Missionary finding his lost brother & avoiding dogs

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, T-Shirt said:

My son came home early due to unforeseen health issues.  We are not "suffering".  I don't get angry or offended when other missionaries finish the full term of their missions.  I don't feel pain when Elder Nelson promises protection for missionaries.  In fact, I feel encouraged and am very happy for other missionaries who experience divine protection on their missions.

What an awful way to live, always looking for ways to be offended and turn other people's joy into your pain.

I'm glad your experience has been a positive one.  I'm guessing that you wouldn't claim that everyone is going to have the same experience as you and your family.  So how would you minister to those who are suffering and impacted by stories like this?  Are you saying they don't exist, or are you saying that they shouldn't be suffering because its something they can control through having a positive attitude?  I'm not sure I understand how your experience should be applied to others who have different experiences.  

1 hour ago, T-Shirt said:

I am so happy for him and his family.  I felt joy.  I offered prayers of gratitude.  I do not feel like it was unfair that he was preserved and my father wasn't.  I encourage this man to tell his story.  I share his story, as well.  I don't know why my father died and he didn't, but I rejoice that he didn't and do not feel any offense, anger, pain or harm.  In reality, I am content to look at my father's life and realize that his life was likely preserved many times prior to his death.  Likewise, I can look at my son and see a faithful young man who answered the call to serve.  He is just as much of a returned missionary as any other.  God will bless him in many other ways. 

As humans we try to find meaning in our experiences after the fact.  I agree with you that we don't know why things happen, and why one person dies and other person seems miraculously saved from death is anyone's guess.  I think this ought to make us more humble, knowing that we don't know why things happen and they aren't fair.  

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, T-Shirt said:

Did you miss this, from one of the links you posted:

I guess we don't really know whether Elder Holland is trying to protect their privacy just because that is good etiquette and out of respect, or perhaps he doesn't have permission to share the story.  Do you know?  

I don't think the statement he made tells us whether the actual people in the story would be willing to speak about the experience or not.  

[juliann]

8 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

All this complaining about a story makes me think I have accidentally clicked on the " much ado about Russians " channel.

It puzzles me. I'm curious what the objections are really about.

1. It was told by an apostle?
2. Such a thing could never happen? So...
3. An apostle made it all up? 
4. Some minor details are not consistent in other accounts? So...
5. An apostle lied? 
6. It has a Mormon theme?

I now see a new element, it isn't nice to tell stories that won't happen to everyone. 

Have I missed something? I'd like to understand what is triggering such extreme reactions to a story that could be made into a successful TV movie without backlash. 

[juliann]

6 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I guess we don't really know whether Elder Holland is trying to protect their privacy just because that is good etiquette and out of respect, or perhaps he doesn't have permission to share the story.  Do you know?  

I don't think the statement he made tells us whether the actual people in the story would be willing to speak about the experience or not.  

Does it matter? 

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, T-Shirt said:

My son came home early due to unforeseen health issues.  We are not "suffering".  I don't get angry or offended when other missionaries finish the full term of their missions.  I don't feel pain when Elder Nelson promises protection for missionaries.  In fact, I feel encouraged and am very happy for other missionaries who experience divine protection on their missions.

My father died too young.  He had heart problems for years and one day his heart just stopped beating.  There was no one there to revive him.  I have a good friend who is a faithful member of another faith.  One day he went home in the middle of the day and wasn't feeling well so he decided to lay down.  His wife just happened to come home, when she normally wouldn't, and went in to the bedroom.  She found him there, his heart had stopped beating. She called 911 and then thought to call her neighbor, who is a physician's assistant.  He, normally, would never be home at this time, but he was.  He ran to their house and was able to revive him.  In the hospital they found a defect in his heart that was repaired in surgery.  He's as good as new.

I am so happy for him and his family.  I felt joy.  I offered prayers of gratitude.  I do not feel like it was unfair that he was preserved and my father wasn't.  I encourage this man to tell his story.  I share his story, as well.  I don't know why my father died and he didn't, but I rejoice that he didn't and do not feel any offense, anger, pain or harm.  In reality, I am content to look at my father's life and realize that his life was likely preserved many times prior to his death.  Likewise, I can look at my son and see a faithful young man who answered the call to serve.  He is just as much of a returned missionary as any other.  God will bless him in many other ways. 

