Hans H. Mattsson, Area 70 On Mormon Stories

[ERayR]

2: It is clear to me that you don't care what others may think of you. But the point is your comment is from an a priori dogmatic position that Christ actually said these words which certainly can be questioned by many good people.

From this comment can I assume that your comments come from an a priori dogmatic position that Christ did not actually say these words? I am just trying to get clarification of your position.

[ERayR]

As for Mattsson choosing or not choosing, well I am not sure it is a choice.

One always has a choice. You may not like the choices but there is a choice.

[ERayR]

And all the people of God say, "Amen". Just remember, the Book of Mormon is ANOTHER testament of Jesus Christ. We have the Old Testament, New Testament, and other more conventional, if you will, words of God. The iron rod at it's core is Jesus Christ. Personal revelation begins with the knowledge from God that Jesus is the Son of the Most High God. Everything else comes in at a distant second. And by everything else I mean: was Joseph Smith a prophet, is the BOM "true", is the "Church" true, do we have a prophet leading us today? Am I the only LDS that thinks this way? Doesn't it make sense to begin at the beginning, at foundation of existence and being? All of the early LDS converts believed in the Bible first and believed that Jesus was who He claimed to be prior to acceptance of LDS-specific doctrine.

Edited July 23, 2013 by ERayR

[Scott Lloyd]

I've not been following this thread closely, so I don't know if this has been posted yet, but I learn from Daniel Peterson's blog that the Interpreter, a Journal of Mormon Scripture has weighed in here on this topic.

[Alan]

Ok canard78, I know you don't like "personal" evidence, but this is why I feel Mattsson is a fraud.

This man (Mattsson) came to speak at a fireside in our Stake at which I was present.

He bore a strong testimony of the truthfulness of the church, of the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith and of the BofM. He said he knew by the Spirit that these things were true. He said a lot of other things too, but I won't go into detail.

It now appears he was lying.

[Calm]

When did this happen? How long ago?

------------

There aren't a huge amount of exmormons I know personally well enough to say what most likely triggered there issues, but I believe there are two cases where I can say pretty positively it was not worthiness issues that were at root, but rather a tragedy in their life that made them look at God in a different way and seek answers to their heartbreak. One, who lost his young wife to cancer, went so far as to start giving antimormon presentation even though the local Church had gone out of its way from what I saw to help with care of their children and home while she was ill. The other has kept his disbelief over the years in the family and has varied in his level of anger in criticism...it is interesting to me that his wife went through the same situations and sees the outcome as prayers being answered by God while he looks at it as God letting them down as they should be protected from tragedy, not just be able to endure it in his view.

Edited July 23, 2013 by calmoriah

[Johnnie Cake]

I've not been following this thread closely, so I don't know if this has been posted yet, but I learn from Daniel Peterson's blog that the Interpreter, a Journal of Mormon Scripture has weighed in here on this topic.

From the Givens Letter:

The call to faith is a summons to engage the heart, to attune it to resonate in sympathy with principles and values and ideals that we devoutly hope are true and which we have reasonable* but not certain grounds for believing to be true.

* Stone randomly found while digging a well, used in a failed attempt to find buried treasure then put in a hat to translate non present plates that were supposedly tucked in a hollow log in the woods. Seems reasonable enough to me...I can't imagine how anyone could have any doubts.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Johnnie Cake

[Scott Lloyd]

1: I understand the context and have read the verse 100s of times and used it in many teaching settings.

If you understood the context, one wouldn't have been able to tell that from your post, which conveyed a matter-of-fact, a priori (to use the term you applied to my response) assumption that, contrary to the purport of the revelation, it is not Christ but Joseph Smith who gave the message.

2: It is clear to me that you don't care what others may think of you.

That's not precisely what I said.

To restate it, I have my religious beliefs, and if unbelievers, antagonists or boobirds criticize me for expressing those beliefs, it is of no great moment to me.

But the point is your comment is from an a priori dogmatic position that Christ actually said these words which certainly can be questioned by many good people.

ERay raised a good point. My comment is no more "a priori" or "dogmatic" than your unsubstantiated notion, contradicting what D&C 1 purports, that Joseph Smith was putting words in Christ's mouth.

In other words, you have no greater basis to dismiss my heartfelt, faith-based belief that the revelation is what it purports to be than I do to dismiss your assumption. If anything, as the accuser bears the burden of proof, you bear the burden for disputing the veracity of the revelation as it stands.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[ERayR]

I can imagine this must be really tough going for you and other saints who were uplifted by him. About 7-8 years ago a priesthood leader left the church for historical issues. He told me he'd only discuss them with me if I asked as he didn't want to hurt my faith. I didn't ask. It was a challenging experience as I really admired him.

Even our senior-most priesthood leaders have faith trials. This is not something anyone is immune to, not even the prophet.

