Teancum Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 28 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I don't accept your criticism. We, each of us, ought to understand that when we post something on the internet, we are publishing it to the world, and it is apt to remain accessible for many years. It is not unreasonable for someone to come along later and cite it. The author can clarify later, as John did here when I gave him the opportunity to do so. I am not surprised. I still think it was pretty crummy. To each their own I suppose.
Teancum Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 Just now, Scott Lloyd said: No, its not. Based on the evidence or lack there of... .yes it is. Your personal testimony is not evidence of historicity.
Scott Lloyd Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 1 minute ago, jkwilliams said: I don't see it that way at all. My wife is neither ill-informed nor naive. What I mean is that she has an untroubled faith that doesn't need to have all the answers and know all the details. There is not the least bit of condescension or criticism in calling my wife's faith "simple." I wasn't referring to your wife; I was merely saying why I don't care for the expression. It is ambiguous, and ambiguity is best avoided.
Teancum Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 20 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I didn't search the board specifically for that. As I've indicated, I had already found the thread yesterday when I was endeavoring to reconstruct the history of the accusation against Elder Holland, and I happened to run across that particular post from John. I remembered it when I saw his post today about not thinking Elder Holland's recent talks are powerful. I thought it relevant so I produced it here. John, to his credit, doesn't seem to think it as big a deal as you are making of it; neither do I. He has clarified, and I accept his clarification. Let the matter end there. Incidentally, I've not seen you weigh in on how "crummy" it is to dredge up an old accusation against an apostle of the Lord, an accusation that was almost immediately discredited at the time it was made. I posted a post on how much I admire Elder Holland and commented positively about the LDS leaders. Did you miss that?
Scott Lloyd Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 1 minute ago, jkwilliams said: I don't see it that way at all. My wife is neither ill-informed nor naive. What I mean is that she has an untroubled faith that doesn't need to have all the answers and know all the details. There is not the least bit of condescension or criticism in calling my wife's faith "simple." I wasn't referring to your wife; I was merely saying why I don't care for the expression. It is ambiguous, and ambiguity is best avoided.
Scott Lloyd Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Teancum said: I posted a post on how much I admire Elder Holland and commented positively about the LDS leaders. Did you miss that? No, I saw that. Where did you say you thought it was "crummy" to dredge up a false accusation against him when the accusation was already discredited almost as soon as it surfaced? I missed it if you did. Edited August 25, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
jkwilliams Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 6 minutes ago, Teancum said: Our situations are similar. Spouses with simple faith and testimony as well. I think Scott believes we are talking about a "simplistic" faith that is unexamined. Such is not the case with my wife, and I don't like the implication that I even came close to implying that.
UtahTexan Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 59 minutes ago, Teancum said: You know Scott this may sound harsh. But I think it was really crummy of you to search the board and dredge up something that John shared that was very personal in order to seemingly simply score a point. John is a wonderful person who is very transparent. I think this is a good example of why, on boards like this, it is better NOT to share personal feelings and thoughts. Funny thing....the folks here that are on the other board have dredged up posts that I made as an anti. Further, they have dredged up posts I made as a Catholic, before my conversion. So, I do not fault Scott. The precedent was set 1
Teancum Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: FWIW, I've never cared for the expression "simple faith." The connotation is that the faith is ill-informed or naive. I don't think that is necessarily the case. Sometimes it is ill informed and naïve. I know personally of people in my life who just don't challenge things and take it at face value. They don't think about the hard questions of the problem of evil and suffering. They don't delve into the issues of philosophy or theology or so on. They just don't care. For my DW she loves the church for the practical benefits. But the things I wonder about, read about, used to defend and not challenge she could care less about. They just don't enter into her thought process. That does not make her bad, or dumb nor does it anyone like her. One of my best friends is the same. For him the LDS Church is just true "and if it is not its the best thing out there." I ask him if he has looked at anything else. No he has not nor will he nor does he want to. And I am ok with that. Yet he is ill informed and naïve to some extent. But I don't think that is bad. I wish I could be like that many days. But if there is a God apparently I was not made that way.
Jeanne Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 John, I just wanted to let you know that I was touched by the older post I so much identify with the feelings there and wanted to go back in time where I belonged and believed. As for Scott..well using something so personal and honest against John really surprised me. The fact that John is letting it roll off his back is a credit to his character as a good person. 2
jkwilliams Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I wasn't referring to your wife; I was merely saying why I don't care for the expression. It is ambiguous, and ambiguity is best avoided. Well, I was thinking of all the times it's been used by apostles and prophets. I once heard Elder Faust talk about an "untroubled faith," and I believe he mentioned something about having a "simple faith." Found it (thank heavens for the Internet): https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/james-e-faust_untroubled-faith/ Here's the part that stood out to me (I was a student at BYU at the time): Quote I should like to speak this evening of the need to nurture a simple, untroubled faith. I urge complete acceptance of the absolutes of our own faith. At the same time, I urge you not to be unduly concerned over the intricacies, the complexities, and any seeming contradictions that seem to trouble many of us. Sometimes we spend time satisfying our intellectual egos and look for all the answers before we accept any. Here at Brigham Young University we are in the pursuit of truth and knowledge. The nurturing of a simple untroubled faith does not limit us in the pursuit of growth and accomplishment. On the contrary, it may intensify and hasten our progress. This is so because our natural gifts and powers of achievement are increasingly enhanced by the endless growth of knowledge. In our belief, it is possible to be even the helper of the Father and of the Son, and to be under their personal tutelage. Obviously, you dislike the usage. Fair enough. I like it. Edited August 25, 2016 by jkwilliams 1
Scott Lloyd Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 6 minutes ago, Teancum said: Based on the evidence or lack there of... .yes it is. Your personal testimony is not evidence of historicity. I don't think I've ever heard someone bear testimony based on physical evidence. A testimony pertains to a spiritual confirmation through the power of the Holy Ghost, not physical evidence. And you have not disproven the historicity of the Book of Mormon in any case (I don't believe you can), so I am as entitled to say that it is historical as you are to say that it isn't. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 11 minutes ago, Teancum said: I am not surprised. I still think it was pretty crummy. To each their own I suppose. Again, why haven't you commented on how "crummy" it is to dredge up a seven-year-old accusation against an apostle when the accusation was already discredited almost immediately.
