of Hell's Angels and Dobermans

[stemelbow]

I know that other thread was closed.  It should have been.  I have nothing against Bill, but I found it inappropriate to question Scott about verifying Elder Holland's story.  I didn't see that as something Scott was obliged to do.  he reported on Holland's speech and did so quite well.  Although in another sense I'd love to have verification of the story, since it's been shared with us.  I hate to repeat stories when they are either largely false or largely embellished. 

I have a different aspect I'd like to discuss about this.  I don't doubt the parameters of the story myself.  It rings so reminiscent to me, I swear it's a story I heard as a youth growing up some 20-25 years ago.  But the way it's told it makes it sound far more recent.

On to the different accounts (the variations remind me of the variations among the differing accounts of the first vision).

Scott's summary:

Quote

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. One night the young man stormed out of the house and set off to join an infamous motorcycle gang. He succeeded in that resolve and for 20 years became immersed in a culture “of temptations yielded to and degradations explored,” never contacting his parents, who feared that he was dead.

Eventually ending up in Southern California, he one day was sitting on the porch of a rented home when he saw two LDS missionaries making their way up the street.

“With a rush of memory and guilt, regret and rage, he despised the very sight of them,” Elder Holland recounted. “But he was safe, because he kept all visitors at bay by employing two Doberman Pinschers who viciously charged the gate every moment that anyone came near.”

The dogs startled the missionaries as they passed by and continued on, “our man on the porch laughing at the lovely little drama he had just witnessed, wishing only that the gate hadn’t restrained his two dogs.”

Then, the two elders stopped, looked at each other, conversed a little, “likely said a silent prayer,” then turned around and approached the gate.

“The Dobermans on cue charged the gate again, hit it, snarling, frothing, and then stopped in their tracks,” Elder Holland said. “They looked at the missionaries, dropped their heads, ambled back to the front steps and lay down.”

 

The man on the porch was speechless as they missionaries opened the gate, walked up the path and greeted him.

“One of the elders said, ‘Are you from this part of California?’

“The man said, ‘No. If you want to know, I’m from Pocatello, Idaho.’

“There was a pause. ‘That’s interesting,’ the elder said. ‘Do you know the [such-and-such] family in Pocatello?’

“With a stunned look, our biker paused, and then, in very measured words, said, ‘Yeah, I know them. They are my parents.’

“ ‘Well, they’re my parents too,’ the missionary said. ‘God has sent me to invite you to come home.’ ”

The younger brother had been born after the older boy had left home. The elder brother did not even know of him.

 

“Mom and Dad have been praying for you every morning and night for 20 years,” the younger brother said. “They were not sure you were alive, but they knew if you were, that someday you would come back to us.”

The wayward son invited the two in, and they talked for the rest of the day and some of the night. He did return home, returned to Church activity and, in March 2015, was married and sealed in the Boise Idaho Temple.

Commenting on the account, Elder Holland said, “This is a story of the role of Almighty God, the Savior of the World, and the Holy Ghost involved in the work of the ministry to which we’ve been called.

“The Holy Ghost prompted those parents to keep praying, to keep believing, to keep trusting. … The Holy Ghost inspired that rebellious boy to come to himself like the prodigal he was and to head for California. … The Holy Ghost influenced that younger son to serve a mission and be willing to accept a call to Southern California. … The Holy Ghost inspired one of my brethren in the Twelve, who was on the assignment desk that Friday, to trust his impression and assign that young man for service not a great distance from his native-born state. The Holy Ghost inspired that mission president to assign that young missionary to that district and that member unit. The Holy Ghost led those missionaries to that street, that day, that hour, with big brother sitting on the porch waiting, and, with Doberman Pinschers notwithstanding, the Holy Ghost prompted those to elders to stop, talk and in spite of their fear, to go back and present their message. …

“And, through the elders, the Holy Ghost taught repentance and brought true conversion to one coming back into the fold.”

Elder Holland said the young elder, without realizing it, gave the missionary speech of all time, when he said to his brother, “God has sent me here to invite you to come home.”

“We are sent by God to invite His children home,” Elder Holland concluded. “We do that through the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth, on the strength of the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Welcome to the divine companionship.”

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

From the Texas Houston south mission blog-page(?):

Quote

In our many discussions at the seminar, Elder Holland shared an account, not too dissimilar from that of the prodigal son we read about in Luke 15.  He told of a man that was born and raised in Southern Idaho, who had grown up in the Church, and had all the blessings of the gospel laid before him.  In his late teens he decided he wanted his inheritance, of which there was none, jumped on his motorcycle, and moved to the Big Apple to find a more thrilling and better life.  Never to think of family and home again, he was done with what he was taught to be true.  Upon arriving in New York City, he began to sow a lifestyle of immorality, drug abuse, tattoos, and worldliness beyond reproach.  While not necessarily happy, he supposed it was better than anything better he could be doing, so he sank deeper and deeper into a pit.  

