juliann Posted May 31, 2017 Posted May 31, 2017 3 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: Sigh. OK. I'm out. Now you can go find someone else to pass judgment on. It seems to be what you do best. I certainly did not intend that. I apologize. 4
rockpond Posted May 31, 2017 Posted May 31, 2017 1 hour ago, juliann said: Pot meet kettle perhaps? How many critics are on the board that haven't kept up with scholarly defenses or the cybermountain of data the church is disgorging before they recycle the same old talking points over and over and over and...... No. But feel free to point that out when it happens. I also think that criticizing someone's work when one hasn't even bothered to listen to a significant amount of the work they are criticizing is inappropriate.
Popular Post cinepro Posted May 31, 2017 Popular Post Posted May 31, 2017 (edited) On 5/30/2017 at 9:44 AM, rockpond said: The vast majority of Dehlin's guests are friendly to the church. And friendly or not, he generally will play "devil's advocate", describing the more orthodox position, at some point during the interview to challenge some of their assumptions. Can you name the top five or six podcasts that you felt were "friendly to the church"? Lets use this as the metric. If someone were not a member and unfamiliar with the Church and they listed to the entire podcast, they would most likely come away being more inclined to believe in the fundamental truth claims and doctrines of the Church, including the existence of God, the divinity and atonement of Christ, the historicity and translation of the Book of Mormon as described by Joseph Smith and taught by the Church, the inspiration and unique authority of LDS priesthood leadership and ordinances, and the unique position of the Church as God's true Church on the face of the earth today, with uniquely and divinely inspired leadership (including their teachings regarding the doctrines on homosexuality and same-sex marriage). You have 747 "episodes" to choose from here: http://www.mormonstories.org/episodes-list-chronological/ I'll even spot you two. I'm assuming the "Inside the Mind of a Mormon Apologist" and Richard Bushman podcasts, both from 10+ years ago, might be "friendly" to the Church. Edited May 31, 2017 by cinepro 6
rockpond Posted May 31, 2017 Posted May 31, 2017 1 hour ago, cinepro said: Can you name the top five or six podcasts that you felt were "friendly to the church"? Lets use this as the metric. If someone were not a member and unfamiliar with the Church and they listed to the entire podcast, they would most likely come away being more inclined to believe in the fundamental truth claims and doctrines of the Church, including the existence of God, the divinity and atonement of Christ, the historicity and translation of the Book of Mormon as described by Joseph Smith and taught by the Church, the inspiration and unique authority of LDS priesthood leadership and ordinances, and the unique position of the Church as God's true Church on the face of the earth today, with uniquely and divinely inspired leadership (including their teachings regarding the doctrines on homosexuality and same-sex marriage). You have 747 "episodes" to choose from here: http://www.mormonstories.org/episodes-list-chronological/ I'll even spot you two. I'm assuming the "Inside the Mind of a Mormon Apologist" and Richard Bushman podcasts, both from 10+ years ago, might be "friendly" to the Church. I find Bushman to be really uplifting. I also like Hardy, Givens, Miller, and Prince. All of them have multiples episodes so that's more than the top 5. You and I have different definitions of friendly to the church. Very few of the MS episodes are going to meet the standard you've outlined because they so often deal with tough questions and issues. They deal with real life stories that aren't always like reading the Ensign.
Popular Post cinepro Posted May 31, 2017 Popular Post Posted May 31, 2017 (edited) 12 minutes ago, rockpond said: I find Bushman to be really uplifting. I also like Hardy, Givens, Miller, and Prince. All of them have multiples episodes so that's more than the top 5. You and I have different definitions of friendly to the church. Very few of the MS episodes are going to meet the standard you've outlined because they so often deal with tough questions and issues. They deal with real life stories that aren't always like reading the Ensign. To paraphrase, if a podcast is questioning any of the points I mentioned and it still wants to be considered "friendly to the Church", then with friends like these, why would the Church need enemies? I've long argued for the value of criticism towards the Church, and I've certainly been critical for over 15 years. But I would never say that such "criticism" is friendly towards the Church. When I say the Church is out to lunch on its literal interpretation of the Noah's Flood story, it might be true, but it isn't "friendly" if you're talking about a claim that must be believed on faith. Edited May 31, 2017 by cinepro 5
rockpond Posted May 31, 2017 Posted May 31, 2017 18 minutes ago, cinepro said: To paraphrase, if a podcast is questioning any of the points I mentioned and it still wants to be considered "friendly to the Church", then with friends like these, why would the Church need enemies? I've long argued for the value of criticism towards the Church, and I've certainly been critical for over 15 years. But I would never say that such "criticism" is friendly towards the Church. When I say the Church is out to lunch on its literal interpretation of the Noah's Flood story, it might be true, but it isn't "friendly" if you're talking about a claim that must be believed on faith. We've obviously got different viewpoints. I don't consider it unfriendly to examine the church, its claims, history, doctrine, culture, etc. As a church we honor questions. To the extent that we have the truth, it will stand up to scrutiny. Where we lack truth, we ought to be questioned. 1
Teancum Posted May 31, 2017 Posted May 31, 2017 22 hours ago, Bob Crockett said: 1. No comment. 2. I am lazy! I'd rather poke needles in my eyes than listen to hours of podcasts on LDS topics. I can't provide a source for my recollection that he doesn't like to read, but it is apparent. It is just my lazy opinion. 3. Not sure I get you. 4. Great. Sorry I posted so fast and did not take time to edit my comments.