What an awful way to live, always looking for ways to be offended and turn other people's joy into your pain.

I've never been offended by others' good fortune, I'm just thinking not every thing is because of God, not saying you were. But what if God didn't have anything to do with the the wife coming home at the right time to call 911. What if the wife had intuition, or is intuition God? I guess I have a lot of questions, but not enough answers to these things. 

I'm sorry about your dad, mine also died of a heart attack, seconds before I was able to say goodbye in the emergency room. He had stayed home and thought it was the flu before calling my husband to take him to the hospital, I was at work and didn't get the call from my dad earlier when he wanted me to go and help my mom at the care center with lunch. If only I had checked my phone earlier. 

I shared a link on LDS.org about the church sharing faith promoting stories on another thread. Now I'm not too sure they are really all that great to hear, if they are embellished etc. But how do we know how embellished they are? Especially after having listened to Paul H. Dunn stories. How disappointing to find out some of his were embellished or even totally made up. Here's is a portion of the link

"Perhaps the perfect pattern in presenting faith-promoting stories is to teach what is found in the scriptures and then to put a seal of living reality upon it by telling a similar and equivalent thing that has happened in our dispensation and to our people and—most ideally—to us as individuals." 

What does this quote even really mean? It's from this link... 

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

[hope_for_things]

58 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I'm going to chalk it up to coincidence that the missionary found his long lost brother. And I'm now thinking that God provided a world and now onto other things. I don't believe He can answer our prayers and I think it's up to us basically. If this were not the case it shows that God is a respector of persons. It's the lost key analogy, someone prays to find their keys and get their prayer answered. But the poor soul that is in far worse condition doesn't? 

No, the God whom I now believe in, doesn't hold a lot of control, we are pretty much on our own, or that God does have favorites, or who prays the hardest, or who is the most righteous, wins? No, that's not how I picture Him at all anymore. I think He gave us agency and it's up to us how we use it. And the poor souls that were born with nothing and in the poorest of situations, I hope the angels are there to get them through until they do die. Or anyone that is going through an ordeal. 

I'm now becoming immuned to the faith promoting stories because of the huge descrepancies between the situations out there. I know how cynical I sound, and maybe I'll change my mind, but until then I need some hard facts, from the first party to believe this story anymore. Or it is believable, just not giving God the whole credit, though I would like to. Except then, I would have to accept a God that doesn't care about so many others out there. 

Thanks Tacenda for the honest post.  I personally don't believe in a selectively interventionist God.  At the same time I have had experiences in my life that I have "felt" that God was involved.  So, how do I square this with my more empiricist type of perspective.  Let me recommend a couple resources in the links below.  Mike McHargue a former fundamentalist baptist became an atheist through a faith deconstruction, but through science and some unique personal experiences he found his way back to faith in a metaphorical way, but with a very rational approach to things, and not a supernatural world view.  I've found his perspective to be inspiring and I recommend checking out his two podcasts and his book.  

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0345503422/_encoding=UTF8?coliid=I153DHF5HYVPKD&colid=3DENV5AC8WEYS

http://mikemchargue.com/ask-science-mike/

http://www.theliturgists.com/podcast/

https://www.amazon.com/Finding-God-Waves-Through-Science/dp/1101906049/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499720710&sr=8-1&keywords=finding+god+in+the+waves

I consider myself either a Deist or a Panentheist or an Agnostic, but I'm also active at church and try to find value in the traditions and community and I think I have a lot of good I can learn and share from my perspectives.  I think we need to be careful with how we share miraculous experiences at church because I think the overall goal is not to support some idea that the church is a divinely favored institution, but our overarching goal should be to minister to the suffering and afflicted in whatever ways we can and to be very utilitarian about that approach.  This means we have to think about the potential consequences of the stories that we share.  