It's taken me a long time, but I'm gradually becoming accustomed to the idea that prophets are not what I thought they were.

We sustain them as 'prophets, seers and revelators.' Not as 'prophets, seers, revelators and historians'

We get carried away by the image of a few scriptural prophets who were said to have been shown the beginning to the end of history. But really they had visions of a select few events. They may not have even been visions of historically accurate events. They may have been simply visions/impressions of symbols and stories to teach a principle.

I know it's really difficult to view it that way. It's not the way we think we've been taught. Maybe that's poor manuals. Maybe that's poor students. I still frustrated by this misperception. But I'm not sure I should always point my annoyance away from myself.

I can find you dozens of GA quotes where they effectively say "please don't place your eternal salvation in trusting on what we say. Place it on your own relationship with God."

The prophets probably can't just "ring up" God to check on certain historical facts, because there's no evidence that it has ever worked that way. The prophets also make mistakes and say things the wrong way. They probably make fewer mistakes than I do. But they still mistakes. Sometimes they make mistakes that we might feel invalidates their calling.

I can agree with this. I think all too often we tend to forget these are men in a chaotic world fulfilling a high and holy calling. As you say,we do sustain them as prophets, seers and revelators and not Not as infallible 'prophets, seers, revelators and historians'

[Calm]

But Brigham Young did the same thing...so did John Taylor. Brigham married Zina Huntington Jacobs and had children with her, while she was married to Henry Bailey Jacobs.

If by this you mean there was no official divorce, there were practical reasons for that (no officials around to grant it, iirc) and such was no uncommon among frontier communities where often people married and divorced without government involvement due to the lack of government officials to do the honours.

[DJBrown]

Mormonism is not "the way."

I believe in one path towards becoming more like one God. We're either travelling up the path towards godliness or down the path away from it.

I consider Mormonism to be the best vehicle for me to travel that path. The "only true and living" one for me at this time in my life. But there are lots of other vehicles for travelling that path.

Elder Mattsson makes this point very eloquently in part 5. He even expresses a desire to find a middle way of association with Mormonism even after his changes perspective.

His local leaders on the other hand (the area president) forced a choice. In and shut up, or out.

That's a terrible choice to offer and one that should have never been put on the table.

Consider Christ's responses in several situations- "Come follow me....." Or the response He gave to the rich young man. He certainly put people in the position of having to choose "in or out." It makes sense that His servants and church just might do the same thing at some level.

[ERayR]

If by this you mean there was no official divorce, there were practical reasons for that (no officials around to grant it, iirc) and such was no uncommon among frontier communities where often people married and divorced without government involvement due to the lack of government officials to do the honours.

Hence the fallacy of applying current social mores to prior eras.

[ALarson]

Ok canard78, I know you don't like "personal" evidence, but this is why I feel Mattsson is a fraud.

This man (Mattsson) came to speak at a fireside in our Stake at which I was present.

He bore a strong testimony of the truthfulness of the church, of the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith and of the BofM. He said he knew by the Spirit that these things were true. He said a lot of other things too, but I won't go into detail.

It now appears he was lying.

Wow. Really? How long ago was that fireside? How about giving Mattsson the benefit of the doubt that he WAS being truthful at that time, but has since had that belief shaken by things he's discovered and experienced?

Are you seriously saying that you have never believed something at one point in your life only to change that belief later? You come across as extremely judgmental.

And....we are still waiting for you to answer your other CFR requests (including the evidence that William Clayton's journal was rewritten or altered which you promised to return and post).

[Scott Lloyd]

One always has a choice. You may not like the choices but there is a choice.

Certainly there's a choice. Unless one position or the other has been unassailably and indisputably proven (which has not transpired in this case) one has the choice to accept it or reject it. If nothing else, it's a choice of which advocates or sources to believe and which ones to reject.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

Are you seriously saying that you have never believed something at one point in your life only to change that belief later? You come across as extremely judgmental.

Actually I believe he has stated his views of JS's plural marriages have changed over time so it is probably unlikely (one would hope) that it is the mere change that leads him to this position.

[pmccombs1]

He said he knew by the Spirit that these things were true. He said a lot of other things too, but I won't go into detail.

It now appears he was lying.

Alan, what do people mean when they say they know something by the Spirit? There was a time when I said that too, and I meant it. But over the years, I have come to believe that those experiences weren't actually evidence for the kind of reality that I thought they were. I have changed my mind about what those kinds of experiences really mean, and the degree to which I am justified in making claims of certainty based on them. Because people learn new things and change their minds over time does not make them liars retroactively.

[Buckeye]

Certainly there's a choice. Unless one position or the other has been unassailably and indisputably proven (which has not transpired in this case) one has the choice to accept it or reject it. If nothing else, it's a choice of which advocates or sources to believe and which ones to reject.

