Elder Ballard Addresses Importance of Traditional Marriage at World Congress of Families
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ต.ค. 2015
- Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints spoke at the ninth World Congress of Families in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Thank you Elder Ballard for the address you gave at the ninth World Congress of Families. You are truly a man of God with a much needed message of the importance of God's plan here on earth.
Elder Ballard's message is one of inspiration that all of us can use in our lives and is worth living by. His message is one of hope for all of God's children.
I am grateful to have living prophets and apostles who teach us about God's will for us.
Thank you, Elder Ballard for bearing your testimony on families.
+Devan Sisson ... I love the family unit as you do... Show me a statement from any GA/12 who says they have actually heard from God and not in a still small voice... The interview with GBH and Larry King shows that he receives revelation in the same way as the Pope would... Help me find a GA who boldly states his interaction in a physical manner with God since the time of JS..
You really think prophets are for real? Why?
We are challenged to discover for ourselves whether the gospel is true. We read the Book of Mormon. We pray about it. We listen to the prophet's words. We pray about it. We ask "are these things true"? A sincere desire to learn for ourselves and adopt truth, regardless of whether it's popular or convenient, but simply because if it is true... we want it.
So we seek for it. And as the Biblical promise goes, if we truly seek then God will open the door and answer our questions. If you want to know why, revelation is the doctrine I suggest you study. If you understand it, then you'll know why we believe and indeed strive to follow our prophets, just like the ancient people who followed Moses and other prophets.
I am totally grateful and humble to have prophets and apostles who walk upon this earth teaching the WILL and MIND of GOD. Thank you Elder Ballard.
I'm appreciate the truths spoken by Elder Ballard. I think those truths, like all truths, will stand the test of time.
+Barbara Paskett Your religion is one of 250,000 religions worldwide. I've never seen anything on the planet as subjective as religious "truth".
+IAN 4000 according to the official definition of Religion, there is only one Religion and not thousands.
+IAN 4000 well according to the definition I know, there is only one Religion, I'll stick to that one since is more concrete.
Kevin D. Najera "Religion" is sometimes used to refer to all religions. It still doesn't mean there is one religion. You are misinterpreting the definition.
You are placing all religions into a generalized category, the equivalent of which is theism. That's like saying since all religions are theist, theism is the only religion. It just doesn't apply.
Thank you Elder Ballard for testifying of the constant nature of God and his commandments.
I have really appreciated the role the LDS faith has had in preserving and promoting the traditional family.
You will really know and feel by the spirit that Elder Ballard is a messenger of God. Family is still the basic unit of society. I love my family so much.
+Virnadette Abasanta That feeling is actually just a placebo. Never underestimate the power of the mind. Anyone can convince themselves whole-heartedly of _anything_.
+IAN 4000 placebo has become a word anyone thinks they can define according to their own will, now that sounds like a placebo "too".
Kevin D. Najera Sure, the definition of the word placebo itself is generally associated with the medical community, but the fact that it has become a sort of a catch all term for when the mind convinces itself it's feeling something it isn't, isn't necessarily a bad thing.
"Feel by the spirit". That sounds like a placebo to me. There's no evidence that a god has ever existed or ever will exist. It is by millions-to-one odds that any given deity is instead a projection of human insecurity, locked into the psyche through cognitive biases. This is made true through the facts that humans will run towards comforting lies rather than inconvenient truths, and that it is easier to fool someone than convince them that they've been filled.
That is the more probable scenario. So that is the one I believe is the case.
+IAN 4000 ohh that's not the Spirit, is one thing to feel good when you want to convince yourself to feel good, it is a different feeling to feel and recognize the Spirit when you don't even want to (which was my case), why would my mind make me feel something I didn't want to feel, I was so against it because I was so prideful to accept it, but still it was there, I wanted to deny it, but it is something you have to lie to yourself continually in order p deny it, I was not always a member of the Church as you can tell by now.
Now about evidence, I recall many years ago there was no evidence that the Earth was round, it was flat. what about flying through the skies? going to the moon, man you were laugh at whenever you would say the contrary, what made the difference? well a lot of things, one of them is technology, can technology prove God? I don't know, my point is that we don't have enough technology to prove God or deny God, we don't have evidence for many things, it was fascinating to me when I learned at school that the electron's speed is not constant, I though, "could it be that it goes at a speed that it is willing to go?" you can call me crazy, but that would put me in the same place great scientist were at some point of their carrier :), I would appreciate that actually.