[hope_for_things]

18 minutes ago, juliann said:

Does it matter? 

I think it matters to the listener if the story being shared is accurate or a gross exaggeration.  Now this is not to say that anecdotes or even fictional stories aren't also powerful teaching devices, they are.  Thinking of Paul H. Dunn as an example.  

I think it also might matter to the individuals in the story, remember that these are real people, and if the story being told about them is reflective of their actual experience might matter very much to them.  I personally wouldn't like it if I new someone else was telling a story about me, if I knew the story they were telling was materially different than how I experienced the event.  That would bother me.  

[Calm]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

I would hope that in the event of such a situation, that I wouldn't be so selfish as to be upset that some had been spared, just because my loved one wasn't.  But I also recognize that grief is not usually rational or kind and that's o.k.  

I know how I react with life shattering circumstances outside of death and it makes me feel better when I hear stories of others who are spared suffering.  I might feel different if my husband or children were killed, especially in a horrific manner.  I am not going to judge anyone who grieves in that way, it doesn't make them selfish or self centered or jealous imo, they are griefstricken and dealing with sorrow the best way they can.  If we know people feeling that way, certainly we shouldn't try to soften their grief or try and change their outlook by pointing out how God blesses other people.

But there are also those who feel strengthened by stories of blessings and hope fulfilled in the here and now and I don't think we should withhold from them what comforts out of fear that someone else hurting might be offended by hearing the same stories that make life more bearable for others.  Each is grieving, each deserves comfort.

I wish that those telling the stories would also include statements like 'we know not all were protected even when they were as deserving or loved as those who were saved and we grieve for those who were lost or who have lost those they loved'.  I have heard many accounts that do just that.  I think that is the best way to approach speaking out to a group, which will likely have all kinds of mourners in it, some who will be buoyed by good news for others while there will be others for whom the contrast with their own circumstances will sharpen their pain, some that probably experience both.

We don't withhold medicine that can heal based on the fact that some have allergic reactions to it.  Taking precautions to minimize such is wiser than removing it completely just in case.

Edited July 10, 2017 by Calm

[hope_for_things]

42 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

All this complaining about a story makes me think I have accidentally clicked on the " much ado about Russians " channel.

Funny how people interpret question asking as complaining.  I don't think my OP was at all complaining about anything.  

[ksfisher]

28 minutes ago, juliann said:

It puzzles me. I'm curious what the objections are really about.

1. It was told by an apostle?
2. Such a thing could never happen? So...
3. An apostle made it all up? 
4. Some minor details are not consistent in other accounts? So...
5. An apostle lied? 
6. It has a Mormon theme?

I now see a new element, it isn't nice to tell stories that won't happen to everyone. 

Have I missed something? I'd like to understand what is triggering such extreme reactions to a story that could be made into a successful TV movie without backlash. 

Perhaps if the story was about a missionary finding his lost dog while avoiding his brother it would go over better.

[Danzo]

55 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Are you preaching, bearing testimony, or quoting scripture without attribution or comment?

perhaps,

It just seems like it is so applicable here. 

Those that don't believe God intervenes will never be able to see Gods Hand. 

 

[hope_for_things]

26 minutes ago, juliann said:

It puzzles me. I'm curious what the objections are really about.

1. It was told by an apostle?
2. Such a thing could never happen? So...
3. An apostle made it all up? 
4. Some minor details are not consistent in other accounts? So...
5. An apostle lied? 
6. It has a Mormon theme?

I now see a new element, it isn't nice to tell stories that won't happen to everyone. 

Have I missed something? I'd like to understand what is triggering such extreme reactions to a story that could be made into a successful TV movie without backlash. 

Interesting, so I'm sensing a theme here from some participants.  Why do you consider the questions I asked in this thread to be "extreme reactions"? 

I wanted to get input and have a discussion and I'd like to understand why you aren't addressing any of the questions I posed in the OP and are instead showing a defensiveness towards having dialogue about this subject, maybe there is something going on here that I just don't understand.  

[T-Shirt]

13 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I'm glad your experience has been a positive one.  I'm guessing that you wouldn't claim that everyone is going to have the same experience as you and your family.

