Telemantros

Members
  • Posts

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Telemantros

  1. No, that’s not what I mean. My point is that if one’s salvation is based off their effort in conjunction with Christ, then that’s a load I would say cannot be accomplished. As for the underwear comment, that’s not what I believe either. It would seem very much that he was, at least his launguage selection seems to indicate as such “you are not” is a prescriptive phrase. This, is not, again what the LDS missionaries have told me.
  2. That’s not what the LDS missionaries have told me when I ask them about my current status.
  3. I don’t know what I think about this summation. I disagree that I no longer think that the LDS view of salvation does not crush; rather, I think the if/then language is prevelant in your scriptures and remains existentially crushing based off one’s efforts.
  4. I see. The views that systematic theology is worthless (even that there can never be a systematic theology in principle)are beginning to make sense given your views of open canon and the prophet. I also believe that I know understand your views of salvation. I very much disagree (for another thread sometime), but at least I'm understanding your views, which is helpful. Thanks. Tele
  5. @Just_A_Guy Thats very helpful, I’m seeing where the disconnect is. Thanks, tele
  6. @Jane_Doe Hi! I don't think I'm making it any more complicated than it needs to be, I'm just engaging in theology. LDS do engage in systematic theology yes? These would simply be moments of the salvation process, each with some import. I thank you for your three steps. I also appreciate that for many, there just needs to be a functional understanding of how things work when it comes to salvation and repentance. But my mind does not work like that. I want to make sure I understand what is being taught; call it a flaw, or call it a virtue - but it is who I am. Cheers, Tele
  7. Thanks everyone. So is it accurate to say that on the LDS view, a believer is finally justified before God after being obedient, that is, after a process of transformation? Peace, tele
  8. Specifically regarding the order of salvation. For instance the typical Protestant view would be: election, gospel call, regeneration, conversion, justification, adoption, sanctification. Catholic as best as I understand it is: actual grace, gospel call, faith/conversion, baptism/regeneration, justification coupled with sanctification. Would the LDS view be premortal existence, gospel call, conversion (faith and repentance), baptism and the gift of the HS, and enduring to the end? Peace, Tele
  9. Greetings! A question for your lot! So in the last moment in history before we enjoy God forever is the judgment seat. The bible is pretty clear that all of us (e.g. Mt. 12:36, Rom. 14:10, 12; 2 Cor. 5:10; Heb. 4:13), believer and non-believer, face some sort of judgement for what we have done with our lives. But it also seems clear (to me anyway) that Christians will not be judged pertaining to our salvation (e.g. John 3:16, 18; 5:24; Romans 8:1). So it seems that our lives/actions are being judged here. If this is all correct so far, here's my question I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on: If we/Christians are judged according to our works, and this is not for salvation, then what is it for? Is it to determine rewards? Is it just to count the evidence that indicates we where believers in the first place? Is it to fulfill justice and balance the divine ledger officially? Assuming this question is making sense, what do you guys/gals think? Peace, Tele
  10. From what I have read, multiverse is an untestable theory ... meaning we cannot observe anything past our universe, and so cannot detect a multiverse if it did exist. From what I have read, multiverse is typically appealed too to get around the fine-tuning argument for the existence of God; an argument worth checking out! As far as making application to Ezekiel 37, this is about the new David bringing hope and a new heart to an otherwise stubborn and obstinate people. I don’t see a scientific interpretation possible here. What do you think? tele
  11. But highly recommended. In 2007, there was a church manual (which I previously cited) that was encouraged reading “Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Spencer W. Kimball,” wherein the editors for this manual referenced The Miracle of Forgiveness in the historical summary and cited the book 22 times in a chapter in forgiveness. So there is some precedent. At least you can say is that it is highly recommended as it was also recommended from the pulpit twice at your general conference (as I mentioned before). @Lost Boy I could see how this book would make you feel worse. This is the crushed spirit I was referencing earlier, one I think that is unfounded based off what salvation really entails, a precious gift.