Kevin D. Najera That was many, MANY years ago. What you're saying is that people should have believed that the Earth was flat without any reason to do so. It's illogical to believe in something just because it's possible that evidence for it *might* be found someday. When it comes down to it, there is no evidence. And thus, you have no logical reason to believe in it.
Do you know how many nonsensical things you can defend by saying that you "cannot prove or disprove them"? I defy you to disprove that I can magically transform into a pink unicorn. In a scientific setting, I would need to first _prove_ that I can turn into a fluffy pink unicorn before anyone is obligated to believe in it. That is the "Burden of proof". No one should believe a notion that has nothing to support it, and you cannot prove a negative nor expect someone to do so.
Just because someone is laughed at does not mean that they are right:
"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."
-Carl Sagan
I sang there with my choir as an opening introduction to the ceremony! (International Children's Choir)
I testify that what Elder M. Russel Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints IS TRUE!
The fairness and maturity he has displayed is the kind of leadership I want to follow. This kind of leadership teaches instead of mocks, teases or assaults. For those that think these views are on the wrong side of history I would say Elder M. Russell Ballard spoke clearly and calmly without drawing unneeded attention to himself. Anyone disagreeing with any part of his talk I would ask are you being belligerent or fault finding? Can you be on the right side of history and be a horrible leader or can Elder M. Russell Ballard be on the right side of history and be a great leader. These views are polarized but regardless of viewpoint what type of leadership was most mature?
terrific talk!
13:27 - 14:07
I am as heterosexual as it gets... I have looked for any statement from a GA that states God has physically talked to them or shown himself to them since the days of JS and I cannot find any... I want to find a recent statement from a GA about God and the direct communication to them and I can't... In fact the very interview with GBH with Larry King specifically says that he has the same interaction with God and the Pope... I am distraught and looking for anything to show direct intervention with God and I cannot find any.... Please enlighten me....
I honestly think the fact that my dad, the man who torn many families apart, who committed adultery and felons many times can go to the temple, but just because I'm gay, I'm not allowed entrance. I'm not against traditional marriage and not against the church. However, even I put the effort to do everything right, I'm not allowed to be part of the church. I've been in the temple, I was a boys scout, I blessed the sacrament, and I have done many things for my church, but they completely shut me out when I came out. It isn't fair, but the only I can do is just to respect their beliefs.
Gregory Pabst, The temple is open to ALL of Gods Children -even you. To enter God's Holy House you and everyone who wants to enter must live by His laws and His ordnances. I am sure at the time your father was committing such pardonable sins he was not able to attend the temple. The same is true for everyone that wants to enter. They must be a baptized member, repent (to turn away from) their sins, and receive a Temple Recommend from their Bishop and Stake President. After these steps are completed anyone can go to the temple and receive the Glories Blessing Contained Therein! It is never to late to go but much is lost by waiting.
+Cristian Perez ... Show me a direct statement of any GA who has physically talked to God about any of these subjects since JS?... I have searched long and hard and can't find any... I am as heterosexual as it gets and am not biased at all - in fact maybe opposite - but help me find real statements not half talk that does not stand up to scrutiny of belief... In fact, I wonder if any of the 12 believe it to death at this point....?
+Cristian Perez ... How is being gay the same degree as murder? If that's what the church sees then I'm in the wrong religion.
Traditional marriage in the United States was never under attack. Even after the Supreme Court ruling, a man can still marry a woman. That tradition was never in jeopardy. Of course, if by "traditional marriage" you really mean "traditional marriage at the exclusion of everyone else," then yes, that was attacked and is now dead. But like this man, few defenders of traditional marriage are willing to say what they truly mean because "...at the exclusion of everyone else" is just a longer way of saying "discrimination." But that's ok, we all know what you really mean, because after all, anyone who would defend something that isn't being attacked would be a fool. And surely these people aren't fools. Surely.
