People leave the church because of a "trust gap"

[Teancum]

On 4/19/2017 at 10:10 PM, SamIam said:

Got any substance for this discussion?

Oh and by the way there was little to now substance to your post which I responded to.  Typical dogmatic drivel.

[Calm]

 

5 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

No- I can't refute the Tsunami story. Did I somehow suggest otherwise?

The speaker clearly intended to give the message that the mission president was inspired to protect his missionaries by inviting them "all" to the conference. Of course he didn't invite all.

 

Except he stated right up front not "all missionaries in the mission" or "all missionaries in potential danger", but specified "zone".  Perhaps there was an overestimation that LDS members knew what "zone" meant in terms of missionary context, but given the number of returned missionaries in the Church, I don't think it was unreasonable to anticipate a correct understanding.

Anyone who thinks Stevenson was talking about all the missionaries in the mission was not paying attention or is uneducated in mission parlance and for some reason assumes "zone" man's the same thing as "mission"...but even that misunderstanding is no evidence that Stevenson inflated the story.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Calm

[clarkgoble]

2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

That's very fair but also illustrates the need to be accurate. Did Elder Bragg mean harm by making the story sound better than it really was? Maybe, maybe not. We don't really know. What we know is that it wasn't accurate. 

It's easy to see how stories are stretched, not just over the course of a few years but over centuries and millennia of scriptural additions and revisions. 

Could someone explain what exactly the claim is regarding Bragg? The Wheat and Tare blogs only says, "they did look into Elder Mark A. Bragg’s depiction of a fire in a stake center in California that seems a bit embellished when looking into the details." Yet the reference is to the podcast without making any description of what was embellished so we could even know if we'd agree with their judgment. 

Certainly second hand accounts can have errors. As I said it seems like they attempt to check that, but honestly if the Braggs issue is like the tsunami one this is a whole lot of nothing going on. Are people really criticizing devotional talks for not being carefully fact checked like a thesis about to be defended? Doesn't this rise to a whole other level of nitpickiness? And to even remotely compare those to what Dunn did seems to be guilty of far worse exaggeration than what they claim of these speakers.

[juliann]

4 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Well I think that's the question though. If they were dynastic were they real marriages? Who will Zina be married to?  

To everyone she was sealed to. Would you ask that if she was male? The CHI no longer mandates that a woman must choose. 

[Calm]

18 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Could someone explain what exactly the claim is regarding Bragg? The Wheat and Tare blogs only says, "they did look into Elder Mark A. Bragg’s depiction of a fire in a stake center in California that seems a bit embellished when looking into the details." Yet the reference is to the podcast without making any description of what was embellished so we could even know if we'd agree with their judgment. 

Certainly second hand accounts can have errors. As I said it seems like they attempt to check that, but honestly if the Braggs issue is like the tsunami one this is a whole lot of nothing going on. Are people really criticizing devotional talks for not being carefully fact checked like a thesis about to be defended? Doesn't this rise to a whole other level of nitpickiness? And to even remotely compare those to what Dunn did seems to be guilty of far worse exaggeration than what they claim of these speakers.

The roof was apparently on fire even if the rest of the building wasn't at that time.  From the after shots of this video, it looks like the building was trashed by the fire.  Obviously the artwork was removed prior to their rooms being involved...at least the ones seen, but it seems strange to act as if having a large roof fire was not something to be worried about as they moved through the rest of the building.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Fire-Burning-Glassell-Park-312252731.html

"A small brush fire that started off a Southern California freeway ripped through a Mormon church's gabled roof on Tuesday in Glassell Park and injured one firefighter.

Teams of firefighters worked to douse the flames that could be seen through the triangular roof of a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints....

A large portion of the church's roof collapsed while firefighters were outside trying to save the structure from additional damage.

"Rapidly the roof started failing," said Capt. Mark Egizi of Los Angeles City Fire Department."

Edited April 21, 2017 by Calm

[clarkgoble]

14 minutes ago, juliann said:

To everyone she was sealed to. Would you ask that if she was male? The CHI no longer mandates that a woman must choose. 

Of course I'd ask. Because in genealogy there's a tendency to seal them all and let God sort it out in the millennium.

