I cannot and do not speak for Glenn Beck. Nor should I without his consent and instruction.
I suggest the same approach be conceded by others as well.
Most of my recent posts on this blog have been around the issue of the unjust and un-constitutionally sanctioned actions of the BLM. Without reservation I have sided with the Bundy family. That “siding” was not due to the Bundy family directly, but rather due to the wrongful acts of the Bureau of Land Management. The BLM atrocious oppression of the Bundy family is in actuality oppression of all American citizens. Of that I am certain.
The following comments with regards to the commentary of Glenn Beck are coached in language which would be most familiar to him; mormonese, if you will. I have no expectation that Glenn Beck would do me the honor of hearing and agreeing with my views, but here is what I would say to Glenn if he were to read my words and mind.
In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) there is a doctrinal statement that says;
We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
(Doctrine and Covenants 121:39)
This verse of scripture is spoken in reference to priesthood authority within the LDS Church. The principle is clearly applicable to all forms of authority. That includes political authority. Even political authority presumed to be a derivative of the US Constitution. The BLM is established, unjustly under the US Constitution, by a national elected leadership over the years which exercised unrightful dominion. Ultimately, despite best efforts and best intentions, the BLM began…and continues to exercise authority which they suppose themselves to have.
From Glenn Beck’s mesage he said ;
“It is so easy to be consumed by hate. I have seen it happen with my friends. I have. Please, get the poison out of you, please, please, please. You will regret this. Don’t let the sun go down on your anger.”
Too many took offense at Glenn for what appeared to be a waffling by him. As he declared, that would be us misinterpreting him for many years. I heard many comments about Beck’s oratory that were derogative. Being one who admittedly has agreed with Beck frequently I was at first reluctant to read what he had said. I was persuaded that maybe he had deep-ended. But, I gather my resolve around me like a woolen blanket, hoping that his actual words would not turn it to a wet blanket, and read what he said.
Now again from LDS scripture;
“42 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—
43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;
44 That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.”
(Doctrine and Covenants 121:41–44)
I would ask that we temporarily substitute “priesthood” with the “office” or “perspective”.
What Glenn Beck proscribed was not that wrong should be overlooked, but rather that wrong should be overshadowed by love unfeigned.
I see no flaw in his reasoning on that point.
Now, although Beck taught the higher principle of love instead of anger his tome slightly betrayed him.
“In Nevada, one of the guys, he was a former sheriff, he was on television, and he was actually talking about how they were going to put women in front of the protests so in case somebody shot anybody, it would be the image of a dying woman on television, and that would help their cause.
I don’t think appalling even begins to describe that. Do the ends justify the means? If there is violence, well, as long as it’s violence with them shooting women and kids, then it will be good for the cause. They’re not saying they want to get them to shoot them, but if they’re going to shoot, let them shoot women and children. It is evil.”
Do you sense as do I that perhaps there was a slight touch of anger in Glenn’s tone? Again, from LDS scripture we read;
“13 Behold, I am in my anger, and also my people; ye have sought to murder us, and we have only sought to defend ourselves. But behold, if ye seek to destroy us more we will seek to destroy you; yea, and we will seek our land, the land of our first inheritance.
14 Now I close my epistle. I am Moroni; I am a leader of the people of the Nephites.
I do not point that out to suggest an hypocrisy in Beck. In fact he, with equal vehemence, then proceeds to say that those who align with such attitudes of hate and anger are not welcome to influence him or those within the range of his voice.
The consummate blessing of God is that every person has the freedom of will. They are free to choose persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, meekness, and love unfeigned. Likewise, they are free to choose force, intolerance, oppression, vanity, and hatred. Yet, the distinctiveness is that they are free to choose. Glenn Beck was pointing that principle out…clearly, and where he stands and has stood.
The issue which Glenn became a little animated about was using women and children as fodder in a war of wills. For those familiar with LDS scripture, as is Beck, there is an incident in which “the people pf Ammon” prostrated themselves before an advancing army. They literally, for their own just causes, subjected themselves to be killed rather than commit murder even in defense of their own lives and families.
Too many this will sound harsh. However, it comes back to the principle of free will. Those people chose. But that is not then end.
The subsequent chapter to that particular group of people is in their children. Their sons became the greatest among the great warriors of their day. “And they were all young men, and they were exceedingly valiant for courage, and also for strength and activity; but behold, this was not all—they were men who were true at all times in whatsoever thing they were entrusted.”
It is not for us to determine the just cause of any man when exercising free will that does not place anyone in violence at the his whim. To do so would be to exercise unrightful dominion. Likewise to stand as the bulwark of defense against an aggressor is not evil in and of itself. Nearly since the first days of human life on Earth there have been wars. Some of those wars have been in the act of oppression, while others have been in acts of defense.
When Glenn Beck says that waging war in anger, or to use my word “enmity”, it is most frequently that the war is fought for the purpose of oppression.
For my limited understanding Glenn Beck was not suggesting opposition was wrong. What I drew away from his words is that oppression, covert or overt, was the wrong means.
That Is The Way I See It.