 Of course everyone is different. 

Quote

So how would you minister to those who are suffering and impacted by stories like this?  Are you saying they don't exist, or are you saying that they shouldn't be suffering because its something they can control through having a positive attitude?  I'm not sure I understand how your experience should be applied to others who have different experiences.  

We teach people to love and find joy in other people's success and blessings. We teach people to recognize and find the hand of God in their own lives and experiences.  We stop catering to the idea that something is not fair if it happens to someone else and not me.  There seems to be a whole generation that is finding offense in just about everything.  People are afraid to celebrate accomplishment because they have been told their success is offensive to those who haven't yet had a similar accomplishment or blessing.  We need to stop this.  There is no greater healing than what comes from forgiving others and rejoicing with those who have cause to rejoice.  There is absolutely no healing in bitterness and anger, none!

We have compassion on those who struggle with these feelings and seek to lift them up and teach them to recognize their own blessings.  We should never suggest that their anger at someone else's blessing is justified.

Putting a stop to the telling of stories of how God has blessed people's lives is exactly the wrong thing to do.

Quote

As humans we try to find meaning in our experiences after the fact.  I agree with you that we don't know why things happen, and why one person dies and other person seems miraculously saved from death is anyone's guess.  I think this ought to make us more humble, knowing that we don't know why things happen and they aren't fair.

  Trying to find fairness in the human experience is a completely wrong approach.  We already have two decades of participation trophies and this has not worked, it has only contributed to the, "It's not fair" lie.  Life is not a matter of fairness, it is about loving our neighbor, mourning with them and rejoicing with them.

If you want to see someone grow as never before and experience real joy, despite all of their adversity, teach them to forgive and serve.

[Bobbieaware]

6 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Funny how people interpret question asking as complaining.  I don't think my OP was at all complaining about anything.  

Perhaps not. But you had to know starting another thread on this worn-out, "dead horse" topic would provide a lot of chronic complainers with the opportunity to do what they do best -- complain.

[hope_for_things]

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

I know how I react with life shattering circumstances outside of death and it makes me feel better when I hear stories of others who are spared suffering.  I feel different if my husband or children were killed, especially in a horrific manner.  I am not going to judge anyone who grieves in that way, it doesn't make them selfish or self centered or jealous imo, they are griefstricken and dealing with sorrow the best way they can.  If we know people feeling that way, certainly we shouldn't try to soften their grief or try and change their outlook by pointing out how God blesses other people.

But there are also those who feel strengthened by stories of blessings and hope fulfilled in the here and now and I don't think we should withhold from them what comforts out of fear that someone else hurting might be offended by hearing the same stories that make life more bearable for others.  Each is grieving, each deserves comfort.

I wish that those telling the stories would also include statements like 'we know not all were protected even when they were as deserving or loved as those who were saved and we grieve for those who were lost or who have lost those they loved'.  I have heard many accounts that do just that.  I think that is the best way to approach speaking out to a group, which will likely have all kinds of mourners in it, some who will be buoyed by good news for others while there will be others for whom the contrast with their own circumstances will sharpen their pain, some that probably experience both.

We don't withhold medicine that can heal based on the fact that some have allergic reactions to it.  Taking precautions to minimize such is wiser than removing it completely just in case.

Thanks Calm, I like this as it seems like an attempt at a balanced approach.  Unfortunately, I don't hear this very often at church or in GC over the pulpit, but I think that an effort to be sensitive to people across a diverse spectrum of experience seems like a very thoughtful approach to take.

Also, I like your allergy analogy because I personally have some very life threatening allergies, and I really appreciate it when companies and individuals make an effort to make things safer for me and others who suffer from such allergies.  Often I think we can help make things better with just a little more awareness and recognition.  

[HappyJackWagon]

2 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Interesting, so I'm sensing a theme here from some participants.  Why do you consider the questions I asked in this thread to be "extreme reactions"? 

