Light is Good.

[Glenn101]

3 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

This sounds like coercion. Again, there are victims who are persuaded into believing that abuse is good. 

A possible explanation is that Joseph was skilled and perhaps even convinced himself that these notions were divine,  but they do not pass the test of free agency. If women are real people, with real souls, and God's children, these coercions are absolutely not divine.

There are other women, men also, who have very different testimonies, which undermine Joseph's credibility. 

You have your viewpoint on the situation. I do not quite understand how this is perceived as coercion since Joseph initially broached the subject, then left it off for four months, and only spoke to her again when he sensed her deep unhappiness. I do not think at this point in history we can look back and decide that such was abuse and coercion in light of the testimonies of the ladies involved.

There are other men and women who have received testimonies that concur with those of Joseph's wives. At least one person, Vilate Kimball, received a revelation on plural marriage before either her husband or Joseph broached the matter to her. There are people today who are still receiving spiritual conformation of the restoration of the Gospel and of Joseph Smith as a prophet. Are they all wrong?

I was not there when any of those ladies received their revelations. I do take them at their word and do not assume that they were all so lacking in sophistication as to become victims and never realize it. I chose Lucy Walker's story because she was one that was fiercely and adamantly opposed to the idea until she received a spiritual confirmation.

I was not their when you received you own communication from the Spirit of Truth. I can only say that there is a conflict between the two sides.

I was the only one there when I received my own spiritual confirmation that Jesus is the Christ, the Atonement, the restoration of the gospel, and of Joseph Smith as a prophet.

One day the light of which you are talking will illuminate us all fully and the shadows that we see now will flee before it. Right now we all see through Paul's glass so darkly.

Glenn

[rockpond]

FYI... Dehlin's podcast, addressing some of the allegations has been released, and all appears to be quiet over on the Dehlin thread. 

[JulieM]

3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

FYI... Dehlin's podcast, addressing some of the allegations has been released, and all appears to be quiet over on the Dehlin thread. 

I think you should start a new thread with the link.

Can you post the link?

[rockpond]

34 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I think you should start a new thread with the link.

Can you post the link?

http://www.mormonstories.org/osf-celebrates-and-reviews-2016/

I am about 2/3 through it and they behave been addressing a lot of the questions and allegations raised on the other thread. 

If only the Church would do the same.

[Meadowchik]

8 hours ago, pogi said:

I don't think this should be seen as a call for absolute transparency.  That is a pretty extreme translation.  Much of what I do as a nurse is in secret, thanks to HIPPA.  Even you acknowledge that not all deeds should be done in the light of transparency, I hope.   Indeed, Christ frequently commands us to do good deeds in secret, to pray in secret, and to do our alms in secret, to fast in secret, to "not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing."

From Barnes' Notes on the Bible on these passages:

 

Yet it is support for transparency being consistent with the gospel.

[Meadowchik]

9 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

That has no direct relationship to volunteering private information but with a love of truth.
God loves truth perfectly and withholds an eternity of information from general view.

Again, there is no gospel principle requiring us to have ANY say or concern about how tithing is used once we've paid it.

It does show gospel principles being consistent with transparency. 

[Meadowchik]

8 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

And
Matthew 6:4 - 4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. (Alms = Fast offerings, should be in secret).

D&C 41:6 For it is not meet that the things which belong to the children of the kingdom should be given to them that are not worthy, or to dogs, or the pearls to be cast before swine.

D&C 45:72 And now I say unto you, keep these things from going abroad unto the world until it is expedient in me, that ye may accomplish this work in the eyes of the people, and in the eyes of your enemies, that they may not know your works until ye have accomplished the thing which I have commanded you;

"The reason we do not have the secrets of the Lord revealed unto us, is because we do not keep them but reveal them; we do not keep our own secrets, but reveal our difficulties to the world, even to our enemies, then how would we keep the secrets of the Lord? I can keep a secret till Doomsday." - Joseph Smith speaking of temples.  (Why would sacred funds be any less protected than sacred teachings?)