One morning he woke up and decided he'd had enough of New York and that he'd make a new start on the sunny beaches of Southern California.  He rode his motorcycle on the long journey and intentionally drove as far away as he could from his small town in Idaho.  Along the way he hooked up with a new motorcycle gang, and upon arriving in California, continued the party lifestyle, added more tattoos, and distanced himself further and further from who he had once been.  

A few years went by and he made his home in a shabby part of town, guarded by his two Rottweilers, up to no good.  One day a pair of Mormon missionaries were walking past his house, and as trained, the two vicious dogs leapt from the front porch and raced towards the sidewalk, only being held back by long chains around their neck and a fence that surrounded the yard.  The dogs came barking, with teeth baring, saliva flying, and eager to keep all away.  As wise missionaries, they of course avoided this particular house, no need to risk life and limb on trying to get into this door.  

As they walked down street, some thirty yards down the road now, the senior companion looked at the junior and said, "we have to go back to that house."  The junior companion, thinking his senior companion was absolutely insane, reluctantly followed his companion back towards certain death.  As they approached the fence, the Rottweilers sprang from the porch and went into their usual attack mode.  This time however, instead of trying to break the chains that held them back, they came to the fences edge, turned around, and went back and sat on the porch.  

Seeing the dogs retreat, the emboldened elders passed through the gate, walked up to the porch, and knocked on the front door.  The now heavily tattooed, twenty years older, and worn down by life man, opened the door and stared down the two missionaries.  Unfazed by the image of the man in front of them, the elders began with the message they had come prepared to share and before they could get much out, he asked them where they were from.  The junior companion said he was from a town in Utah, and the senior companion said he was from a small town in Southern Idaho.  Surprised that this Idaho missionary was from the same part of the world he was from, he asked the missionary the name of the town, and was even more surprised to hear they were from the same town!  Now interested, the man asked if the missionary knew about such and such a man from this small town.  The missionary responded that he did know him.  The man then said, "that is my father", and then the elder smiled and said, "he is my father too."

Elder Holland then went on to tell us that he's kept track of this man.  He's now returned to Southern Idaho, tattoos and all, married, and soon to be sealed in the temple.  His point in telling us this story was to remind us as mission presidents that God, not only knows his children, but he continues to watch over them.  He stated, "Imagine what the transfer board in heaven must look like and what it must have taken to get this young elder, at this time in his life, to a place where he could rescue his brother.  Imagine the prayers that came from his parents, who for years, had never given up hope.  Imagine the inspiration that must have come to a mission president who knew where to assign a missionary to this particular area.

http://www.texashoustonsouthmission.com/weekly-presidents-pen/2016/4/25/presidents-pen-4-25-16

From 2015 missionary Yakima Washington mission:

Quote

Before I go I want to tell an amazing story we were told at the devotional last night by Kim. B Clark of The Seventy. He said there was this man who grew up in Idaho Falls in a faithful Mormon family, who ran away from home when he was 14 and went down a dark path of life. He joined the Hell's angels and got heavily into drugs and alcohol. One day he was passed out in the front yard of the home the Hell's Angels have in L.A California (a place to dry out if you are too wasted to drive), and some Mormon missionaries came walking up their street. He started mocking them, because he used to be Mormon and thought these elders were so naive. They had two dogs in the yard that were trained to attack and kill anyone who tried to come into the yard, so he wasn't too worried about them trying to preach to him when they walked by. But then when they got to the end of the street, they talked for a minute and turned around and came back to the Hell's Angels house. The dogs started growling and acting like they were going to attack. But as soon as the Elders stepped foot on their sidewalk, the dogs walked away and laid down and went to sleep. Then one of the elders came up to the wasted man from Idaho, and said, "What's up?" The man said, “Oh, nothing,” and then the elder asked, "Where are you from?" and he said "Idaho Falls." Then the elder said, "No way! Me too! Do you happen to know the So-and-sos?" And then the wasted man said, "Yeah, they're my parents." Then the elder said something that changed both of their lives. "They're my parents, too."

 

It was the Hell's Angel's younger brother, all grown up and called to serve a mission in California. The elder said to his older brother he never knew what happened to him, but that he knows that God sent him there to bring him home. He ended up helping his brother turn his life around, go back to church, find Jesus again, move back home to Idaho, and reconnect with their parents. He ended up getting married in the temple five years later. The Hell's Angel ended up being in the Stake Presidency (local church leadership) with Kim B. Clark, which is where he learned the story from.

http://hermanaalisonknight.blogspot.com/2015/11/one-month-down-17-to-go.html

1.  In the first rendition the man left the home set on joining a motorcycle gang.  In the second there was no mention of a motorcycle gang.  he left home in his late teens.  Just that he had left on his motorcycle to NYC (get a rope).  In the third rendition he had left home at 14 and joined the Hell's Angels (at some point). 