Popular Post cinepro Posted May 31, 2017 Popular Post Posted May 31, 2017 2 hours ago, rockpond said: We've obviously got different viewpoints. I don't consider it unfriendly to examine the church, its claims, history, doctrine, culture, etc. As a church we honor questions. To the extent that we have the truth, it will stand up to scrutiny. Where we lack truth, we ought to be questioned. Honestly, if Dehlin was intending his podcasts to be taken as friendly towards the Church, then he's an even worse interviewer than I thought. 6
Kenngo1969 Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 23 hours ago, juliann said: I certainly did not intend that. I apologize. Apology accepted. For the record, my only point was that some skeptics/critics seem to think that it's perfectly OK to "kill" the Church of Jesus Christ for its alleged doctrinal, historical, and other sins (speaking solely metaphorically) ... as long as they do it "softly," a la John Dehlin. I'm with Stephen Robinson (hat tip to Scott Lloyd, who quotes Bro. Robinson approvingly in his signature line): I prefer my anti-Mormons straight-up. 4
rockpond Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 17 hours ago, cinepro said: Honestly, if Dehlin was intending his podcasts to be taken as friendly towards the Church, then he's an even worse interviewer than I thought. As I said, different perspectives on friendly. But, I agree, he's not a great interviewer -- Is there anyone who disagrees with that? I don't think Dehlin would even claim to be a great interviewer.
cinepro Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 23 hours ago, rockpond said: We've obviously got different viewpoints. I don't consider it unfriendly to examine the church, its claims, history, doctrine, culture, etc. As a church we honor questions. To the extent that we have the truth, it will stand up to scrutiny. Where we lack truth, we ought to be questioned. Yes, I'm glad Dehlin could help the Church stand up to scrutiny and "question the truth" by doing a 70 minute missionary-themed podcast titled "Jacob Hampton – Sent Home Early for Cuddling with Zone Leader." 2
rockpond Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 49 minutes ago, cinepro said: Yes, I'm glad Dehlin could help the Church stand up to scrutiny and "question the truth" by doing a 70 minute missionary-themed podcast titled "Jacob Hampton – Sent Home Early for Cuddling with Zone Leader." Did you listen to that series of podcasts regarding missionaries who were sent home early? It was a good series and wasn't as goofy as that headline might suggest.
Kenngo1969 Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, rockpond said: As I said, different perspectives on friendly. But, I agree, he's not a great interviewer -- Is there anyone who disagrees with that? I don't think Dehlin would even claim to be a great interviewer. On the one hand, you have excoriated those of us who lack the desire, the patience, and/or the wherewithal to wade through hundreds of podcasts, each of which is several hours in length, in order to ferret out what kernels of wheat might be present among all of that chaff. On the other hand, you have conceded that John Dehlin could be a (much?!!) better interviewer. Still, you refuse to connect the dots between John Dehlin's interviewing skills (or lack thereof, which even you concede), the length of his podcasts, and the lack of desire among those of us who are reticent to listen to him. Why is the onus on his would-be listeners to consume his product (notwithstanding its flaws, at least some of which even you concede) rather than on him to improve that product (by ... I dunno ... taking a class in interviewing skills, by being better prepared, by being more succinct, by "cutting to the chase" quicker, and so on) and, thereby, to improve its listenability? Edited June 1, 2017 by Kenngo1969 1
Kenngo1969 Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 1 hour ago, rockpond said: Did you listen to that series of podcasts regarding missionaries who were sent home early? It was a good series and wasn't as goofy as that headline might suggest. Ultimately, who's responsible for how Mr. Dehlin's product is packaged if it isn't Mr. Dehlin? You expect rank-and-file, devout members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to be as enthusiastic about consuming content with such a title as "Jacob Hampton: Sent Home Early for Cuddling With Zone Leader" as they are about consuming content from The Ensign? You expect them to be as enthusiastic about consuming John Dehlin's latest offering as they are about consuming President Thomas S. Monson's most recent output? And yet it's those very same rank-and-file devout members of the Church who are the problem? Such inflammatory publicity stunts as this notwithstanding, you expect those same members of the Church of Jesus Christ to not question Mr. Dehlin's methods, his motives, and so on? Dream on! 2