[JLHPROF]

15 minutes ago, juliann said:

To everyone she was sealed to. Would you ask that if she was male? The CHI no longer mandates that a woman must choose.

Well then someone got their doctrine wrong.
It's either the early Church or the Church today.

I'd love to know when the revelation changing the practice came, to which prophet, and what it said.

[JLHPROF]

2 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Of course I'd ask. Because in genealogy there's a tendency to seal them all and let God sort it out in the millennium.

1000 years to fix all our wrong sealings.
Could be interesting.

[Calm]

Here is the story:

"who fought to save a burning stake center in Southern California in 2015. As the fire raged, a battalion commander called an LDS friend to ask where the sacred relics and sacrament cups were kept so they could be saved. His friend assured him that there were no sacred relics and that the sacrament cups were actually very, very replaceable. But the commander felt he should do more, so he sent firefighters back into the burning building to pull every painting of Christ off of the walls that they might be preserved. They even placed one in the firetruck in the hope that the firefighters might be watched over. I was truly touched by the commander’s kindness, goodness, and sensitivity to the Light during a dangerous and difficult time."

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2017/04/brighter-and-brighter-until-the-perfect-day?lang=eng

The building was burning at the time they got the artwork unless one wants to claim the roof was not part of the building.  The fire on the roof is described by the news with terms "ripping" and "engulfed".  News may be over dramatic, but the firefighter said they had a two second warning iirc before the roof collapsed to get out of the building, so it certainly seems highly dangerous to me and very kind of the commander to focus on saving something meaningful for the members as he probably realized the building itself would be toast.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Of course I'd ask. Because in genealogy there's a tendency to seal them all and let God sort it out in the millennium.

And they used to say that in the Handbook in regards to women's multiple sealings.

They don't anymore.

If the intent of Joseph Smith's polyandrous sealings was to bring the family along into the celestial kingdom with him, then there had to be some sort of understanding that the relationship of the first husband with their wife had to stay intact, or the sealing would have been meaningless for that husband.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Calm

[clarkgoble]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

Here is the story:

"who fought to save a burning stake center in Southern California in 2015. As the fire raged, a battalion commander called an LDS friend to ask where the sacred relics and sacrament cups were kept so they could be saved. His friend assured him that there were no sacred relics and that the sacrament cups were actually very, very replaceable. But the commander felt he should do more, so he sent firefighters back into the burning building to pull every painting of Christ off of the walls that they might be preserved. They even placed one in the firetruck in the hope that the firefighters might be watched over. I was truly touched by the commander’s kindness, goodness, and sensitivity to the Light during a dangerous and difficult time."

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2017/04/brighter-and-brighter-until-the-perfect-day?lang=eng

The building was burning at the time they got the artwork unless one wants to claim the roof was not part of the building.  The fire on the roof is described by the news with terms "ripping" and "engulfed".  News may be over dramatic, but the firefighter said they had a two second warning iirc before the roof collapsed to get out of the building, so it certainly seems highly dangerous to me and very kind of the commander to focus on saving something meaningful for the members as he probably realized the building itself would be toast.

So it's even less of an issue than the tsunami one. So the talks purportedly on par with Paul H. Dunn amount to nothing. What's funniest is that the people accusing the leadership of deception and exaggeration are doing the most exaggerating. What's the inverse of whitewashing?

[bsjkki]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Here is the story:

"who fought to save a burning stake center in Southern California in 2015. As the fire raged, a battalion commander called an LDS friend to ask where the sacred relics and sacrament cups were kept so they could be saved. His friend assured him that there were no sacred relics and that the sacrament cups were actually very, very replaceable. But the commander felt he should do more, so he sent firefighters back into the burning building to pull every painting of Christ off of the walls that they might be preserved. They even placed one in the firetruck in the hope that the firefighters might be watched over. I was truly touched by the commander’s kindness, goodness, and sensitivity to the Light during a dangerous and difficult time."

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2017/04/brighter-and-brighter-until-the-perfect-day?lang=eng

The building was burning at the time they got the artwork unless one wants to claim the roof was not part of the building.  The fire on the roof is described by the news with terms "ripping" and "engulfed".  News may be over dramatic, but the firefighter said they had a two second warning iirc before the roof collapsed to get out of the building, so it certainly seems highly dangerous to me and very kind of the commander to focus on saving something meaningful for the members as he probably realized the building itself would be toast.

