  Brian David Mitchell?  Joseph Paul Franklin?  The Lafferty brothers?  Glen and Justin Helzer?  Jodi Arias?  Arthur Gary Bishop?  Ronald Lee Haskell?  Anderson Lee Aldrich?  Jason Derek Brown?

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

https://deseretbook.com/t/author/avraham-gileadi

I hope Smac addresses this problem, he still hasn't addressed when I asked about Tim Ballard a few comments back. 

You'll need to provide a link.

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Even Fairlds speaks up about the problem on their commentary on "Preparing a People". 

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/home-page/current-events/the-vallow-daybell-trial/preparing-a-people

Or at least addressing the problem with people being extremists in the prepper movement.

Interesting that you should bring up this group.

When I was serving as a bishop, a member of my ward approached me and advised that he had been invited to, and had attended, an emergency preparedness "expo," which turned out to be a "Preparing a People" event.  I did some digging and located the owners of the PAP organization, and also reviewed the contents of the PAP website.  With my stake president's permission, I compiled my findings, including a summary of what I felt were the problematic aspects of the PAP website (the stuff they were selling, the speakers they were hosting (one of whom was Chad Daybell), etc.) and forwarded them to the stake president of the owners of PAP, and also to the stake president of the family that had moved to a remote part of Utah.  I received responses from both stake presidents, and I left the matters with them.

Here is a partially redacted portion of what I wrote in my email to one of the stake presidents:

Quote

President {SNIP},

 

My name is Spencer Macdonald, and I am the bishop of the {SNIP} Ward in Provo.  I was recently approached by a member of my ward who expressed some concern about an event he attended at the request of {SNIP}, who are members of the {SNIP} Ward in your stake.  The event was a "conference" put on by an organization called "Preparing a People," which maintains a website here: https://www.preparingapeople.com/ ("PAP").  The member of my ward described the event in fairly strange terms, as follows:

• He said there was a lot of emphasis on "end-times" scenarios, mixed together with "doomsday prepper"-style rhetoric and products for sale.
• He said that the event seemed to be attempting to parallel General Conference.  The presenters and attendees called the event a "conference" broken up into "sessions."  They began each session with a hymn and an opening prayer.
• He said there were many references to Julie Rowe, a member of the Church who has claimed to have received visions and revelations.
• He was fairly concerned about the tone and content of many of the presentations at this event, as most of them consist of descriptions of visions and prophecies the presenters have received.
• One of the presenters was someone named Hector Sosa.  He was listed in the program as a "Visionary and Author," and that he has "foreseen" events (listed in his bio on the PAP website), such as "earthquakes in Utah," "concentration camps on U.S. soil," "an invasion from foreign troops," etc.   He and other presenters told the audience about visions and dreams they have had.  He presented himself as having heard God's voice and the Savior's voice, and seen them.  He presented this as intending to bolster the legitimacy of his statements.
• Other presenters included Marilyn Light, Shawn Littlebear and Chad Daybell:
  • Ms. Light's bio (see previous link) includes her speaking of each person having a "unique time clock," and of her being an expert in herbalism and "in spiritual understanding of astral patterns."  On her personal website (a link to which is provided on the PAP website) she claims that she has "a gift to uncover the seemingly endless HIDDEN wisdom observed in our Universe, Solar System and Earth School."  She offers courses on "Heaven's Time Clock" which cost $50 per session.
  • Mr. Littlebear's bio states that he has "visionary gifts" inherited from his ancestors, and that he "has been commissioned to preserve sacred artifacts and teachings which will bless the world."  On his personal website (a link to which is provided on the above website) he presents himself as an "an LDS Cheyenne Medicine Man."  In this flyer for an upcoming event in Arizona, he is described as an "LDS traditional leader."
  • Mr. Daybell's personal website (linked to on the PAP website) includes video "episodes" for viewers to purchase ($50 each).  These videos have titles such as "A Tour Through the Spirit World," "The Reality of Ghosts," "Messages from Prominent People on the Other Side," and "Angelic Warnings About America's Future."
• The event was a for-profit endeavor.  Attendees must pay to get in (around $30 per ticket).  There were also vendors at the event.

My ward member indicated that {SNIP} strongly and repeatedly encouraged him and his wife {SNIP} to attend this event.  He also said that {SNIP} sold their house in {SNIP} and moved to {SNIP} in response to a purported "prophecy" by Julie Rowe that {SNIP} would be a safe place during forthcoming social disruptions.