rockpond Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said: On the one hand, you have excoriated those of us who lack the desire, the patience, and/or the wherewithal to wade through hundreds of podcasts, each of which is several hours in length, in order to ferret out what kernels of wheat might be present among all of that chaff. On the other hand, you have conceded that John Dehlin could be a (much?!!) better interviewer. Still, you refuse to connect the dots between John Dehlin's interviewing skills (or lack thereof, which even you concede), the length of his podcasts, and the lack of desire among those of us who are reticent to listen to him. Why is the onus on his would-be listeners to consume his product (notwithstanding its flaws, at least some of which even you concede) rather than on him to improve that product (by ... I dunno ... taking a class in interviewing skills, by being better prepared, by being more succinct, by "cutting to the chase" quicker, and so on) and, thereby, to improve its listenability? Hyperbole much? I haven't excoriated anyone for not listening. Nobody should feel that they need to listen to MS. I only said that I find it inappropriate to criticize his work if you haven't taken the time to listen to enough of it to make such judgements. I have connected the dots, thank you. Dehlin has a podcast that is not only growing in downloads but increasing in financial donations and, arguably, expanding its influence. I disagree that the podcasts are too long. That is a matter of preference. I enjoy hearing the detailed stories of his guests and the deep dives into certain topics. I also think he has made great strides as an interviewer though, as I said earlier, he could still improve. And I disagree that he is unprepared (that was likely more true in the first few years of his podcasts).
rockpond Posted June 1, 2017 Posted June 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said: Ultimately, who's responsible for how Mr. Dehlin's product is packaged if it isn't Mr. Dehlin? You expect rank-and-file, devout members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to be as enthusiastic about consuming content with such a title as "Jacob Hampton: Sent Home Early for Cuddling With Zone Leader" as they are about consuming content from The Ensign? You expect them to be as enthusiastic about consuming John Dehlin's latest offering as they are about consuming President Thomas S. Monson's most recent output? And yet it's those very same rank-and-file devout members of the Church who are the problem? Such inflammatory publicity stunts as this notwithstanding, you expect those same members of the Church of Jesus Christ to not question Mr. Dehlin's methods, his motives, and so on? Dream on! You've created a nice little strawman there but I've never made ANY of those claims. I hold no such expectations of church member. Quote the opposite. By the way, what is the "inflammatory public stunt" to which you refer? And please be ready to back it up with facts.
Kenngo1969 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, rockpond said: You've created a nice little strawman there but I've never made ANY of those claims. I hold no such expectations of church member. Quote the opposite. No, you're right; you haven't made any of those claims ... at least, not explicitly. Quote By the way, what is the "inflammatory public stunt" to which you refer? And please be ready to back it up with facts. I'm not sure what "LDS Missionary Sent Home Early for Cuddling With Zone Leader" is supposed to be if it's not intended as a dog whistle to the disaffected. (And I'm sure there are other such examples in the titles to episodes of "Mormon Stories." Quote I have connected the dots, thank you. Dehlin has a podcast that is not only growing in downloads but increasing in financial donations and, arguably, expanding its influence. OK, so you're a devotee of Mr. Dr. Dehlin ... sorry; (along with thousands millions billions trillions quadrillions[/S] [/S] et cetera ... of others). Congratulations. I'm sure you're all in very good company. Earlier in this thread, you, yourself conceded that Dr. Dehlin is not a very good interviewer, before backing off of that claim when at least one other person tried to use it as part of the explanation for why someone might not think Dr. Dehlin is worth taking the considerable time that would be necessary to devote to listening to him and his guests. If you have time enough to devote hours upon hours listening to hundreds of six-hour podcasts, more power to you. Personally, my hunch is that if Dr. Dehlin were a better interviewer, his podcasts would/could be far shorter. Edited June 2, 2017 by Kenngo1969
rockpond Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 59 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: No, you're right; you haven't made any of those claims ... at least, not explicitly. I'm not sure what "LDS Missionary Sent Home Early for Cuddling With Zone Leader" is supposed to be if it's not intended as a dog whistle to the disaffected. (And I'm sure there are other such examples in the titles to episodes of "Mormon Stories." OK, so you're a devotee of Mr. Dr. Dehlin ... sorry; (along with thousands millions billions trillions quadrillions[/S] [/S] et cetera ... of others). Congratulations. I'm sure you're all in very good company. Earlier in this thread, you, yourself conceded that Dr. Dehlin is not a very good interviewer, before backing off of that claim when at least one other person tried to use it as part of the explanation for why someone might not think Dr. Dehlin is worth taking the considerable time that would be necessary to devote to listening to him and his guests. If you have time enough to devote hours upon hours listening to hundreds of six-hour podcasts, more power to you. Personally, my hunch is that if Dr. Dehlin were a better interviewer, his podcasts would/could be far shorter. Correct... I didn't make those claims either explicitly or implicitly. As for what the podcast in question is supposed to be perhaps you could actually listen to it before making unsubstantiated conclusions. It was part of a series about missionaries who returned home early for a variety of reasons. It delved into their mission experiences (positive and negative) as well as the difficulties of returning home early. As for your last paragraph, I'm not sure why you wrote it and struck through it. Perhaps because it comes across as a childish rant. I haven't backed away from my earlier statement and "your hunch" is fairly worthless given your lack of exposure to the podcasts.
