Now I was reading over this thread again and trying to re-activated and noticed most people have posted talk about that being an Apostate would indicate someone who has different believes from the Church and they preach it to others (teach it). Based on talks I have read and recent personal experience, it seems to me that also just thinking about an issue from a different perspective or not agreeing or asking the wrong question can get you in real trouble and be considered an 'Apostate'.
"One of the first steps to apostasy is to find fault with your Bishop; and when that is done, unless repented of a second step is soon taken, and by and by the person is cut off from the Church, and that is the end of it. Will you allow yourselves to find fault with your Bishop? (DBY, 86).
No man gets power from God to raise disturbance in any Branch of the Church. Such power is obtained from an evil source (DBY, 72).
When a man begins to find fault, inquiring in regard to this, that, and the other, saying, "Does this or that look as though the Lord dictated it?" you may know that that person has more or less of the spirit of apostasy"
https://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Cur...%20apostasy.htm
There is a popular joke about apostates on the net, it shows someone sustaining a member and in one hand it shows 'All in Favor?' (Everyone raises their hand) and then on the other part the cartoon shows 'All the apostates may now raise their hand in opposition' (No one raises their hand). It is funny, because I know most members generally feel that if you just do not 'follow along' with what everyone else is doing you are apostate.
The Church handles everything based on facts and not opinions. So if you did not want to sustain someone then you should have 'hard' evidence concerning their worthiness such as committing adultery, stealing, or anything that would warrant a disciplinary council. Other than that you just need to work it out. Now it is important to understand that having 'hard evidence' is not a written policy, it is merely assumed by those in leadership.
Personally I think there is a difference between inquiring after knowledge and making firm declarations. For instance, one might ask, 'Why did the Church practise plural marriage?' as opposed to 'We should practise plural marriage!' The latter is what gets members in trouble because they are basically saying how the Church should be run.
So, where does that leave those of us who have questions? Essentially this attitude says that anyone who asks a question such as, "Brigham said 'X', and Elder Y said 'not X', so, which is right?" now is an apostate. Is that right?
What about those cases where a person really feels uncomfortable with their Bishop (EQ president, RS president, etc)? They may have a very bad feeling about that person, to the point where they cannot divulge information, yet there is no 'proof' of wrongdoing. Is this person apostate? Under the current conditions, they are, and are most likely to either go inactive or be disciplined.
The problem is that now we are having some of the leaders (fortunately very few), being found to be real rascals and low lifes. There have been cases of leaders who have been abusive, power hungry, etc. But the damage was done, when the people who weren't comfortable with the situation were driven away as apostate for not fully supporting their leaders.
It gets even more sticky when you have someone who has studied a lot, has sought further light and knowledge, and has received personal revelation on certain subjects. On some of these subjects, people are getting excommunicated as apostate simply because they express their testimonies.
I guess that I have a personal interest in this subject, as I am not particularly orthodox in my beliefs and attitudes.
QUOTE |
Personally I think there is a difference between inquiring after knowledge and making firm declarations. For instance, one might ask, 'Why did the Church practise plural marriage?' as opposed to 'We should practise plural marriage!' The latter is what gets members in trouble because they are basically saying how the Church should be run. |
QUOTE |
The problem is that now we are having some of the leaders (fortunately very few), being found to be real rascals and low lifes. There have been cases of leaders who have been abusive, power hungry, etc. But the damage was done, when the people who weren't comfortable with the situation were driven away as apostate for not fully supporting their leaders. |
QUOTE |
Mormon author disciplined by church Book questioned whether Smith revised scriptureThe Associated Press Updated: 7:16 p.m. ET Dec. 12, 2004SANDY, Utah - A retired Mormon educator who wrote a book questioning whether the founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints misrepresented his authority as a prophet was suspended from the church Sunday. Grant Palmer, 64, who wrote "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins," could have been excommunicated. Instead, he said the church "disfellowshipped" him at a hearing, which means he will retain his membership but lose certain privileges, such as being able to go into temples or serve in an official church capacity. https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6703588/ |
Offtopic but, Maybe this should be a new topic, but I wasn't sure so if you think it should and it isn't too negative, feel free to move it to it's own topic |
Tena, I haven't read the book but I read some of the extracts of it and it is highly controversial because he basically denies the divinity of the Book of Mormon. If he as a member of the Church do not believe in the First vision and thinks Joseph Smith lied, then a serious chat with his Church leaders is neccesary.
Joseph Smith:
"I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives."
(History of the Church, 3:385)
I have read every post under this topic, and to be honest it truly scared me at first to think the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints will one day become corrupt or infiltrated by the devil. But then I thought of the promise given to Joseph Smith, that the priesthood will never again be taken from this earth, and this Church is the only place on earth one can find this priesthood/authority.
As for any unresolved issue or questions you may have, Brother Nighthawk, the only advice I can think of is to fallow Brother Josephs example, pray when you lack wisdom.
Also perhaps what Isaiah was referring to was the time when some of the saints left the church after the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum. Even the Prophet's own wife Emma separated. Could Isaiah's words be referring to that time in Latter Day history?