Recent Excommunications

[HappyJackWagon]

I know you didn't actually use the "dare" expression.  But you and HappyJack were questioning of the propriety of my using my right to make a prediction based on available evidence as to how they might jump in the given circumstance.  Not to channel Bobby Brown or anything, but it's my prerogative to use my brain to think with.

 

 

I don't believe anyone has questioned your ability to judge others. Clearly you have that prerogative. As long as you recognize that you'll be judged with the same harshness with which you judge based on incomplete information and negative assumptions about others. If you can live with that, have at it, but don't be surprised if you're called out on it and asked to defend your sweeping, generalized judgements about others.

 

FYI- I too have to expect judgement similar to the kind I mete out. That's life but that's also why I think we should first look for the positive, be charitable towards others and try to judge kindly.

[Calm]

Was listening to a podcast recently, where someone said that in the Preach My Gospel book, there is no mention of women in there. I don't know if that means quotes only or scriptures or stories or all three. It's time for young girls, young women, and older women to hear more of these in Sacrament meetings, SS, Primary, RS and Young Women lessons etc.

Preach your gospel is online.  You should go check for yourself if this is true or not and get the specifics.

[Tacenda]

Preach your gospel is online. You should go check for yourself if this is true or not and get the specifics.

I have one, come to think of it. I'll check my resources and find out, just call me lazy butt. Edited June 13, 2015 by Tacenda

[Stargazer]

I don't believe anyone has questioned your ability to judge others. Clearly you have that prerogative. As long as you recognize that you'll be judged with the same harshness with which you judge based on incomplete information and negative assumptions about others. If you can live with that, have at it, but don't be surprised if you're called out on it and asked to defend your sweeping, generalized judgements about others.

 

FYI- I too have to expect judgement similar to the kind I mete out. That's life but that's also why I think we should first look for the positive, be charitable towards others and try to judge kindly.

 

Well, I got the possibly mistaken impression that you and rockpond thought I was hopelessly mean and nasty for making the prediction of their probable reaction that I brought into the discussion.  Now you definitely brought in the word "harsh", and so let me gently disabuse your mind as to the harshness of my prediction.

 

I don't think it's harsh to make a prediction which is based on the publicly-stated goals of the organization.  They say women need to have the Church ordain women".  They ask the leaders to ask the Lord, which is fine, but I don't get the idea that this is a negotiable item, when all is said and done. 

 

If this scenario actually did play itself out, then I would be surprised if they gave in on their goal.  But I would be charmed at such a reaction and would not continue to think ill of them.

[Stargazer]

I have one, come to think of it. I'll check my resources and find out, just call me lazy butt.

 

There's exactly two women mentioned by name in the Book of Mormon, when you come to it.  Lehi's wife, and a harlot.

[JLHPROF]

There's exactly two women mentioned by name in the Book of Mormon, when you come to it.  Lehi's wife, and a harlot.

 

Actually, a quick google says 6 women are named - Sariah, Isabel, Abish, Eve, Sarah, and Mary.

[Stargazer]

Actually, a quick google says 6 women are named - Sariah, Isabel, Abish, Eve, Sarah, and Mary.

Darn, I guess I was just repeating what I had been told years and years ago.  Flog me with a noodle, then.

[why me]

Darn, I guess I was just repeating what I had been told years and years ago.  Flog me with a noodle, then.

This is actually a big problem with church members. They seem to go by what others have said and not do their own research. How many people have left the church based on what others have said and from doing their own indepth research with a critical mind? Many. So, although your statement is innocent, it doess have some interesting insights in how people tend to not do their own research to confirm what are the real facts of the matter.

 

As such, there seems to be a 'lazy butt' trend. I believe that many members are 'internet surfers' looking for confirmation bias or quick soundbites for confirmation. The ability to put on a critical thinking cap where evidence is weighed from both sides of an argument and reflectively questioned, seems to be in short supply.