I wanted to get input and have a discussion and I'd like to understand why you aren't addressing any of the questions I posed in the OP and are instead showing a defensiveness towards having dialogue about this subject, maybe there is something going on here that I just don't understand.  

As with Paul Dunn, exaggerated stories tarnish the credibility of the leaders who tell them. IF Holland is exaggerating this story for effect, what else might he be exaggerating?

Stories like the one from the OP sound more like a fictionalized Lifetime movie than a real event. It sounds like a story crafted to elicit an emotional response that validates a religious worldview. While I don't think there is any malicious intent or intentional dishonesty, I think it is very natural for a storyteller to embellish for greater effect. But there is a credibility cost. That kind of storytelling has its place, especially when it's limitations are recognized.

[Tacenda]

21 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Thanks Tacenda for the honest post.  I personally don't believe in a selectively interventionist God.  At the same time I have had experiences in my life that I have "felt" that God was involved.  So, how do I square this with my more empiricist type of perspective.  Let me recommend a couple resources in the links below.  Mike McHargue a former fundamentalist baptist became an atheist through a faith deconstruction, but through science and some unique personal experiences he found his way back to faith in a metaphorical way, but with a very rational approach to things, and not a supernatural world view.  I've found his perspective to be inspiring and I recommend checking out his two podcasts and his book.  

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0345503422/_encoding=UTF8?coliid=I153DHF5HYVPKD&colid=3DENV5AC8WEYS

http://mikemchargue.com/ask-science-mike/

http://www.theliturgists.com/podcast/

https://www.amazon.com/Finding-God-Waves-Through-Science/dp/1101906049/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499720710&sr=8-1&keywords=finding+god+in+the+waves

I consider myself either a Deist or a Panentheist or an Agnostic, but I'm also active at church and try to find value in the traditions and community and I think I have a lot of good I can learn and share from my perspectives.  I think we need to be careful with how we share miraculous experiences at church because I think the overall goal is not to support some idea that the church is a divinely favored institution, but our overarching goal should be to minister to the suffering and afflicted in whatever ways we can and to be very utilitarian about that approach.  This means we have to think about the potential consequences of the stories that we share.  

Thanks for the links, I'm going to get a free trial audio book for the first one "How God Changes Your Brain",  and I'm going to listen to the podcasts since I'm a huge podcast junkie.

[Jeanne]

We have already had an apostle tell us that some things that are true are not very useful.  So..if a faith promoting story is not based on truth and facts, what good is it really? Is it just useful because it is faith promoting...?

Edited July 10, 2017 by Jeanne

[Danzo]

5 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

As with Paul Dunn, exaggerated stories tarnish the credibility of the leaders who tell them. IF Holland is exaggerating this story for effect, what else might he be exaggerating?

Stories like the one from the OP sound more like a fictionalized Lifetime movie than a real event. It sounds like a story crafted to elicit an emotional response that validates a religious worldview. While I don't think there is any malicious intent or intentional dishonesty, I think it is very natural for a storyteller to embellish for greater effect. But there is a credibility cost. That kind of storytelling has its place, especially when it's limitations are recognized.

Sounds like you don't trust Elder Holland.

Would you believe it more if John Dehlin said it?

[HappyJackWagon]

5 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Sounds like you don't trust Elder Holland.

Would you believe it more if John Dehlin said it?

Snide as usual.

It would be unlikely for me to believe that kind of story is miraculous unless I personally knew the person telling it well, and it was a first hand account. But I do believe in serendipitous moments and events in our lives.

Edited July 10, 2017 by HappyJackWagon

[hope_for_things]

9 minutes ago, T-Shirt said:

 Of course everyone is different. 

We teach people to love and find joy in other people's success and blessings. We teach people to recognize and find the hand of God in their own lives and experiences.  We stop catering to the idea that something is not fair if it happens to someone else and not me.  There seems to be a whole generation that is finding offense in just about everything.  People are afraid to celebrate accomplishment because they have been told their success is offensive to those who haven't yet had a similar accomplishment or blessing.  We need to stop this.  There is no greater healing than what comes from forgiving others and rejoicing with those who have cause to rejoice.  There is absolutely no healing in bitterness and anger, none!