  12. @zil A few points of clarification to my questions. My expression of exasperation "what is a seeker to do," is my general confusion as to how truth is achieved in LDS view; I'm very much trying to follow but I'm used to a more linear, point-by-point approach. I was expressing, perhaps not well enough, my confusion as to the impact of this book I just read. I asked if this book was trustworthy or not and how to know, and people say that it is in part. They say that the prophet wrote things about forgiveness that where perhaps "too harsh" or "true in part," and then point me to other writings of the same prophet. Ok I track, but then some have cited other statements from Kimball that seem to directly contradict what I just read in Miracle of Forgiveness. This is my point, how am I supposed to conclude? Some say they hate the book (e.g. @lostinwater), others don't' comment on what they think, and still others, you are correct, think its overall positive. The problem is I don't know which impression is true, I'm new to all of this. I get the sense that people are saying, listen to the prophet his words are true ... unless they aren't. You note salvation has always been taught as a process with God's help. But my problem, again as a newbie, is that I didn't see that in the Miracle of Forgiveness, which leads me back to the ambiguity of the above paragraph. You try to help me by asking me how to reconcile some biblical passages. Well, this is a great question. How does one reconcile them? I have no idea, this is why I'm asking questions! Lastly, you state nowhere does it say you cannot repent a second, third, fourth time. Well, Kimball says it in his book (I provided the page numbers) and he quotes scriptures to boot. Again, hence my confusion. i.e. True repentance does not allow for repeated sin but forsaking that sin; that is, if a sin must be forsaken again (a second, third, fourth time) then the sin by definition was never utterly forsaken in the first place. True repentance means not repeating the sin. Kimball quotes John 8:11, “… go, and sin no more,” D&C 82:7, “7 And now, verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge; go your ways and sin no more; but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God,” and, D&C 58:43, “43 By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins—behold, he will confess them and forsake them.” Kimball notes, “In other words, it is not real repentance until one has abandoned the error of his way and started on a new path,” (p. 163). He continues, “Old sins return, says the Lord in his modern revelations. Many people either do not know this or they conveniently forget it … Each previously forgiven sin is added to the new one and the whole gets to be a heavy load. Thus when a man has made up his mind to change his life, there must be no turning back. Any reversal, even in a small degree, is greatly to his detriment,” (p. 169, 170). He insists, “Discontinuance of sin must be permanent. The will to do must be strong and kept strengthened,” (p. 176). Remember, “Being perfect means to triumph over sin. This is a mandate from the Lord. He is just and wise and kind. HE would never require anything from his children which was not fro their benefit and which was not attainable. Perfection therefore is an achievable goal,” (p. 209). Finally, “’Yes,’ I said, ‘but we are commanded to be supermen. Said the Lord, ‘Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.’ (Matt. 5:48) We are gods in embryo, and the Lord demands perfection of us,’” (p. 286). I want to emphasize, I am not trying to be combative, aggressive, or argumentative. I'm simply trying to understand what I just read. I am not an LDS. I want to understand LDS teaching but am having trouble. Tele
  13. I am glad, I hope/assume you worship God. But that isn’t what I’m asking, I’m wondering if Kimball’s is correct or not as I previously stated.