2.  In the first rendition the man was sitting on the front porch of a rented home.  In the second he was inside, as the elder's after taming the dogs with their sweet spirits (?) knocked on the front door.  In the third he was passed out in the front yard, yet still was able to mock the missionaries as they passed by (I don't know about you but being passed out would mean he wouldn't be able to mock them, but oh well....we have a young sister missionary repeating to us the story). 

3.  In the first, the elder's stopped looked at each other "likely said a little prayer" and turned back.  In the second, they had walked 30 yards beyond the house and the older missionary stopped the junior one and said, "we have to go back to that house".  The junior followed reluctantly.  In the third, the missionaries got to the end of the street, talked a minute and went back. 

4.  In the first rendition the dogs who rushed the gate were Doberman's.  In the second they were Rottweiller's.  In the third, they were just dogs. 

5.  In the first, the dogs looked at the elder's a stopped their snarling and frothing--no mention of chains.  In the second, their was no snarling and frothing as the missionaries approached the second time.  They sprang up and started to run towards the fence, while chained, but stopped before trying to break the chains and went back and sat down.  In the third, as soon as the missionaries stepped foot on the sidewalk the dogs walked away and laid down to sleep. 

6.  In the first, the man was speechless because the elder's got passed his dogs (?) and the Elder's asked if he was from California, to which he responded, "No, I'm from Pocatello, ID".  In the second, the elder's approached the house and knocked on the door.  The man stared them down and then asked where they were from, after, it seems, the missionaries started their approach. When the older companion said southern Idaho the man was surprised he was from the same area as he and was more surprised to learn they were from the same town. In the third the elder asked, "what's up?" and the man said, "oh nothing".  The elder then asked, "where are you from?"  The man said, "Idaho Falls".  

7.  In the first, the elder said. ‘Do you know the [such-and-such] family in Pocatello?’ With a stunned look, our biker paused, and then, in very measured words, said, ‘Yeah, I know them. They are my parents.’ ‘Well, they’re my parents too,’ the missionary said. ‘God has sent me to invite you to come home.’ ”  In the second, " Now interested, the man asked if the missionary knew about such and such a man from this small town.  The missionary responded that he did know him.  The man then said, "that is my father", and then the elder smiled and said, "he is my father too." in the third, after the man said what town he was from the elder said, "No way! Me too! Do you happen to know the So-and-sos?" And then the wasted man said, "Yeah, they're my parents." Then the elder said something that changed both of their lives. "They're my parents, too."

8.  in the first, the man did return home, returned to Church activity and, in March 2015, was married and sealed in the Boise Idaho Temple.  In the second, in April 25, 2016, he had yet to be sealed in the temple but was planning to be ("soon to be sealed in the temple").  in the third, Nov 2015 he had been sealed in the temple (5 years after the encounter, which is undated).  But at the time this man was said to have served in the Stake Presidency with Kim B. Clark at some point before the telling of the story ("The Hell's Angel ended up being in the Stake Presidency (local church leadership) with Kim B. Clark, which is where he learned the story from.") 

Quote

Clark has served in various assignments in the LDS Church, including bishop, scoutmaster, elders quorum president, Sunday School teacher, and counselor in a stake mission presidency. From 2007 to 2014, Clark served as an area seventy in the church's Idaho Area. On April 4, 2015, Clark was sustained as a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy.^[8] On August 1, 2015, he succeeded Paul V. Johnson as the Commissioner of Church Education.^[2]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_B._Clark#LDS_Church_service_and_family

No mention of Clark serving in a Stake Presidency, but that he was in the Area 70 from 2007 to 2014, and was sustained in the 1st quorum of the 70 in April 2015.  So one would think it would have been before he was called to the area 70 in 2007. 

Anyway, reasonable?  These kinds of discrepancies are what seem to be pointed out by critics of the First vision--since it was told a few times, by different people in the earlier years of the Church. 

Or

Is there some added embellishments in the tellings for the sake of faith building?  if so, is it good to embellish for that reason? 

[mfbukowski]

There is no such thing as objectivity and we repeat things as we hear them.

These stories are written reality as I see it.  The overall message is there but every story from every person ever told is going to be different in their own words.  Repeat a story over and again, as happens when the story is told a lot, and it always comes out different. 

There are no facts, only interpretations and this is an exaggerated example of how that works.  The differences could be much smaller, but in the re-telling from person to person, the story WILL change.

This is "history" as HIS-STORY and why I find religious history to be irrelevant.  This reminds me of the first vision accounts.

What matters is not the details but the point being made.  Were this story in the scriptures the literalists would want the guy's address, pictures of his tattoos before they would catch the fact that what matters is that God leads us and answers prayers

THAT is what the story says- the rest is totally immaterial.

NONE of the story is verifiable as no scripture is verifiable.  As such you read it for the meaning of the content and the lesson taught and forget about the details.  Again this is why I am not a literalist when it comes to scripture.