Thank you! 

 

2 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

nitpickiness

Perfect description of this "fake" controversy.

[bluebell]

9 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

No- I can't refute the Tsunami story. Did I somehow suggest otherwise?

The speaker clearly intended to give the message that the mission president was inspired to protect his missionaries by inviting them "all" to the conference. Of course he didn't invite all. There were many missionaries who couldn't be reached for days after the Tsunami. Claiming that God inspired this mission president to protect a few missionaries, instead of "all" really isn't very inspiring. It makes the story of inviting extra missionaries to the conference to be little more than a mundane coincidence as it relates to the Tsunami.

 

It's very inspiring when the person understands that not all of the missionaries were in equal amounts of danger and that the ones in the most danger were the ones who were invited.

[Hamba Tuhan]

4 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

What's the inverse of whitewashing?

Gainsaying? Murmuring? Evil speaking? Making a man an offender for a word?

Edited April 22, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Gainsaying? Murmuring? Evil speaking? Making a man an offender for a word?

Smearing?

[Tacenda]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

Here is the story:

"who fought to save a burning stake center in Southern California in 2015. As the fire raged, a battalion commander called an LDS friend to ask where the sacred relics and sacrament cups were kept so they could be saved. His friend assured him that there were no sacred relics and that the sacrament cups were actually very, very replaceable. But the commander felt he should do more, so he sent firefighters back into the burning building to pull every painting of Christ off of the walls that they might be preserved. They even placed one in the firetruck in the hope that the firefighters might be watched over. I was truly touched by the commander’s kindness, goodness, and sensitivity to the Light during a dangerous and difficult time."

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2017/04/brighter-and-brighter-until-the-perfect-day?lang=eng

The building was burning at the time they got the artwork unless one wants to claim the roof was not part of the building.  The fire on the roof is described by the news with terms "ripping" and "engulfed".  News may be over dramatic, but the firefighter said they had a two second warning iirc before the roof collapsed to get out of the building, so it certainly seems highly dangerous to me and very kind of the commander to focus on saving something meaningful for the members as he probably realized the building itself would be toast.

I think it was careless to risk lives. 

[Calm]

22 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I think it was careless to risk lives. 

Who was risking lives?

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

Who was risking lives?

The fire  chief when he sent in the other firefighters to get the pictures of the Saviour off the walls.

[Calm]

10 hours ago, Tacenda said:

The fire  chief when he sent in the other firefighters to get the pictures of the Saviour off the walls.

The man was quite experienced, I would tend to trust him that he put his people first.  He wasn't a Mormon, he was being compassionate and his men could have easily reported it was unsafe if it was.  They had to clear the building to ensure there was no one there, probably look to see if there were ways they could control the spread, it makes sense to grab useful or valued property while they are doing that.  Wouldn't have been his first fire, undoubtedly he knew how it can affect a family, a community to lose everything.  No one who was getting the pictures was hurt, which speaks to his experience and professional judgment, imo, rather than luck.

Feel free to write the man and ask him why rather than libel him for being unprofessional and improperly taking care of his men when you haven't a clue what when on.

Edited April 22, 2017 by Calm

[Guest]

On April 19, 2017 at 9:21 PM, bsjkki said:

The Salt Lake Tribune interviewed Jana Reiss about her research on why Mormon's leave the church. She explains it is because of a "trust gap." She explains people find controversial information about the church from outside sources, find out this information is true and then wonder why they never heard the information at church. According to her research this is the number one reason millennials leave the church. She puts it this way,

People leave for many reasons, in Joesph's day a member and his family left because, Joseph spelled his name wrong. A man who later aided in his murder, well Joeshp, Hyrum (and not for lack of trying John Taylor. All of this hate and murder, over leaving one letter out I'd memory serves. I have never felt lied too, in addition first it is lying and then not disclosing "controversial information". I realize you ar speak to her material, but people leave for a whole host of reasons, and don't get to by a GA for lying. To add to this, of course you find more material off of this site. Most other sites, speak of Mormonism as being "the devil carnage", and or leaders as unholy liars. As for the young people you listed, many leave of the Church's because they don't like our views on social issues, our stanch view on moral issues, not to mention the desire to fit in. 

