smac97 Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 3 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: I agree that your example of the spouse beater is a loaded question. Are you saying that Scott's question about this post not being of "good faith" is also a loaded question? In which case, are you agreeing with me that it doesn't add to the discussion in a productive way to use loaded questions like that. I think several of the "questions" in the OP are loaded. I think that's the point. Thanks, -Smac 2
smac97 Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 2 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: I'm confused, isn't this exactly what you are doing with your questioning the good faith of DBMormon's post? I am not asking loaded questions. I am criticizing the form, content and apparent intent of the questions. Thanks, -Smac 1
hope_for_things Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I didn't ask a question about a post "not being of [sic] good faith." I expressed agreement with smac97 that questions posed in the OP are not asked in good faith. Ok, it sounds like my post should apply only to smac97, since it sounds like you're withdrawing your earlier agreement with his post.
hope_for_things Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 Just now, smac97 said: I am not asking loaded questions. I am criticizing the form, content and apparent intent of the questions. Thanks, -Smac You're questioning the "good faith" of his post. Which I think isn't constructive or respectful. I see this kind of behavior often enough, and I was hoping to point it out in an effort to elevate the discussion of this thread. However, it sounds like we're talking past each other now. Unfortunately, this is what frequently seems to happen on message boards...
Popular Post UtahTexan Posted April 8, 2016 Popular Post Posted April 8, 2016 It is always humorous when someone posts a list of questions like these that are addressed to people who are not here. The questions are not meant to have answers, but to cause issues....discord, etc. How many of the questions actually matter to my Salvation? I dunno. I know I had a lot of questions. I received answers to most...the others did not really seem to matter once I realized they had nothing to do with my eternal well-being. I suppose I could answer most of these...but the point was not to get answers..... 5
Scott Lloyd Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 (edited) 9 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Ok, it sounds like my post should apply only to smac97, since it sounds like you're withdrawing your earlier agreement with his post. I'm not withdrawing anything. I'm disputing the accuracy of your claim. In your question to smac you said: Quote Are you saying that Scott's question about this post not being of "good faith" is also a loaded question? I never asked any question about a post not being "of good faith." The only thing I did was agree with smac that DB's 21 questions were not posed in good faith. I think you need to go back and review the last several posts. You're exhibiting confusion. Edited April 8, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
pogi Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 (edited) 27 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Who's getting played the fool? Anyone who buys into what he is saying. Yes, he has something to say. If I am wrong, and I have been wrong before, DBMormon can explain exactly what he meant here: Quote I feel I have the answer to many of these for myself. My issue is the Brethren like to stand back and say "Gone are the days when we brush people off and give simple answers" and yet that is exactly what they do. In other words, "they are liars." He made it abundantly clear that his intent is not to get answers to sincere questions, but his "issue" and intent is to publicly defame them. When I perceive that happening, you bet I will get involved in a thread, especially when I question their intention. Here are some more clues to his intent: Quote If they answered these questions, the entire way general membership framed "What is the Church" What is my testimony" and " What is a prophet and what should I expect and not expect from him and other leaders" would have to shift dramatically. He is pushing for a paradigm shift, not looking for private answers to personal questions. Edited April 8, 2016 by pogi 3
Scott Lloyd Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 5 minutes ago, CountryBoy said: It is always humorous when someone posts a list of questions like these that are addressed to people who are not here. The questions are not meant to have answers, but to cause issues....discord, etc. Indeed. They are de facto gripes in the form of questions. 1
hope_for_things Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I'm not withdrawing anything. I'm disputing the accuracy of your claim. In your question to smac you said: I never asked any question about a post not being "of good faith." The only thing I did was agree with smac that DB's 21 questions were not posed in good faith. I think you need to go back and review the last several posts. You're exhibiting confusion. Were you hoping to score a debate point for being technically right that you weren't the person who originally said the post wasn't of "good faith". You merely agreed with that person, so I'm technically wrong, but substantively right. I'll give you the debate point though. Happy Friday!
UtahTexan Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Indeed. They are de facto gripes in the form of questions. Yep.....and it just tires me...you know?
