New Era: "Balancing Church History"

[cinepro]

Please cite the most recent such instance in general conference where the speaker discussed "the perils of reading unflattering church history online as if it were pornography."

Or, failing that, any such instance.

Since it happens "way too often" in your view, I should think it would be easy enough for you to locate with a computer word search and there would be specific instances fresh in your memory.

A few years ago, our Gospel Doctrine teacher had asked for suggestions on things we could do to strengthen our testimonies. Among the answers of "pray" and "study the scriptures", someone called out "don't study Church History on the internet".

Of course, that someone was me, so it probably doesn't count.

As for Buckeye's claim, I offer him this valuable tool:

http://corpus.byu.edu/gc/

I spent a few minutes trying to find anything close, but I couldn't.

Edited June 3, 2013 by cinepro

[Scott Lloyd]

Well, that's not how I read it. Agree to disagree.

You've not been persuasive in your reading of it, and thus, it does not serve as an example to substantiate Buckeye's assertion.

Yes, Scott. That's what "presumably" means. I drew an inference that repenting from the choice of immersing oneself in critical websites would entail avoiding critical websites in the future.

That's up to you. But I see no compelling need for others to make such a presumption or to draw such an inference.

But maybe you're right. Maybe Elder Cook never intended to warn people against websites "that magnify, exaggerate, and, in some cases, invent shortcomings of early Church leaders"...

Contrary to the above passive-aggressive concession, I didn't say that. Obviously, he is giving a warning about the deceptive nature of such sites. But I deny that he is forbidding people to view them. Bear in mind the comparison that Hawkeye made. Church leaders have repeatedly urged people to avoid pornography; Elder Cook didn't say that with regard to "unflattering" information about the Church, as Hawkeye alleged.

... and is simply indicating that such sites should be used with moderation.

Rather, I take Elder Cook as urging people to keep a proper perspective in how they view such content -- if they are going to view it at all -- as opposed to "immersing" themselves in it, drawing false conclusions and otherwise letting themselves be misled as they neglect the things of God.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Nevo]

You've not been persuasive in your reading of it, and thus, it does not serve as an example to substantiate Buckeye's assertion.

It seems silly to have to parse for you what are fairly straightforward comments, but here goes.

Many who are in a spiritual drought and lack commitment have not necessarily been involved in major sins or transgressions, but they have made unwise choices. Some are casual in their observance of sacred covenants. Others spend most of their time giving first-class devotion to lesser causes. Some allow intense cultural or political views to weaken their allegiance to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Some have immersed themselves in Internet materials that magnify, exaggerate, and, in some cases, invent shortcomings of early Church leaders. Then they draw incorrect conclusions that can affect testimony. Any who have made these choices can repent and be spiritually renewed.

Elder Cook states: "Many who are in a spiritual drought and lack commitment . . . have made unwise choices." He goes on to list four examples of such "unwise choices."

1. "Some are casual in their observance of sacred covenants."
   
2. "Others spend most of their time giving first-class devotion to lesser causes."
   
3. "Some allow intense cultural or political views to weaken their allegiance to the gospel of Jesus Christ."
   
4. "Some have immersed themselves in Internet materials that magnify, exaggerate, and, in some cases, invent shortcomings of early Church leaders. Then they draw incorrect conclusions that can affect testimony."
   

He concludes: "Any who have made these choices [choices 1, 2, 3, and 4] can repent and be spiritually renewed."

Regarding choice 4, the "unwise choice" proper is the decision to immerse oneself in Internet materials critical of the Church. "Drawing incorrect conclusions that can affect testimony" follows from that initial choice.

Therefore, to repent of choice 4 is, in the first place, to repent of the choice to immerse oneself in Internet materials critical of the Church.

I infer from this that Elder Cook is encouraging individuals who find themselves in a spiritual drought brought on by reading critical materials to turn away from (read: avoid) such materials (and instead immerse themselves in the scriptures).

Your protests notwithstanding, I find it difficult to believe that Elder Cook is not here urging members struggling with testimony issues to avoid deceptive, testimony-weakening websites but rather is simply advising them to use such sites with caution.

If Elder Cook is really suggesting, as you contend, that struggling members are welcome to frequent such sites as long as they "keep a proper perspective," then I have completely mistaken him.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Nevo

[Scott Lloyd]

It seems silly to have to parse for you what are fairly straightforward comments, but here goes.

