Ravenous Wolves/Lost Sheep

[The Folk Prophet]

Thought a discussion might be interesting on this. I was studying scriptures and came across:

 

Matt 7:15

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

 

Which led me to:

 

Alma 5:59-60

"59 For what shepherd is there among you having many sheep doth not watch over them, that the wolves enter not and devour his flock? And behold, if a wolf enter his flock doth he not drive him out? Yea, and at the last, if he can, he will destroy him.

 

60 And now I say unto you that the good shepherd doth call after you; and if you will hearken unto his voice he will bring you into his fold, and ye are his sheep; and he commandeth you that ye suffer no ravenous wolf to enter among you, that ye may not be destroyed."

 

and

 

Acts 20:28-30

"28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

 

29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.

 

30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them."

 

And in light of the whole excommunication thing going on it got me to thinking. So thought I'd pose the question:

 

Who are the ravenous wolves?

 

Contrast this with:

 

Luke 15:4-6

"4 What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?

 

5 And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing.

 

6 And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost."

 

We hear a lot about lost sheep, but I cannot but help wonder if more often than not, those we are treating as lost sheep are instead ravenous wolves.

[Just_A_Guy]

This probably isn't what you're going for, but something that leapt out at me as I skimmed your post:

 

The idea of "ravenous" or "ravening" wolves is interesting.  The wolves aren't trying to be destructive.  They're not trying to hurt anyone.  There's no coordinated conspiracy to cause the extinction of the sheep--indeed, the wolves could not survive in the absence of sheep.  But they're hungry, and they're trying to sate their hunger the only way they know how. 

 

Doesn't mean we let them stay in the fold; but the point is--we don't bear them ill will.  We do what is necessary to protect the sheep, and no more.

[The Folk Prophet]

This probably isn't what you're going for, but something that leapt out at me as I skimmed your post:

 

The idea of "ravenous" or "ravening" wolves is interesting.  The wolves aren't trying to be destructive.  They're not trying to hurt anyone.  There's no coordinated conspiracy to cause the extinction of the sheep--indeed, the wolves could not survive in the absence of sheep.  But they're hungry, and they're trying to sate their hunger the only way they know how. 

 

Doesn't mean we let them stay in the fold; but the point is--we don't bear them ill will.  We do what is necessary to protect the sheep, and no more.

 

Except for the theoretical suggestion behind, "and at the last, if he can, he will destroy him."  

 

But here's the thing. The ravenous wolves are ALSO lost sheep. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. 

[classylady]

Think of Alma the Younger and the Sons of Mosiah. Were they lost sheep yet also ravenous wolves?  They led many astray, but yet they came back into the fold.

[Blackmarch]

 

Thought a discussion might be interesting on this. I was studying scriptures and came across:

 

Matt 7:15

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

 

Which led me to:

 

Alma 5:59-60

"59 For what shepherd is there among you having many sheep doth not watch over them, that the wolves enter not and devour his flock? And behold, if a wolf enter his flock doth he not drive him out? Yea, and at the last, if he can, he will destroy him.

 

60 And now I say unto you that the good shepherd doth call after you; and if you will hearken unto his voice he will bring you into his fold, and ye are his sheep; and he commandeth you that ye suffer no ravenous wolf to enter among you, that ye may not be destroyed."

 

and

 

Acts 20:28-30

"28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

 

29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.

 

30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them."

 

And in light of the whole excommunication thing going on it got me to thinking. So thought I'd pose the question:

 

Who are the ravenous wolves?

 

Contrast this with:

 

Luke 15:4-6

"4 What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?

 

5 And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing.

 

6 And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost."

 

We hear a lot about lost sheep, but I cannot but help wonder if more often than not, those we are treating as lost sheep are instead ravenous wolves.

 

Until you know for sure otherwise, tis best to err on the side of charity, that way even if they are wolves perhaps there is still hope for a change in their hearts.

[The Folk Prophet]

Until you know for sure otherwise, tis best to err on the side of charity, that way even if they are wolves perhaps there is still hope for a change in their hearts.