  14. Wow, lot of responses, thanks so much for the willingness to help me. So most people don't like Miracle of Forgiveness, this much is clear! Not very many positive statements at all about it. This is odd to me; there seems to be a discrepancy between the opinion of the high officers of the church and their praise for the book in years past (as I mentioned) vs. this forum's opinion of it. What is a seeker to do? On the one hand, this book is apparently cited in church manuals, proclaimed or alluded to in general conference and speeches, and yet on the other hand everyone on this forum is expressing their dislike or their interpretation (or reinterpretation of it?) - the main one being that salvation is a process with God's help. I'm at a loss though, for this interpretation stands against the four main points Kimball outlined above ... with book citation ... with scriptural support! Even if we take Kimball's own words and inner logic with a grain of salt, he is still quoting the standard works to make his points. We can't just ignore these. "Perfection is not required," it is noted here in this forum, but he quotes, "... be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect." "It's a process," it is suggested in this forum, but Kimball quotes, "And now, verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge; go your ways and sin no more; but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God." I appreciate your interpretations of Kimball, and your responses, but as far as I can tell no one has dealt with the actual logic and scriptural support in the book. And Kimball notes, “The Lord’s program is unchangeable. His laws are immutable. They will not be modified. Your opinion or mine does not alter the laws. Many in the world, and even some in the Church, seem to think that eventually the Lord will be merciful and give them the unearned blessing. But the Lord cannot be merciful at the expense of justice,” (p. 249). I am certainly not trying to be argumentative here, i'm simply trying to understand. Hopefully you can see my confusion. Tele
  15. A Gospel that Crushes? Good day to you. I’ve introduced myself in several forums on this website already, and I’m glad to be a part of this community. If we haven’t “met” yet, hello! I’m a middle aged, seeker who has been praying for and thinking through LDS views since I was visited by missionaries 10 years ago during my college years. In between raising a family and working, my time to devote has to be balanced; but I have read the BoM through completely, prayed and sought God, and continue to attend church. I’ve recently joined these forums to have some questions answered. Most recently, I stumbled across the book, “The Miracle of Forgiveness” by the Apostle/Prophet Spencer Kimball, and felt like I ought to read it. It has pressed me greatly on the nature of the gospel, but I’m just not sure in a good way; hence, this post. I’ve really tried to keep this as brief as a I can; but I obviously failed so to respect your time, here’s this post summed in the form of a question, “Does the LDS gospel crush your spirit?” If you want to know where I’m coming from, read on. I. Apostle’s Authority: First off, what about the author? Can I trust him, or was he in error when it comes to the gospel? From my limited understanding, Spencer Kimball was an apostle under Harold B. Lee, and became the 12thpresident of the LDS church. As an apostle at the time of writing “The Miracle of Forgiveness,” he was a member of the highest levels of the church with some of the highest authority (under the prophet of course). It is my understanding that apostles and prophets can even be considered to voice scripture at general conferences and in their writings on the LDS website? From this I take it that one better heed what an apostle/prophet has to say. However, some have told me that these men are just that, fallible men. I’m sympathetic to that, for even the prophets of the OT had moral struggles (e.g. Moses and anger). No one is perfect except Christ indeed. So a crucial question then, how does one know if an apostle or prophet is speaking doctrine or just as a man? Well, I asked this community and they suggested two tests: Scripture consistency, and the Law of multiple witnesses. This is helpful, and what’s more, seems to suggest that the press I feel from Kimball in his book is all the more valid. In other words, what he says regarding the gospel is trustworthy. Consider the two tests; briefly: 1. Scripture – Kimball offers a copious amount of scripture for some of his main points indicating scriptural support and consistency (see section II); and, 2. Law of multiple witnesses – a quick Google search lead me to find that this book was affirmed often by both active apostles and prophets throughout the several decades it was in print (e.g. Richard G Scott in the 1995 and 2004 General Conference, the Seventy Bruce Hafen, prophet Thomas Monson in his work “On the Lord’s Errand” written in 1985, Apostle Richard Evans in 1970, and the Apostle Boyd Packer in Ensign Magazine in 1974). The book, moreover, apparently sold over 1.6 million copies and was recommended by some church manuals (i.e. Teachings of the president of the church,”). It seems, from my