Criticism-READ IT!

[LukeAir2008]

I had an interesting thought while in the Temple. When we are covered by the atonement we cannot point our finger in accusation towards anyone.

+1

[Dewey Olsen]

Why Is Ezekiel So Negitive about the Leaders of the Last Days. God do I understand your old prophets or am I just blind?

Chapter 34
The Lord reproves those shepherds who do not feed the flock—In the last days, the Lord will gather the lost sheep of Israel—The Messiah will be their Shepherd—The Lord will make his gospel covenant with them.

So another prophet, Ezekiel says, we will have a feeding problem, in the day we live in.... So thats Ezekiel, Jerimia, Isaiah all say we will have a feeding problem in the day that we live in.... And that our leaders will be replaced, because they are not feeding us correctly.


Why is Ezekiel so negative about our leaders of the last day…. That he sends the Messiah and his servant David to fix the problem?

2 Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks?3 Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: but ye feed not the flock.4 The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them.



If I understand what Ezekiel says… it seems they put their self-first, and some Kill them that are feed. Hum… I know we send food all over the world, I know this for a fact. I know I feel the spirit when they speak in conference. So why does Ezekiel say bad things about our day and Ezekiel says “ the Messiah and his servant David come to earth”, and fix or replace the bad Shepherds of Israel with a new Shepherd named David… The Messiah right hand man.

8 As I live, saith the Lord God, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock;9 Therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord;
10 Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require my flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; for I will deliver my flock from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them.
I know we have 60,000 or so people out trying to find the lost sheep… So How could Ezekiel be talking about our leaders… He must be talking about those T.V. guys. Or perhaps He Christ Thinks he can do a better Job of gathering. So if the bridegroom came??? Why would only half of our virgins(sound like temple types) find and follow him… That just blows me away.


12 As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out my sheep, and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day.

13 And I will bring them out from the people, and gather them from the countries, and will bring them to their own land, and feed them upon the mountains of Israel by the rivers, and in all the inhabited places of the country.

This is interesting… It sounds like “In the Day of the Lord” He will be among his sheep… So In the Last days…. Some of our leaders do not feed the sheep,

[ They what give vomit or milk instead of Meat? See Isaiah commentary chapter 28 http://www.isaiahexplained.com/isaiah_ch_28.html#_7CWHO CAN READ THIS AND NOT WONDER? AM I BLIND? DO I UNDERSTAND THE DAY I AM LIVING IN?



So The Messiah (Bridegroom???) comes among his people [See chapter summery] and starts gathering them out… why ??? If our Leaders are doing it ok, why does the Messiah want to do it. Like Moses and his right hand man in a dark day they deliver them out of all the places where they have been scattered.




Back to Ezekiel...
17 And as for you, O my flock, thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I judge between cattle and cattle, between the rams and the he goats.
18 Seemeth it a small thing unto you to have eaten up the good pasture, but ye must tread down with your feet the residue of your pastures? and to have drunk of the deep waters, but ye must foul the residue with your feet? 19 And as for my flock, they eat that which ye have trodden with your feet; and they drink that which ye have fouled with your feet.

20 Therefore thus saith the Lord God unto them; Behold, I, even I, will judge between the fat cattle and between the lean cattle.


23 And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.

24 And I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the Lord have spoken it.

Verse 24 sounds like two people… So We Have Christ and His right hand man…. David in that day…. When these Guys come to the earth… it sound like Ezekiel is Happy about their leadership. Un like some current leaders in our day… The last Days…. THE Shepherds of Israel… ouch.

Wow what a day to live in....
dEwEy

[BroJones]

Juliette -- I loved the talk by Elder Oaks also (your 1st post), yet I notice that you LEFT OUT a very important part -- regarding his counsel that is OK (and even desirable) for us to criticize POLITICAL leaders, and he explains why this is important.

Would you take a minute, and quote the REST of the talk? thanks.
Steve

[Juliette]

Juliette -- I loved the talk by Elder Oaks also (your 1st post), yet I notice that you LEFT OUT a very important part -- regarding his counsel that is OK (and even desirable) for us to criticize POLITICAL leaders, and he explains why this is important.

Would you take a minute, and quote the REST of the talk? thanks.
Steve

My post was about being critical of our church leaders. I did read the rest, and didn't want the tread going in that direction.
Why don't you start a new thread and quote the rest?

[LukeAir2008]

I do not refer to the kind of criticism the dictionary defines as “the act of passing judgment as to the merits of anything.” (Random House Dictionary, unabridged ed., s.v. “criticism.”) That kind of criticism is inherent in the exercise of agency and freedom.