 

Tithing is alms already given. What is done with that tithing is not necessarily alms. And since the church does report some of its charitable work anf spending to the membership and public , the alms-in-secret-scripture doesn't seem to be a factor in hindering church financial transparency. 

[Meadowchik]

8 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

And it's still none of the general memberships business.  None at all.

You say that, but how is that claim supported by gospel principles?

[Meadowchik]

8 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

You have your viewpoint on the situation. I do not quite understand how this is perceived as coercion since Joseph initially broached the subject, then left it off for four months, and only spoke to her again when he sensed her deep unhappiness. I do not think at this point in history we can look back and decide that such was abuse and coercion in light of the testimonies of the ladies involved.

There are other men and women who have received testimonies that concur with those of Joseph's wives. At least one person, Vilate Kimball, received a revelation on plural marriage before either her husband or Joseph broached the matter to her. There are people today who are still receiving spiritual conformation of the restoration of the Gospel and of Joseph Smith as a prophet. Are they all wrong?

I was not there when any of those ladies received their revelations. I do take them at their word and do not assume that they were all so lacking in sophistication as to become victims and never realize it. I chose Lucy Walker's story because she was one that was fiercely and adamantly opposed to the idea until she received a spiritual confirmation.

I was not their when you received you own communication from the Spirit of Truth. I can only say that there is a conflict between the two sides.

I was the only one there when I received my own spiritual confirmation that Jesus is the Christ, the Atonement, the restoration of the gospel, and of Joseph Smith as a prophet.

One day the light of which you are talking will illuminate us all fully and the shadows that we see now will flee before it. Right now we all see through Paul's glass so darkly.

Glenn

Well I do appreciate that you acknowledge conflict between both sides. Thank you.

My confirmation by the Spirit was not evidence, but confirmation of evidence seen. 

How do you know that your spiritual confirmation of Joseph Smith as prophet is legitimate?  What, besides Mormon-taught techniques, teach you that Joseph was a prophet? In other words, are you not using techniques Joseph taught for recognizing truth to confirm what he taught? Does the validity of those techniques stand on their own?

 

[Glenn101]

4 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Well I do appreciate that you acknowledge conflict between both sides. Thank you.

My confirmation by the Spirit was not evidence, but confirmation of evidence seen. 

How do you know that your spiritual confirmation of Joseph Smith as prophet is legitimate?  What, besides Mormon-taught techniques, teach you that Joseph was a prophet? In other words, are you not using techniques Joseph taught for recognizing truth to confirm what he taught? Does the validity of those techniques stand on their own?

 

I am using techniques I learned from the Bible.

1 Corinthians 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand ............that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

Hebrews 10:15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

Luke 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

 

My confirmation of Joseph as a prophet was the same as my confirmation that Jesus is the Christ and that of His Atonement. 

I was not raised in the church in my early years. We mostly did not have an automobile. We lived out in the country (we called it the sticks) and I do not recall seeing the inside of a church until we moved to the "town" of Pink Hill many years ago. I was in the first grade in school. We went to Presbyterian, Methodist, and Free Will Baptist churches in that town, i.e. the ones we could get to by walking. I was in my eighth year when we had a car that would get us to the LDS Albertson Branch. a distance of only about eight miles, but it seemed much further to me then.

My mother told me that it was the "true church" and I believed her, but I did not know anything about it. However, at one Sacrament Service an elderly man was speaking and I saw a halo about that man's head (I did not know what a halo was at that point in my life) and I knew that what he was saying was true. That experience has stayed with me all of my life. I learned bit by bit what the man had been speaking.

When I first read Joseph's own story in the Pearl of Great Price and the First Vision Account I was struck by the same conviction, a communication from the Holy Ghost that it was true and that Joseph was indeed a prophet.