Malignus68, It is unfortunate that you feel that way. Marriage has always been (for thousands of years) a covenant between a man and a woman and God. You can't make a covenant with God unless it is by His terms. Who gives any man or court the right to think they can change the covenant with God. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints fights for equality for gays in hospitalization, medical care, fair housing, employment, probate rights, ect. That is not discrimination by trying to help someone, surely if anyone knows about discrimination it is the Mormons-being run out of 3 or more states, having their homes burned to the ground, tarred and feathered, shot at, arrested, ect. That's discrimination. Marriage is ordained of God. If it is not done according to the will of God it is not marriage, it is a government union and should not be allowed in the Church of God.
You need to read the Supreme Court ruling, and then read what your wrote. There is nothing in that ruling that directs any church to perform same-sex weddings. That ruling directs the courts to perform same-sex marriage. I counter your question with this one: what gives any church the right to change what happens in the courts? Nothing. Church and state are separate, and this was a state matter from the beginning. Churches don't have to like it, they don't have to honor it inside their church buildings, but they have no right to try and control it. As soon as they do that, they are no longer a religion, they are a political body. And before you deny that the Mormons are attempting to be a political body, does Proposition 8 ring a bell?
+Malignus68 Obviously you do not accept the premise that God is the Supreme Law, even over all government officials-even the US Supreme Court. That is your right, however the majority of the founders of our country were believers in God as the Supreme Being and Law. And all of the rights that come from the Bill of Rights are based on that principle. When the court tries to overturn God's Laws then there will be a breakdown in society as a whole (which is happening now because of the breakdown of the family because of easy divorce and not having a mother or father at home raising their own kids). Church and State comes from Thomas Jefferson speaking to the Danbury Baptist Church in which he is talking about the State or Government should not have any control over moral issues of the individual or the Church. The reason that the LDS Church was involved in Prop. 8 is because of the moral issue of same sex marriage. The LDS Church is involved in all moral issues though the members. I believe it is not the business of our Government to be involved in any moral issue. Our Federal Government was designed to protect us as united-states. That's all- All laws were to be established through the individual states. How we got to where we are today is the complete opposite of what our founders wanted.
Utter silliness. There's not a single law in the entire United States that God wrote; not a single bill became law with God's signature. God did not write or sign the Declaration of Independence, or the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights. God didn't even write the Bible. God's law may have sway in the afterlife, but here on Earth the laws are written by people. And until God himself gets appointed to the Supreme Court, what you think God may or may not want doesn't count for squat...exactly according to the founding fathers' design.
+Malignus68 Elder Ballard stated the stance of the church and by the religious beliefs what is right and wrong. It is not wrong to disagree with a law. He even acknowledges the govt law of the United States that same sex marriage is allowed but affirms that this is not a practice which the church, it's chapels or temple can be used for as it is contrary to the purpose these were established for. This does not "change what happens in the courts" as you so put it but clarifies the Mormon position. Same sex couples are welcome to attend church services and classes but why would they want to when they disagree with the most basic teachings of that church?
I feel sorry for the one's who believe in the LDS religion
Traditional families.... Abraham's polygynous family. Moses' polygynous family, Jacob's polygynous family. Yes, one man, more than one woman. Until A.D. 1,000 the Jews were polygynous (then Rabbeinu Gershom sold-out for advantage), and the Muslims still practice polygyny. Hmm, three very different Abrahamic religions, yet all practiced polygyny. Some Baptist churches (who have never been Mormons) practice polygyny.
I am a Mormon, yet, I uphold that most all Mormons do not live by Christian standards (this is true of most who call themselves Christians also). That said, regardless of mainstream-Christianity's opinions, the use of garments have always been by members of the Church of Jesus Christ since ancient times. Paul, in the NT, talked about this, and so does the Old Testament (Leviticus 8). People like to harp on Joseph Smith about polygamy too (the mainstream Mormons excommunicate those who choose to live it), yet, polygamy is biblical. There are even Baptist churches out there (who have never had anything to do with "Mormons", who practice polygamy too. It is Biblical. people harp on Joseph Smith for preaching marriage can last for eternity, they say he invented the notion, yet it is in the bible, and even Muslims believe in polygamy and eternal marriage (just differently than Christians). People get mad at Joseph for saying that people can become Gods 'like' our Father in Heaven, yet St. Jerome (a Catholic) taught that too. It was a common belief until the council of Nicaea. The council of Nicaea decided they would dictate what is right, and discard the rest (forget what God has to say is what they were saying in effect). People harp on Joseph for saying many American Indians are of Hebrew ancestry, yet, it was a commonly held belief by many congregational ministers in the 19th century. Books were written about this before Joseph even showed-up on scene. Even the idea of temples is biblical, and as God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, I fail to see how God will do things differently than he planned them before he even laid the foundation of the world. Which is why apostles and prophets still exist and always will; though, I would agree that Monson and his fellows are not apostles nor prophets, but are frauds (see D&C 64; 37-40, and D&C 107). F and J gaming, how many churches who call themselves Christian fulfill these Biblical requirements? Monson and his ilk are frauds, yes, but somewhere (though we do not know where exactly) there are real prophets on earth, and the book of revelations talks about more to come who will be hear even before the Lord returns. Anyway, more could be said...