In my opinion you can't be.  There is no shred of evidence for any RELIGIOUS content in any scriptural account of allegedly "what happened".

As I have said many times, one who lived in Jerusalem 2k years ago could have passed by just another random crucifixion by the side of the road and given it no significance whatsoever while Christians see that event as the "atonement" and therefore their sins are forgiven

WE ARE THE ONES who give ANY story meaning, each of us individually giving it our own meaning.  Scientific data by itself has no meaning except what we give it.  One chemical reaction in one test tube could theoretically be the "cure for cancer" but does the planet earth care if cancer is cured?

That chemical reaction may have meaning for billions of people because it saves lives etc- but who GIVES it meaning?

The billions who no longer have to worry about cancer.  Same with religious events like the atonement.  What difference does one crucifixion make?

It makes whatever difference we decide to give it, as does THIS story, no more verifiable than the atonement.  Yet what a vast difference such stories can make in our lives!!

It is the BELIEF behind the story- the meaning we give that belief- that counts in our lives.  Dobermans or Rottweilers don't matter a bit!  

WE GIVE "significant scientific discoveries" their significance, the same as WE GIVE religious stories their significance.  This is how we construct our lives.

[Duncan]

Be grateful someone admits they come from Pocatello, Idaho

[Gray]

8 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

What matters is not the details but the point being made.  Were this story in the scriptures the literalists would want the guy's address, pictures of his tattoos before they would catch the fact that what matters is that God leads us and answers prayers

 

JD Crossan has observed that literalists and skeptics arguing about historicity is a great way for both parties to avoid responsibility for living up to the MEANING of the stories in the scriptures.

[stemelbow]

3 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

There is no such thing as objectivity and we repeat things as we hear them.

These stories are written reality as I see it.  The overall message is there but every story from every person ever told is going to be different in their own words.  Repeat a story over and again, as happens when the story is told a lot, and it always comes out different. 

There are no facts, only interpretations and this is an exaggerated example of how that works.  The differences could be much smaller, but in the re-telling from person to person, the story WILL change.

This is "history" as HIS-STORY and why I find religious history to be irrelevant.  This reminds me of the first vision accounts.

What matters is not the details but the point being made.  Were this story in the scriptures the literalists would want the guy's address, pictures of his tattoos before they would catch the fact that what matters is that God leads us and answers prayers

THAT is what the story says- the rest is totally immaterial.

NONE of the story is verifiable as no scripture is verifiable.  As such you read it for the meaning of the content and the lesson taught and forget about the details.  Again this is why I am not a literalist when it comes to scripture.

In my opinion you can't be.  There is no shred of evidence for any RELIGIOUS content in any scriptural account of allegedly "what happened".

As I have said many times, one who lived in Jerusalem 2k years ago could have passed by just another random crucifixion by the side of the road and given it no significance whatsoever while Christians see that event as the "atonement" and therefore their sins are forgiven

WE ARE THE ONES who give ANY story meaning, each of us individually giving it our own meaning.  Scientific data by itself has no meaning except what we give it.  One chemical reaction in one test tube could theoretically be the "cure for cancer" but does the planet earth care if cancer is cured?

That chemical reaction may have meaning for billions of people because it saves lives etc- but who GIVES it meaning?

The billions who no longer have to worry about cancer.  Same with religious events like the atonement.  What difference does one crucifixion make?

It makes whatever difference we decide to give it, as does THIS story, no more verifiable than the atonement.  Yet what a vast difference such stories can make in our lives!!

It is the BELIEF behind the story- the meaning we give that belief- that counts in our lives.  Dobermans or Rottweilers don't matter a bit!  

WE GIVE "significant scientific discoveries" their significance, the same as WE GIVE religious stories their significance.  This is how we construct our lives.

I think I agree with you for the most part, here, MFB.  Just sit around when I gather with old friends and my siblings as we tell stories.  They differ here and there on the details for sure.  I could tell a story from my childhood in one instance and retell it another time and likely get some of the details mixed up or add embellishments here or there.  It hasn't been that big of an issue for me. 

In this case, there is some details that make it matter.  It's all faith promoting.  So if the story is true, as told, in any of the instances, it is inspiring and all that.  But if the actual events are much less romantic-sounding, well, it kind of ruins the story.  So say, the young missionary knew where to find his brother, after he or his family looked into where they might find him?  That makes the coincidence of it all less exciting.  If, say, the dogs barked when people walked by but stopped and got all excited and wanting to be playful when the house was approached, well, that seems to change things too.  I mean, I had a companion who was set on fighting territorial dogs when we were out.  He'd wrestle them to the ground and stuff his backpack in their mouth in order to approach a house.  It was cute, and quite a sight sometimes, but we had, I assure you, no power or magic to tame such dogs in any case.  Either they attacked and my companion who took the lead in such situations, because I'd rather have just moved on, would fight back, or the dog would just bark and act all intimidating but never really do anything aside from getting all snarly and loud. 