However those experiences became dim in my mind as some of my desires conflicted with the standards of the Church and I actually left for quite a period of time. Later, in a period of great spiritual and emotional crisis where suicide seemed to be a more desirable option than continuing on with my miserable life, I actually began praying again for the first time in years. It took some time and a lot of effort, but one day I had a vision, a communication I cannot describe. It brought back vividly my earlier experiences and showed me what I had to do both temporally and spiritually, in precise detail, to survive and "make it." I followed those steps and, although I have not "made it" yet, as in the Celestial Kingdom, I did make it past a terrible crisis in my life, including the unexpected death of my wife.

I do not know what experiences you have been through in your life. I can only attest to what I have known and experienced in my life. I know that I have received revelation from the Holy Ghost concerning the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and Joseph Smith, as well as other matters. 

Glenn

[Calm]

11 hours ago, rockpond said:

FYI... Dehlin's podcast, addressing some of the allegations has been released, and all appears to be quiet over on the Dehlin thread. 

Since I didn't get home till ten last and was then needing to play Mom to my daughter and dog until I crawled into bed and vegged till the curtain came down and still need a few hours sleep to get my minimum of 6, I won't have a chance to opine on it until much later today...haven't had a chance to visit any of the sites I covered earlier to find info either.

Since I suggested starting a new thread for the podcast, perhaps they are respecting my request and waiting for someone else to do it.  Some people appear to be shy of starting new discussions.

Or they could just have other things to do on a Friday night and Saturday morning than listening to an  89 minute podcast which from what I heard reported in detail elsewhere added no new info.  Won't stop me from listening before I add to the discussion about him again, it does not make me eager to get to it though.

[HappyJackWagon]

11 hours ago, rockpond said:

http://www.mormonstories.org/osf-celebrates-and-reviews-2016/

I am about 2/3 through it and they behave been addressing a lot of the questions and allegations raised on the other thread. 

If only the Church would do the same.

I am very impressed with the transparency and acknowledgement of past and present mistakes and limitations of the organization. The board is an impressive group of professionals who have substantial experience running non-profits. Their explanations regarding OSF organization and finances are incredibly reasonable. I'd love to hear if anyone takes issue with what is discussed on the podcast because I don't see any problems. They aren't perfect, but they recognize that and have plans to improve.

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, Glenn101 said:

I am using techniques I learned from the Bible.

1 Corinthians 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand ............that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

Hebrews 10:15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

Luke 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

 

My confirmation of Joseph as a prophet was the same as my confirmation that Jesus is the Christ and that of His Atonement. 

I was not raised in the church in my early years. We mostly did not have an automobile. We lived out in the country (we called it the sticks) and I do not recall seeing the inside of a church until we moved to the "town" of Pink Hill many years ago. I was in the first grade in school. We went to Presbyterian, Methodist, and Free Will Baptist churches in that town, i.e. the ones we could get to by walking. I was in my eighth year when we had a car that would get us to the LDS Albertson Branch. a distance of only about eight miles, but it seemed much further to me then.

My mother told me that it was the "true church" and I believed her, but I did not know anything about it. However, at one Sacrament Service an elderly man was speaking and I saw a halo about that man's head (I did not know what a halo was at that point in my life) and I knew that what he was saying was true. That experience has stayed with me all of my life. I learned bit by bit what the man had been speaking.

When I first read Joseph's own story in the Pearl of Great Price and the First Vision Account I was struck by the same conviction, a communication from the Holy Ghost that it was true and that Joseph was indeed a prophet.

However those experiences became dim in my mind as some of my desires conflicted with the standards of the Church and I actually left for quite a period of time. Later, in a period of great spiritual and emotional crisis where suicide seemed to be a more desirable option than continuing on with my miserable life, I actually began praying again for the first time in years. It took some time and a lot of effort, but one day I had a vision, a communication I cannot describe. It brought back vividly my earlier experiences and showed me what I had to do both temporally and spiritually, in precise detail, to survive and "make it." I followed those steps and, although I have not "made it" yet, as in the Celestial Kingdom, I did make it past a terrible crisis in my life, including the unexpected death of my wife.

I do not know what experiences you have been through in your life. I can only attest to what I have known and experienced in my life. I know that I have received revelation from the Holy Ghost concerning the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and Joseph Smith, as well as other matters. 