+Clinton Rhinehart Nice try troll.
I'm not a troll, though, I find it funny people who haven't a response call people names. If I am wrong, show me.
"If any man writes to you, or preaches to you, doctrines contrary to the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, set him as an imposter." --Joseph Smith, Times & Seasons, 1 April 1844
What I wrote above Joseph also taught. I admit I wrote from memory, as the references were not in front of me. You write and preach contrary to what the Lord taught Joseph, so does Monson; etc... So whoa re the imposters?
Now, I challenge you, "yew neek," instead of trying to insult me, if you say I am wrong, show me, from the Bible specifically, were i am wrong. You can't.
Joseph Smith said the whole gospel could be proven in the Bible, but that the Book of Mormon was another witness of Jesus Christ.
So, stop talking and libeling, and man-up, SHOW me where I am incorrect. Prove it. So far, your only response was to attack my character.
Speak to identify abomination as the Scriptures do. EMMANUEL called a Syrophoenician Woman a dog. Matthew, Mark 7:24-30.
mt15: 21 After leaving there, Jesus withdrew to the district of Tyre and Sidon. 22 And a Canaanite woman from that district came out and began to cry out [urgently], saying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David (Messiah); my daughter is cruelly possessed by a demon.” 23 But He did not say a word in answer to her. And His disciples came and asked Him [repeatedly], “Send her away, because she keeps shouting out after us.” 24 He answered, “I was commissioned by Godand sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” 25 But she came andbegan to kneel down before Him, saying, “Lord, help me!” 26 And He replied, “It is not good (appropriate, fair) to take the children’s bread and throw it to the pet dogs.” 27 She said, “Yes, Lord; but even the pet dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their [young] masters’ table.” 28 Then Jesus answered her, “Woman, your faith [your personal trust and confidence in My power] is great; it will be done for you as you wish.” And her daughter was healed from that moment.
mk7:24 Jesus got up and left there and went to the region of Tyre [and Sidon, the coastal area of Phoenicia]. He entered a house and did not want anyone to knowabout it; but it was impossible for Him to be hidden [from the public]. 25 Instead, after hearing about Him, a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit immediately came and fell at His feet. 26 Now the woman was a Gentile (Greek), a Syrophoenician by nationality. And she kept pleading with Him to drive the demon out of her daughter. 27 He was saying to her, “First let the children [of Israel] be fed, for it is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the pet dogs (non-Jews).” 28 But she replied, “Yes, Lord, but even the pet dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.” 29 And He said to her, “Because of this answer [reflecting your humility and faith], go [knowing that your request is granted]; the demon has left your daughter [permanently].” 30 And returning to her home, she found the child lying on the couch [relaxed and resting], the demon has gone.
And this woman had humility and faith.
Abominations are doing the opposite of advertising pleadings with The HIGH PRIEST in Heaven. They delight to be called Demons.
None are HEAVENLY FATHER'S Children until they come to HIM, through HIS Son, in the New Birth of Life.
EMMANUEL come to destroy all unrighteousness, leaving no place for sin.
Those singing kids are creepy.
Ballard speaks of "traditional" families and marriages; and yet Brigham Young and his successors satisfied their lust through non-traditional polygamy. Fighting against same-sex marriage under the guise of supporting traditional marriage is crazy; and the Mormon leadership is wrong. Joseph Smith would not have fought against same sex marriage. The Book of Mormon does not preach against same sex marriage. Only the Mormon leadership after Joseph Smith have gotten it all wrong.