Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Post Reply
User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Julie Rowe refuses to aknowledge defeat

Post by AI2.0 »

Silver wrote: October 4th, 2017, 9:05 pm Are you saying this page on her website is a reaction to Elder Ballard's conference message?
Onsdag wrote: October 4th, 2017, 8:35 pm http://julieroweprepare.com/who-do-you-trust/

My comments in blue
Who do you trust?



And why is it that everything spoken in third person? Did Julie write this herself, or did she have someone else (Eric?) write and post it for her?





AI2.0: Oh yes, if you are familiar with Julie Rowe, then there's no question this is a reaction. Since Eric Smith wrote it, I bet he'll also do a podcast to address it--because in order to keep her audience on board, they need to dispel concerns which might arise and hurt fundraising/sales etc. They very much feel the sting of being 'called out' by Elder Ballard. And make no mistake, she was called out and she knows it.
Last edited by AI2.0 on October 5th, 2017, 9:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
lemuel
Operating Thetan
Posts: 993

Re: Julie Rowe refuses to aknowledge defeat

Post by lemuel »

Silver wrote: October 5th, 2017, 4:49 am The Snufferites are like Protestants, pure and simple, only they have unfortunately broken away from the true Church. Without the true Church, they would have nothing. They're trying to scoop up some dirt and add their own "natural man" interpretation to it which is by definition imperfect.
So hidden assumption in the analysis here is that if the LDS church has gone astray, then it cannot have priesthood. As we say about the protestants, they can't have any priesthood because they're a branch broken off of a dead tree. Therefore, if the LDS church has gone astray, any branch broken off of the LDS church cannot have priesthood, and if the LDS church hasn't gone astray, then any branch broken off is wrong to do so and also cannot have priesthood.

But there are counterexamples. The Jewish church had priesthood until John the Baptist wrested the keys (whatever that means), even though they had been spiritually barren for centuries. Alma had priesthood even though he was Noah's henchman.

So why did Catholicism lose priesthood while Jews and Alma retained it?

I would speculate (and it's only speculation) that priesthood might still be conferred by wicked men if the ordinance is done properly. Otherwise we would have to look through our entire priesthood line of authority and hope none of them were secretly adulterers or apostates else our priesthood is invalid.

So perhaps Noah and the Jews conferred the Aaronic priesthood properly, albeit wickedly, but the Catholics didn't stick to the revealed ordinance. Does anyone know what the Catholic ordinance is for ordaining priests? I suspect it's different from how we do it.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Julie Rowe refuses to aknowledge defeat

Post by AI2.0 »

lemuel wrote: October 5th, 2017, 9:44 am
Silver wrote: October 5th, 2017, 4:49 am The Snufferites are like Protestants, pure and simple, only they have unfortunately broken away from the true Church. Without the true Church, they would have nothing. They're trying to scoop up some dirt and add their own "natural man" interpretation to it which is by definition imperfect.
So hidden assumption in the analysis here is that if the LDS church has gone astray, then it cannot have priesthood. As we say about the protestants, they can't have any priesthood because they're a branch broken off of a dead tree. Therefore, if the LDS church has gone astray, any branch broken off of the LDS church cannot have priesthood, and if the LDS church hasn't gone astray, then any branch broken off is wrong to do so and also cannot have priesthood.

But there are counterexamples. The Jewish church had priesthood until John the Baptist wrested the keys (whatever that means), even though they had been spiritually barren for centuries. Alma had priesthood even though he was Noah's henchman.

So why did Catholicism lose priesthood while Jews and Alma retained it?

I would speculate (and it's only speculation) that priesthood might still be conferred by wicked men if the ordinance is done properly. Otherwise we would have to look through our entire priesthood line of authority and hope none of them were secretly adulterers or apostates else our priesthood is invalid.

So perhaps Noah and the Jews conferred the Aaronic priesthood properly, albeit wickedly, but the Catholics didn't stick to the revealed ordinance. Does anyone know what the Catholic ordinance is for ordaining priests? I suspect it's different from how we do it.
Snufferism is a 'protest' against the mother church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. In all his writings, Snuffer never claimed that God had called him to re-restore the true church, since it had been rejected in 1841. He never claimed that, he insisted he was teaching nothing wrong. His break with the church was when he lost his appeal of his excommunication. And, it wasn't until after the fact, that he started claiming to 'wrest key's and speak for God, be the Davidic Servant and head of another dispensation.