I don't recall there being much personal criticism of Church leaders on this forum. I can't remember seeing anyone single out a specific leader and criticise them or malign them personally.

Is criticism of something like City Creek Mall a personal attack on someone or criticism as to the merits or value of something as defined by Elder Oaks above?

[Juliette]

I do not refer to the kind of criticism the dictionary defines as “the act of passing judgment as to the merits of anything.” (Random House Dictionary, unabridged ed., s.v. “criticism.”) That kind of criticism is inherent in the exercise of agency and freedom.

I don't recall there being much personal criticism of Church leaders on this forum. I can't remember seeing anyone single out a specific leader and criticise them or malign them personally.

Is criticism of something like City Creek Mall a personal attack on someone or criticism as to the merits or value of something as defined by Elder Oaks above?

It is definitely criticism. Not good. Read the posts.

[chase]

It is definitely criticism. Not good. Read the posts.

I guess that's one opinion. Emphasis on the word opinion. I have mine, you have yours. Truth is truth, independent of opinion. There has been some criticism on this forum, but I believe the vast majority of what you label as "criticism" is not criticism at all. Forgive us for using our brains to connect historical dots into what we believe makes an honest picture. Feel free to draw your own conclusions, but please allow us that same privilege. We claim the privilege of worshiping God and allow other men that same privilege. Do we not? Does that AoF exclude allowing members from having differing opinions? Maybe I should write an article about how people shouldn't criticize those of us with different opinions. Are the brethren so much loftier than us that we are subject to your criticism but they are not? Last time I checked, lofty positions are dangerous. Why do we set men up on pedestals? Aren't we all men? Aren't we all in this together? Then why criticize any man? Satan would have you believe that you are better than those who believe different than you. Christ would have you withhold judgment from all men. I don't believe we are innocent when we berate any man, brethren included. However, I believe we can make observations about our standing before God as individuals and also as members of church, for we are all members and all entitled to know if our path is acceptable. So that revelation is not off limits, and if a man feels uncomfortable with his standing because the church seems to have sidestepped, it is his responsibility to either get on or remain on the right path. The brethren aren't even relevant in this conversation. Individual growth and faithfulness and especially revelation is the only measuring stick we can use to gauge our salvation.

*edit to fix the quote syntax

[Juliette]

It is definitely criticism. Not good. Read the posts.

I guess that's one opinion. Emphasis on the word opinion. I have mine, you have yours. Truth is truth, independent of opinion. There has been some criticism on this forum, but I believe the vast majority of what you label as "criticism" is not criticism at all. Forgive us for using our brains to connect historical dots into what we believe makes an honest picture. Feel free to draw your own conclusions, but please allow us that same privilege. We claim the privilege of worshiping God and allow other men that same privilege. Do we not? Does that AoF exclude allowing members from having differing opinions? Maybe I should write an article about how people shouldn't criticize those of us with different opinions. Are the brethren so much loftier than us that we are subject to your criticism but they are not? Last time I checked, lofty positions are dangerous. Why do we set men up on pedestals? Aren't we all men? Aren't we all in this together? Then why criticize any man? Satan would have you believe that you are better than those who believe different than you. Christ would have you withhold judgment from all men. I don't believe we are innocent when we berate any man, brethren included. However, I believe we can make observations about our standing before God as individuals and also as members of church, for we are all members and all entitled to know if our path is acceptable. So that revelation is not off limits, and if a man feels uncomfortable with his standing because the church seems to have sidestepped, it is his responsibility to either get on or remain on the right path. The brethren aren't even relevant in this conversation. Individual growth and faithfulness and especially revelation is the only measuring stick we can use to gauge our salvation.

*edit to fix the quote syntax

You are correct Chase, it is my opinion, that is what we discuss here, opinions. I was not point blank criticising you, but if one is ultra-sensitive they might take it that way. And yes, I hold the Prophet and General Authorities in high esteem, and also felt that they were being criticized. So that makes me think I am better than those who believe differently? Who's judging who?