 

I don't know that I agree. Which is exactly why I brought it up. So let me explain my thinking. One lost sheep = how many lost souls? One. One ravenous wolf = how many lost souls? Perhaps many. Perhaps innumerable.

 

If Kate Kelly, for example, went about quietly losing her testimony concerning women's ordination then she is astray. When she starts preaching, converting, appealing, protesting, etc., etc. then she becomes the ravenous wolf, and it is no longer best to err on the side of charity, but to err on the side of protecting the other sheep in the fold.

 

When a wolf is coming after the flock you don't say, "but the wolf might be nice. I'm sure we can domesticate it." You get your pitchfork and torch out, the gun if you have one, and you go after the wolf.

 

More to the point, and perhaps you'll expand your thought on this. You imply that we can't tell when someone is a wolf. I'm not so sure about that. Seems pretty easy to tell when principles espoused by someone, particularly publicly, are produced to harm rather than build up the kingdom.

 

It really comes down to this thought: How many sheep are we willing to let be destroyed in order to try and save the wolf?

[Blackmarch]

I don't know that I agree. Which is exactly why I brought it up. So let me explain my thinking. One lost sheep = how many lost souls? One. One ravenous wolf = how many lost souls? Perhaps many. Perhaps innumerable.

 

If Kate Kelly, for example, went about quietly losing her testimony concerning women's ordination then she is astray. When she starts preaching, converting, appealing, protesting, etc., etc. then she becomes the ravenous wolf, and it is no longer best to err on the side of charity, but to err on the side of protecting the other sheep in the fold.

 

When a wolf is coming after the flock you don't say, "but the wolf might be nice. I'm sure we can domesticate it." You get your pitchfork and torch out, the gun if you have one, and you go after the wolf.

 

More to the point, and perhaps you'll expand your thought on this. You imply that we can't tell when someone is a wolf. I'm not so sure about that. Seems pretty easy to tell when principles espoused by someone, particularly publicly, are produced to harm rather than build up the kingdom.

 

It really comes down to this thought: How many sheep are we willing to let be destroyed in order to try and save the wolf?

it's more a matter of we don't know the future, and also that people change good can change to bad and vice versa (a good example in the scriptures is alma's conversion- did alma senior run him off? if he did would alma junior ever had his conversion?). As well as the matter that we should give every person every chance they can to change.

it's better to reinforce the sheep we know with truth and light so that they may see any potential predation and avoid it. Sometimes its easy to see, however oftentimes it is not. The running off with pitchfork decision should only be left to the shepherd (now if the sheep see it they certainly may let the shepherd know about it, and their feelings about it).

Dealing with wolves in sheeps clothing are going to be some of the more difficult trials to our fatith that an individual will face.... which is why continual study of the scripture, prayer humility and listening to the prophet are so crucial.

[The Folk Prophet]

it's more a matter of we don't know the future, and also that people change good can change to bad and vice versa (a good example in the scriptures is alma's conversion- did alma senior run him off? if he did would alma junior ever had his conversion?).

 

We have no idea. We don't know if he was excommunicated, publicly censured, or if they argued all the time. Perhaps Alma the Senior said, "If you're going to behave like this then you're not living here." We have no idea. We know he prayed for him. That's about it, I think.

 

I'm not suggesting running people off though...not, at least, in the meaning I infer from your question. No one has run Kate Kelly off either. She is specifically, and clearly, invited to repent, invited to attend meetings, and invited to be return to God.

 

The is exactly the point of excommunication. To allow no ravenous wolves among you. It does not mean literally. All are welcome at church. It means that we don't allow them to be numbered among us. Their names are blotted out on the register of fellow-saints. And, more importantly, I believe, we are to speak against their teachings, emphatically, without apology, strongly, and clearly. The true ravenous wolf is the philosophy being preached, after all. We do all we can to limit their influence, and to limit the damage they are causing.

 

I'm not arguing with you, btw, if it isn't clear. I agree with your post. I'm just expounding on my thoughts.