Patrick Mason at FairMormon

[morgan.deane]

2 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

How?  Where is what he said?  Has it been posted legitimately?

It came up in my facebook feed not too long ago: http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2016-fairmormon-conference/courage-convictions

 

[Calm]

16 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

Perfect.  One down

Meaning what exactly?

[mfbukowski]

14 minutes ago, morgan.deane said:

It came up in my facebook feed not too long ago: http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2016-fairmormon-conference/courage-convictions

 

Thanks

[juliann]

1 hour ago, churchistrue said:

Hmm, I thought I did exactly what you did.  You just used critics in your example.  And I used conservative apologists in my example.    I wouldn't consider either of us engaging in polemics.  We both were talking about a group misinterpreting and misapplying Hardy and Mason.

 

 Remember to do that for Hardy's talk :-) 

[TheSkepticChristian]

 

8 hours ago, DBMormon said:

8.)    He says we need to repent as a church and apologize for our serious errors.

 If our church is true that is up to God to decide, not us! God can fix all the mistakes and problems in a second through his prophets. 

The real questions are: Is the Church True? Is there a god out-there that cares about us?  I don't know.  

8 hours ago, DBMormon said:

9.)  He says we need to Incorporate more diversity into our church ( race, gender, economic status. sexual orientation, and other differences)

Again,  if our church is true that is up to God to decide, not us! God can fix all the mistakes and problems in a second through his prophets. 

8 hours ago, DBMormon said:

4.) That we should not blame the doubters and that we would be better looking at ourselves for our problems rather than secularists, feminists, intellectuals, and even Satan

5.) That the CES letter was an inevitable response to the false dominant narrative we have taught.  And that said narrative is not his mormonism nor the Mormonism that can flourish in the future.

the "false dominant narrative" is not the problem, I don't care about the CES letter, it a bad letter anyway. The real problem is that we haven't detected the Holy Ghost and we see no evidence. 

I want to know how we can detect the Holy Ghost? How can we know it is not the result of patternicity, hallucination(minor brain stroke), the Improbability Principle, false memory? 

Edited August 17, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian

[juliann]

30 minutes ago, Calm said:

Meaning what exactly?

It does give off the impression he does not want to discuss the actual content of Mason's talk.....I hope that I am wrong.

[juliann]

6 hours ago, DBMormon said:

Just dropped a donation in the FairMormon bucket.  So now we can now allow a conversation of the points made since I have "paid" as suggested here to listen to the audio? The entire streaming was $29.99 and I over paid for this one specific talk.  So lets return to the thread.

Thanks

The talks are not sold singly. The cost is $29.99. Did you try to convince store owners to let you pay for one song on a CD?  So it may be a gesture, but it is not the payment you claim.  Or anywhere close. 

[churchistrue]

2 hours ago, juliann said:

The talks are not sold singly. The cost is $29.99. Did you try to convince store owners to let you pay for one song on a CD?  So it may be a gesture, but it is not the payment you claim.  Or anywhere close. 

 

I'm assuming there's some history here I'm not understanding.  But this seems really petty.  Let's move on.

[juliann]

1 hour ago, churchistrue said:

I'm assuming there's some history here I'm not understanding.  But this seems really petty.  Let's move on.

What history do you need to call out piracy? No, I'm not moving on. I think it is important that people understand what it is. There is a legal term called "clean hands," or those seeking equity must do equity. It has everything to do with the OP.

[juliann]

And for all the disappointed conspiracy theorists....the transcript is what Mason provided. I'm sure he did not read it word for word in his presentation.   Nor did the transcript include the Q&A, obviously. That will have to be added.

 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, juliann said:

The talks are not sold singly. The cost is $29.99. Did you try to convince store owners to let you pay for one song on a CD?  So it may be a gesture, but it is not the payment you claim.  Or anywhere close. 

If he can't afford thirty bucks he needs to flip some burgers or something.

[mfbukowski]

Nine pages and the discussion has not yet started?

Oh

My

Gosh

[juliann]

9 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Nine pages and the discussion has not yet started?

Oh

My

Gosh

Bill's idea of discussion, once we were able to post accurate quotes was  " Perfect.  [One] down " for every substantial quote. It's not looking good for any discussion on that score. Do you want to talk more about piracy while we wait? 