In the end, it seems to me if the story was embellished in some way, as I mentioned, it kind takes away the significance of it's message. 

[RevTestament]

I have read the one account where the dogs were Rottweilers instead of Dobermans and the lost brother did the asking of questions rather than the missionary, but the gist is the same. The Hell's Angel was a lost brother who came back to the Church. I believe this is a perfect example of how facts get a little changed with time after being remembered by separate witnesses, and probably explains why some stories only appear in one or two of the gospels instead of the same way in all of them. 

I don't believe these variations are purposeful embellishments, but are just different details getting remembered differently. But to answer your question directly, no the story should not be embellished to make it more "faith promoting" and I hope it is not. The Church has enough of that to deal with.

[stemelbow]

7 minutes ago, Gray said:

JD Crossan has observed that literalists and skeptics arguing about historicity is a great way for both parties to avoid responsibility for living up to the MEANING of the stories in the scriptures.

In light of the scriptures you make an excellent point on this.  Whether the story really happened or not doesn't matter, it's that there is meaning to get out of it.  So why did everyone get all worked up about Paul H Dunn back when his embellishments were uncovered? 

if say, the young missionary or his family looked up where to find his brother while he was out there or before he went, wouldn't matter, because even if he did, it was still quite magical that he ended up having an encounter with is lost brother?  or something.  I guess my concern is that the story is told to somehow highlight the story of the prodigal son.  It's much nicer when stories are put in parable, like Jesus did, so we don't have to take them literally. 

[stemelbow]

15 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Be grateful someone admits they come from Pocatello, Idaho

Or Idaho Falls for that matter.  I'm not sure which admission would take more courage. 

[stemelbow]

And am I alone in feeling such familiarity with the story that I swear it was told back when I was young (in the 80s or early 90s)? 

[stemelbow]

6 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

I have read the one account where the dogs were Rottweilers instead of Dobermans and the lost brother did the asking of questions rather than the missionary, but the gist is the same. The Hell's Angel was a lost brother who came back to the Church. I believe this is a perfect example of how facts get a little changed with time after being remembered by separate witnesses, and probably explains why some stories only appear in one or two of the gospels instead of the same way in all of them. 

I don't believe these variations are purposeful embellishments, but are just different details getting remembered differently. But to answer your question directly, no the story should not be embellished to make it more "faith promoting" and I hope it is not. The Church has enough of that to deal with.

In relating any personal stories in a church setting, it makes me wonder did I purposefully embellish to make them a little more romantic in a religious spiritual sense?  I've probably done it, although I don't think at the time I would have admitted to such. 

[Tacenda]

3 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

And am I alone in feeling such familiarity with the story that I swear it was told back when I was young (in the 80s or early 90s)? 

Nope, unless my mind is playing tricks on me. 

[Gray]

9 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

In light of the scriptures you make an excellent point on this.  Whether the story really happened or not doesn't matter, it's that there is meaning to get out of it.  So why did everyone get all worked up about Paul H Dunn back when his embellishments were uncovered? 

if say, the young missionary or his family looked up where to find his brother while he was out there or before he went, wouldn't matter, because even if he did, it was still quite magical that he ended up having an encounter with is lost brother?  or something.  I guess my concern is that the story is told to somehow highlight the story of the prodigal son.  It's much nicer when stories are put in parable, like Jesus did, so we don't have to take them literally. 

I quote Crossan, but I'm actually interested in both the meaning and whether or not the story happened (although I don't make the former contingent on the latter).

Honestly, I assume most faith-promoting stories are at least exaggerated. Passing along stories is very imprecise to begin with, but I also think true believers have a lot of incentive to embellish such stories in an effort to inspire. I've seen it happen over and over again.

[stemelbow]

7 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Nope, unless my mind is playing tricks on me. 

Thank you, Tacenda.  I guess it's possible my mind is playing tricks on me too.  But this helps me feel better.

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, Gray said:

I quote Crossan, but I'm actually interested in both the meaning and whether or not the story happened (although I don't make the former contingent on the latter).

Honestly, I assume most faith-promoting stories are at least exaggerated. Passing along stories is very imprecise to begin with, but I also think true believers have a lot of incentive to embellish such stories in an effort to inspire. I've seen it happen over and over again.

I agree.  As has happened with more than I can count, I've failed to put it so well.  Thanks. 

[pogi]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

Anyway, reasonable?  These kinds of discrepancies are what seem to be pointed out by critics of the First vision--since it was told a few times, by different people in the earlier years of the Church. 

Or

Is there some added embellishments in the tellings for the sake of faith building?  if so, is it good to embellish for that reason? 

Elder Holland's account is a second-hand account, the other 2 accounts are third-hand accounts. Who knows how many years have passed since Holland first heard this story!?  I am actually surprised that the stories were so similar.