Glenn

Glenn, thanks so much for sharing your personal story and testimony with me. I am very glad that that it has helped you in your life. I wish you only the best.

For the purposes of this topic I will describe a few types of Spirit experiences:

1) You intellectually see a clear path and the Spirit confirms it with good feelings

2) You have good feelings about a choice and attribute them to the Spirit

3) You have good feelings about a thing (like a belief or a church) and attribute it to the Spirit

4) You have good feelings about a person and attribute them to the Spirit l

I have done all four of these things and more, as I guess you surely also have. There are also other ways to describe the Spirit. Yet, my evaluation about the Spirit has changed and I no longer believe experiences like 2, 3, or 4 are  necessarily valid examples of the Spirit of God. They imo can be overgeneralised to legitimize too much.

For example, many Spirit experiences can be very simple witnesses of the worth of a person, be it yourself or others and are common as we make choices validating that worth. 

Moroni's Promise, rather than a real truth-seeking method, now seems to me like an emotional method to leverage loyalty to the Book of Mormon.  There are so many things in the book which can generate strong feelings to facilitate this method.

Alternatively, I think the Spirit will testify of things more simply and specifically, one thing at a time.  To me, a church with a claim of authority and direct line to God is an inadequate replacement of the authentic spiritual life. While an authentic spiritusl life might happen concurrently as one participates in a "one true church," I think that at some point or points the two will likely diverge.  

Sometimes the separation becomes untenable.

I guess it really comes down to blind faith. To me, one cannot prioritise another person's spiritual experience over one's own.

If one, then, is going to be an active participant of equal worth in a spiritual gathering of believers, they will see the doings common to their group, that those experiences can be made opportunities to feel the Spirit with an informed mind, more expansively and more authentically. These doings, whatever they are, will be continually an inseparable part of the shared experieces. Hiding such things is only a hindrance to growth and unity.

 

 

[Ouagadougou]

17 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Why?
Everyone seems to feel that way, but nobody seems to provide a good reason that includes any gospel principles.

"By their fruits ye shall know them."

If members have to account for how much they provide to the church every year during tithing settlement, IMO, the church should do the same for its members who are giving money.  The gospel reason is simple: honesty.  

[flameburns623]

On 5/24/2017 at 1:35 PM, pogi said:

Are you suggesting that adultery, child/spousal abuse, etc. should not be subject to church discipline unless it can be done in a public fashion?

You believe that the only good reason for state secrets to be withheld is because not every US citizen is a covenant Christian?

Transparency in disciplinary councils would not necessarily imply publicizing such councils: but making certain the proceedures ensure a fair playing field for accused parties to make a reasoned defense before an impartial panel of peers. And in a manner which ensures the accused, if determined culpable, is given loving advice and discipline in a manner which has the best possible chance of being medicinal and healing for the transgressor, for any direct victims, and for the Church and Body of Christ as a whole. 

Let's first be clear: most Church disciplinary councils probably don't have to address the fact of guilt or of innocence of an accused member. That member may have already confessed to a transgression. And the nature of the transgression is often such that all concerned would prefer privacy.  

Such councils are therefore probably mainly going to address any mitigating facts and circumstances and determine the penalties to be imposed. These will not be adversarial processes in such cases. 

And, if there is reasonable doubt--if one spouse accuses another of abuse or infidelity, but the other spouse denies it: unless hard evidence is forthcoming, I am going to guess that a council will not be convened. 

It is likely at least a bit rare for one spouse to steadfastly deny allegations while the other purports to bring forth evidence. In such cases, however, there should be some right of "discovery", allowing each side opportunity to prepare a rebuttal to any evidence or witnesses.

And care should be taken that those empanelled for the matter have no personal interest, i.e. are not relatives, personal friends, or business partners, of either spouse. 

Basically,  though, I think even the sharpest critics of proceedure in LDS didciplinary councils would assent to a high degree of privacy where purely personal issues are being hammered out.