[Rivers]

Just read the transcript.  It's a great presentation.

 I feel empowered to go out and  make Mormonism great again!

 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, juliann said:

Bill's idea of discussion, once we were able to post accurate quotes was  " Perfect.  [One] down " for every substantial quote. It's not looking good for any discussion on that score. Do you want to talk more about piracy while we wait? 

When my son was very small he would come to me and say he wanted to talk.  I would ask him what he wanted to talk about.  Because I was Dad and not Mom he would say "trucks" because of course trucks are a male topic.  

Then I would ask him what he wanted to know about trucks,  and he would say "HMMMMM, what's your favorite color of truck?"

He was so cute I couldn't stand it!!

But as to substance, I think this thread is about on that par right now.

[Robert F. Smith]

9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I take the train to and from work, Robert, and this, I believe, affords me the chance to observe what I think is a fairly broad cross-section of Utahns -- at least those in the greater Salt Lake City area. It's quite easy to tell the active Mormons apart from the rest, just going by general appearance, manner, behavior, etc., enough so that i would have to question your "careful research".

You might need to talk with someone like Armand Mauss about that type of research (back in the 1970s I think).  Having been born &  raised in California, and having lived in many other places for extended periods (including 4 years in Israel), I am particularly sensitive to cultural differences.  Also, I am not sure that judging character by outward appearance is very useful.

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

 If our church is true that is up to God to decide, not us! God can fix all the mistakes and problems in a second through his prophets. 

The real questions are: Is the Church True? Is there a god out-there that cares about us?  I don't know.  

Again,  if our church is true that is up to God to decide, not us! God can fix all the mistakes and problems in a second through his prophets. 

The question is  not "is the church true," but rather is the Gospel true.  In addition, it is false doctrine to preach that God has to decide, or that he can correct problems in a second through his prophets.  Sheer nonsense.  We are pretty much on our own here, on probation.  We have to make the decisions.

4 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

the "false dominant narrative" is not the problem, I don't care about the CES letter, it a bad letter anyway. The real problem is that we haven't detected the Holy Ghost and we see no evidence. 

I want to know how we can detect the Holy Ghost? How can we know it is not the result of patternicity, hallucination(minor brain stroke), the Improbability Principle, false memory? 

Who is the "we" that sees or doesn't see evidence of the Holy Spirit?  Speak for yourself, Skeptic.  Moreover, if you are unwilling to make the effort, you will not obtain any knowledge, either secular or religious.  Just a stupor of thought.

[Calm]

12 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I listened to this last night, saw it on FB. I wondered why I was able to watch it so soon after the Fair Mormon conference. I almost sent it to the lady I visit teach that I loaned the book, "Planted" to. Her son is going through a faith crisis. So glad I didn't, that wouldn't look or be good, if it is pirated. 

  

Thank you for your concern, Tacenda.  I hope you have had a chance or will soon to send her the transcript.  If it would be helpful, I would love to purchase the video for you when it comes out for the two of them as well.  PM me if it looks like a good thing.  Also be sure and check out Grant Hardy's talk when it is posted as I bet that will go well with Mason's.  And you might take a look at Ally Isom's as well.  I haven't had a chance to see much of Hardy's talk yet, but it looks that the three of them really hit a lot of important concepts together.

You can find two of them already here and the third will probably be added soon, along with the Q&As when they get transcribed (if you do send it, you might want to give him the link as well so he can check back in for the QandAs, I think the priority is to get the talks up and then the extras, but I may be wrong; if I have some time and they want me...not that good at transcribing so they may not, lol, I may help the process along some):

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2016-fairmormon-conference

Edited August 17, 2016 by Calm

[Calm]

55 minutes ago, Rivers said:

Just read the transcript.  It's a great presentation.

 I feel empowered to go out and  make Mormonism great again!

 

Good man.  Join the movement.

[Calm]

5 hours ago, juliann said:

It does give off the impression he does not want to discuss the actual content of Mason's talk.....I hope that I am wrong.

Quote

I think a much better approach would be for you to provide Mason's actual words. In full sentences.