[stemelbow]

8 minutes ago, pogi said:

Elder Holland's account is a second-hand account, the other 2 accounts are third-hand accounts. Who knows how many years have passed since Holland first heard this story!?  I am actually surprised that the stories were so similar.

Fair point. THey are fairly close.  It's pretty good that the story remains fairly consistent with the different re-tellings. 

Here's another version (again 3rd hand through Elder Clark):

Quote

“This guy was raised in a strong Mormon home, but rebelled and joined the Hell’s Angels for 20 years. One day he woke up in New York, and had no idea how he got there. So he drove back to California, to one of the houses that the Hells Angels own, to dry out. He was there on the porch one day, and saw some mormon missionaries walking down the road. He wasn’t worried that they would come to this house, because of the huge, trained to kill Dobermans chained next to the Gate, so he was mocking them quietly. At the end of the street, the Missionaries stopped, talked to each other, and came walking back towards the house. They stopped in front of the Gate, and the Dogs rushed at them at the ends of their chains, snapping and snarling. Then the dogs stopped barking, went back to their posts, and fell asleep. The Missionaries then entered, walked up to the Biker, and said “Hey! How you doin’?”

This caught the man off guard.

The one missionary asked him where he was from, and the guy answered “Pocahtello Idaho”

The missionary squinted at him, and asked “do you know the So-and-so’s?”

The man said “Yeah, they’re my parents.”

The Missionary said. “They’re my parents too.”

 

YEAH. That was a crazy moment in the MTC. I audibly gasped. Chills. Elder Clark knows this is a true story, because he told that talk in a stake in Idaho, and someone came up to him, and told him that the Biker guy was just sealed to his wife in the temple. Dang. I mean, I knew God knew everybody, but that’s some Joseph in Egypt stuff right now.

https://stareshinagee.wordpress.com/2015/11/30/18-nov-2015-letter-to-his-mother-the-time-is-at-hand/

I guess it's true because Elder Clark, after giving a talk in a Stake in Idaho, was approached by someone and told that the guy int he story was sealed in the temple.

Sounds like this story was told by Elder Clark, heard from somewhere, someone.  Elder Clark in telling it found a link to a guy whom the story was based off of, and Elder Holland and/or Clark were able to get in touch with the guy.  Or something. 

 

I'm feeling a book coming on

Edited July 5, 2017 by stemelbow

[pogi]

3 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Fair point. THey are fairly close.  It's pretty good that the story remains fairly consistent with the different re-tellings. 

Here's another version (again 3rd hand through Elder Clark):

https://stareshinagee.wordpress.com/2015/11/30/18-nov-2015-letter-to-his-mother-the-time-is-at-hand/

I guess it's true because Elder Clark, after giving a talk in a Stake in Idaho, was approached by someone and told that the guy int he story was sealed in the temple.

Sounds like this story was told by Elder Clark, heard from somewhere, someone.  Elder Clark in telling it found a link to a guy whom the story was based off of, and Elder Holland and/or Clark were able to get in touch with the guy.  Or something. 

That is actually a fourth-hand account of Elder Clark's third-hand account.

I do think it is remarkable how similar they are even through a fourth-hand retelling, considering the potential for embellishment and different emphasis in each retelling the story remains on-point. 

Here are the main points that I take away from the story.

1) A biker guy from Idaho leaves home and leaves the church.

2) He eventually ends up in Southern California on his bike and lives a colorful biker lifestyle. 

3) Two Mormon missionaries go to his house in California.

4) 2 mean dogs cause the missionaries to pass the home.  They then stop and return to the home.

5) The dogs become docile for the missionaries.

6) Turns out, one of the missionaries is the younger brother of the biker guy whom he has never met, as he left home before the missionary was born.

7) Biker guy is reactivated.

All seven of those main points are addressed in each retelling of the story.  Pretty remarkable if you ask me.  I could see how it would be easy to mix up some of the minor details after several re-telling's and several years. 

[Duncan]

47 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Or Idaho Falls for that matter.  I'm not sure which admission would take more courage. 

it's funny, my trainer is from a town outside of IF and the way he talked about his town it sounded like Chicago or Wilmington, Delaware. When I got home i couldn't even find it on a map!!!!!!!! some place!!!!!

[Rain]

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

 

1.  In the first rendition the man left the home set on joining a motorcycle gang.  In the second there was no mention of a motorcycle gang.  he left home in his late teens.  Just that he had left on his motorcycle to NYC (get a rope).  In the third rendition he had left home at 14 and joined the Hell's Angels (at some point). 

None of these contradict each other as written.

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

 

3.  In the first, the elder's stopped looked at each other "likely said a little prayer" and turned back.  In the second, they had walked 30 yards beyond the house and the older missionary stopped the junior one and said, "we have to go back to that house".  The junior followed reluctantly.  In the third, the missionaries got to the end of the street, talked a minute and went back. 

None of these contradict each other as written either.