 

Overall he was fairly concerned and disturbed by the proceedings of this event, as he felt that some of the personal experiences shared may have been embellished or even fabricated, and that even those legitimate experiences should not be the subject of public discussion, nor should the re-telling of them be sold for money.  He is also concerned about the effect these presenters and their materials and claims are having on his wife and {SNIP}.

 

In speaking about this issue with my stake president (copied on this email), he reminded me of Elder Ballard's October 2017 General Conference talk which included the following counsel:

 

We must be careful where our footsteps in life take us. We must be watchful and heed the counsel of Jesus to His disciples as He answered these questions: “Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

 

“And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man [and I add woman] deceive you.”9

 

Today I repeat earlier counsel from Church leaders.

• Brothers and sisters, keep the doctrine of Christ pure and never be deceived by those who tamper with the doctrine. The gospel of the Father and the Son was restored through Joseph Smith, the prophet for this last dispensation.
• Do not listen to those who have not been ordained and/or set apart to their Church calling and are not acknowledged by common consent of the members of the Church.10
• Be aware of organizations, groups, or individuals claiming secret answers to doctrinal questions that they say today’s apostles and prophets do not have or understand.
• Do not listen to those who entice you with get-rich schemes. Our members have lost far too much money, so be careful.

In some places, too many of our people are looking beyond the mark and seeking secret knowledge in expensive and questionable practices to provide healing and support.

 

An official Church statement, issued one year ago, states: “We urge Church members to be cautious about participating in any group that promises—in exchange for money—miraculous healings or that claims to have special methods for accessing healing power outside of properly ordained priesthood holders.”11

 

The Church Handbook counsels: “Members should not use medical or health practices that are ethically or legally questionable. Local leaders should advise members who have health problems to consult with competent professional practitioners who are licensed in the countries where they practice.”12

 

Brothers and sisters, be wise and aware that such practices may be emotionally appealing but may ultimately prove to be spiritually and physically harmful.

___________

9. Matthew 24:3–4.

10. See Doctrine and Covenants 26:2; 28:13; 43:6–7.

11. Church spokesman Eric Hawkins, Sept. 2016.

12. Handbook 2, 21.3.6.

 

I am presenting these concerns as they have come to me because they pertain to members of your stake.  {SNIP}.  Please let me know if you have any questions about this matter.

I sent the above emails in early November 2018.  All the terrible stuff with Vallow's children happened the following September, by which point I had been released as bishop.  However, on the morning the news broke, I saw the name "Chad Daybell" and it reminded me of him being a presenter at the PAP event described above.  I called the Rexburg Police Department and spoke with a detective assigned to the case.  I told him about the above matters, and clarifying that I had no personal knowledge of or experience with Daybell, but that I felt the police should be aware of the "end times" stuff.  He thanked me, saying they had already been aware of that angle.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited November 1, 2023 by smac97

[Teancum]

On 10/28/2023 at 6:28 PM, Calm said:

Two sides of the same coin imo.  Both believing they have deeper knowledge and experience than the typical Saint, one leads to seeing less meaning in scriptures and other sacred experiences and the other is seeing more meaning, probably more than there actually is (tying it to politics, for example ).

I  don't disagree that they are two sides of the same coin.  However, I can tell you the The Firm Foundation, AVOW and the likes haul in by many multiple times the crowds the Thrive does.  I don't think that Thrive is even running now.

On 10/28/2023 at 6:28 PM, Calm said:

 If I had to guess, from the comments we get on FAIR for people struggling with family members, the Dehlin/Runnels type is much more numerous. 

I would think that would be the case.  FAIR is equipped to focus on those questioning and doubting the church.  The other side of your coin still exhibit deeply religious beliefs though they may be unorthodox.  And I would not consider Meldrum as a dangerous extremist nor his group though some who attend may be. Meldrum is pretty orthodox.  He would argue more orthodox than the FAIR crew though I know FAIR and FIRM types do cross swords at time.

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I get what you're after Teancum, and I agree.