Edited June 14, 2015 by why me

[Russell C McGregor]

seriously.  Are you aware of Malcolm Jeppson Clark's journal?  like john dehlin or not, you may want to take a listen to his interview with Jeppson's daughter where she reads his journal verbatim and he says he was told from higher ups to go after some of the september 6.  Add that with the real people disciplined recently who were told by their stake presidents that higher ups were pushing for councils.  It has least happened on 1 occasion and the evidence points to it having happened on several occasions - but please deflect and brush away.

There's nothing to "deflect." There is no evidence that the brethren have lied about anything. That someone said something to someone about some excommunications back in the 1990's is not evidence about what has happened recently. If you denied going to the supermarket today, and someone else anonymously called you a liar on the internet because you went to the supermarket last week, and therefore you cannot credibly deny going there today, you'd be justified in returning the accusation of dishonesty back upon your accuser.

You clearly fail to understand that what someone says that someone else confidentially told him about what someone else said to him is hearsay, and not in the category of evidence.

However, I do not fail to understand why you are so emotionally committed to believing the people with whom you identify.

[Russell C McGregor]

Having seen you set yourself up as the final declarant of what constitutes valid LDS beliefs...

You have seen me do no such thing.

Your accusation is clearly false.

But I wonder if that even occurs to you; and if it did, if it would even bother you.

[rockpond]

You have seen me do no such thing.

Your accusation is clearly false.

But I wonder if that even occurs to you; and if it did, if it would even bother you.

Did you or did you not, on this website, declare me to be something less than a faithful Latter-day Saint?

[Russell C McGregor]

Did you or did you not, on this website, declare me to be something less than a faithful Latter-day Saint?

You are shifting the goal posts.

I take that as an admission that you are unable to support your former claim, namely that I "set [myself] up as the final declarant of what constitutes valid LDS beliefs."

Because, of course, to say that some proposition P is not a valid Latter-day Saint view is manifestly not equivalent to asserting that I am the "final declarant of what constitutes valid LDS beliefs."

And you of course know this.

Kindly cease and desist from misrepresenting my views.

Thankyouverymuch.

[Avatar4321]

I don't believe anyone has questioned your ability to judge others. Clearly you have that prerogative. As long as you recognize that you'll be judged with the same harshness with which you judge based on incomplete information and negative assumptions about others. If you can live with that, have at it, but don't be surprised if you're called out on it and asked to defend your sweeping, generalized judgements about others.

 

FYI- I too have to expect judgement similar to the kind I mete out. That's life but that's also why I think we should first look for the positive, be charitable towards others and try to judge kindly.

I find this incredibly ironic since it's the churches critics who have been doing the uncharitable judging.

How about we just all humble ourselves before God, seek His Spirir, and establish Zion as He has commanded instead of trying to force Him to do things our way?

[Avatar4321]

This is actually a big problem with church members. They seem to go by what others have said and not do their own research. How many people have left the church based on what others have said and from doing their own indepth research with a critical mind? Many. So, although your statement is innocent, it doess have some interesting insights in how people tend to not do their own research to confirm what are the real facts of the matter.

 

As such, there seems to be a 'lazy butt' trend. I believe that many members are 'internet surfers' looking for confirmation bias or quick soundbites for confirmation. The ability to put on a critical thinking cap where evidence is weighed from both sides of an argument and reflectively questioned, seems to be in short supply.

If people did their own research, I think we would have far less critics of the Church and far more who had received a testimony

[rockpond]

You are shifting the goal posts.

I take that as an admission that you are unable to support your former claim, namely that I "set [myself] up as the final declarant of what constitutes valid LDS beliefs."

Because, of course, to say that some proposition P is not a valid Latter-day Saint view is manifestly not equivalent to asserting that I am the "final declarant of what constitutes valid LDS beliefs."

And you of course know this.

Kindly cease and desist from misrepresenting my views.

Thankyouverymuch.

You didn't answer my question.