Everything he's done is reactionary to having been excommunicated. Snuffer's movement is a reaction and protest against the LDS church and his followers are dissidents who've left the church to join him. That's what this is and eventually, the Fruits of this movement and it's false prophet will be evident.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Julie Rowe refuses to aknowledge defeat

Post by Silver »

lemuel wrote: October 5th, 2017, 9:44 am
Silver wrote: October 5th, 2017, 4:49 am The Snufferites are like Protestants, pure and simple, only they have unfortunately broken away from the true Church. Without the true Church, they would have nothing. They're trying to scoop up some dirt and add their own "natural man" interpretation to it which is by definition imperfect.
So hidden assumption in the analysis here is that if the LDS church has gone astray, then it cannot have priesthood. As we say about the protestants, they can't have any priesthood because they're a branch broken off of a dead tree. Therefore, if the LDS church has gone astray, any branch broken off of the LDS church cannot have priesthood, and if the LDS church hasn't gone astray, then any branch broken off is wrong to do so and also cannot have priesthood.

But there are counterexamples. The Jewish church had priesthood until John the Baptist wrested the keys (whatever that means), even though they had been spiritually barren for centuries. Alma had priesthood even though he was Noah's henchman.

So why did Catholicism lose priesthood while Jews and Alma retained it?

I would speculate (and it's only speculation) that priesthood might still be conferred by wicked men if the ordinance is done properly. Otherwise we would have to look through our entire priesthood line of authority and hope none of them were secretly adulterers or apostates else our priesthood is invalid.

So perhaps Noah and the Jews conferred the Aaronic priesthood properly, albeit wickedly, but the Catholics didn't stick to the revealed ordinance. Does anyone know what the Catholic ordinance is for ordaining priests? I suspect it's different from how we do it.
Fortunately, the LDS church has not gone astray. By that fact you will know that any who fight against it or who break away from it are without the Lord's approval. End of story.

User avatar
lemuel
Operating Thetan
Posts: 993

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by lemuel »

If the LDS church hasn't gone astray, then yes, Silver, you would be right.

User avatar
lemuel
Operating Thetan
Posts: 993

Re: Julie Rowe refuses to aknowledge defeat

Post by lemuel »

AI2.0 wrote: October 5th, 2017, 9:54 am Snufferism is a 'protest' against the mother church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. In all his writings, Snuffer never claimed that God had called him to re-restore the true church, since it had been rejected in 1841. He never claimed that, he insisted he was teaching nothing wrong. His break with the church was when he lost his appeal of his excommunication. And, it wasn't until after the fact, that he started claiming to 'wrest key's and speak for God, be the Davidic Servant and head of another dispensation.

Everything he's done is reactionary to having been excommunicated. Snuffer's movement is a reaction and protest against the LDS church and his followers are dissidents who've left the church to join him. That's what this is and eventually, the Fruits of this movement and it's false prophet will be evident.
That's one way of looking at it. But, on the other hand, if God sent a messenger to the LDS church and that messenger was rejected and cast out by the church, then that would probably be bad for the LDS church. In this case, things like wresting keys might be plausible next steps for the Lord to take.

But if the Lord is well pleased with the leaders of the LDS church then no messenger would be necessary and Snuffer would be just another crackpot.

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on the facts of the case. At any rate, the fruits of the movement will eventually be evident, one way or the other. Good luck on your journey. Hope to see you in Zion, whichever of us is right.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by Silver »

lemuel wrote: October 5th, 2017, 10:14 am If the LDS church hasn't gone astray, then yes, Silver, you would be right.
No "if" involved here, Lemuel. Oh, the experiences I could tell!

e-eye2.0
captain of 100
Posts: 454

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by e-eye2.0 »

I'm on a site where she is followed with great earnest and it's not AVOW. They have explained away how energy healing is a bad thing. Nobody even brought up that the reference in conference. On another site "not avow" they have shut down Julie Rowe talk and energy healing but there are still members trying to justify the practice.

Sometimes we really do just accidentally get into the wrong things and have good intentions - The Lord judges our heart. However, when he comes out and warns us and we don't correct ship it's best we correct our path or the consequences are much more severe.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: Julie Rowe refuses to aknowledge defeat

Post by AI2.0 »

lemuel wrote: October 5th, 2017, 10:21 am
AI2.0 wrote: October 5th, 2017, 9:54 am Snufferism is a 'protest' against the mother church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. In all his writings, Snuffer never claimed that God had called him to re-restore the true church, since it had been rejected in 1841. He never claimed that, he insisted he was teaching nothing wrong. His break with the church was when he lost his appeal of his excommunication. And, it wasn't until after the fact, that he started claiming to 'wrest key's and speak for God, be the Davidic Servant and head of another dispensation.

Everything he's done is reactionary to having been excommunicated. Snuffer's movement is a reaction and protest against the LDS church and his followers are dissidents who've left the church to join him. That's what this is and eventually, the Fruits of this movement and it's false prophet will be evident.
That's one way of looking at it. But, on the other hand, if God sent a messenger to the LDS church and that messenger was rejected and cast out by the church, then that would probably be bad for the LDS church. In this case, things like wresting keys might be plausible next steps for the Lord to take.