IMO, the church has been negligent in not going after people like Thom Harrison, Avraham Gileadi, and Christopher Parret. They did go after Julie Rowe and eventually Chad Daybell. But they are low on the totem pole and only became the way they did because of people like Thom, Avraham and Chris. In a podcast I heard Avraham Gileadi has a book on the shelves of Deseret Book even.  These dudes are just as damaging to the church as the John Dehlin's or RFM's out there, but damaging in a far worse way. People that go off the deep end, can end up killing people who they may think are zombies, or dark people, or even killing loved ones for their own good. You don't see exLDS doing this. 

https://deseretbook.com/t/author/avraham-gileadi

I hope Smac addresses this problem, he still hasn't addressed when I asked about Tim Ballard a few comments back. 

Even Fairlds speaks up about the problem on their commentary on "Preparing a People". 

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/home-page/current-events/the-vallow-daybell-trial/preparing-a-people

Or at least addressing the problem with people being extremists in the prepper movement.

Thumbs up since I cannot click the button  for you.

[ttribe]

IMO, every religious tradition and organization has its wackos and, AFAIK, there is no research data on who has more wackos then whom. That being said, the LDS Church's claims to having prophets lead the Church does open the door slightly wider, in my opinion, to the wackos who want justification for their fringe beliefs and behaviors since they can point back to statements by Brigham Young (especially) amongst other early leaders and say "Well, they were prophets! We've fallen away from the straight and narrow and now must re-institute Blood Atonement" or some such poorly reasoned and poorly supported nonsense.

All that aside, anyone know Ammon Bundy's membership status these days? He's been out in front of a lot of the anti-government stuff and using the BoM to justify his behavior. I'm not trying to engage in bomb throwing; I've sincerely lost track of that wacko.

[Tacenda]

31 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Thom Harrison apparently apologized in 2014:

Seems like this sort of thing should count for something.  Do you concur?

As for Avraham Gileadi, perhaps his writings do merit some attention from his local leaders.  I haven't read his stuff.

Regarding Christopher Parret, I think his conduct relative to AVOW may well need to be addressed (I don't know much about it), but that's a matter for his local leaders.

"They" being . . . the bishop of Julie Rowe and the stake president of Chad Daybell (probably).

Well, let's pump the brakes a bit.  That Daybell and Vallow went off the deep end is terrible, but it's not a pattern or systemic.

I agree with the generalized sentiment that the Church needs to take its mandates regarding membership seriously, but I don't think every form of zealotry is of equal moral weight.  Someone may well become overly occupied with emergency preparedness, but that doesn't justify throwing him into the same category as murderers and adulterers.

We don't?  No former (or lapsed) Latter-day Saint has ever done something terrible?

Mark Hofmann?  Brian David Mitchell?  Joseph Paul Franklin?  The Lafferty brothers?  Glen and Justin Helzer?  Jodi Arias?  Arthur Gary Bishop?  Ronald Lee Haskell?  Anderson Lee Aldrich?  Jason Derek Brown?

You'll need to provide a link.

Interesting that you should bring up this group.

When I was serving as a bishop, a member of my ward approached me and advised that he had been invited to, and had attended, an emergency preparedness "expo," which turned out to be a "Preparing a People" event.  I did some digging and located the owners of the PAP organization, and also reviewed the contents of the PAP website.  With my stake president's permission, I compiled my findings, including a summary of what I felt were the problematic aspects of the PAP website (the stuff they were selling, the speakers they were hosting (one of whom was Chad Daybell), etc.) and forwarded them to the stake president of the owners of PAP, and also to the stake president of the family that had moved to a remote part of Utah.  I received responses from both stake presidents, and I left the matters with them.

Here is a partially redacted portion of what I wrote in my email to one of the stake presidents:

I sent the above emails in early November 2018.  All the terrible stuff with Vallow's children happened the following September, by which point I had been released as bishop.  However, on the morning the news broke, I saw the name "Chad Daybell" and it reminded me of him being a presenter at the PAP event described above.  I called the Rexburg Police Department and spoke with a detective assigned to the case.  I told him about the above matters, and clarifying that I had no personal knowledge of or experience with Daybell, but that I felt the police should be aware of the "end times" stuff.  He thanked me, saying they had already been aware of that angle.

Thanks,

-Smac

smac, I appreciate the time and effort you put into your comments to me, I don't know if I'm worth the time, lol.

But thanks.

And thanks for taking action and calling Rexburg and sending the letter to your stake president. 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Thom Harrison: therapist, according to hearsay was a therapist for the church, also mentor to Jodi Hildebrandt, Tim Ballard, Chad & Lori Daybell etc. He is "Spencer" in the book "Visions of Glory". Tim Ballard said Thom said he would become the president of the church, president of the USA, etc. 

