Elder Ballard spoke against Julie Rowe and Denver Snuffer

[Spider]

^^ Good article.

[EmmaLee]

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?

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.

[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]

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]

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]

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.

[gradles21]

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

[LdsMarco]

I whole heartily agree!

[Silver]

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..."?

[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]

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.

[iWriteStuff]

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 them—unless 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]

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 them—unless 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]

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]

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 them—unless 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.

[Mark]

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.

You make a great point here BL. The Brethren are not omniscient and they can be influenced by the plethora of info coming out of the "conventional" sources in the media etc. About everybody is to some extent. However this is where Satan has been having a hay-day with folks. I have seen many on this site fall into this troubling category. They scour the internet to pick out something that one of the Brethren might say that does not square with the worldview they might espouse to or discern and immediately they begin to go down that road of becoming an accuser of the Brethren trying to "show them up" so to speak thru their own prideful boasts of what they themselves have perceived to be correct. Even if they ARE correct in that world view they have fallen into the very trap set for them by the adversary of becoming an accuser of said Brethren that Joseph warned against. They begin to feebly attempt to thwart the work of the Lord as conducted thru these Brethren in their stewardship responsibilities and roles of bringing people unto Christ and His church as you correctly said which is their primary stewardship role.

I have absolutely no problem realizing some of these Brethren might be influenced by what they hear or read in the MSM. I would expect it. The problem starts when I succumb to the temptation of broadcasting to all who will listen this attitude of calling them on the carpet by elevating myself above them and others in trying to show them up. Developing a broken heart and a contrite spirit helps one to avoid that adversarial trap. If the Brethren are incorrect in their perception of a certain worldview it is critical for my spiritual progress to handle those differences of opinion in a respectful and humble way. In other words in the Lords prescribed methods which are: gentleness, meekness, love unfeigned, without guile, etc etc.

[Hogmeister]

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.

You make a great point here BL. The Brethren are not omniscient and they can be influenced by the plethora of info coming out of the "conventional" sources in the media etc. About everybody is to some extent. However this is where Satan has been having a hay-day with folks. I have seen many on this site fall into this troubling category. They scour the internet to pick out something that one of the Brethren might say that does not square with the worldview they might espouse to or discern and immediately they begin to go down that road of becoming an accuser of the Brethren trying to "show them up" so to speak thru their own prideful boasts of what they themselves have perceived to be correct. Even if they ARE correct in that world view they have fallen into the very trap set for them by the adversary of becoming an accuser of said Brethren that Joseph warned against. They begin to feebly attempt to thwart the work of the Lord as conducted thru these Brethren in their stewardship responsibilities and roles of bringing people unto Christ and His church as you correctly said which is their primary stewardship role.

I have absolutely no problem realizing some of these Brethren might be influenced by what they hear or read in the MSM. I would expect it. The problem starts when I succumb to the temptation of broadcasting to all who will listen this attitude of calling them on the carpet by elevating myself above them and others in trying to show them up. Developing a broken heart and a contrite spirit helps one to avoid that adversarial trap. If the Brethren are incorrect in their perception of a certain worldview it is critical for my spiritual progress to handle those differences of opinion in a respectful and humble way. In other words in the Lords prescribed methods which are: gentleness, meekness, love unfeigned, without guile, etc etc.

I appreciate this post. I was considering this when I made my comments.

[silk]

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 them—unless 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.

Thank you for this comment. I've thought a lot about the dead recently as I've been doing family history and temple work, and I've wondered the same thing. Couldn't people in the spirit world just watch what we're doing and then imitate it? But I think there's a secret to the endowment -- we don't just learn things, we also receive certain things physically. That's why there has to be a proxy. You can't give what you haven't received.

I also want to add my witness that temple work is real. The ordinances we perform really have the power to reach and affect people on the other side of the veil. It is a true miracle, and one that I'm grateful to participate in.

[Silver]

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 them—unless 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.

Thank you for this comment. I've thought a lot about the dead recently as I've been doing family history and temple work, and I've wondered the same thing. Couldn't people in the spirit world just watch what we're doing and then imitate it? But I think there's a secret to the endowment -- we don't just learn things, we also receive certain things physically. That's why there has to be a proxy. You can't give what you haven't received.