But if the Lord is well pleased with the leaders of the LDS church then no messenger would be necessary and Snuffer would be just another crackpot.

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on the facts of the case. At any rate, the fruits of the movement will eventually be evident, one way or the other. Good luck on your journey. Hope to see you in Zion, whichever of us is right.
Because of the beginnings of Mormonism and the teachings of the Prophets from Joseph Smith down to Thomas S. Monson, and the many scriptures warning against following break off sects and false prophets, there is no way the Lord course corrects with a Denver Snuffer. No way. We've been warned and warned and warned against this, for 180 years and we've seen the end results for those who let go of the iron rod, who wander off into strange paths. The Lord leads and guides this church through his duly appointed servants and they are men of faith, humility and love, that was made clear to me once again this last General Conference.

Good luck to you.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by Silver »

Do you know this box? It contains several issues that were covered in Elder Ballard's recent Conference talk.
Elder Ballard Talk Issues and Ideas.jpg
Elder Ballard Talk Issues and Ideas.jpg (79.45 KiB) Viewed 1646 times
An explanation of the box and parts of the talk are on a website called Wheat And Tares here:
https://wheatandtares.org/2017/10/04/th ... surprised/

Think You Understood What Elder Ballard Was Talking About? You Might Be Surprised.

Date: October 4, 2017
Author: Mary Ann
12 Comments
Elder Ballard’s talk in the Sunday afternoon session of General Conference caused an immediate stir on social media feeds. Besides his denunciations of racism, sexism, and nationalism, tweets were flying on Ballard’s “take-down” of MLMs, herbal supplements, and all sorts of medical quackery. On Monday, Geoff B. at The Millennial Star wrote a thoughtful post on Ballard’s warning about nationalism, offering some useful context via statements from other general authorities. I seek to do the same for the central portion of Ballard’s talk, his rapid-fire list of warnings after cautioning, “We must be careful where our footsteps in life take us.”[7:06]

Some Background

powerpoint-slide-mormonleaks

But first, you’ve seen the so-called Enemies List slide, right? If not, read up here. For Ballard’s current talk, we only need to focus on the green bubbles to the right. Those green bubbles are major areas of concern the Brethren were talking about in December 2015 pertaining to right-wing fringe movements. Placing them on the right side of the spectrum can be taken in a somewhat political sense, but it also has to do with fundamentalist leanings. That means, a lot of these concerns involve embracing viewpoints common in earlier periods of modern church history, but current leaders have since distanced themselves from. Several green bubble ideas pop up in aspects of this central section of Ballard’s talk.

End of World Predictions

Ballard began his series of warnings with,

[7:11] 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.” (Matt. 24:3-4)

This relates to the green bubble, “Last days/end of world predictions.” Two years ago there was enough anxiety over the imminent arrival of the Second Coming (and accompanying devastation) that the Brethren issued a public statement:

The Church encourages our members to be spiritually and physically prepared for life’s ups and downs. For many decades, Church leaders have counseled members that, where possible, they should gradually build a supply of food, water and financial resources to ensure they are self-reliant during disasters and the normal hardships that are part of life, including illness, injury or unemployment.

This teaching to be self-reliant has been accompanied by the counsel of Church leaders to avoid being caught up in extreme efforts to anticipate catastrophic events.

The writings and speculations of individual Church members, some of which have gained currency recently, should be considered as personal accounts or positions that do not reflect Church doctrine.

One of the “individual members” inspiring concern with end times visions was Julie Rowe. A month before this statement, the Church put a 2014 publication by Rowe on a “Spurious Materials in Circulation” memo sent to CES instructors. It warned although she was an active member of the Church, her personal experiences “do not necessarily reflect Church doctrine or they may distort Church doctrine.”

Spurious Materials - Julie Rowe

With recent natural disasters and unusual astronomical events, like the solar eclipse and astrological “Revelation 12 sign,” a lot of people are paying closer attention to Second Coming predictions and end times visionaries. Julie Rowe never left. Earlier this year she started a YouTube channel associated with a new podcast series, and the first podcast garnered over 14k views. But it’s not just Rowe. The popular apocalyptic book Visions of Glory, published almost five years ago, was never officially denounced (in spite of doctrinal issues) and sways a lot of Second Coming thinking. Other influential visionaries include Sarah Menet, Hector Soza, and many more.

Scriptures Stock Image

Keeping the Doctrine Pure

Ballard continued,

[7:42] 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.