From one of Tim's victims on what Thom told Tim:

“He also had told me to read this book it was called Visions of Glory and that he had met with the man who wrote it before he had died. His name was Tom Harrison, and that Tom had told him lots of visions that he had had that actually had Tim in them.”

“He said that Tim would be a prophet of the LDS church one day that he would be the President of the United States.”

“He told me that he also had another psychic friend, one here in Utah that she would tell him things like who his partners should be.”

Christopher Parret: He started the Avow movement. https://www.abysmal.com/product/DV-II.html

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2020/08/06/idaho-man-charged-hiding-remains-had-links-apocalyptic-church

Avraham Gileadi: Wiki has more info on him, plus this podcast will tell you what you need to know. Their teachings have caused so much damage, IMO. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HtoFogOWbY

I'm tending my granddaughter and she is napping, I can't make a peep, therefore lots of time to sit in my recliner and google. But that's nothing new. 

Thanks Tacenda!

[bluebell]

24 minutes ago, ttribe said:

IMO, every religious tradition and organization has its wackos and, AFAIK, there is no research data on who has more wackos then whom. That being said, the LDS Church's claims to having prophets lead the Church does open the door slightly wider, in my opinion, to the wackos who want justification for their fringe beliefs and behaviors since they can point back to statements by Brigham Young (especially) amongst other early leaders and say "Well, they were prophets! We've fallen away from the straight and narrow and now must re-institute Blood Atonement" or some such poorly reasoned and poorly supported nonsense.

All that aside, anyone know Ammon Bundy's membership status these days? He's been out in front of a lot of the anti-government stuff and using the BoM to justify his behavior. I'm not trying to engage in bomb throwing; I've sincerely lost track of that wacko.

There's a surprising number of protestant wackos out there as well.  I just don't think they are often on our radar because they aren't often wacko enough to hit the news and we obviously don't run in protestant circles so don't hear about them otherwise.

[Calm]

59 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Seems like this sort of thing should count for something.  Do you concur?

Not much, imo. It was the easy way out. 
 

And he may have been keeping a connection going as he apparently did some presentations with Gileadi’s Isaiah Institute. Maybe Tacenda had a reference for this. I am going to try and find it to find out the years. 
 

——

looks like he was also an actual “mentor” for Tim Ballard or at least colleague.  From a friend who is tracking this stuff.

[Calm]

Just now, bluebell said:

There's a surprising number of protestant wackos out there as well.  I just don't think they are often on our radar because they aren't often wacko enough to hit the news and we obviously don't run in protestant circles so don't hear about them otherwise.

It is not that big of a deal for Protestants to change churches (news wise) or to start their own , I am guessing. 

[Calm]

On 11/1/2023 at 5:23 PM, Teancum said:

However, I can tell you the The Firm Foundation, AVOW and the likes haul in by many multiple times the crowds the Thrive does.  I don't think that Thrive is even running now.

It would be kind of strange given Thrive is iirc more about creating a life away from the Church, which would likely mean people are going off in different directions and decreasing activity and you don’t exactly need anyone to do so even if it may help to have support, therefore having less reason to gather together and Firm, etc are about upgrading one’s life in the Church, at least to begin with and working together towards a common goal, thus there are reasons to gather together and to continue to do so. 
 

I assume people hang out around the FIRM, Preparing a People, AVOW for much longer than Thrive due to the ongoing nature of the relationship. It would be interesting to figure out sheer numbers of those ever involved.  I think Thrive numbers would be tons less just because it is probably easier to leave the Church or at least lower activity or mental engagement with the Church without adding Thrive to it except in difficult family situations.  And one can certainly study BoM Geography and speculate about end times without these types of organizations as people did for years before the Internet made it very accessible. But I bet it is more fun and interesting to do it with other people like a special interest club where I would see Thrive is more like group therapy and while some enjoy that, most I know do not. Social club beats group therapy for most.
 

So just the nature of the two groups makes numbers comparing probably useless in telling us much. 
 

edited to change a “with” to “without”.  Hope that was understood by context even with the typo

Edited November 3, 2023 by Calm

[bluebell]

Just now, Calm said:

It is not that big of a deal for Protestants to change churches (news wise) or to start their own , I am guessing. 