[Calm]

Not exactly.  I think the reasoning was not that unreasonable depending on how infallible one believe the spirit would communicate.  He apparently had a God Breathed, no errors allowed view of revelation.

"was baptized that same month, but his enthusiasm was short-lived. He soon received a ministerial call signed by the Prophet Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon that stated that it had been given them by the Spirit and that it was the Lord’s will he be called to preach the gospel. In both the informal letter he received and in the official commission to preach, his last name was misspelled Rider, instead of Ryder. He left the Church, claiming that if the “‘Spirit’ through which he had been called to preach could err in the matter of spelling his name, it might have erred in calling him to the ministry as well; or, in other words, he was led to doubt if he were called at all by the Spirit of God, because of the [scribal] error in the spelling of his name!” 8This error appears to have resulted in his rejection of the prophetic mantle of Joseph Smith."

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2001/04/early-lessons-on-following-the-prophet?lang=eng

As can happen in a faith crisis, one small thing can cause one to begin to doubt...here an inconsistency with how Ryder believed the Spirit reveals, and then other things that might have been accepted if in full faith are rejected if thought there might just be a man in charge, not God.

I believe Ryder went on to have concerns over the United order or some other financial concern that seemed wonky to him.

Edited April 22, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

"Black and other scholars challenge the notion that Ryder’s apostasy was that simple. Mark Staker notes that during the summer of 1831, Ryder began having more doubts about the principle of consecration than his misspelled name (see "Hearken O Ye People: The Historical Settings of Joseph Smith’s Ohio Revelations").

Ryder published articles proving his open opposition to Mormonism. Some, including Joseph Smith himself, believed that Ryder helped organize and participate in the mob that forcibly took the Prophet from his home and then tarred and feathered him in 1832, according to Staker."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865676641/Picturing-history-Symonds-Ryder-who-went-from-LDS-Church-friend-to-enemy-because-of-a-misspelled.html

It would appear there is little actual evidence that he participated in the tarring and feathering, but just speculation, possibly based on location.  I haven't seen anything referring to involvement in the martyrdom.

Edited April 22, 2017 by Calm

[Kenngo1969]

7 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I think it was careless to risk lives. 

 

7 hours ago, Calm said:

Who was risking lives?

 

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

The fire  chief when he sent in the other firefighters to get the pictures of the Saviour off the walls.

Calm's point about clearing the building is a good one.  But, for the sake of this discussion, let's lay that aside for a moment.  You were there and you heard the chief order firefighters to enter the building to save the "sacred relics," then? How do you know he didn't ask for volunteers?  How do you know firefighters didn't volunteer without having to be asked?

[california boy]

5 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 

 

Calm's point about clearing the building is a good one.  But, for the sake of this discussion, let's lay that aside for a moment.  You were there and you heard the chief order firefighters to enter the building to save the "sacred relics," then? How do you know he didn't ask for volunteers?  How do you know firefighters didn't volunteer without having to be asked?

I think it is touching that the fire chief was concerned with relics and paintings but Mormon ward buildings have neither relics or paintings. No one should be sent into a building on fire to save something ordered from church distribution. 

I would be the first to volunteer to go into a burning building to rescue a painting.  But a poster printed on canvas, probably not

[Calm]

Otoh, the action could have been undertaken out of respect for Christ or his awareness of our respect for Christ that made the artwork significant, not its monetary value.

I think the commander was trying to provide the Saints who were losing their spiritual home something spiritually sentimental to give them emotional comfort in a time of loss.

There really isn't anything else that comes close to being symbolic of our belief in our buildings.

The artwork became priceless by his concern.  I can imagine a great joy and a sense of homecoming when the pictures of Christ get put up in their new building, not because a few dollars were saved, but because they are a memorial now to a shared experience of great compassion.

Tacenda, would you condemn the commander for directing his men to pick up teddy bears or a skate board as they were clearing a house that was likely to suffer damage throughout in order to give the kids something they could keep with them for comfort?

Edited April 22, 2017 by Calm