You won’t find the exact phrase “keep the doctrine of Christ pure” on lds.org, but you will find related admonitions like “keep the doctrine pure.” It’s where you find these phrases that helps clarify Ballard’s statement. Keeping the doctrine pure is the ultimate responsibility of church leaders, but that responsibility is also extended to anyone in a position to teach the gospel. From Teaching, No Greater Call,

President Gordon B. Hinckley stated: “I have spoken before about the importance of keeping the doctrine of the Church pure, and seeing that it is taught in all of our meetings. I worry about this. Small aberrations in doctrinal teaching can lead to large and evil falsehoods” (Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley [1997], 620).

In 2016, Elder Ballard gave a landmark address to CES instructors, The Opportunities and Responsibilities of CES Teachers in the 21st Century. He also cited President Hinckley,

In a General Authority training meeting, President Gordon B. Hinckley taught on the subject “keeping the doctrine pure and the Church on the right course.” He said, “We cannot be too careful. We must watch that we do not get off [course]. In our efforts to be original and fresh and different, we may teach things which may not be entirely in harmony with the basic doctrines of this the restored Church of Jesus Christ. … We had better be more alert. … We must be watchmen on the tower.”

In the Teaching, No Greater Call manual, teachers are warned that to keep doctrine pure, they must avoid certain practices: speculation, misquoting, gospel hobbies, sensational stories, reshaping church history, and private interpretations and unorthodox views. Similarly, Ballard warned CES instructors,

In teaching your students and in responding to their questions, let me warn you not to pass along faith-promoting or unsubstantiated rumors or outdated understandings and explanations of our doctrine and practices from the past… [E]nsure you do not teach things that are untrue, out of date, or odd and quirky.

One of the green bubbles on the Enemies List was a well-respected former CES instructor, Robert Norman. Seminary and institute teachers are spiritual mentors to rising generations, and their opinions and speculation carry tremendous weight. But in this democratic era where the internet makes the voice of any individual carry across the globe, a regular church member can easily become an influential gospel teacher. This suggests a measure of responsibility for that speaker (or writer) and caution for any listeners (or readers).

giphy

False Prophets

In a related vein, Ballard cautioned against spiritual leaders without institutional authority.

[7:58] The gospel of the Father and the Son was restored through Joseph Smith, the prophet of this last dispensation. Do not listen to those who have not been ordained or set apart to their church calling and are acknowledged by common consent of the members of the church. Be aware of organizations or groups or individuals claiming secret answers to doctrinal questions that they say today’s apostles and prophets do not have or understand.

In October 1992, Elder Boyd K. Packer issued a similar warning, though it included a lot more doomsday elements as well. This was likely in response to the Harmston group.

There are some among us now who have not been regularly ordained by the heads of the Church and who tell of impending political and economic chaos, the end of the world—something of the “sky is falling, chicken licken” of the fables. They are misleading members to gather to colonies or cults.

Those deceivers say that the Brethren do not know what is going on in the world or that the Brethren approve of their teaching but do not wish to speak of it over the pulpit. Neither is true. The Brethren, by virtue of traveling constantly everywhere on earth, certainly know what is going on, and by virtue of prophetic insight are able to read the signs of the times.

Do not be deceived by them—those deceivers. If there is to be any gathering, it will be announced by those who have been regularly ordained and who are known to the Church to have authority.

Come away from any others. Follow your leaders who have been duly ordained and have been publicly sustained, and you will not be led astray.

But we’ve also heard similar sentiments in recent years. In June 2015, Elder Oaks held a special three-stake meeting in Boise to address apostasy, sometimes dubbed the “Boise Rescue.” It was a tag-team presentation between Elder Oaks and then-assistant church historian, Richard Turley. In that presentation, the threat of false prophets was emphasized. “False prophets can be most threatening to those who already believe in prophets,” Oaks warned. Turley quoted scripture, “For all things must be done in order, and by common consent in the church” (D&C 28:13). He also taught among several principles of order, “No one is to preach or build up the church except he be regularly ordained by the head of the church.”

At the time it was widely understood the special Boise meeting (an Area Business Weekend) was in response to the rising influence of Denver Snuffer, who got his own green bubble on the Enemies List rather than being grouped with regular old False Prophets. For those not aware, Denver Snuffer (yes, that is his birth name) began to draw fans with the publication of The Second Comforter in 2006. In that book, he testified he’d had a personal visitation from Jesus Christ and described the process others could use to gain their own theophanies. He followed up the popular volume with several more books, but only drew the ire of church leaders with his 2011 book, Passing the Heavenly Gift. Church leadership found the book too critical (it suggested church leaders seriously dropped the ball after Joseph Smith), and Snuffer was excommunicated in 2013.

Since his excommunication, Denver Snuffer’s influence has not diminished. He declared the church in apostasy and has inspired a loose coalition of fellowships made up “of between 5,000 and 10,000 followers in 49 states and several countries — mostly former or current members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” In early September, this coalition voted to canonize a revised set of scriptures, including many of Snuffer’s prophecies.