Here's a few posts I found offensive and critical:

-- Juxtapose a pic of First Pres. cutting Mall Ribbon with Book of Mormon verses about oppressing the poor [Col. Flagg]
-- Declare the church leaders will be held accountable for all the people leaving, and that they like to keep us in the dark [ithink]
-- Accuse the Church/leaders of suppressing scripture (1/3 tithing), robbing the poor [Thinker]
-- Accuse (alternatingly) Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, et al, of being gross adulterers [Col Flagg]
-- Declare that a Prophet (Heber J. Grant) removed scripture (Lectures on faith), and substituted at least 20 points of False Doctrine [Etheriel Blue]
-- Promote the view that Joseph Smith (and later leaders) lied about Book of Abraham, creating impression it is fiction [iThink]
-- Declare the Conference Center is the Great and Spacious Building, built for the aggrandizement of old white men; money should have been spent on poor [Aussie Oi]
-- Polygamy/sec 132 is false arguments are essentially that Joseph lied or Brigham Lied, Church lied/is lying - and full implications of that [Col Flagg, Awake, & others]
-- City Creek Mall is Church worshipping mammon/ oppressing poor [Col Flagg, AussieOi, Thinker, iThink, Awake, others]

[chase]

It is definitely criticism. Not good. Read the posts.

I guess that's one opinion. Emphasis on the word opinion. I have mine, you have yours. Truth is truth, independent of opinion. There has been some criticism on this forum, but I believe the vast majority of what you label as "criticism" is not criticism at all. Forgive us for using our brains to connect historical dots into what we believe makes an honest picture. Feel free to draw your own conclusions, but please allow us that same privilege. We claim the privilege of worshiping God and allow other men that same privilege. Do we not? Does that AoF exclude allowing members from having differing opinions? Maybe I should write an article about how people shouldn't criticize those of us with different opinions. Are the brethren so much loftier than us that we are subject to your criticism but they are not? Last time I checked, lofty positions are dangerous. Why do we set men up on pedestals? Aren't we all men? Aren't we all in this together? Then why criticize any man? Satan would have you believe that you are better than those who believe different than you. Christ would have you withhold judgment from all men. I don't believe we are innocent when we berate any man, brethren included. However, I believe we can make observations about our standing before God as individuals and also as members of church, for we are all members and all entitled to know if our path is acceptable. So that revelation is not off limits, and if a man feels uncomfortable with his standing because the church seems to have sidestepped, it is his responsibility to either get on or remain on the right path. The brethren aren't even relevant in this conversation. Individual growth and faithfulness and especially revelation is the only measuring stick we can use to gauge our salvation.

*edit to fix the quote syntax

You are correct Chase, it is my opinion, that is what we discuss here, opinions. I was not point blank criticising you, but if one is ultra-sensitive they might take it that way. And yes, I hold the Prophet and General Authorities in high esteem, and also felt that they were being criticized. So that makes me think I am better than those who believe differently? Who's judging who?

Here's a few posts I found offensive and critical:

-- Juxtapose a pic of First Pres. cutting Mall Ribbon with Book of Mormon verses about oppressing the poor [Col. Flagg]
-- Declare the church leaders will be held accountable for all the people leaving, and that they like to keep us in the dark [ithink]
-- Accuse the Church/leaders of suppressing scripture (1/3 tithing), robbing the poor [Thinker]
-- Accuse (alternatingly) Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, et al, of being gross adulterers [Col Flagg]
-- Declare that a Prophet (Heber J. Grant) removed scripture (Lectures on faith), and substituted at least 20 points of False Doctrine [Etheriel Blue]
-- Promote the view that Joseph Smith (and later leaders) lied about Book of Abraham, creating impression it is fiction [iThink]
-- Declare the Conference Center is the Great and Spacious Building, built for the aggrandizement of old white men; money should have been spent on poor [Aussie Oi]
-- Polygamy/sec 132 is false arguments are essentially that Joseph lied or Brigham Lied, Church lied/is lying - and full implications of that [Col Flagg, Awake, & others]
-- City Creek Mall is Church worshipping mammon/ oppressing poor [Col Flagg, AussieOi, Thinker, iThink, Awake, others]

Ultra-sensitive, no. Here's a question. Is it a criticism of someone to point out that they may have been dishonest? Another question. Are any of these things true? DID Heber J Grant remove the Lectures of Faith from the D&C? Yes. Did he substitute 20 points of false doctrine? Perhaps. Is that a criticism or an attack on him? No. It is a honest question. If there is evidence suggesting that a number of people on either side of the argument may have been mistaken in their view concerning polygamy, is it critical to entertain the possibility that any one of them may have lied or presented a false view of the truth? No, it is an honest question. Is disapproval of the mall at City Creek a criticism of anyone? No. City Creek is an object, not a person. I personally do not believe that it was a wise use of church funds. Does that constitute criticism of any man? No it doesn't. It is nothing more than a differing opinion. Like I said, there has been some criticism on this forum, yes. But in general we keep things pretty clean, in my opinion. My point is that if you are going to hold the members of this forum to such high standards on this forum, then do it in both directions. I can point out many many more examples of disagreeing members of this forum calling individuals "wolves in sheep clothing" or other similar things. Their criticism of members of the forum who have differing viewpoints is just as damnable as any criticism I have seen toward any church leader. If they are above it, we ought to be too. I'm not saying that there haven't been people that have crossed the line. I am saying that it is true of both sides. I'm not being sensitive. I'm simply stating that the standard ought to apply to everyone who criticizes, because there are many who criticize on this forum and assume they are doing it in defense of something and that they are justified. Vain hope.