cursory Google searching on LDS, that this book meets multiple witnesses. Moreover, when an apostle speaks to something as central as the gospel, if would seem dangerous for an apostle to speak in error. If an apostle where to err on something so foundational as the gospel, think of the ramifications! II. A Gospel that Crushes? If the author is trustworthy, then we can turn to the content of the work, “The Miracle of Forgiveness,” itself. I read this book in the course of a week and a half and afterwards, felt that my soul was deeply crushed. If what Kimball says about the gospel is true, then it seems to me that no one can be saved (see Kimball’s four points below). Below is what I take to be central points that Kimball makes, with scriptural affirmations, about how forgiveness is bestowed. a). In order to be saved, one must keep the commandments; that is, faith alone is not enough. Kimball quotes the following passages: 2 Nephi 25:23, “… for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do,” 3 Nephi 27:19-20, “…therefore nothing entereth into his rest save it be those who have washed their garments in my blood, because of their faith, and the repentance of all their sins, and their faithfulness unto the end,” Romans 2:6, “will render to every man according to his deeds,” and, Romans 2:13, “For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.” He summarizes: “However good a person’s works, he could not be saved had Jesus not died for his and everyone else’s sins. And however powerful the saving grace of Christ, it brings exaltation to no man who does no comply with the works of the gospel,” (p. 207). b). God never issues a commandment that cannot be kept; that is, every commandment in scripture is possible to be followed by humanity. Kimball quotes the following passages: Matthew 5:48, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect,” 1 Nephi 3:7, “And it came to pass that I, Nephi, said unto my father: I will go and do the things which the Lord hath commanded, for I know that the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing which he commandeth them.” Kimball notes, “But to carry the analogy further, my bull, had he been human, might have disciplined himself. Then with no right in the nose he would have controlled his own actions. So it is with human sin – self-control, self-mastery, can be substituted for the domain of sin, and the sinner can move by his own agency toward God rather than under the control of sin toward Satan,” (p. 28). Further, “While changing one’s life from evil to good is admittedly not easy, we cannot emphasize too strongly that every person endowed with normal faculties can do it,” (p. 175). c). One cannot be forgiven without true repentance; that is, if one does not keep a commandment they must repent. Kimball quotes the following passages: Moroni 10:32, “32 Yea, come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ; and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ, ye can in nowise deny the power of God.”, 2 Nephi 25:23 (as aforementioned), and, “Alma 11:37, “37 And I say unto you again that he cannot save them in their sins; for I cannot deny his word, and he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? Therefore, ye cannot be saved in your sins.” Kimball notes,“In my years since then I have repeatedly heard people praise the Lord for his mercy in having forgiven the adulteress (in reference to Matthew 7:7). This example has been used numerous times to show how easily one can be forgiven of gross sin. But did the Lord forgave the woman? Could he forgive her? There seems to be no evidence of forgiveness. His command to her was, ‘Go, and sin no more.’ He was directing the sinful woman to go her way, abandon her evil life, commit no more sin, transform her life. He was saying, Go, woman and start your repentance,” (p. 165). He concludes, “To every forgiveness there is a condition. The plaster must be as wide as the sore. The fasting, the prayers, the humility must be equal to or greater than the sin. There must be a broken heart and a contrite spirit. There must be ‘sackcloth and ashes.’ There must be tears and genuine change of heart. There must be conviction of the sin, abandonment of the evil, confession of the error to properly constituted authorizes of the Lord … there must be a new consecration and devotion to the living of all the laws of God. In short, there must be an overcoming of self, of sin, and of the world,” (p. 353). d). True repentance does not allow for repeated sin but forsaking that sin; that is, if a sin must be forsaken again (a second, third, fourth time) then the sin by definition was never utterly forsaken in the first place. True repentance means not repeating the sin. Kimball quotes John 8:11, “… go, and sin no more,” D&C 82:7, “7 And now, verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge; go your ways and sin no more; but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God,” and, D&C 58:43, “43 By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins—behold, he will confess them and forsake them.” Kimball notes, “In other words, it is not real repentance until one has abandoned the error of his way and started on a new path,” (p. 163). He continues, “Old sins return, says