But it’s not just about Denver Snuffer. “Secret answers” and mystical doctrinal knowledge are attractive to members wherever the information comes from. In an August 2015 FairMormon address, Cassandra Hedelius shared many points from the Boise Rescue in her discussion of emerging “Mormon Gnosticism.” In the Q&A section, Hedelius summarized her warning, “f you are seeking for something deeper, and more spiritually awesome, then you are on dangerous ground.” A Salt Lake Tribune article described many of those who followed Snuffer out of the LDS church, and the characteristics might be surprising to some:

They were mostly super-Mormons, zealots who gave their all to the faith. They taught in the LDS Church Educational System or worked at church-owned Brigham Young University. They served in temples. They dissected the scriptures looking for potent but hidden clues to Jesus’ Second Coming or keys to salvation. Some devotees delved into holistic healing, piled up excessive food storage or launched apocalyptic preparations. Others found mainstream Mormon services too boring, too shallow to feed their spiritual hungering. They ached for more celestial manifestations, more holy works, more Holy Writ.

Dollars

Affinity Fraud

Ballard then switched gears to secular matters,

[8:36] Do not listen to those who entice you with get-rich schemes. Our members have lost far too much money, so be careful.

Many members assume Ballard was referring to multi-level-marketing ventures,[1] but past statements suggest Ballard was targeting affinity fraud. In the April 1987 general conference Ballard said,

There are no shortcuts to financial security. There are no get-rich-quick schemes that work… Do not trust your money to others without a thorough evaluation of any proposed investment. Our people have lost far too much money by trusting their assets to others.

In 2008, the First Presidency issued a letter to be read in all ward congregations stating, “Reports of fraud schemes and unwise investments prompt us to again counsel members with respect to prudence in managing one’s financial affairs.” In 2012, Michael Otterson of the church’s public affairs department spoke at a fraud conference. He noted, “As the threat of affinity and other fraud has surfaced in recent years, the Church has increased its efforts to teach its members and to encourage them to live by sound financial principles, as well as to avoid the dangers of financial predators.” And, early in 2016, Utah earned the dubious honor of becoming the first state in the U.S. to have an online registry for white-collar criminals due to it’s high “financial vulnerability” to affinity fraud.

Holistic

Energy Healing

In the final point of Ballard’s central section, he issued warnings about certain health practices:

[8:48] In some places, too many of our people are looking beyond the mark and seeking secret knowledge and 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.”

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.” (21.3.6)

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

The key here is that “official” church statement. The 2016 statement was only issued to a single local news station; it never appeared in the Mormon Newsroom or anywhere else on LDS.org. The statement was in response to a media query on the church’s position concerning Christ-centered energy healing. According to an official statement by the subject of that news article, Tammy Ward, Christ-centered energy healing is not a specific technique itself, but a recognition of various holistic practices where practitioners profess “personal faith in Jesus Christ and recognize Him as the true source of all healing.” Ward’s company created the Christ-centered Energy Healing Conference, and explained that several types of holistic practices involved are referred to as energy healing modalities “because they utilize various energy systems in the body, such as meridians, chakras, auras, etc.”

Our 2-day conference provides an opportunity for individuals to be introduced to and instructed by professionals in a variety of complimentary and holistic health modalities including: The Emotion Code, The Healer’s BluePrint, Foot Zonology, Kinesiology, and Reiki among many others.

Many assume Ballard was talking about essential oils or herbal supplements, both of which are very popular along the Mormon Corridor. I’ve also seen people suggest Ballard was referring to medical marijuana. In my opinion, it’s more likely he was only speaking of the “emotionally appealing” varieties of energy healing. (Which is a little hard to admit, because I’m really not a fan of essential oils and herbal supplements.)

Overlap

As the earlier Tribune article quote about Snuffer supporters attests, several of the warnings Ballard raised appeal to similar demographics. Last March, MormonLeaks released a letter from a concerned stake president documenting apostate practices of members in his stake and others. The president noted that all subjects “were involved, to some extent, in holistic healing, energy treatments, foot zoning, etc.” It was his opinion that “holistic healing and energy treatments seem to be the ‘gateway drug’ used to find recruits.” The members were heavily influenced by Denver Snuffer’s books, The Second Comforter and Passing the Heavenly Gift. They participated in activities common among those who follow Snuffer’s teachings, re-baptism and at-home sacrament meetings with wine. They relied on the book Visions of Glory which, at the time, was sold at Seagull Book, and also listened to other end times visionaries.

