mfbukowski Posted July 5, 2017 Posted July 5, 2017 53 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 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. 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. It would be very easy to put together a more generic story where the dogs were "dogs" and the distance traveled was a "short distance", and the cities were just "a city" etc then none of these would be "contradictions". The original author - if there was one- could have told about the experience in those terms and we would not be having this silly thread the idea of which was started by Bill Reel and the way his mind works. No understanding of spiritual matters, yet he struggles with them, good for him that he is still struggling. I am sure he would have wanted to find the name of the brother and father in the prodigal son story as well as where they are buried or less he would have found the story worthless.
CV75 Posted July 5, 2017 Posted July 5, 2017 4 hours ago, stemelbow said: 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. Why would you love to have verification if you are not going to share it any further?
CV75 Posted July 5, 2017 Posted July 5, 2017 4 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 you pointed out are reasonable considering the foibles of human communication, especially when specifics are intentionally left out in the name of protecting privacy. Things like this are typically shared among those of good faith having a common sense of the purpose of sharing the account, and not in an apologetic sense to persuade those who are doubtful. I don't think intentional embellishment for the sake of faith-building is a good thing to do--does any of this come across as being embellished for that purpose?
Jeanne Posted July 5, 2017 Posted July 5, 2017 4 hours ago, Duncan said: Be grateful someone admits they come from Pocatello, Idaho When my kids were little, Their grandma and grandpa took them to Pocatello....they were little..but the joke is that they went to pocoho Idaho. 1
pogi Posted July 5, 2017 Posted July 5, 2017 2 hours ago, stemelbow said: 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. I think it would be safe to share the 7 main points I listed. That is the heart of the story anyway, so who really cares what kind of dogs they were? The point is that they were intimidating. Was he inside the house or on the porch? That is besides the point, so it is not important to include that in the retelling. The discrepancies are to be expected don't you think, whether it is a true story or not? Mormons are not unique in this phenomena. We all know about the telephone game - you tell a story to one person, they pass it down the line, trying to re-tell the story as accurately as possible, and by the time the story gets back to you, it is a far cry from what you original said. It turns out, our memories are a lot like that game as well, the more you retell a story, the more it changes. So, even a first hand account can change over time, couple that with second, third, and fourth-hand accounts, it is not surprising at all that we see variation. https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2012/09/your-memory-is-like-the-telephone-game Should the story teller verify and confirm what kind of dog it was, or whether he was in the house or not? I wouldn't waste my time confirming such minute details that do not alter the main point. I don't suspect that most people are such sticklers about insignificant details in their story telling.
stemelbow Posted July 5, 2017 Author Posted July 5, 2017 14 minutes ago, pogi said: I think it would be safe to share the 7 main points I listed. That is the heart of the story anyway, so who really cares what kind of dogs they were? Well do lovers like me, of course. But beside that, I can't recount the story as a matter of principle because I have no verification. 14 minutes ago, pogi said: The point is that they were intimidating. Was he inside the house or on the porch? That is besides the point, so it is not important to include that in the retelling. The discrepancies are brought up because they suggest the story may not be conveying what really happened. I can't rehearse it with a straight face because of that. 14 minutes ago, pogi said: The discrepancies are to be expected don't you think, whether it is a true story or not? To some extent sure. But, that's not really my concern. It's that there is no verification. A first hand account works for me. A second, third fourth hand with many discrepancies? Not so much. 14 minutes ago, pogi said: Mormons are not unique in this phenomena. We all know about the telephone game - you tell a story to one person, they pass it down the line, trying to re-tell the story as accurately as possible, and by the time the story gets back to you, it is a far cry from what you original said. It turns out, our memories are a lot like that game as well, the more you retell a story, the more it changes. So, even a first hand account can change over time, couple that with second, third, and fourth-hand accounts, it is not surprising at all that we see variation. https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2012/09/your-memory-is-like-the-telephone-game Should the story teller verify and confirm what kind of dog it was, or whether he was in the house or not? I wouldn't waste my time confirming such minute details that do not alter the main point. I don't suspect that most people are such sticklers about insignificant details in their story telling. Well, I agree to an extent. I'm not saying the story is lie. It might be true. But I can't just accept that and tell the story as if it's true. I need someone to confirm it to me.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 5, 2017 Posted July 5, 2017 (edited) 47 minutes ago, Jeanne said: When my kids were little, Their grandma and grandpa took them to Pocatello....they were little..but the joke is that they went to pocoho Idaho. Judy Garland immortalized the town in "A Star Is Born." https://youtu.be/7qduArM_4Ps Edited July 5, 2017 by Scott Lloyd
Rain Posted July 5, 2017 Posted July 5, 2017 4 hours ago, mfbukowski said: It would be very easy to put together a more generic story where the dogs were "dogs" and the distance traveled was a "short distance", and the cities were just "a city" etc then none of these would be "contradictions". .. Yes, it would be easy, but not very realistic. Who even worries about that when they tell a story? The story actually rings more true to me with contradictions than if everything was generic. People often visualize stories as they hear them and it makes perfect sense that some of the unimportant details were substituted as people now report on what they visualized when they heard it. 2
Johnnie Cake Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 (edited) 10 hours 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 the story has been rolled out since the days of Jesus ... the only thing missing in these modern day versions is the fatted calf and a feast Edited July 6, 2017 by Johnnie Cake
strappinglad Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 If the police were to interview 6 witnesses to a robbery at a bank , and they all told EXACTLY the same story down to the smallest details, I am sure they would suspect something fishy was going on. Had all the tellings of the missionary story been thus , would the OP be complaining about the ' fix being in ' ? Personally I think the story would be much more interesting had the dogs been Chihuahuas. Those guys can be downright nasty! 3
Tacenda Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 4 hours ago, Rain said: Yes, it would be easy, but not very realistic. Who even worries about that when they tell a story? The story actually rings more true to me with contradictions than if everything was generic. People often visualize stories as they hear them and it makes perfect sense that some of the unimportant details were substituted as people now report on what they visualized when they heard it. Sometimes I will tell a story that happened long ago and worry that I made the thing up and it didn't happen. Like I remember it happening but worry I added details that didn't because I couldn't remember it as "clear as a bell". Not too long ago I asked my older brother (not the one that went to rehab recently) something that had been bothering me for years, I kept thinking I forgot to go to my brother's house and take care of their dog while they were on vacation. And thought that maybe the dog died as a result, but they didn't want to make me feel bad so they never told me. This past Christmas when out to dinner I told him what I had been thinking all these years about maybe killing their dog, I was single and just moved away from home right after high school. He said nope, didn't happen. Such a relief!! Yes, I'm weird, I worry about doing something I never did! False memories I guess.
CV75 Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 I was there. His biggest hurdle was the Word of Wisdom: Post-cold turkey:
Judd Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 A number of years ago a news article was published about our family finding a brother placed for adoption some 60 years previously, of which nobody had known about. The process of how it unfolded was rather incredible. The author of the article interviewed many people on the (fairly long) piece. Despite that, there were several inaccuracies. None of them were significant or really change the point, but mostly just context issues. People whose profession it is to put this together often struggle to capture the whole story, even when they have lengthy interview access to the primary individuals of relevant events -- it's kind of amazing to expect fourth-hand stories to line up on particulars such as dog breed. 1
Recommended Posts