We have compassion on those who struggle with these feelings and seek to lift them up and teach them to recognize their own blessings.  We should never suggest that their anger at someone else's blessing is justified.

Putting a stop to the telling of stories of how God has blessed people's lives is exactly the wrong thing to do.

  Trying to find fairness in the human experience is a completely wrong approach.  We already have two decades of participation trophies and this has not worked, it has only contributed to the, "It's not fair" lie.  Life is not a matter of fairness, it is about loving our neighbor, mourning with them and rejoicing with them.

If you want to see someone grow as never before and experience real joy, despite all of their adversity, teach them to forgive and serve.

Hmm...  I would agree that life isn't fair, but I don't think that means we shouldn't try to be fair to others, shouldn't that be an aspiration to strive for?  

As for people finding offense at just about everything, I'm not sure that is an accurate stereotype.  I think we're probably more aware of how what we do can impact others today than at any other time in history and I think that's a good thing overall.  Certainly there is overreach sometimes.  

I'm not familiar with any pushes to not celebrate accomplishments, maybe I missed something in the culture, it seems to me like those who excel are celebrated.  I wonder if there have been any scientific studies to back up your claims about some of these failed trends?  

Lastly, I agree with your comment about how we should love our neighbor and mourn and rejoice with them.  I would challenge you about that mourning part and ask how do you expect to mourn with someone who has experienced a great loss and who is hurt by a faith promoting story of miraculous proportions, if you can't truly empathize with their experience?  

[hope_for_things]

11 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

As with Paul Dunn, exaggerated stories tarnish the credibility of the leaders who tell them. IF Holland is exaggerating this story for effect, what else might he be exaggerating?

Stories like the one from the OP sound more like a fictionalized Lifetime movie than a real event. It sounds like a story crafted to elicit an emotional response that validates a religious worldview. While I don't think there is any malicious intent or intentional dishonesty, I think it is very natural for a storyteller to embellish for greater effect. But there is a credibility cost. That kind of storytelling has its place, especially when it's limitations are recognized.

Yes, I agree that this is the risk of telling an embellished story, that the person loses credibility.  I don't know if the story was embellished, and personally I find the story believable, even with the differences in the various accounts, and the crafted sound to the message.  I also think that these kinds of coincidences happen every day, and that's not to say that God couldn't have been involved, I think that's a possibility too.  

I would also agree that this sounds like a lifetime movie kind of story, and that is how we've told much of our history and thats also how American's have told their history about the country as well.  I think this tradition of telling heroic stories has its pros and cons, and that we ought to be careful about this kind of story telling.  

[hope_for_things]

16 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks for the links, I'm going to get a free trial audio book for the first one "How God Changes Your Brain",  and I'm going to listen to the podcasts since I'm a huge podcast junkie.

Awesome, I think you'll really like them.  

[hope_for_things]

24 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

Perhaps not. But you had to know starting another thread on this worn-out, "dead horse" topic would provide a lot of chronic complainers with the opportunity to do what they do best -- complain.

Well, I asked Stemelbow who started the last thread if he closed it, but he said the mods closed it, so I thought it wouldn't hurt to start another one.  Seems relevant to me, but I'm probably naive about grumpy attitudes on things.  Its a Monday after all.  :-) 

[Danzo]

Just now, HappyJackWagon said:

Snide as usual.

It would be unlikely for me to believe that kind of story is miraculous unless I personally knew the person telling it well, and it was a first hand account. I do believe in serendipitous moments and events in our lives.

Sounds like a trust issue to me. 

Since almost all information we are exposed to comes from people we do not know and is usually second or third hand, then there really isn't much that can be believed, can it?

None of us will ever know all of the details of this story first hand.

We have to choose to believe or not believe. 

I have witnessed and have heard first hand stories of things that are "Miraculous". Since I have experienced them, it doesn't surprise me when they happen to other people.

I have not found that Elder Holland has a record of making things up, so I believe him.  

 "And now, believest thou that we deceive this people, that causes such joy in their hearts?"