Mystery Meat Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 48 minutes ago, pogi said: As I have already said, it doesn't appear that you are looking for a private answer to your personal questions. Even if your answers were given privately, it seems your intent would be to broadcast it to the world. Your motive seems to be spelled out here: Quote If they answered these questions, the entire way general membership framed "What is the Church" What is my testimony" and " What is a prophet and what should I expect and not expect from him and other leaders" would have to shift dramatically. These are not a sincere questions of private inquiry. It appears to be a manipulative attempt at a paradigm shift. I agree with you. I like Bill, but I think his approach has always been that he is trying to force or create a space within Mormon Theology and Mormon Culture for a type of faith that I do not think is compatible. I think you captured it perfectly here. That is what he is really after. He is trying to make everyone else's faith look like his. 2
smac97 Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 8 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: You're questioning the "good faith" of his post. Which I think isn't constructive or respectful. If someone posed a question to me which is inherently lacking in good faith (a la "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"), then responding to it would not be constructive. And "respect" isn't even part of the equation at all. The question is innately disrespectful. The questions in the OP are not presented in good faith. They are not respectful. They are not sincere. They are not constructive. To respond to them in earnest, disregarding their lack of good faith and good will, would be farcical. Thanks, -Smac 3
hope_for_things Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 7 minutes ago, pogi said: Anyone who buys into what he is saying. Yes, he has something to say. If I am wrong, and I have been wrong before, DBMormon can explain exactly what he meant here: In other words, "they are liars." He made it abundantly clear that his intent is not to get answers to sincere questions, but his "issue" and intent is to publicly defame them. When I perceive that happening, you bet I will get involved in a thread, especially when I question their intention. Here are some more clues to his intent: He is pushing for a paradigm shift, not looking for private answers to public questions. Why would the answers need to be private? I think he's looking for transparency. I've listened to a lot of what he's said over the years, his podcast as well, and I don't question that he has these questions and they are sincere from his point of view. I don't think he's asking you to "buy into" what he's saying, and I don't understand why you think this is playing you the fool.
Jeanne Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 6 minutes ago, smac97 said: If someone posed a question to me which is inherently lacking in good faith (a la "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"), then responding to it would not be constructive. And "respect" isn't even part of the equation at all. The question is innately disrespectful. The questions in the OP are not presented in good faith. They are not respectful. They are not sincere. They are not constructive. To respond to them in earnest, disregarding their lack of good faith and good will, would be farcical. Thanks, -Smac I can't believe you think this. Seriously. What kind of questions would you need to say that it is a good faith question. You just can't think outside that square box and so it is difficult for you to think for yourself. If the leadership can help one with their faith, isn't that a good thing?? If Oaks or somebody higher up said the sky was black and purple today...would you agree just because he said so???
hope_for_things Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 4 minutes ago, smac97 said: If someone posed a question to me which is inherently lacking in good faith (a la "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"), then responding to it would not be constructive. And "respect" isn't even part of the equation at all. The question is innately disrespectful. The questions in the OP are not presented in good faith. They are not respectful. They are not sincere. They are not constructive. To respond to them in earnest, disregarding their lack of good faith and good will, would be farcical. Thanks, -Smac You've still never responded to my earliest question. Why not just avoid the topic all together if you don't like it? Why question the person's good faith. That's my point, why even engage. Your honor hasn't been insulted, we don't live in the days of chivalry. You are detracting from the post in a destructive way, and ironically, now that we've had this back and forth, I've also contributed to detracting from the post. But I think its an important point. Couldn't we do better by just avoiding some kinds of commenting, like questioning the good faith of someone posting an OP?
Scott Lloyd Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 13 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Were you hoping to score a debate point for being technically right that you weren't the person who originally said the post wasn't of "good faith". You merely agreed with that person, so I'm technically wrong, but substantively right. I'll give you the debate point though. Happy Friday! You were not "substantively right" in saying that I asked a "loaded question." I didn't ask any question at all, let alone a "loaded" one. And correcting an error is not tantamount to "scor[ing] a debate point."
smac97 Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 7 minutes ago, Jeanne said: I can't believe you think this. Seriously. What kind of questions would you need to say that it is a good faith question. You just can't think outside that square box and so it is difficult for you to think for yourself. Nothing I've said indicates an inability to think for myself. Quote If the leadership can help one with their faith, isn't that a good thing?? If Oaks or somebody higher up said the sky was black and purple today...would you agree just because he said so??? No. Your question makes no sense. Thanks, -Smac
UtahTexan Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 7 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: You've still never responded to my earliest question. Why not just avoid the topic all together if you don't like it? Why question the person's good faith. That's my point, why even engage. Your honor hasn't been insulted, we don't live in the days of chivalry. You are detracting from the post in a destructive way, and ironically, now that we've had this back and forth, I've also contributed to detracting from the post. But I think its an important point. Couldn't we do better by just avoiding some kinds of commenting, like questioning the good faith of someone posting an OP? I disagree. The points of the OP was to be disruptive and a distraction. You seem to give honor where none is deserved and dishonor where it is warranted.