the Lord in his modern revelations. Many people either do not know this or they conveniently forget it … Each previously forgiven sin is added to the new one and the whole gets to be a heavy load. Thus when a man has made up his mind to change his life, there must be no turning back. Any reversal, even in a small degree, is greatly to his detriment,” (p. 169, 170). He insists, “Discontinuance of sin must be permanent. The will to do must be strong and kept strengthened,” (p. 176). Remember, “Being perfect means to triumph over sin. This is a mandate from the Lord. He is just and wise and kind. HE would never require anything from his children which was not fro their benefit and which was not attainable. Perfection therefore is an achievable goal,” (p. 209). Finally, “’Yes,’ I said, ‘but we are commanded to be supermen. Said the Lord, ‘Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.’ (Matt. 5:48) We are gods in embryo, and the Lord demands perfection of us,’” (p. 286). Sum: If salvation necessarily requires human collaboration in keeping the commands of God, if those commandments are truly follow-able by humanity via their will, if one cannot be forgiven without repenting when one fails to keep a commandment, and if true repentance means forsaking sin and never returning, then this gospel crushes. Just reflect on your own life for a moment; I grantee you haven’t done this. The mere presence of just one “habitual” or “frequent” sin cancels out your repentance and places the whole of your sin back on you. Kimball notes that humanity has been given the possible condition (keep commands) with allowance of repentance once, then never to return. Yet, in human experience, this is impossible and places a burden of effort so high that is too heavy to carry. It seems to me that this is the very reason why Christ came to die for us, for alone he was perfect and alone he is our rescue. We couldn’t do it. III. Making it Personal If this is all correct, then how am I (and you?) doing with this understanding of the gospel? There seems to be only three options available in response: a). “I’m not doing what Kimball says” – in that case, you are not forgiven and lost in your sin. b). “I am doing what Kimball says: – this seem ludicrous given the sheer breadth of potential sins of omission and commission, and depth of our fallen state. Are you really free from forgetting tithing, missing meetings, breaking the Sabbath, failing in family prayer, breaking the Word of Wisdom, lust of the mind and eyes, cursing, serving in the church, angry outbursts, hatred and frustration with those that disagree with you, selfishness and pride? As the saying goes, no one is perfect except Christ. c). “I’m kind of doing what Kimball says” – this is a catchall category. Statements like, “I’m doing the best I can, “I’m trying,” etc. I get this answer more than those who deeply want to follow Christ. However, Kimball has a lot to say to this in his book, and none of it is sympathetic. i. I’m trying – Kimball says, “One Church member of my acquaintance said, as she drank her coffee: ‘The Lord knows my heart is right and that I have good intentions, and that I will someday get the strength to quit.’ But will one receive eternal life on the basis of his good intentions? Can one enter a country, receive a scholastic degree, and so on, on the strength of good intent unsupported by appropriate action? Samuel Johnson remarked that ‘hell is paved with good intentions.’ The Lord will not translate one’s good hopes and desires and intentions into works. Each of us must dot that for himself,” (p. 8). And, “Nor is repentance complete when one merely tries to abandon sin. To try with a weakness of attitude and effort is to assure failure in the face of Satan’s strong counteracting efforts. What is needed is resolute action. A story will perhaps illustrate this. An army officer called a solider to him and ordered him to take a message to another officer. The solider saluted and said, ‘I’ll try, sir! I’ll try!’ To this the officer responded: ‘I don’t what you tor try, I want you to deliver this message.’ The solider, somewhat embarrassed, now replied: ‘I’ll do the best I can, sir.’ At this the officer, now disgusted, rejoined with some vigor: ‘I don’t want you to try and I don’t want you do ‘do the best you can.’ I want you to deliver this message.’ Now the young solider, straightening to his full height, approached the mater magnificently, as he thought, when he saluted again and said: ‘I’ll do it or die, sir.’ To this the now irate officer responded: ‘I don’t want you to die, and I don’t want you merely to do the best you can, and I don’t want you to try. Now, the request is a reasonable one; the message is important; the distance is not far; you are able-bodied; you can do what I have ordered. Now get out of here and accomplish your mission,’” (p. 164). Finally, “But adults, who have gone through these learning periods, must determine what they will do, then proceed to do it. To ‘try’ is weak. To ‘do the best I can’ is not strong. We must always do better than we can,” (p. 164-65). ii. I can do it later in the afterlife – Kimball, “It is true that repentance is always worth while. But spirit world repentance cannot recompense for that which could and should have been done on earth,” (p. 315). He also cites Alma 34:32-35. iii. Baptism and membership cover me – Kimball notes, “Numerous members of the Church will be disappointed. All will fail of these blessings who fail to live worthy lives, even though the temple ordinances have been done for them,” (p. 246). Why is this? He continues, “Remember this: exaltation is available only to righteous members of the Church of Jesus Christ; only to those who accept the gospel; only to those who have their endowments in holy temples of God and have been sealed for eternity and who then continue to live righteously throughout their lives,” (246). His entire first chapter deals with this point of view, specifically pages 7-14. iv. God is gracious and will forgive me (despite what Kimball has said about this) – Kimball says, “The Lord’s program is unchangeable. His laws are immutable. They will not be modified. Your opinion or mine does not alter the laws. Many in the world, and even some in the Church, seem to think that eventually the Lord will be merciful and give them the unearned blessing. But the Lord cannot be merciful at the expense of justice,” (p. 249). And, “There are many people who seem to rely solely on the Lord’s mercy rather that on accomplishing their own repentance. One woman rather flippantly said, ‘The Lord knows my intents and that I’d like to give up my bad habits. He will understand and forgive me.’ But the scriptures will not bear this out. The Lord may temper justice with mercy, but he will never supplant it. Mercy can never replace justice. God is merciful, but he is also just,” (p. 358). Finally, “Your Heavenly Father has promised forgiveness upon total repentance and meeting all the requirements, but that forgiveness is not granted merely for asking. There must be works – many works – and an all-out, total surrender, with a great humility and a ‘broken heart and contrite spirit.’ It depends upon you whether or not you are forgiven, and when,” (p. 324-25). IV. Sum: So, now you know where I’m coming from. Maybe you feel crushed too from all of the works and requirements asked of you just to be saved. So, to sum, I ask, “Does the LDS crush your spirit?” Because I think there is a better understanding of salvation, and that is simply that Jesus paid for your sins on the cross because you couldn’t do it yourself. And that is a gift to you, and it is a gift that will transform your soul and make you want to follow Jesus like you, perhaps, you never have before. Sincerely, Tele
  16. Hmmm ... well to be honest, after praying, thinking, reading the Book of Mormon and Kimball’s book, and talking to you guys I’d have to say I don’t have a “burning the busom” or a “good feeling.” Actually on the contrary. Maybe I’m missing something. I’ll post a new topic on Kimball’s Book ... maybe that is what did it. Tele
  17. @Jane_Doe ok that helps. Last pre-question. How do you know this doesn’t reflect LDS thought? In other words, by what criteria are we discerning what statements from an LDS apostle are true and others false? I’m not disagreeing with your analysis, I’m just trying to understand how one can justify disagreement with an apostle. Thanks, Tele
  18. First question is which sections of this book don’t reflect LDS thought; that will help me narrow my questions 😀
  19. Well, I finished Spencer Kimball’s “The miracle of forgiveness,” and I have a list of question a mile long. I appreciated his honest and clear writing style. I also appreciated his heavy use of scripture (as to further his case, although not sure he needed to as an Apostle of the LDS Church?). The book seems timely even bough it was written in 1969! I’ll have to think some on this so I can get my questions in order but just an update. Tele
  20. Hey All, I'm new to this forum, but looks like it is pretty tolerant for discussion, seeking and genuine conversation. I love those three things! Just a hello from a 30 something, mid-western, christian dad of three. See you around! Tele
  21. @zil Blunt doesn’t bother me 😀. I’d rather have someone be blunt than beat around the bush of vagueness. Can you tell me anything about he author? @Jane_Doe Thanks!
  22. @zil @Blackmarch @Grunt Thanks for your combined advice on knowing genuine sincerity and intent l. If I may sum what you have collectively said so I can make sure I’m understanding correctly. It sounds as if the general consensus is to act as if it where true (prayer, church attendance, listen to sermons, read). That is, the view is persueing confirmation in the BoM and prayer is not always enough. Sounds like I’m on the right track then. It’s encoraging, first of all, to know that some of you have had similar experiences and have felt the same way as me. That this is a process without time expectation is also encouraging. I have been praying and will continue, and I have been attending my local christian church so I’ll continue with this as well as finishing the Book of Mormon. Im also going to start reading a book I found in a used book store called, “The miracle of forgiveness,” by Kimball. Maybe I can capture a vision of the LDS worldview this way. If I have questions about what I read should I ask here or in the theology forum? Tele