If it emerges that an accused person is guilty of, or strongly suspected of, sexual abuses, particularly of a minor, I know the critics are rather concerned the Church may need improved safeguards for the victim, a more robust commitment to early reporting and involvement of child protective services and the police.  

It is in cases of ideological challenges to someone's faith--i.e., when a charge of apostasy is leveled against an individual--that critics are especially concerned.

Various Church tribunals have convened where this was the central issue, and where those who experienced the process claim they encountered a system heavily skewed against them. In several cases,  it has been implied that the issue boiled down to,  "Did you say/do this"? And, "Will you repudiate it, publicly,  and desist from this, publicly, ever again"?

No discussion of whether the statements of the accused were based in factually accurate material or whether the accused was operating within scope of academic or other professional freedom,  or within the scope of his or her free agency as a churchmember.

And with no opportunity to have a transcript or recording of the procedures (unless a bootleg recording is performed) to use either in an appeal or to publicize so that other members of the Church can then decide if the Church were being fair and impartial.

It is fair to say that since apostasy is fully a public transgression, critics seem to feel that making a publicly reviewable record for such a disciplinary hearing should be the default policy, unless the accused requests otherwise.  

This, at least, is the feeling I get from reading accounts by critics. I hope my analysis is not mistaken for advocacy 

Without endorsing the above: I do believe that in an increasingly secular government and society, many nations--possibly even the United States--may apply enormous pressure on private organizations,  including churches,  to exercise the same high levels of openness and transparency increasingly expected of government and of business.  

Unlike another poster, my understanding of history is that it is free and open societies which practice transparency. It is oppressive, often criminal,  snd certainly brutal societies in my reading of history,  which enforce secretiveness, which cordon off ordinary members of a society from the halls of effective power.

Remember that even the Soviet Union had elections--conducted in such a way as to ensure that dissidents were easily identified and therefore subject to social and official penalties. 

So: social pressure, if not legal pressure, could very well impel the LDS Church to do differently in the relatively near future than has been in the past. Other churches will face similar expectations.  

Anyhow: stuff to chew the fat on. 

Edited May 27, 2017 by flameburns623
Typos and poor wording.

[rockpond]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

Since I didn't get home till ten last and was then needing to play Mom to my daughter and dog until I crawled into bed and vegged till the curtain came down and still need a few hours sleep to get my minimum of 6, I won't have a chance to opine on it until much later today...haven't had a chance to visit any of the sites I covered earlier to find info either.

Since I suggested starting a new thread for the podcast, perhaps they are respecting my request and waiting for someone else to do it.  Some people appear to be shy of starting new discussions.

Or they could just have other things to do on a Friday night and Saturday morning than listening to an  89 minute podcast which from what I heard reported in detail elsewhere added no new info.  Won't stop me from listening before I add to the discussion about him again, it does not make me eager to get to it though.

Totally understandable. 

I have actually listened to the whole thing and I think it answers a lot of questions. Certainly addresses all the Kristy Money allegations.  

[Teancum]

21 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Question - Are you for or against light shining on every part of an organization's doings?
Answer - Christ was clear that pearls are not to be cast before swine.  Not everything is for public consumption.

Seems relevant to me if the organization is in possession of "pearls" or responsible for their safeguarding.

As noted in other posts it depends on the organization. And in other posts I think I stated what I think a Church like the LDS Church ought to disclose.

[Calm]

20 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Totally understandable. 

I have actually listened to the whole thing and I think it answers a lot of questions. Certainly addresses all the Kristy Money allegations.  

Good to hear a different view...bit more motivated to listen now, but will likely wait till evening when I can trust the dog not to go ballistic a bird is in the yard (she has been a bit neglected last week with her walker in Samoa and therefore is on edge...I prefer the treadmill, but will brace the concrete in hopes of exhausting her so she will space out the rest of the day...I think the reverse is more likely to happen).

[Teancum]

On 5/23/2017 at 10:25 AM, stemelbow said:

I'm for it. 