I also want to add my witness that temple work is real. The ordinances we perform really have the power to reach and affect people on the other side of the veil. It is a true miracle, and one that I'm grateful to participate in.

Since October's General Conference, I've been reading The Living Christ: THE TESTIMONY OF THE APOSTLES every day and often ponder the following words:

He entreated all to follow His example. He walked the roads of Palestine, healing the sick, causing the blind to see, and raising the dead. He taught the truths of eternity, the reality of our premortal existence, the purpose of our life on earth, and the potential for the sons and daughters of God in the life to come.

He instituted the sacrament as a reminder of His great atoning sacrifice. He was arrested and condemned on spurious charges, convicted to satisfy a mob, and sentenced to die on Calvary’s cross. He gave His life to atone for the sins of all mankind. His was a great vicarious gift in behalf of all who would ever live upon the earth.

So His example, which we are to emulate, is to help and heal and raise from the dead. Also, His great atoning vicarious gift saved us. We follow that particular example when we do family history research and temple work.

From prior experience, quite precious to me, I know that the departed spirits are close, very close. We could "touch" them if we could see them.

[e-eye2.0]

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 them—unless 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.

Thank you for this comment. I've thought a lot about the dead recently as I've been doing family history and temple work, and I've wondered the same thing. Couldn't people in the spirit world just watch what we're doing and then imitate it? But I think there's a secret to the endowment -- we don't just learn things, we also receive certain things physically. That's why there has to be a proxy. You can't give what you haven't received.

I also want to add my witness that temple work is real. The ordinances we perform really have the power to reach and affect people on the other side of the veil. It is a true miracle, and one that I'm grateful to participate in.

I think you have to look much deeper into what the temple is and what we learn and promise. I think it's much more than learning a few phrases and actions although they are important and can teach us symbolically. It's about being endowed with power to live and become like Christ. I think when we return to God it will be a little different than just a quick pass through the veil. It will be an interview but we will all go through it. Even those who have their work done for them here have to repent and accept it on the other side to flee spirit prison. There is a lot more too it.

[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.

You make a great point here BL. The Brethren are not omniscient and they can be influenced by the plethora of info coming out of the "conventional" sources in the media etc. About everybody is to some extent. However this is where Satan has been having a hay-day with folks. I have seen many on this site fall into this troubling category. They scour the internet to pick out something that one of the Brethren might say that does not square with the worldview they might espouse to or discern and immediately they begin to go down that road of becoming an accuser of the Brethren trying to "show them up" so to speak thru their own prideful boasts of what they themselves have perceived to be correct. Even if they ARE correct in that world view they have fallen into the very trap set for them by the adversary of becoming an accuser of said Brethren that Joseph warned against. They begin to feebly attempt to thwart the work of the Lord as conducted thru these Brethren in their stewardship responsibilities and roles of bringing people unto Christ and His church as you correctly said which is their primary stewardship role.

I have absolutely no problem realizing some of these Brethren might be influenced by what they hear or read in the MSM. I would expect it. The problem starts when I succumb to the temptation of broadcasting to all who will listen this attitude of calling them on the carpet by elevating myself above them and others in trying to show them up. Developing a broken heart and a contrite spirit helps one to avoid that adversarial trap. If the Brethren are incorrect in their perception of a certain worldview it is critical for my spiritual progress to handle those differences of opinion in a respectful and humble way. In other words in the Lords prescribed methods which are: gentleness, meekness, love unfeigned, without guile, etc etc.

I'm not one of those who "scour the internet" or anything else to find fault with the Brethren or elevate myself above them. My motivation in posting what I've posted on this issue was to express a different point of view regarding 'nationalism' and 'individualism' and/or to get clarification from them on exactly what they meant, not "to show them up". It was motivated out of a certain amount of dismay, not pride. These are basically political/sociological statements. They have the bully pulpit. I do not. The quest and desire to preserve this country under the Constitution has been one of my earnest pursuits for over 20 years.