Last time I checked he hadn't visited the board since he posted that, so perhaps he wanted to acknowledge the effort and didn't have time to do more...but the first impression I got from it was he was counting down the addressing of the CFR issue he thought you were calling for (mystery to me how you suggesting using Mason's words rather than his own as the basis of the discussion gets turned into a CFR) with the posts you and stem? church? put up showing what Mason really said (can't remember who else posted) were dealing with for him in much the same way he had been saying "can we now move on" for other things...as in '3 done, only 7 more for you guys to do; once these are all put up, can we then move on?'.  But if so, it would appear that he could care less now about what Mason actually said and wants instead to focus on his own 10 points in the opening post...since obviously they were not Mason's.

Hopefully once he has time, we will get a more substantive commentary that is actually based on Mason's work and not using him as some figurehead for DB's own ideas (though if DB wants to start a thread using his 10 points as his own points, I don't think there is anything wrong with that, he just needs to stop pushing the labeling as Mason's).

Edited August 17, 2016 by Calm

[Robert F. Smith]

7 hours ago, churchistrue said:

You cherry picked the quote.  Here's the whole thing.

If you used five words to summarize that paragraph,  "we have defined prophets incorrectly," would probably be about the best you could do.

 

7 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Well, if that's the best you can do, you probably ought not try to summarize it in five words.

Because what you have quoted here (which, by the way, is not Mason giving his own words, but rather, Mason quoting from a letter he has received) does not say that "we have defined prophets incorrectly." Again, where is the "flat" statement to that effect?

And I'm still not certain what Bill meant by "we." The institutional Church? The leadership of the Church? Well-meaning rank-and-file members who occasionally err in their understanding? What?

I have occasionally tried to define prophetic function by appealing to the Bible and to scholarly opinion among non-Mormons in order to help us all to get to the heart of the matter, but I am usually met with blank silence.  People apparently want to have it both ways, if at all:  To attack LDS prophets for not being perfect and infallible, or to attack the membership for mistakenly believing LDS prophets to be perfect and infallible -- leaving no room for substantive discussion.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, juliann said:

And for all the disappointed conspiracy theorists....the transcript is what Mason provided. I'm sure he did not read it word for word in his presentation.   Nor did the transcript include the Q&A, obviously. That will have to be added.

 

If they are anxious about getting it all out there, they should feel free to donate money so that we don't have to use the videos to pay for the conference as fundraisers or maybe even hire someone to do the transcribing for us. Here is the donation link to make it that much quicker for them to get what they want:

http://www.fairmormon.org/about-fairmormon/donate-to-fair

 

Edited August 17, 2016 by Calm

[Robert F. Smith]

9 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Yeah, this was a shameful dogpile.

I appreciate the few people who have actually attempted to address the issues raised in the OP. And in 6 pages it is FEW. People seem more interested in discrediting Bill and creating distractions about what he did on Facebook. It's as if FAIR has a standing order to attack Bill's character whenever possible. Good diversion.

....................................................................

Enough with the paranoia, not-so-HappyJack.  In the past, I have always complimented Bill when he is on target.  It would be dishonest to tell him what he wants to hear, rather than what I actually think.  Sometimes I do tell little white lies and compliment young folks who are really trying, but I didn't think that would be appropriate on this board.

[Robert F. Smith]

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

If they are anxious about getting it all out there, they should feel free to donate money so that we don't have to use the videos to pay for the conference as fundraisers or maybe even hire someone to do the transcribing for us. Here is the donation link to make it that much quicker for them to get what they want:

http://www.fairmormon.org/about-fairmormon/donate-to-fair

 

Yes, and it is tax deductible next year.  Would you rather give it to FairMormon or to Uncle Sam?

[canard78]

12 hours ago, DBMormon said:

no I didn't.  I assumed Fairmormon had posted it, and the person was sharing a fairmormon link.  First I in knew it wasn't was this AM when I was notified the link was dead and I messaged the person who shared it with me.  Would you like a image share of the conversation (with his name and photo grayed out of course)?

I've not posted here for a few weeks, but just wanted to say this DB:

I think the way that a few people have gone after you on this thread is unreasonable. 

But if you want them to talk about the substance of the OP rather than your motives in posting the video on Facebook, I suggest you simply ignore any further comments and questions on the subject (including this one).