[Avatar4321]

There's nothing to "deflect." There is no evidence that the brethren have lied about anything. That someone said something to someone about some excommunications back in the 1990's is not evidence about what has happened recently. If you denied going to the supermarket today, and someone else anonymously called you a liar on the internet because you went to the supermarket last week, and therefore you cannot credibly deny going there today, you'd be justified in returning the accusation of dishonesty back upon your accuser.You clearly fail to understand that what someone says that someone else confidentially told him about what someone else said to him is hearsay, and not in the category of evidence.However, I do not fail to understand why you are so emotionally committed to believing the people with whom you identify.

Nor do I see what exactly would be wrong for local leaders to be told they should look into disciplining someone in the first place. Did I miss some scripture or prophetic announcement saying this is forbidden?

[Russell C McGregor]

You didn't answer my question.

And so?

Who died and made you grand inquisitor?

Since your question does not go to the issue of what you asserted, it follows that there is no possible answer to your question that supports your assertion. Your question is merely manipulative.

[thesometimesaint]

While I'm in no position to judge. Given the publicly acknowledged statements presented by those three then Excommunication was/is the only viable option. That doesn't stop them from repenting and regaining full acceptance back into the Church and all its blessings.

[rockpond]

And so?

Who died and made you grand inquisitor?

Since your question does not go to the issue of what you asserted, it follows that there is no possible answer to your question that supports your assertion. Your question is merely manipulative.

 

My question was relevant to the matter at hand.  You have no obligation to answer it - your lack of an answer is sufficient.

Edited June 14, 2015 by rockpond

[Russell C McGregor]

My question was relevant to the matter at hand.  You have no obligation to answer it - your lack of an answer is sufficient.

Did you, or did you not, claim that "faithful" Latter-day Saints supported the notion of "same sex temple marriage?"

Does this mean that you were trying to "set yourself up as the final declarant of what constitutes valid LDS beliefs?"

[rockpond]

Did you, or did you not, claim that "faithful" Latter-day Saints supported the notion of "same sex temple marriage?"

Does this mean that you were trying to "set yourself up as the final declarant of what constitutes valid LDS beliefs?"

Sorry, if you are going to ignore my questions, I'm not going to take the time to answer yours.

[Stargazer]

This is actually a big problem with church members. They seem to go by what others have said and not do their own research. How many people have left the church based on what others have said and from doing their own indepth research with a critical mind? Many. So, although your statement is innocent, it doess have some interesting insights in how people tend to not do their own research to confirm what are the real facts of the matter.

 

As such, there seems to be a 'lazy butt' trend. I believe that many members are 'internet surfers' looking for confirmation bias or quick soundbites for confirmation. The ability to put on a critical thinking cap where evidence is weighed from both sides of an argument and reflectively questioned, seems to be in short supply.

 

Well, whaddya want?  That we should all turn into Blaise Pascal and have a "Cogito, ergo sum" moment, and from there confirm everything we've ever been taught or believed?

 

I think I would rather start from the known, rather than assume nothing.

[Russell C McGregor]

Sorry, if you are going to ignore my questions, I'm not going to take the time to answer yours.

That's quite all right, Rock + Water. As we both know, the correct answers are yes to the first question and no to the second.

Ergo, your question to me is moot, isn't it?

[rockpond]

That's quite all right, Rock + Water. As we both know, the correct answers are yes to the first question and no to the second.

Ergo, your question to me is moot, isn't it?

 

Thanks for answering, I think that you claiming telling me that I am not a faithful Latter-day Saint because of my beliefs about gay marriage is setting yourself up as a final declarant of what constitutes valid LDS beliefs.  I suppose you didn't see it that way.

 

Not sure what you are getting at with the "Rock + Water" thing.

[HappyJackWagon]

He either thinks your a sycophant who is trying to be like Rock or that you are actually Rock Waterman. He's mentioned this a couple of times so he must think he knows a secret about you and it's not that you're currently serving in local church leadership, unlike Rock