I thought we were going to "agree to disagree" on this and that you had (albeit passively-aggressively) conceded that perhaps I am right.

Elder Cook states: "Many who are in a spiritual drought and lack commitment . . . have made unwise choices." He goes on to list four examples of such "unwise choices."

1. "Some are casual in their observance of sacred covenants."
   
2. "Others spend most of their time giving first-class devotion to lesser causes."
   
3. "Some allow intense cultural or political views to weaken their allegiance to the gospel of Jesus Christ."
   
4. "Some have immersed themselves in Internet materials that magnify, exaggerate, and, in some cases, invent shortcomings of early Church leaders. Then they draw incorrect conclusions that can affect testimony."
   

He concludes: "Any who have made these choices [choices 1, 2, 3, and 4] can repent and be spiritually renewed."

Regarding choice 4, the "unwise choice" proper is the decision to immerse oneself in Internet materials critical of the Church. "Drawing incorrect conclusions that can affect testimony" follows from that initial choice.

Therefore, to repent of choice 4 is, in the first place, to repent of the choice to immerse oneself in Internet materials critical of the Church.

But I remind you that it was Buckeye whom you rode in to rescue with an example intended to substantiate what he was saying. Your quote from Elder Cook does not do that. Buckeye said:

Way too often, including in general conference, we hear about the perils of reading unflattering church history online as if it were pornography.

He was talking about the mere reading of "unflattering Church history online," not immersing oneself in it, being taken in by sophistries (that magnify, exaggerate and invent shortcomings of early Church leaders), and drawing false conclusions, which is what Elder Cook was warning against in the conference talk and quotation you supplied. Your effort to rescue Buckeye failed.

Moreover, Buckeye said Church leaders in conference tell members they should deal with "unflattering church history" as though it were pornography. Elder Cook did not do that here.

I infer from this that Elder Cook is encouraging individuals who find themselves in a spiritual drought brought on by reading critical materials to turn away from (read: avoid) such materials (and instead immerse themselves in the scriptures).

You may infer anything you like; that doesn't make your inference compelling.

Your protests notwithstanding, I find it difficult to believe that Elder Cook is not here urging members struggling with testimony issues to avoid deceptive, testimony-weakening websites but rather is simply advising them to use such sites with caution.

If you could cite direct wording from Elder Cook to that effect, you would have a more persuasive case.

If Elder Cook is really suggesting, as you contend, that struggling members are welcome to frequent such sites as long as they "keep a proper perspective," then I have completely mistaken him.

I never contended that he is saying they are "welcome to frequent such sites." I see him as urging them -- if they are going to view such sites at all -- to be forewarned about their deceptive nature and to beware of drawing false conclusions driven by the deception. That's all that can reasonably and definitively be concluded from what Elder Cook said.

You can halt the beating of the dead horse by recognizing that you have not persuasively sustained Buckeye's assertion about general conference sermons and, unless you can come up with something else, he is on his own.

Of course, Buckeye, is free to lay the matter down as well. Neither of you is compelled to push an ill-considered assertion.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[cinepro]

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could snap our fingers and not only get rid of all "Internet materials that magnify, exaggerate, and, in some cases, invent shortcomings of early Church leaders" while at the same time getting rid of all "Internet materials that magnify, exaggerate, and, in some cases, invent virtues of early Church leaders."

Because from both of these can someone "draw incorrect conclusions that can affect testimony."

Yes, that would be marvelous.

[TruthSeeker2013]

I'm jumping late into this thread, so sorry if I'm repeating what's been said before.

My take on the article is, "Awesome!"

Perhaps the greatest thing about the article is that Elder Snow doesn't discourage reading critical sources, in fact, he doesn't dissuade members from even reading what he calls "anti-mormon" literature, so long as there is balance. "If you’re spending time on websites that criticize the Church and its history but aren’t spending time in the scriptures, you’re going to be out of balance...."