I was motivated to write them a letter about this, and even asked anyone including you, if they knew how to address it. In the final analysis, I didn't have enough motivation to search this out myself, perhaps making several attempts to get it right. Got a lot on the plate. Blogging here, for me is an avoidance activity.

My sense is that they have already received quite a bit of feedback regarding this issue. In fact, I would guess that Elder Ballard's response about the limits of his knowledge may have been prompted by this type of feedback.

The Brethren are so way above me in terms of doing their ecclesiastical/Spiritual duty and in their spiritual standing before God that it would be not only wrong but highly laughable for me to publicly take issue with or compare myself to them in this arena . . . as brlenox knows perfectly well.

And I understand your concern about "being an accuser of the Brethren". That's a concern for me, as well.

[Mark]

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.

You make a great point here BL. The Brethren are not omniscient and they can be influenced by the plethora of info coming out of the "conventional" sources in the media etc. About everybody is to some extent. However this is where Satan has been having a hay-day with folks. I have seen many on this site fall into this troubling category. They scour the internet to pick out something that one of the Brethren might say that does not square with the worldview they might espouse to or discern and immediately they begin to go down that road of becoming an accuser of the Brethren trying to "show them up" so to speak thru their own prideful boasts of what they themselves have perceived to be correct. Even if they ARE correct in that world view they have fallen into the very trap set for them by the adversary of becoming an accuser of said Brethren that Joseph warned against. They begin to feebly attempt to thwart the work of the Lord as conducted thru these Brethren in their stewardship responsibilities and roles of bringing people unto Christ and His church as you correctly said which is their primary stewardship role.

I have absolutely no problem realizing some of these Brethren might be influenced by what they hear or read in the MSM. I would expect it. The problem starts when I succumb to the temptation of broadcasting to all who will listen this attitude of calling them on the carpet by elevating myself above them and others in trying to show them up. Developing a broken heart and a contrite spirit helps one to avoid that adversarial trap. If the Brethren are incorrect in their perception of a certain worldview it is critical for my spiritual progress to handle those differences of opinion in a respectful and humble way. In other words in the Lords prescribed methods which are: gentleness, meekness, love unfeigned, without guile, etc etc.

I'm not one of those who "scour the internet" or anything else to find fault with the Brethren or elevate myself above them. My motivation in posting what I've posted on this issue was to express a different point of view regarding 'nationalism' and 'individualism' and/or to get clarification from them on exactly what they meant, not "to show them up". It was motivated out of a certain amount of dismay, not pride. These are basically political/sociological statements. They have the bully pulpit. I do not. The quest and desire to preserve this country under the Constitution has been one of my earnest pursuits for over 20 years.

I was motivated to write them a letter about this, and even asked anyone including you, if they knew how to address it. In the final analysis, I didn't have enough motivation to search this out myself, perhaps making several attempts to get it right. Got a lot on the plate. Blogging here, for me is an avoidance activity.

My sense is that they have already received quite a bit of feedback regarding this issue. In fact, I would guess that Elder Ballard's response about the limits of his knowledge may have been prompted by this type of feedback.

The Brethren are so way above me in terms of doing their ecclesiastical/Spiritual duty and in their spiritual standing before God that it would be not only wrong but highly laughable for me to publicly take issue with or compare myself to them in this arena . . . as brlenox knows perfectly well.

And I understand your concern about "being an accuser of the Brethren". That's a concern for me, as well.

Just to be clear I was not referring to you brother in my post. I thought you have handled any concerns you have had with a good spirit. I cant say that about some others here who love to come on the site and throw out barbs and implied insults against the Brethren whenever they can. Its pretty clear who does so if you read their posts. Most of those posts are comprised of this accusatory or cynical tone. It is them that I was referring to.

[larsenb]

. . . . Just to be clear I was not referring to you brother in my post. I thought you have handled any concerns you have had with a good spirit. I cant say that about some others here who love to come on the site and throw out barbs and implied insults against the Brethren whenever they can. Its pretty clear who does so if you read their posts. Most of those posts are comprised of this accusatory or cynical tone. It is them that I was referring to.