[ithink]

Why is Ezekiel so negative about our leaders of the last day….

That chapter 34 by Ezekiel is not negative: it is the most encouraging thing I have hear in 20 years.

[Juliette]

You are just rambling. Saying that City Creek Mall is an inappropriation of funds IS critcizing our leaders. This is not your area of stewardship. Stop trying to dazzle me with your rhetoric. I don't even understand why you are on the attack. We were just told by the administrator of this forum to please stop this. Get a clue!

[chase]

You are just rambling. Saying that City Creek Mall is an inappropriation of funds IS critcizing our leaders. This is not your area of stewardship. Stop trying to dazzle me with your rhetoric. I don't even understand why you are on the attack. We were just told by the administrator of this forum to please stop this. Get a clue!

Well I guess if you insist on redefinining the word criticism to something it is not, then I have no other answer for you except to reiterate my point (the only point I've really been trying to make which you still have not addressed). Perhaps the criticism that exists on this forum is just as insidious and just as contrary to the spirit of Zion as is the criticism (so called) of leaders. I'm not encouraging criticism of anyone. All I'm saying is that in general our arguments and opinions are NOT criticism, but a lot of the response hurled in return is. Most of the people I observe offering opinions are NOT wolves. BrianM, if you've asked me to stop something and I missed it and am still doing it, I appologize.

[awake]

Disagreeing with someone is not criticizing. Why do some have such a hard time with accepting that God has given us and wants us to use our agency to form and express our own opinions and conclusions and judgments, especially about things church leaders may do or say, so they can't lead us or others astray if they happen to be wrong or fall.

We have to use our brains and then if something is amiss that is not being taken care of, we have to warn and protect others from the error also.

If we disagree with our spouse, is that criticizing them? No.

If we disagree with and say no to something the Bishop asks us to do, is that criticizing? No, it's not even wrong, unless it was a righteous thing the Bishop was asking.

If we disagree with our Stake President asking us to accept a Bishop who smokes or is abusive, is that criticizing? (true story) No.

If we disagree with something a prophet or apostle says in General Conference, and even discuss our disagreement with others, is that criticizing or even wrong? No, especially if what that prophet or apostle said is contrary to the scriptures, and many times it is.

If we disagree with the general practice of the Church supporting men abusing and abandoning their wives and children without question or consequences, and we discuss the huge problem with others, is that criticizing, or wrong? No, it is necessary to try to spread the word of how wrong it is and hopefully someday enough leaders will learn, repent and change things and stand for the right.

If we stay silent in the face of evil or error, then we are only helping that evil or error to grow and we will be held accountable for that.

[katmr]

Disagreeing with someone is not criticizing. Why do some have such a hard time with accepting that God has given us and wants us to use our agency to form and express our own opinions and conclusions and judgments, especially about things church leaders may do or say, so they can't lead us or others astray if they happen to be wrong or fall.

We have to use our brains and then if something is amiss that is not being taken care of, we have to warn and protect others from the error also.

If we disagree with our spouse, is that criticizing them? No.

If we disagree with and say no to something the Bishop asks us to do, is that criticizing? No, it's not even wrong, unless it was a righteous thing the Bishop was asking.

If we disagree with our Stake President asking us to accept a Bishop who smokes or is abusive, is that criticizing? (true story) No.

If we disagree with something a prophet or apostle says in General Conference, and even discuss our disagreement with others, is that criticizing or even wrong? No, especially if what that prophet or apostle said is contrary to the scriptures, and many times it is.

If we disagree with the general practice of the Church supporting men abusing and abandoning their wives and children without question or consequences, and we discuss the huge problem with others, is that criticizing, or wrong? No, it is necessary to try to spread the word of how wrong it is and hopefully someday enough leaders will learn, repent and change things and stand for the right.

If we stay silent in the face of evil or error, then we are only helping that evil or error to grow and we will be held accountable for that.

Very well said.

[gr8ideas]

+1 Awake