I think you are right.  You usually have to get Jim Jones (the People's Temple was considered protestant) sized trouble to make the national news.  Lots of odd protestant churches out there.  Like the Remnant  Fellowship started by Gwen Shamblin.   She became a prophetess and started her own church after having some mild success leading workshops teaching people how to pray away the pounds and that being fat meant you needed to repent.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

As in he knew them personally and had talks with them?  If not, then he might have been a role model or inspiration, but not a mentor.

Tim Ballard is a liar.  The person reporting what Ballard said is also wrong unless Thomas Harrison has died.  John Pontius died.

I don’t think Harrison is blameless in this.  When Visions of Glory started to have problems, he blamed it on Pontius and Pontius’ estate (which is his wife, maybe adult kids as far as I know), washed his hands of it and put up a do not disturb sign as far as I can tell rather than taking any personal responsibility and trying to actually counteract the momentum.

But I think we should be accurate in what we accuse people of and provide documentation, not speculation.  And unless we have someone else reporting they heard Harrison tell Ballard this and not that Ballard was the only source, I don’t buy it.

This is online and is what I draw my conclusion from.  It was in 2014 and Visions of Glory is still causing issues 9 years later.  He could have done much more, still could.

 

 

 

They are seen here at a conference with him. 

[Calm]

23 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

They are seen here at a conference with him. 

Yes, I am finding some material through my friend I mentioned above and my friend, Google (my daughter would probably say here “Google is not your friend, Mom”). You and I may be looking at the same stuff, in fact  

Found this for substantiating the likelihood that Harrison told Ballard he was meant for great things, though details not provided…just the opportunity. 
 

From the state’s investigation…

[Tacenda]

43 minutes ago, Calm said:

Yes, I am finding some material through my friend I mentioned above and my friend, Google (my daughter would probably say here “Google is not your friend, Mom”). You and I may be looking at the same stuff, in fact  

Found this for substantiating the likelihood that Harrison told Ballard he was meant for great things, though details not provided…just the opportunity. 
 

From the state’s investigation…

Funny, said Google is my friend just today, haha. Thanks Calm!

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Not much, imo. It was the easy way out. 
 

And he may have been keeping a connection going as he apparently did some presentations with Gileadi’s Isaiah Institute. Maybe Tacenda had a reference for this. I am going to try and find it to find out the years. 
 

——

looks like he was also an actual “mentor” for Tim Ballard or at least colleague.  From a friend who is tracking this stuff.

Yeesh.

[Calm]

Not sure if I posted this or someone else did as I am discussing it this in a couple of places…it would appear Gileadi doesn’t like FAIR since we are the ones I see being pointed to most to address it.  (I need to check out the other one that is popular as I can’t remember if I’ve read it or not).

https://isaiahinstitute.com/those-with-visions/

Quote

June 11, 2021

The book Visions of Glory by John Pontius, based on the near death experiences of “Spencer,” has been the cause of much division and condemnation from people who find it incredulous or who feel threatened by its graphic depictions of the earth’s endtime phase we have now entered. Because of that, soon after its publication, I compared it with the prophecies of Isaiah and discovered there were no points of conflict between it and Isaiah’s endtime scenario. In fact, Visions of Glory filled in many details in Isaiah’s broader vision of the end from the beginning.

What a pity, then, that in the very hour Visions of Glory has been proving helpful in preparing people’s minds and hearts for the events now upon us, it is receiving renewed condemnation. Didn’t the Lord warn Isaiah against this happening? “Write on tablets concerning them; record it in a book for the endtime, as a testimony forever. They are a rebellious people, sons who break faith, children unwilling to obey the law of Jehovah, who say to the seers, See not! And to those with visions, Predict not what is right for us: flatter us; foresee a farce!” (Isaiah 30:8–10).

Another irony is that the worst opposition to Visions of Glory has come from academia, persons who most come under condemnation from Isaiah and Book of Mormon prophets: “Because these people approach me with the mouth and pay me homage with their lips, while their heart remains far from me—their piety toward me consisting of precepts of men learned by rote—therefore it is that I shall again astound these people with wonder upon wonder, rendering void the knowledge of their sages and the intelligence of their wise men insignificant” (Isaiah 29:13–14);

“Because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men. O the wise, and the learned, and the rich that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts and all those who preach false doctrines and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!” (2 Nephi 28:14–15).