John dehlin's org might have been much better served if he was open about what they were doing and how things had been going.  Apparently, he's been rather controlling and closed about most things except for finances.  And it looks like it might come back to bite his caboose.  Then again, maybe all these allegations are wrong.  So we'll see. 

The Church has been getting light shined on it.  That needs to continue.  There is so much to uncover, I think.  We'll all be better off in the end, though.

 

 

Dehlin's organization is totally transparent.  Do your leg work on this before you make such a comment. He recently did a podcast on this.

 

 

[Teancum]

On 5/23/2017 at 3:08 PM, JLHPROF said:

Not yet, but soon.

Right now it's Heavenly Father's planet and Christ's inheritance to be bestowed.
 

[Teancum]

On 5/24/2017 at 6:44 PM, Mystery Meat said:

Rockpond, 

As an active LDS person, I will say that it is concerning to me. It is concerning to me for exactly the same reasons that it is concerning when ex-mos, anti-mos, doubting mos, and transitioning mos lay terrible charges at the feet of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and very nearly every other Church leader, based almost exclusively on hearsay.

CFR that doubting or ex membes lay charges and claims at the feet of JS, BY and other leaders almost exclusively on hearsay.  Please list the specific claims that are this alleged hearsay.  I doubt you can do this.

[Teancum]

On 5/24/2017 at 6:50 PM, pogi said:

Yeah, I don't really care what your opinion is.  I am willing to discuss reasons for your opinion, however.  So far, the only reasons you have given is that "light is good" and "the truth shall set you free".  Your best argument, so far, is that extreme authority is justification for extreme scrutiny and transparency. What I can't understand is why you are critically evaluating the Mormon church which you are not involved with, and which has no authority over you, while giving a pass to the governmental authority which directly affects you and the lives of all citizens.  In other words, if your reasons are valid, then they should apply to the government too. 

 

Your comparison is absolutely ludicrous.  I am surprised that you keep hammering on it.

[Teancum]

On 5/25/2017 at 2:41 PM, Avatar4321 said:

first, are you sure you know what a prophet is? Because Joseph certainly falls within that definition. Rev 19:10

second, the high priest during Christ ministry was a wicked man but even Christ acknowledged His authority. He was even given the gift to prophesy, even if he didn't understand what he prophesied.

if we need perfect men to have the authority of God, we would be waiting a long time for that to come.

 

 

Really?  Are you sure you KNOW what a prophet is or is this simple an a priori assumption?  More likely than not it is. Nobody really knows what  prophet is. The prophet claims things that cannot be proved empirically.  Do you accept Muhammad as a Prophet?

[Teancum]

On 5/25/2017 at 9:27 PM, Calm said:

 

I believe it is quite possible for leaders to mislead.  I have never placed in the Prophet some unique immunity to failing.  I have never had an an emotional attachement to any Prophet, except I really liked President Hinckley. I have even actively disliked Joseph Smith and Brigham Young as a child and .Brigham Young as a teen until I got to know him better and learn there were somethings to admire in him.  I think my dislike might have stemmed from their portrayals by others, wasn't impressed and felt like others thought I should be, lol.

 There are a few apostles here and there I have become quite fond of, but my faith is first in the presence of God because of personal experiences and then in the gospel and Christ.

If LDS leaders that claim to be Prophets and Apostles tell the members to "follow the brethren" as well as "a Prophet cannot lead the church astray" yet they can mislead then they are not wort following. The Church demands this. it is in the temple recommend interview. You cannot have it both ways.

[Teancum]

On 5/26/2017 at 2:50 PM, Glenn101 said:

Thank you for your response. You attribute your own beliefs to the Spirit of Truth while the ladies involved in the situation relied on their own personal revelations on the subject (which involves the Spirit of Truth also). That is what my own testimony of Jesus the Christ, the Atonement, and of the restoration is based upon. It would only have been unrighteous dominion if Joseph had not been commanded and if the story of the angel were to be found untrue. It seems we have competing "Spirits of Truth."

So do you give the same credence to the so called personal revelations of the women who think Warren Jeffs is God's prophet?