Questions:

What do you think of these interpretations of Elder Ballard’s talk? Do you agree with them?
What else do you think Ballard might have been referring to?
[1] If you really are aching for something against multi-level-marketing, the closest I can give you is Elder Oaks mentioning pyramid schemes. In August 2016, LDS Living published a lengthy quote from a decades-old book by Oaks. It said, “For at least a decade there have been a succession of frauds worked by predominantly Mormon entrepreneurs upon predominately Mormon victims. Stock manipulations; residential mortgage financings; gold, silver, diamonds, uranium, and document investments; pyramid schemes—all have taken their toll upon the faithful and gullible.”

Spider
captain of 100
Posts: 242

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by Spider »

^^ Good article.

EmmaLee
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10884

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by EmmaLee »

Silver wrote: October 5th, 2017, 10:32 pmWhat do you think of these interpretations of Elder Ballard’s talk? Do you agree with them? What else do you think Ballard might have been referring to?
I think they are right on the mark (as opposed to "going beyond the...." ;) ). Add to the list Doug Mendenhall, Shelle McDermott, Mike Stroud, etc.

User avatar
The Red Pill
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1661
Location: Southern Utah

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by The Red Pill »

Late to the discussion, but if you really look at the pattern for revelation it takes a lot of homework and then you petition the Lord for needed clarity. The bretheren just don't KNOW what is going on unless they have studied the matter at length, just like the rest of us.

For example, read up on the agonizing journey that President Kimball went through to gain revelatory answers on the priesthood.

When I hear Elder Ballard use the words racism, sexism and nationism in the same sentence, basically parroting what the MSM have been accusing Trump of for months, it is disturbing to say the least.

If you couple this with the Romney rant, position of the Desert News and the McMullin con, a pattern emerges.

It takes hundreds of hours of research and study to even start to look down the rabbit hole. Unless Elder Ballard has done this out of personal curiosity, then by no means does he understand what is going on in the nationalism verses globalism battle. If he is on a MSM diet, like most people are, that is what shapes his worldview.

If the busy bretheren are simply being advised by the likes of Romney and McMullin, then God help us!! Read up on how Romney's father, George, helped torpedoe the candidacy of Barry Goldwater back in 1964. Ironically, Reagan's most famous speech was his endorsement of Barry Goldwater...

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by larsenb »

Scanning some old issues of LDS Church News, I ran across an article titled 'Religion has to be established freely' in the June 18, 2017, edition, which covered Elder Andersen's talk to a group called: Horasis, "an independent think tank based in Zurich, Switzerland. It was described as a "global gathering of business, government and thought leaders", and was held on May 28. Some 400 world leaders from 70 countries were present "for the global meetings".

Elder Anderson has some very good things to say synopsized by the article, including: "We must all have the ability to choose what we want to believe or [to believe] nothing at all"; and: "There is no significant example in history of any society successfully maintaining moral life without the aid of religion."

One comment, however, that I found a bit disturbing was: Most religions, he said are "promoting good over evil, families over individualism. These are things that make for a moral society and we ought to promote them".

For me, his use of "families over individualism" is something of a false dichotomy. They are not mutually exclusive and individualism has a very healthy component. It is with the individual where freedom is preeminent. Without individual freedom, we're potentially lost to 'statism' and tyranny. It is with the individual that you find the most potent creative well-spring. Even in focus groups, its is the contribution of the individual that adds to the creative whole.

I hate to see 'individualism' relegated to the pejorative trash heap as I see happening to the word 'nationalism'.

My view is that Elder Andersen's dichotomy should have been: families, as opposed to state control in the upbringing of children and dictation to families in general.

Dr. Frank-Jurgen Richter, the chairman of the 'Horas' global meeting was quoted as saying: "We believe in togetherness . . . It's a major theme of the summit." A bit too much like 'group think', in my view.

Along w/the pejorative tagging of 'nationalism', this hints that globalism is injecting its tentacles into the thinking of the LDS population in a disturbing way.

The term: "a good, healthy individualism" used to have some sway and currency. Hate to see this disappear.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by larsenb »

Link to a post citing admission from Elder Ballard from a question-and-answer session during a recent BYU devotional. He expresses the fear that too many members expect him (and I guess the Brethren) to be experts in everything, and says this is a very unreal expectation and that he, like everyone else, needs to consult those he thinks are expert or more knowledgeable in a particular area than he is:

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=47008&p=821353#p821353

He expressed exactly what I've thought about this topic. You can't expect the Brethren to be omniscient and expert on any and every subject, even regarding everything they may talk about in public . . . outside of their role of bringing people to Christ.

Of course this does not preclude them having special knowledge and insight given to them by the Spirit on topics outside of this realm.