Calm Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 The struck through was probably a coding glitch. As I read it, he struck the thousands, etc. (see the two strikethrough tags at the end of the series showing they didn't register with the post) and for some reason the board made the rest of the post that way. I have had that happen and once done, can't be removed, though there used to be a way to see coding so you could edit it. Sometimes even deleting and starting over, the crossout glitch is still there. 2
Kenngo1969 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 Rock Pond, I strongly suspect that if someone were to listen to something less than every minute of every archived episode of Dr. Dehlin's podcast and were to arrive at the same conclusions regarding it that I have, you would issue the same condemnation. So I won't mind if you save me the thousands of hours it would take for me to listen to every minute of every Dehlin podcast and condemn me anyway. C'est la vie! Thanks! -Ken
Kenngo1969 Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 22 hours ago, rockpond said: You've created a nice little strawman there but I've never made ANY of those claims. I hold no such expectations of church member. Quote the opposite. By the way, what is the "inflammatory public stunt" to which you refer? And please be ready to back it up with facts. It seems to me that anyone who attempts to aver that Dr. Dehlin actually is trying to build bridges between the devout and the disaffected with such podcast titles as "LDS Missionary Sent Home for Cuddling With Zone Leader" is attempting to do the equivalent of peeing on the legs of the devout while, all the while, assuring us that it's simply raining. I don't buy it. 1
rockpond Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said: Rock Pond, I strongly suspect that if someone were to listen to something less than every minute of every archived episode of Dr. Dehlin's podcast and were to arrive at the same conclusions regarding it that I have, you would issue the same condemnation. So I won't mind if you save me the thousands of hours it would take for me to listen to every minute of every Dehlin podcast and condemn me anyway. C'est la vie! Thanks! -Ken I haven't issued any condemnation. Is there a reason that you need to exaggerate what I say in order to respond? I stand by my belief that it's reasonable to expect someone to listen to an appropriate amount of Dehlin's podcasts in order for their criticisms (or compliments) to carry much weight.
rockpond Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said: It seems to me that anyone who attempts to aver that Dr. Dehlin actually is trying to build bridges between the devout and the disaffected with such podcast titles as "LDS Missionary Sent Home for Cuddling With Zone Leader" is attempting to do the equivalent of peeing on the legs of the devout while, all the while, assuring us that it's simply raining. I don't buy it. I don't think anyone is making such a claim so you needn't worry and you can dispense with disgusting and immature analogies.
Danzo Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, rockpond said: I haven't issued any condemnation. Is there a reason that you need to exaggerate what I say in order to respond? I stand by my belief that it's reasonable to expect someone to listen to an appropriate amount of Dehlin's podcasts in order for their criticisms (or compliments) to carry much weight. why does one have to play in the mud to find out whether it is dirty or not? I just went to the MS home page and all of the podcasts seem to be about people who have left the church. Do I have to listen to all of them to find out if they are really all about people who have left the church or can I just take the title of the podcasts at face value? 2
rockpond Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Danzo said: why does one have to play in the mud to find out whether it is dirty or not? I just went to the MS home page and all of the podcasts seem to be about people who have left the church. Do I have to listen to all of them to find out if they are really all about people who have left the church or can I just take the title of the podcasts at face value? Apparently because without listening to them you make incorrect conclusions that the podcasts are all about people who have left the church. But I'm not saying anyone has to listen to them. If you don't want to listen, don't. Please, don't! All I've said (despite how Kenngo may have portrayed my words) is that one should actually listen to Dehlin's work if you are going to criticize it. Or, at least expect your criticisms to be easily dismissed if they are solely based on podcast titles and second-hand accounts.
Recommended Posts