The saddest part of this is that those on whom the humble followers of Christ have relied have been the very source of “precepts of men,” ”false doctrines,” and perverted ways of the Lord. They themselves have been in error and not come out from under the condemnation the Lord had earlier pronounced on them: “Your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation” (Doctrine & Covenants 84:54–55).

In such a situation, it is almost inevitable that the conjoining of the academic and ecclesiastical arms of God’s people (as when the Sadducees joined forces with the scribes and Pharisees against the teachings of Jesus) compounds the problem to the point of persecution of the humble followers of Jesus by their own institution: “We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion” (Doctrine & Covenants 121:39).

Didn’t Jesus speak of the validity of NDEs and about those who would reject them? “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead” (Luke 16:31). And didn’t Ammon, Lamoni, and Lamoni’s servants all “declare unto the people that they had seen angels and had conversed with them” while they lay on the ground as if dead (Alma 19:33–34)? Could envy of visionaries lie at the root of the problem? “What is that thou hast testified? Hast thou seen an angel? Why do not angels appear unto us?” (Alma 21:5).

See bold/underlined part…

What does “ecclesiastical arms” mean to everyone else?  I am wondering if my bias is at work here.

And in your opinion, is he basically saying Visions of Glory is the equivalent of missing scripture in the italicized/underlined part since he says it is filling in some of what is missing in Isaiah?

Edited November 2, 2023 by Calm

[The Nehor]

24 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not sure if I posted this or someone else did as I am discussing it this in a couple of places…it would appear Gileadi doesn’t like FAIR since we are the ones I see being pointed to most to address it.  (I need to check out the other one that is popular as I can’t remember if I’ve read it or not).

https://isaiahinstitute.com/those-with-visions/

See bold/underlined part…

What does “ecclesiastical arms” mean to everyone else?  I am wondering if my bias is at work here.

LOL

I especially like how God saying he WOULD NOT send someone to inform the dead guy’s brother in a parable is somehow Jesus endorsing NDE experiences.

I remember last time a supporter of the messiah Spencer came here. I was possibly unkind in my rebuttal. It was fun though.

[MiserereNobis]

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I remember last time a supporter of the messiah Spencer came here. I was possibly unkind in my rebuttal. It was fun though.

Didn’t we have polygamist fundamental prophet here once? A splinter group from a splinter group sort of thing? I think he has a website, too. 

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Didn’t we have polygamist fundamental prophet here once? A splinter group from a splinter group sort of thing? I think he has a website, too. 

The one who claimed to be the successor, but most of the group rejected him except the late leader’s wife…or one of them.  Though I wondered if she really married him to take care of all of his children as a favour to his own dying wife.

[Teancum]

14 hours ago, Calm said:

It would be kind of strange given Thrive is iirc more about creating a life away from the Church, which would likely mean people are going off in different directions and decreasing activity and you don’t exactly need anyone to do so even if it may help to have support, therefore having less reason to gather together and Firm, etc are about upgrading one’s life in the Church, at least to begin with and working together towards a common goal, thus there are reasons to gather together and to continue to do so. 
 

I assume people hang out around the FIRM, Preparing a People, AVOW for much longer than Thrive due to the ongoing nature of the relationship. It would be interesting to figure out sheer numbers of those ever involved.  I think Thrive numbers would be tons less just because it is probably easier to leave the Church or at least lower activity or mental engagement with the Church without adding Thrive to it except in difficult family situations.  And one can certainly study BoM Geography and speculate about end times with these types of organizations as people did for years before the Internet made it very accessible. But I bet it is more fun and interesting to do it with other people like a special interest club where I would see Thrive is more like group therapy and while some enjoy that, most I know do not. Social club bears group therapy for most.
 

So just the nature of the two groups makes numbers comparing probably useless in telling us much. 

I think your observations are spot on.  In my experience, attempts by Dehlin and crew to create a post LDS community have not been successful for the very reason you describe.  Early on Dehlin tried to encourage creation of Mormon Stories Communities in various geographical areas that might have post Latter-day Saints in a critical mass.  That started and stopped and started and sputtered.  And there were a number of reasons.   Some were a bit unseemly in some things that I recall hearing happening in the some groups.  Later Thrive came along but while still around its activities seem limited and also more driven by individuals wanting to organize  groups.  If I recall the last large conference they had may have attracted 500 ot so attendees.  See here for Thrive:

https://www.thrivebeyondreligion.com/