Lizzy60
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8520

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by Lizzy60 »

larsenb wrote: November 20th, 2017, 2:36 pm Link to a post citing admission from Elder Ballard from a question-and-answer session during a recent BYU devotional. He expresses the fear that too many members expect him (and I guess the Brethren) to be experts in everything, and says this is a very unreal expectation and that he, like everyone else, needs to consult those he thinks are expert or more knowledgeable in a particular area than he is:

viewtopic.php?f=19&t=47008&p=821353#p821353

He expressed exactly what I've thought about this topic. You can't expect the Brethren to be omniscient and expert on any and every subject, even regarding everything they may talk about in public . . . outside of their role of bringing people to Christ.

Of course this does not preclude them having special knowledge and insight given to them by the Spirit on topics outside of this realm.
Thanks for posting the link to this talk by Elder Ballard. Several years ago my father accused me of "apostasy" because he heard me listening to several radio shows for information on one of our many terrorist events. He said that I don't need to concern myself with these things until the Brethren tell us to become concerned. He was dead serious.

User avatar
gradles21
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1327
Location: Weimar

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by gradles21 »

I think Julie Rowe is just a lucid dreamer, and maybe she's not even aware of it.

User avatar
LdsMarco
captain of 100
Posts: 606

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by LdsMarco »

I whole heartily agree!


Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by Silver »

gradles21 wrote: November 20th, 2017, 6:26 pm I think Julie Rowe is just a lucid dreamer, and maybe she's not even aware of it.
Wouldn't that require her husband never having a heart-to-heart with her and saying, "Honey, I think..."?

User avatar
LdsMarco
captain of 100
Posts: 606

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by LdsMarco »

What I don't get is that why aren't these individuals (like Julie Rowe) ex'd if they are them who they're talking about.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Elder Ballard just mercifully killed Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by larsenb »

Meili wrote: October 2nd, 2017, 5:36 pm
larsenb wrote: October 2nd, 2017, 4:46 pm
Meili wrote: October 1st, 2017, 9:27 pm
Silver wrote: October 1st, 2017, 8:29 pm

Confidential then. They are not secret for two reasons.
1. Oathbreakers have shared the sacred information outside of the temple, revealing to their own damnation that which they promised to hold dear.
2. The Church and its members spend millions of dollars every year trying to get more people to learn this sacred (not secret) information.

And if you think about it, more people on the other side of the veil know about the temple ordinances than don't know about them on this side. Not a very well kept secret, is it?
When I was in institute, I had a teacher who emphasized that the temple ceremony was both sacred and secret. I guess that stuck with me. I don't ever recall hearing that the temple was "sacred not secret." But I do recall hearing it was both. I have no problem with it being referred to as secret.
I haven't read all posts on this thread, but the two words (secret and sacred) come from the same root, as Hugh Nibley has pointed out, and which I recall confirming w/my old beat-up Websters dictionary, which posted word roots.
Yup. I remember your post. Not sure how some people can consider a ceremony where you make a solemn promise not to reveal certain things as not secret, but to each their own, I guess.
My point, and I think Nibley would agree, would be that a sacred ceremony should be held close to the chest and not talked about. In this sense, the sacred aspect came first; the secret connotation was a spin off and came second. I.e., you hold sacred things close to your chest, because making them the subject of common, public and light conversation profanes them. They are sacred and therefore, secret.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Elder Ballard just mercifully killed Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by iWriteStuff »

larsenb wrote: October 2nd, 2017, 4:46 pm
I haven't read all posts on this thread, but the two words (secret and sacred) come from the same root, as Hugh Nibley has pointed out, and which I recall confirming w/my old beat-up Websters dictionary, which posted word roots.
Not quite.
Secret:
Origin

late Middle English: from Old French, from Latin secretus (adjective) ‘separate, set apart,’ from the verb secernere, from se- ‘apart’ + cernere ‘sift.’
vs
Sacred:
Origin

late Middle English: past participle of archaic sacre ‘consecrate,’ from Old French sacrer, from Latin sacrare, from sacer, sacr- ‘holy.’
Then, from Nibley's Temple and Cosmos:
The ordinances are not deep, dark secrets to be kept as such from the world. It is easy to get a temple recommend and then later apostatize and spread abroad the so-called secrets of the temple. The basic idea of the ordinances from Moses back to Adam is separation from the world...The ordinances are not secret, and yet they are, so to speak, automatically scrambled for those not authorized to have them.

Even though everyone may discover what goes on in the temple, and many have already revealed it, the important thing is that I do not reveal these things; they must remain sacred to me. I must preserve a zone of sanctity which cannot be violated whether or not anyone else in the room has the remotest idea what the situation really is. For my covenants are all between me and my Heavenly Father, all others being present only as witnesses. I can never share my understanding of them completely with anyone but the Lord. No matter what happens, it will, then, always remain secret: only I know exactly the weight and force of the covenants I have made—I and the Lord with whom I have made themunless I choose to reveal them. If I do not, then they are secret and sacred no matter what others may say or do. Anyone who would reveal these things has not understood them, and therefore that person has not given them away. You cannot reveal what you do not know!
That's a lot to think about there, ain't it?