jkwilliams Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: Again, why haven't you commented on how "crummy" it is to dredge up a seven-year-old accusation against an apostle when the accusation was already discredited almost immediately. FWIW, I think the accusation about the book was silly. 1
Teancum Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 8 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: No, I saw that. Where did you say you thought it was "crummy" to dredge up a false accusation against him when the accusation was already discredited almost as soon as it surfaced? I missed it if you did. I didn't specifically say that. But I gave resounding support for him. But here you go. It was crummy to dredge up a a false accusation against him when the accusation was already discredited almost as soon as it surfaced. And I do think it was crummy. 4
UtahTexan Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 9 minutes ago, Jeanne said: John, I just wanted to let you know that I was touched by the older post I so much identify with the feelings there and wanted to go back in time where I belonged and believed. As for Scott..well using something so personal and honest against John really surprised me. The fact that John is letting it roll off his back is a credit to his character as a good person. I wonder why you have not used that same indignation against your friends on the other board when they dredged up my past? If someone praised Elder Holland 7 years ago and then is negative about it now, I believe it is relevant. Elder Holland gave an amazing talk. I was impressed as an anti---I am blown away as a member
Jeanne Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 (edited) 2 minutes ago, CountryBoy said: I wonder why you have not used that same indignation against your friends on the other board when they dredged up my past? If someone praised Elder Holland 7 years ago and then is negative about it now, I believe it is relevant. Elder Holland gave an amazing talk. I was impressed as an anti---I am blown away as a member I had stated above that I understood how John felt at the time..I, too, heard Holland's talk. As for whatever is bugging you about the other board, take it up over there. You seem to spend a lot of time there anyway. CB...enough of hounding me about my friends. I have friends all over and it doesn't change who I am. You seem to wait for me to post so that you can slam other people. Please quit..or I will have to leave this board and I don't want to. Edited August 25, 2016 by Jeanne
stemelbow Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 I can't find anything pre-2011 from posts on this forum. how do you do it? I like reading old stuff.
Teancum Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 16 minutes ago, CountryBoy said: Funny thing....the folks here that are on the other board have dredged up posts that I made as an anti. Further, they have dredged up posts I made as a Catholic, before my conversion. So, I do not fault Scott. The precedent was set Good for you. I do.
UtahTexan Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 Just now, Jeanne said: I had stated above that I understood how John felt at the time..I, too, heard Holland's talk. As for whatever is bugging you about the other board, take it up over there. You seem to spend a lot of time there anyway. Actually, I don't. Have not posted there since you all started really blasting members here. BTW.....Calm is not Nemesis. But thanks. What did you like about Elder Holland's talk specifically? I can tell you, there were many times since about 2005 that I really wished I had my old testimony...it simply would not come. Then, somehow, in 2015 it did. Well, not somehow....I know how. And it has felt so good to be back 2
rockpond Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: Telling people you lack faith is not the same thing as staking out a false position (such as the Book of Mormon being fiction) and advocating that position from the pulpit or in the classroom. Surely you can see the difference! That's an important detail. I wasn't every picturing someone teaching a class and advocating that the Book of Mormon is fictional. Rather, I was imagining someone sharing their belief in the Book of Mormon as something other than a literal history.
UtahTexan Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 1 minute ago, Teancum said: Good for you. I do. Then decry all who do it Do you ever wish you had your full testimony back?
jkwilliams Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 3 minutes ago, Jeanne said: I had stated above that I understood how John felt at the time..I, too, heard Holland's talk. As for whatever is bugging you about the other board, take it up over there. You seem to spend a lot of time there anyway. CB...enough of hounding me about my friends. I have friends all over and it doesn't change who I am. You seem to wait for me to post so that you can slam other people. Please quit..or I will have to leave this board and I don't want to. I haven't said anything negative about that particular talk, for the record. Seriously, though, use the Ignore feature. It will save a lot of headache. 2
Jeanne Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 Just now, CountryBoy said: Actually, I don't. Have not posted there since you all started really blasting members here. BTW.....Calm is not Nemesis. But thanks. What did you like about Elder Holland's talk specifically? I can tell you, there were many times since about 2005 that I really wished I had my old testimony...it simply would not come. Then, somehow, in 2015 it did. Well, not somehow....I know how. And it has felt so good to be back As I have stated before..and even given you support..I have wished you all the best. As for Holland's talk, it was a power of conviction that used to have. I understood the sadness that John was speaking of I don't post over there very much..but after all is said and done..if you have problem, take it over there. They were so willing to have a conversation but you were always so angry. Peace CB....leave me alone okay?
jkwilliams Posted August 25, 2016 Posted August 25, 2016 Just now, Jeanne said: As I have stated before..and even given you support..I have wished you all the best. As for Holland's talk, it was a power of conviction that used to have. I understood the sadness that John was speaking of I don't post over there very much..but after all is said and done..if you have problem, take it over there. They were so willing to have a conversation but you were always so angry. Peace CB....leave me alone okay? Use. The. Ignore. Feature. I put that guy on ignore faster than I have ever put anyone (I think I only have 5 posters on ignore). Have not regretted it once.
Recommended Posts