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

4.  In the first rendition the dogs who rushed the gate were Doberman's.  In the second they were Rottweiller's.  In the third, they were just dogs. 

The third doesn't contradict either of the other statements. Both of these breeds are well known, justly or not, for violence. Many people would not be able to tell the difference between them if asked without seeing them. I couldn't. It doesn't surprise me that they were both used in the story.

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

 

Anyway, reasonable?  These kinds of discrepancies are what seem to be pointed out by critics of the First vision--since it was told a few times, by different people in the earlier years of the Church. 

Or

Is there some added embellishments in the tellings for the sake of faith building?  if so, is it good to embellish for that reason? 

 I think the discrepancies are all reasonable considering how far the story traveled. There is a story DH and I tell of when he lost the sole of his shoe in Italy. We vary it depending on our audience and how we feel at the time, but we don't embellish it. Sometimes we share how badly I needed to go to the bathroom as I laughed hard during it all. Often we don't. Sometimes we share that we went to 2 shoe stores, sometimes 1 and sometimes with the 1 shoe store we don't even share that we did, in fact, get shoes there. We only share that it was next door. Sometimes we share the feeling in the cafe where my husband sat waiting for the goop on his shoes to hopefully dry. And sometimes we share what happened the next night as well. Those 2 night were magical for us, but we often don't share that because unless you were there you may not really get it. So just with our telling there will be many versions that are all true. I don't know how true to the story it would stay if someone else told it.

 

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

In light of the scriptures you make an excellent point on this.  Whether the story really happened or not doesn't matter, it's that there is meaning to get out of it.  So why did everyone get all worked up about Paul H Dunn back when his embellishments were uncovered? 

if say, the young missionary or his family looked up where to find his brother while he was out there or before he went, wouldn't matter, because even if he did, it was still quite magical that he ended up having an encounter with is lost brother?  or something.  I guess my concern is that the story is told to somehow highlight the story of the prodigal son.  It's much nicer when stories are put in parable, like Jesus did, so we don't have to take them literally. 

Whether the story happened DOES matter to me. The little details, like dates, rarely matter. 

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

And am I alone in feeling such familiarity with the story that I swear it was told back when I was young (in the 80s or early 90s)? 

I don't think you are alone in familarity. The practical part of this is like someone mentioned above these kind of stories are not unheard of. I think when you hear enough they will blend together and that will make the next one more familar.

I think personally that is a big part of the familarity, but (here is my romantic spiritual, but true feelings come in) that the story of the lost sheep is familar to all of us in some way. Christ comes for us all so it should feel a little familar to all of us, at least at some point in our lives. 

[stemelbow]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

That is actually a fourth-hand account of Elder Clark's third-hand account.

I realize the blog itself, if correct, makes Elder Clark's telling a third or more hand account.  But I'm assuming the blog writer has that wrong and Elder Clark new the story from the source before he shared it.  It just so happened after he shared it, he found someone else confirming it through some connection of knowing the guy personally. 

1 hour ago, pogi said:

I do think it is remarkable how similar they are even through a fourth-hand retelling, considering the potential for embellishment and different emphasis in each retelling the story remains on-point. 

Here are the main points that I take away from the story.

1) A biker guy from Idaho leaves home and leaves the church.

2) He eventually ends up in Southern California on his bike and lives a colorful biker lifestyle. 

3) Two Mormon missionaries go to his house in California.

4) 2 mean dogs cause the missionaries to pass the home.  They then stop and return to the home.

5) The dogs become docile for the missionaries.

6) Turns out, one of the missionaries is the younger brother of the biker guy whom he has never met, as he left home before the missionary was born.

7) Biker guy is reactivated.

All seven of those main points are addressed in each retelling of the story.  Pretty remarkable if you ask me.  I could see how it would be easy to mix up some of the minor details after several re-telling's and several years. 

Yet, in other points there is discrepancy, conflict and contradiction.  it could also be that the story was told to Elder Clark.  He felt some level of confirmation and told it himself.  He shared it with Elder Holland or Elder Holland heard it and retold it. Did each retelling go from memory and felt no need to confirm certain elements with the original story teller before sharing it, to some extent, widely?  I would hope so.  Just because likely, based on say, Elder Holland's speech, many listeners will take it and share it again. 

But I can't share it because there are contradiction.  I don't know if it's true or not, as a result. 

[stemelbow]

10 minutes ago, Rain said:

None of these contradict each other as written.

None of these contradict each other as written either.

The third doesn't contradict either of the other statements. Both of these breeds are well known, justly or not, for violence. Many people would not be able to tell the difference between them if asked without seeing them. I couldn't. It doesn't surprise me that they were both used in the story.

I wasn't suggesting they were all contradictions. 