Hey Scott,

Can you tell us if DN will be publishing anything about Brother Mattsson? Maybe I'm blind, but I couldn't find anything about him on your website. I did, however, find these critically-acclaimed pieces of journalism:

• Two arrested, bevy of drugs seized in SLC bust (http://www.deseretne...n-SLC-bust.html)
  
• Ranking the best mustaches in BYU football history (http://www.deseretne...ll-history.html)
  
• Pay it forward chain reaches 55 at doughnut store (http://www.deseretne...hnut-store.html)
  

Edited July 23, 2013 by Buckeye

[bubbachen]

And I do understand you. You see, I joined the Church two weeks shy of my 21st birthday and, just like you, it took me years to get over my annoyance with the perception that many of my fellow Latter-day Saints -- especially those 'born into the Church types' -- who seemed, at least to me, to not fully appreciate the singular role, centrality and totally transcendent supremacy of the Lord Jesus Christ in all things pertaining to the Gospel.

Hi Teddy, Can I email you some personal questions of mine? I've enjoyed your posts in the past, and I didn't know why I enjoyed them as much as I did until you spoke of your background. What you described about your conversion at 21 and subsequent feelings, struggles as a former protestant joining the Church, well, these are mine as well. But it seems you've got about 20 years on me! I can't seem to PM you though.

[Scott Lloyd]

Hey Scott,

Can you tell us if DN will be publishing anything about Brother Mattsson? Maybe I'm blind, but I couldn't find anything about him on your website.

Somebody just mentioned to me that a colleague is working on a piece right now.

I did, however, find these critically-acclaimed pieces of journalism:

• Two arrested, bevy of drugs seized in SLC bust (http://www.deseretne...n-SLC-bust.html)
  
• Ranking the best mustaches in BYU football history (http://www.deseretne...ll-history.html)
  
• Pay it forward chain reaches 55 at doughnut store (http://www.deseretne...hnut-store.html)
  

What's with the out-of-the-blue snarkiness?

A newspaper, by nature and definition, covers a variety of items.

[Buckeye]

Somebody just mentioned to me that a colleague is working on a piece right now.

Wish him/her luck. I predict 500+ comments unless they get shut down first.

What's with the out-of-the-blue snarkiness?

A newspaper, by nature and definition, covers a variety of items.

Out of the blue? You should know my snarky nature by now. Perhaps I need to use more emoticons.

And yes, in fairness, apart from DN's LDS-Utah angle, I would not be surprised to see articles like that on any other *real* newsite. Unfortunately those fluffy pieces seem to be the most popular and you are a business after all.

[Scott Lloyd]

Wish him/her luck. I predict 500+ comments unless they get shut down first.

Out of the blue? You should know my snarky nature by now. Perhaps I need to use more emoticons.

Be that as it may, when interacting with me on this board and elsewhere, you will do so with civility or not at all.

[teddyaware]

Hi Teddy, Can I email you some personal questions of mine? I've enjoyed your posts in the past, and I didn't know why I enjoyed them as much as I did until you spoke of your background. What you described about your conversion at 21 and subsequent feelings, struggles as a former protestant joining the Church, well, these are mine as well. But it seems you've got about 20 years on me! I can't seem to PM you though.

Hi there! Tell you what, it seems that for some reason the messaging app needed in order to message others on this board is no longer found on my page. Don't exactly know why this is the case but here I stand partially incommunicado. I can't even message the moderators to let them know of my plight (perhaps one will read this and restore the function).

But here's a simple solution to our private communication problem: I believe I am the only Ted Suhaka (the surname is Russian) in the entire world, so you will easily find me on facebook. Looking forward to hearing from you.

[Tacenda]

Hi Teddy, Can I email you some personal questions of mine? I've enjoyed your posts in the past, and I didn't know why I enjoyed them as much as I did until you spoke of your background. What you described about your conversion at 21 and subsequent feelings, struggles as a former protestant joining the Church, well, these are mine as well. But it seems you've got about 20 years on me! I can't seem to PM you though.

Because it's hidden. I said it and stand by it, until I see a change.

[Tacenda]

Hi there! Tell you what, it seems that for some reason the messaging app needed in order to message others on this board is no longer found on my page. Don't exactly know why this is the case but here I stand partially incommunicado. I can't even message the moderators to let them know of my plight (perhaps one will read this and restore the function).

But here's a simple solution to our private communication problem: I believe I am the only Ted Suhaka (the surname is Russian) in the entire world, so you will easily find me on facebook. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Ted, you are brave, it's nice to see a face with a name, and btw, I have a Yorkie too!

[teddyaware]

Ted, you are brave, it's nice to see a face with a name, and btw, I have a Yorkie too!

Is yours neurotic and wacky like mine?