Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

most incredible missionary story


Recommended Posts

http://www.mormonlight.org/2017/06/30/elder-holland-shares-one-incredible-missionary-stories-time/

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865683974/The-divine-companionship-includes-the-Holy-Ghost-in-missionary-work-Elder-Holland-says.html
 

Quote

The following is a portion of R. Scott Lloyd’s article in the deseret news.
Elder Holland closed by relating a story — being careful to protect the privacy and anonymity of the participants — of a young man from southern Idaho. 

Can Scott verify that he as a journalist has ensured these are real people on the other end of this story?  It sounds as though Elder Holland did not share names and Scott took his word for it.  Curious how we go about ensuring the story took place the way the article says it did.  

I find the story as told in the deseret news to be unbelievable and would like to verify this story being based in a factual account.  How do I do that?   Certainly before we put such a story in a credible newspaper we would do some due diligence and ensure the story is based in historical fact.

I am thinking of how many times I have claimed details that I wouldn't share the end source for them and how many here including Scott gave me a hard time for such.

Is this a story we simply need faith to believe or is there any responsibility on the part of a real Newspaper to fact check stories or just publish hearsay (maybe true or maybe not)?

This has little to do with my trust of Elder Holland but rather whether such stories would ever come out of a credible newspaper in this form?

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

http://www.mormonlight.org/2017/06/30/elder-holland-shares-one-incredible-missionary-stories-time/

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865683974/The-divine-companionship-includes-the-Holy-Ghost-in-missionary-work-Elder-Holland-says.html
 

Can Scott verify that he as a journalist has ensured these are real people on the other end of this story?  It sounds as though Elder Holland did not share names and Scott took his word for it.  Curious how we go about ensuring the story took place the way the article says it did.  

I find the story as told in the deseret news to be unbelievable and would like to verify this story being based in a factual account.  How do I do that?   Certainly before we put such a story in a credible newspaper we would do some due diligence and ensure the story is based in historical fact.

I am thinking of how many times I have claimed details that I wouldn't share the end source for them and how many here including Scott gave me a hard time for such.

Is this a story we simply need faith to believe or is there any responsibility on the part of a real Newspaper to fact check stories or just publish hearsay (maybe true or maybe not)?

This has little to do with my trust of Elder Holland but rather whether such stories would ever come out of a credible newspaper in this form?

If Scott said he did his due diligence, would you just accept that?

What would it take for you to believe the story was true outside of the names of the people involved?

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Calm said:

If Scott said he did his due diligence, would you just accept that?

What would it take for you to believe the story was true outside of the names of the people involved?

I would take Scott's word that he did his journalistic responsibility and verified the story through the actual participants

Edited by DBMormon
Link to comment

if it was found the main person was a woman, living in Southern Kansas and she joined a travelling carnival and she ended up living in New Mexico, the main point of the story remains unchanged

Link to comment
2 hours ago, DBMormon said:

...This has little to do with my trust of Elder Holland but rather whether such stories would ever come out of a credible newspaper in this form?

Credible...with whom?

Are you suggesting Deseret News doesn't have credibility (fx. with its audience)?

Or that it loses credibility (with its audience?) when/if it trusts a previously-tested reliable source, without further fact-checking?

Edited by hagoth7
Link to comment
35 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

I would take Scott's word that he did his journalistic responsibility and verified the story through the actual participants

I agree and well stated.  I disagree with Scott a lot on here, but his word is something you can depend on.  He's a good person.

Link to comment
44 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

Curious how we go about ensuring the story took place the way the article says it did.  

The answer to that question is at the very heart of the Restoration.

 

1. Is it "true" (did it happen?)

2. Is it "true" (does it teach true principles, and point one in a true.. beneficial...course to follow?)

 

As someone who enjoys history, even I would align with those who say we often focus too much on #1.

When #2 is more important.

I frankly don't need to know whether every parable told was based on a true story. The principle to draw from it and apply is a much more important truth.

As to the specifics of story, if the Spirit of God can tame/convert the beast in a man, as it did with Nebuchadnezzar, it can do so with lions in a den, or with billowing waves, or wth a troubled mind/heart, or with dogs in a yard. Did the dogs still? For me, yes. See #2

Was a man recovered by his own brother?  For me, of course. See #2

Did he come from Idaho? See Duncan's post.

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, juliann said:

He is openly questioning Scott's integrity as a journalist...

I didn't quite take it that way.

Seemed more to be questioning the integrity/credibility of the entire newspaper.

? DB?

Edited by hagoth7
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Calm said:

...And the sons meeting...odd things happen like that all the time.  When we went to Russia, the RS Pres. was my husband's first girlfriend he hadn't seen in 20 years.  My husband goes back east and runs into the kids of our neighbours.  You can accept that it is pure chance or you can see something at work in them all the time or on occasion.

When things need to happen, it rapidly becomes a *very* small world.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, hagoth7 said:

I didn't quite take it that way.

Seemed more to be questioning the integrity/credibility of the entire newspaper.

? DB?

He will accept that a reporter did " his journalistic responsibility" if he did what DB says to do? That is not questioning the newspaper, Hagoth.  He has made up a nonexistent "journalistic responsibility" and then challenged Scott to defend himself. What do you think the conclusion is when the demand is framed in that manner and Scott doesn't do as ordered? Not. Cool. 

 

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Calm said:

The paper is not reporting the story itself as news, they are reporting the speech.  They are not making claims the speech is factual, etc.

I don't think there is a journalistic rule that requires them to factcheck every claim made by those they interview or report.  When done so, I certainly appreciate it, but don't expect it even for speeches by politicians.  Now at times factchecking can be a great story of its own.

I do believe that Elder Holland had a responsibility to determine the story was accurate before he used it as he is the one reporting it as a fact.  I don't know how he approaches such things, so I will not be making any claims on whether or not it took place to others though as another said, it reminds me of such that has occurred in my life.

Agreed. On every point.

The OP nonetheless seemed to openly question the credibility of the entire paper...unless I read things into the OP that weren't intended...   

DB?

 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, juliann said:

He will accept that a reporter did " his journalistic responsibility" if he did what DB says to do? That is not questioning the newspaper, Hagoth.  He has made up a nonexistent "journalistic responsibility" and then challenged Scott to defend himself. What do you think the conclusion is when the demand is framed in that manner and Scott doesn't do as ordered? Not. Cool. 

He said he'd take Scott's word.  Read his post as I see it as saying something quite different from how you interpreted it.

Here's what he stated:

"I would take Scott's word that he did his journalistic responsibility and verified the story through the actual participants."

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...