I was always taught growing up that I should avoid "anti-mormon" literature at all costs, to not go anywhere near it. This was always disconcerting to me because I've always been interested in finding the truth and felt that if the anti-mormon stuff out there was really that untrue then surely there would be good answers to it. I'm grateful that I disregarded that warning and have tried to become well versed with critical arguments against the church. To me, much of it has been a shock indeed (as he described) but that's because I WASN'T INOCULATED. By telling the youth that there should be balance rather than telling them that they should never look at critical literature, we are moving towards inoculation which I believe will help keep many more people in the church as they will not feel betrayed or lied to when they come across something critical about the church and that they'd never been taught in their last x number of decades as a member.

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm jumping late into this thread, so sorry if I'm repeating what's been said before.

My take on the article is, "Awesome!"

Perhaps the greatest thing about the article is that Elder Snow doesn't discourage reading critical sources, in fact, he doesn't dissuade members from even reading what he calls "anti-mormon" literature, so long as there is balance. "If you’re spending time on websites that criticize the Church and its history but aren’t spending time in the scriptures, you’re going to be out of balance...."

I was always taught growing up that I should avoid "anti-mormon" literature at all costs, to not go anywhere near it. This was always disconcerting to me because I've always been interested in finding the truth and felt that if the anti-mormon stuff out there was really that untrue then surely there would be good answers to it. I'm grateful that I disregarded that warning and have tried to become well versed with critical arguments against the church. To me, much of it has been a shock indeed (as he described) but that's because I WASN'T INOCULATED. By telling the youth that there should be balance rather than telling them that they should never look at critical literature, we are moving towards inoculation which I believe will help keep many more people in the church as they will not feel betrayed or lied to when they come across something critical about the church and that they'd never been taught in their last x number of decades as a member.

Born and reared in Utah in the heart of Mormondom by parents who sought to give me every educational advantage with regard to learning and knowing the teachings of the Church. I've lived most of my life here and, for nigh on three decades, have pursued a livelihood that required I be well-acquainted with the authoritative teachings of the Church (and to differentiate them from rumor or supposition).

In all that time, I don't recall a single instance in which I was taught "that I should avoid anti-mormon literature at all costs, to not go anywhere near it." I probably would have rejected it had I been taught such a thing, because I've never believed that self-imposed ignorance was a good way to pursue truth. But it simply never came up.

To the extent such a thing is ever taught, I have to conclude it is an example of folk doctrine. I say this, because in repeated past discussions about it that I have encountered online, no one when challenged has ever provided a citation from the voluminous on-line content from the Church's curriculum materials, periodicals and published sermons of a passage to the effect that anti-Mormon literature is to be avoided at all costs and that one should never go near it.

So, while I too value what Elder Snow has written here, I really don't see in it anything very new or novel.

Edited June 4, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[TruthSeeker2013]

Born and reared in Utah in the heart of Mormondom by parents who sought to give me every educational advantage with regard to learning and knowing the teachings of the Church. I've lived most of my life here and, for nigh on three decades, have pursued a livelihood that required I be well-acquainted with the authoritative teachings of the Church (and to differentiate them from rumor or supposition).

In all that time, I don't recall a single instance in which I was taught "that I should avoid anti-mormon literature at all costs, to not go anywhere near it." I probably would have rejected it had I been taught such a thing, because I've never believed that self-imposed ignorance was a good way to pursue truth. But it simply never came up.

To the extent such a thing is ever taught, I have to conclude it is an example of folk doctrine. I say this, because in repeated past discussions about it that I have encountered online, no one when challenged has ever provided a citation from the voluminous on-line content from the Church's curriculum materials, periodicals and published sermons of a passage to the effect that anti-Mormon literature is to be avoided at all costs and that one should never go near it.

So, while I too value what Elder Snow has written here, I really don't see in it anything very new or novel.

I'm jealous of your upbringing.

[Scott Lloyd]

Please cite the most recent such instance in general conference where the speaker discussed "the perils of reading unflattering church history online as if it were pornography."

Or, failing that, any such instance.

Since it happens "way too often" in your view, I should think it would be easy enough for you to locate with a computer word search and there would be specific instances fresh in your memory.

So we're coming up on three days now and have yet to see a response on this from Buckeye.

Nevo failed in an attempt to present an example. Cinepro admitted that he looked but couldn't find anything close.

I guess if we never hear from Buckeye on this, we can pretty much conclude that the notion of general conference speakers "way too often" warning people away from reading unflattering Church history is more misperception than reality.

Just want to note it for the record before this thread drifts off into the archives.