Whew! OK. Thanks. Wasn't too certain about that.

[Onsdag]

Just revisiting this other great talk by Elder Ballard, given in the October 2008 General Conference (with emphasis added).

The Truth of God Shall Go Forth:

God has spoken through His prophet and announced to the world that “the Standard of Truth has been erected” and that “no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing.” That is undeniably and indisputably true. We have seen it for ourselves, in decade after decade, from the time of the Prophet Joseph Smith to the time of President Thomas S. Monson. Persecutions have raged. Calumny and lies and misrepresentation have attempted to defame. But in every decade from the time of the Restoration forward, the truth of God has gone “forth boldly, nobly, and independent.” The little Church that started in 1830 with just a handful of members has now grown to more than 13 million Latter-day Saints in many different nations around the world, and we are well on our way to penetrating every continent, visiting every clime, sweeping every country, and sounding in every ear.

This is God’s work, and God’s work will not be frustrated. But there is still much to be done before the Great Jehovah can announce that the work is done. While we praise and honor those faithful Saints who have brought us to this point of public prominence, we cannot afford, my brothers and sisters, to be comfortable or content.

We are all needed to finish the work that was begun by those pioneering Saints over 175 years ago and carried out through the subsequent decades by faithful Saints of every generation. We need to believe as they believed. We need to work as they worked. We need to serve as they served. And we need to overcome as they overcame.

Of course, our challenges are different today, but they are no less demanding. Instead of angry mobs, we face those who constantly try to defame. Instead of extreme exposure and hardship, we face alcohol and drug abuse, pornography, all kinds of filth, sleaze, greed, dishonesty, and spiritual apathy. Instead of families being uprooted and torn from their homes, we see the institution of the family, including the divine institution of marriage, under attack as groups and individuals seek to define away the prominent and divine role of the family in society.

This is not to suggest that our challenges today are more severe than the challenges faced by those who have gone before us. They are just different. The Lord isn’t asking us to load up a handcart; He’s asking us to fortify our faith. He isn’t asking us to walk across a continent; He’s asking us to walk across the street to visit our neighbor. He isn’t asking us to give all of our worldly possessions to build a temple; He’s asking us to give of our means and our time despite the pressures of modern living to continue to build temples and then to attend regularly the temples already built. He isn’t asking us to die a martyr’s death; He’s asking us to live a disciple’s life.

This is a great time to live, brothers and sisters, and it is up to us to carry on the rich tradition of devoted commitment that has been the hallmark of previous generations of Latter-day Saints. This is not a time for the spiritually faint of heart. We cannot afford to be superficially righteous. Our testimonies must run deep, with spiritual roots firmly embedded in the rock of revelation. And we must continue to move the work forward as a covenanted, consecrated people, with faith in every footstep, “till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done.” That it may be so for us is my humble prayer in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

I was especially impressed with what this Prophet and Apostle of God has said that the Lord is asking us to do:

"This is not to suggest that our challenges today are more severe than the challenges faced by those who have gone before us. They are just different. The Lord isn’t asking us to load up a handcart (Julie Rowe seems to believe otherwise); He’s asking us to fortify our faith. He isn’t asking us to walk across a continent (Julie Rowe has been preaching a gospel of preparing for just such a scenario); He’s asking us to walk across the street to visit our neighbor. He isn’t asking us to give all of our worldly possessions to build a temple (Julie Rowe has been asking people to give away their worldly possessions to build up her charity, GTRF); He’s asking us to give of our means and our time despite the pressures of modern living to continue to build temples and then to attend regularly the temples already built. He isn’t asking us to die a martyr’s death (Julie Rowe seems to be preparing herself for such an eventuality); He’s asking us to live a disciple’s life."

Brothers and sisters, how well are each of us doing in these areas that the Lord, through an Apostle of God, is asking us to work on? I testify that we are led by God through living Prophets and Apostles. They know our day and they can see and foresee the challenges we are faced with. If we do what they ask and follow their counsel we will safely make it through the challenges of our day - including the challenges of wolves among the sheep, tares among the wheat, and foolish virgins among the wise. Indeed, "this is a great time to live!"