pogi Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 (edited) 23 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Why would the answers need to be private? I think you missed my point. He claims that he desires the answers to these questions for personal healing, increased faith, and to bring him closer to Christ. The fact that he needs his personal questions answered publicly, tells me that it is not about personal healing at all, or a private answer would suffice. It is about changing the way the "general membership" views things - to be more inline with his views. 23 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: I don't question that he has these questions. Well, it certainly is strange to insist on answers to question to which you feel that you already have the answers to. He made it clear that his "issue" is not these questions; his "issue" is that the brethren said one thing (which he obviously misinterpreted), and are doing another. This is what he is all about: 26 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said: He is trying to make everyone else's faith look like his. Edited April 8, 2016 by pogi 1
Calm Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 11 minutes ago, Jeanne said: What kind of questions would you need to say that it is a good faith question. Ones that don't insist we must concede something as a given when it isn't and doesn't come close to being a given unless you completely ignore evidence from a very significant source. 1
smac97 Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 8 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: You've still never responded to my earliest question. Why not just avoid the topic all together if you don't like it? I did answer it. See here. Quote Why question the person's good faith. That's my point, why even engage. Your honor hasn't been insulted, we don't live in the days of chivalry. You are detracting from the post in a destructive way, and ironically, now that we've had this back and forth, I've also contributed to detracting from the post. But I think its an important point. Couldn't we do better by just avoiding some kinds of commenting, like questioning the good faith of someone posting an OP? When a person seemingly seeks to engage us in dialogue about our faith, but does so in bad faith, we can either A) ignore the attempt, or B) explain to the participants in the discussion why meaningful dialogue is not feasible. Often times (most times, in fact) I use Option A. There are people on this board with whom I simply do not communicate, as I find them so irredeemably hostile to my faith that any effort to discuss sacred things would probably be both futile and perhaps also profane. But sometimes Option B is appropriate. Thanks, -Smac 4
strappinglad Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 I have no training in the Law, but I have been told that a good lawyer should never ask a question in court that he does not already know the answer to. DBMormon has indicated that he has answers to many of his questions , so now he wants his preferable answers stated by the Brethren so that he can claim that the Church is now much more transparent.
Mystery Meat Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 19 minutes ago, Jeanne said: I can't believe you think this. Seriously. What kind of questions would you need to say that it is a good faith question. You just can't think outside that square box and so it is difficult for you to think for yourself. If the leadership can help one with their faith, isn't that a good thing?? If Oaks or somebody higher up said the sky was black and purple today...would you agree just because he said so??? Jeanne, Let me ask you a sincere question I want a sincere answer for: At the time you left the Church, why didn't you simply resolve your sins with your bishop instead of letting your guild push you out? Now, I don't believe you left because of any sins and in fact I am sure you were a good practicing Mormon at the time of your disaffection. But the above question is full of assumptions that should make it obvious to you I am not asking my question in good faith. Bill's questions are the exact same thing to those of us who don't think is underlying assumptions are true or correct on their face. Therefore, there is a presumption he is not acting in good faith and dialogue, or at least meaningful dialogue, is likely to be without good fruit.
UtahTexan Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 3 minutes ago, strappinglad said: I have no training in the Law, but I have been told that a good lawyer should never ask a question in court that he does not already know the answer to. DBMormon has indicated that he has answers to many of his questions , so now he wants his preferable answers stated by the Brethren so that he can claim that the Church is now much more transparent. I DO have training in the law...and I know when questions are designed to solicit honest answers and I know when questions are meant to cause discussion and to ridicule and to make points. The lack of integrity comes when couching your questions as a request for answers when they are clearly not for that purpose. 1
consiglieri Posted April 8, 2016 Posted April 8, 2016 1 hour ago, pogi said: DBMormon is questioning the intentions of the brethren (how much money they make, etc.), why does he get a pass? Asking how much money LDS leaders make is not questioning their intentions.
Recommended Posts