10 minutes ago, Rain said:

 I think the discrepancies are all reasonable considering how far the story traveled.

how far did it travel?  I thought in the case of Elder Holland it went from the guy to Elder Holland.  Or from the guy to Elder Clark.  Maybe it went from the guy to another person to another, to Elder Clark, who then passed it on to Elder Holland?  If so, then the discrepancies make more sense.  But if that is the case, then how can we rely on it much at all? 

10 minutes ago, Rain said:

There is a story DH and I tell of when he lost the sole of his shoe in Italy. We vary it depending on our audience and how we feel at the time, but we don't embellish it. Sometimes we share how badly I needed to go to the bathroom as I laughed hard during it all. Often we don't. Sometimes we share that we went to 2 shoe stores, sometimes 1 and sometimes with the 1 shoe store we don't even share that we did, in fact, get shoes there. We only share that it was next door. Sometimes we share the feeling in the cafe where my husband sat waiting for the goop on his shoes to hopefully dry. And sometimes we share what happened the next night as well. Those 2 night were magical for us, but we often don't share that because unless you were there you may not really get it. So just with our telling there will be many versions that are all true. I don't know how true to the story it would stay if someone else told it.

 

Whether the story happened DOES matter to me. The little details, like dates, rarely matter. 

I don't think you are alone in familarity. The practical part of this is like someone mentioned above these kind of stories are not unheard of. I think when you hear enough they will blend together and that will make the next one more familar.

I think personally that is a big part of the familarity, but (here is my romantic spiritual, but true feelings come in) that the story of the lost sheep is familar to all of us in some way. Christ comes for us all so it should feel a little familar to all of us, at least at some point in our lives. 

 

[Tacenda]

https://www.lds.org/new-era/1978/07/the-how-and-why-of-faith-promoting-stories?lang=eng

I guess it's quite important to share faith promoting stories according to this article. Here's another missionary sharing it in 2015:

http://hermanaalisonknight.blogspot.com/2015/11/one-month-down-17-to-go.html

I don't doubt that something like this happened. I believe there may have been dogs too. Too cool that the brothers reunite like that. And I do see how the story evolved. But understand that things even written down, might be embellished or might have been remembered wrong. I wonder if the guy is still active, and maybe that's why it's hidden on who it is. But I shouldn't make guesses. 

I probably saw the article passed around a couple of years ago. Maybe that's why it sounds so familiar. In fact I'm almost sure I've heard the story before. It may have been in a church talk, or lesson. 

[stemelbow]

7 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

https://www.lds.org/new-era/1978/07/the-how-and-why-of-faith-promoting-stories?lang=eng

I guess it's quite important to share faith promoting stories according to this article. Here's another missionary sharing it in 2015:

http://hermanaalisonknight.blogspot.com/2015/11/one-month-down-17-to-go.html

I don't doubt that something like this happened. I believe there may have been dogs too. Too cool that the brothers reunite like that. And I do see how the story evolved. But understand that things even written down, might be embellished or might have been remembered wrong. I wonder if the guy is still active, and maybe that's why it's hidden on who it is. But I shouldn't make guesses. 

I probably saw the article passed around a couple of years ago. Maybe that's why it sounds so familiar. In fact I'm almost sure I've heard the story before. It may have been in a church talk, or lesson. 

One thing feels certain to me, in recent times, 2015, it was told first by Elder Clark (even though I still feel it is a story that was floating around in my youth).  SOmehow the story either through Elder Clark or what, made it's way to Elder Holland, who apparently first told it in 2016.  Elder Holland claims to be in touch with the guy to some extent, at least in the Texas Houston South mission blog it says "Elder Holland then went on to tell us that he's kept track of this man."  So it's possible Elder Clark helped make that contact between Elder Holland and that man happen. 

I don't doubt the story is possible.  Or that it or something like it happened.  It'd be nice to have some sort of verification.  I have a feeling the story will make it's rounds, through the local Church congregations.  I'm curious how far it will go.  It does sound like a book might be on the horizon. 

[Tacenda]

When I was a RS secretary I was in charge of the Newsletter each month. I would put in the birthdays for the month, the events that month and the RS president's message. With her permission she would let me share stories or articles. There was one I found that I wished I had kept. My memory is foggy but it was about a guy that owned a sports team (?), and he commented about the Mormons and how awesome they were and he'd be more than happy to let his daughter date one, (or maybe I'm totally incorrect on the dating his daughter bit.). The funny thing is, the following Sunday after the newsletter came out, my bishop at the time, told that story over the pulpit. I guess he liked it, and I'm assuming he had read the story from my newsletter. Or it was coincidence. And I know I didn't verify if the story was correct. I could have been sharing heresay for all I know. I just think as LDS we like/liked faith promoting stories. 

Does anyone know the story? It's killing me that I can't remember it now. 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Duncan said:

it's funny, my trainer is from a town outside of IF and the way he talked about his town it sounded like Chicago or Wilmington, Delaware. When I got home i couldn't even find it on a map!!!!!!!! some place!!!!!

Gosh that's on a par with Milwaukee!