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Elder Ballard just mercifully killed Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by larsenb »

iWriteStuff wrote: November 21st, 2017, 10:14 pm
larsenb wrote: October 2nd, 2017, 4:46 pm
I haven't read all posts on this thread, but the two words (secret and sacred) come from the same root, as Hugh Nibley has pointed out, and which I recall confirming w/my old beat-up Websters dictionary, which posted word roots.
Not quite.
Secret:
Origin

late Middle English: from Old French, from Latin secretus (adjective) ‘separate, set apart,’ from the verb secernere, from se- ‘apart’ + cernere ‘sift.’
vs
Sacred:
Origin

late Middle English: past participle of archaic sacre ‘consecrate,’ from Old French sacrer, from Latin sacrare, from sacer, sacr- ‘holy.’
Then, from Nibley's Temple and Cosmos:
The ordinances are not deep, dark secrets to be kept as such from the world. It is easy to get a temple recommend and then later apostatize and spread abroad the so-called secrets of the temple. The basic idea of the ordinances from Moses back to Adam is separation from the world...The ordinances are not secret, and yet they are, so to speak, automatically scrambled for those not authorized to have them.

Even though everyone may discover what goes on in the temple, and many have already revealed it, the important thing is that I do not reveal these things; they must remain sacred to me. I must preserve a zone of sanctity which cannot be violated whether or not anyone else in the room has the remotest idea what the situation really is. For my covenants are all between me and my Heavenly Father, all others being present only as witnesses. I can never share my understanding of them completely with anyone but the Lord. No matter what happens, it will, then, always remain secret: only I know exactly the weight and force of the covenants I have made—I and the Lord with whom I have made themunless I choose to reveal them. If I do not, then they are secret and sacred no matter what others may say or do. Anyone who would reveal these things has not understood them, and therefore that person has not given them away. You cannot reveal what you do not know!
That's a lot to think about there, ain't it?
You're right. I should have checked my old Webster's before going off on this idea. So much for false memories regarding what Nibley has written.

One possibility, however, if you could go back to a 1st Century BC Latin equivalent to the old Websters that showed the origins/derivations of Latin vocabulary, you may find that secretus and sacrare had the same original Latin-precursor root ;)

Oh, and because I've read Nibley's Temple and Cosmos 2-3 times, I should have remembered this quote . . . which I do, seeing it once again.

gardener4life
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1690

Re: Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by gardener4life »

Interesting comments all. However I want to point out something. An apostle is a prophet, seer, and revelator. So someone said they do need to study it out just like the rest of us. I do think that comment is true. They do need to study the scriptures, but they have that spirit and calling of phophecy, revelation, etc. to help fill in the gaps too that the is specifically for their calling which we don't have. They are given things to help the members they are trying to care for, just like a shepherd gains skills to help the sheep.

Hope that helps positively.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Elder Ballard just mercifully killed Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

Post by Silver »

iWriteStuff wrote: November 21st, 2017, 10:14 pm
Then, from Nibley's Temple and Cosmos:
The ordinances are not deep, dark secrets to be kept as such from the world. It is easy to get a temple recommend and then later apostatize and spread abroad the so-called secrets of the temple. The basic idea of the ordinances from Moses back to Adam is separation from the world...The ordinances are not secret, and yet they are, so to speak, automatically scrambled for those not authorized to have them.

Even though everyone may discover what goes on in the temple, and many have already revealed it, the important thing is that I do not reveal these things; they must remain sacred to me. I must preserve a zone of sanctity which cannot be violated whether or not anyone else in the room has the remotest idea what the situation really is. For my covenants are all between me and my Heavenly Father, all others being present only as witnesses. I can never share my understanding of them completely with anyone but the Lord. No matter what happens, it will, then, always remain secret: only I know exactly the weight and force of the covenants I have made—I and the Lord with whom I have made themunless I choose to reveal them. If I do not, then they are secret and sacred no matter what others may say or do. Anyone who would reveal these things has not understood them, and therefore that person has not given them away. You cannot reveal what you do not know!
That's a lot to think about there, ain't it?
Thanks for sharing that quote.

It makes me wonder how widespread, and therefore, not secret, knowledge of the endowment ritual is in the Spirit World. When I take a name through, can only the departed man for whom I am vicariously participating "see" my actions for him? Can others in the Spirit World "hear" the covenants proffered and my responses? Do those others see him accept the endowment on his side of the veil? Is there a cloaking device in the spirit world?

Regardless of the answers to my pondering, no doubt many millions have accepted, and the best unkept secret in the world continues to travel at high speed, ever expanding. Thanks be to God for this great work of salvation for the dead.

Post Reply