Rivers Posted October 3, 2017 Posted October 3, 2017 3 hours ago, rockpond said: I think those who find Bill's podcast to be negative ought to just ignore it. For me, listening to Bill has been an enlightening and often uplifting experience. Thank you for that @DBMormon! If we're now allowed to point out negativity, I'll say that listening to Dallin Oaks and reading posts by Scott Lloyd are key factors in making me want to distance myself from the church. Certainly not the case for what I hear and read from Bill Reel. Ignoring Bill's podcast is exactly what I did. For me, the last straw was his episode with Radio Free Mormon last General Conference. They were doing some really ridiculous nitpicking. Its unfortunate because LDS podcasts that are both intellectually stimulating and positive are getting harder to come by.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 3, 2017 Posted October 3, 2017 1 hour ago, ALarson said: Actually I think the quote is originally attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt: "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.” (But I was directly responding to Kennego's reference to what Ann Landers had stated.) Yeah. The guy in “The Princess Diaries” did attribute it to Eleanor Roosevelt, now that you mention it.
ALarson Posted October 3, 2017 Posted October 3, 2017 (edited) 14 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: I think, perhaps, that the "abuse" metaphor gets thrown around entirely too often. Yes, undeniably, horrible things happen: abuse, neglect, rape, murder, the list is endless. Yes, people may experience hurt in the Church of Jesus Christ or at the hands of some/one of its leaders or members. No, I don't mean to make light of any of that. Yes, criminal conduct should be dealt with by the authorities, and appropriate sanctions meted out. But even many people who have been victimized in horrible ways eventually heal. Rape is horrible, but even many (most, I daresay) rape victims heal (Elizabeth Smart-Gilmour is a terrific example of that); murder is horrible, but even many (again, most, I daresay) of those who have lost loved ones to that fate heal; and so on. If people can heal even from such undeniably horrible predations as that, then I fail to see how any putative harm inflicted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or by any of its leaders can compare. I deny that the Church of Jesus Christ as an institution, or that the vast majority of its leaders, ever set out to hurt anyone. If the "abuse" label gets attached to too wide of a variety of phenomena, then it loses its potency. And mischaracterizing or overstating a problem is, perhaps, the first step toward not solving it. Thanks for explaining, Kenngo. I think your opinion is very valid here. I also feel that other's opinions are valid as well and know of many who have been hurt or experience pain when they discover some things about the church they didn't previously know. I'm not into playing the blame game either though and agree with much of what you state above. However, this doesn't change the fact that members have been hurt and many are in pain. (That was the point I was making.) Edited October 3, 2017 by ALarson 1
DBMormon Posted October 3, 2017 Posted October 3, 2017 17 hours ago, rockpond said: I think those who find Bill's podcast to be negative ought to just ignore it. For me, listening to Bill has been an enlightening and often uplifting experience. Thank you for that @DBMormon! If we're now allowed to point out negativity, I'll say that listening to Dallin Oaks and reading posts by Scott Lloyd are key factors in making me want to distance myself from the church. Certainly not the case for what I hear and read from Bill Reel. thank you my friend! 2
DBMormon Posted October 3, 2017 Posted October 3, 2017 14 hours ago, Rivers said: LDS podcasts that are both intellectually stimulating and positive are getting harder to come by. hmmmmmmmmmmmm 1
Jeanne Posted October 3, 2017 Posted October 3, 2017 18 hours ago, rockpond said: I think those who find Bill's podcast to be negative ought to just ignore it. For me, listening to Bill has been an enlightening and often uplifting experience. Thank you for that @DBMormon! If we're now allowed to point out negativity, I'll say that listening to Dallin Oaks and reading posts by Scott Lloyd are key factors in making me want to distance myself from the church. Certainly not the case for what I hear and read from Bill Reel. I agree...
rockpond Posted October 4, 2017 Posted October 4, 2017 On 10/2/2017 at 10:44 PM, Rivers said: Ignoring Bill's podcast is exactly what I did. For me, the last straw was his episode with Radio Free Mormon last General Conference. They were doing some really ridiculous nitpicking. Its unfortunate because LDS podcasts that are both intellectually stimulating and positive are getting harder to come by. If you are willing to give it another shot, you might really enjoy Radio Free Mormon's two part podcast (episodes 14 and 15 from July 2017) titled "Apostolic Coup-d-etat" about the succession crisis. Lots of fascinating research.
rockpond Posted October 4, 2017 Posted October 4, 2017 On 10/2/2017 at 6:40 PM, Robert F. Smith said: We all prefer to listen to and read sources which buttress our strong beliefs, as well as to distance ourselves from anything which calls our apriori views into question. Not an auspicious basis for critical analysis, and certainly not scholarly. I seek learning from varied sources and different points of view. I was simply sharing the impact different people have had on me -- doesn't mean I'm going to stop listening/reading to all sources. Poster removed because of previous post attacking another poster.
jkwilliams Posted October 4, 2017 Posted October 4, 2017 On 10/3/2017 at 2:44 PM, DBMormon said: thank you my friend! IMO, the best podcasts and blogs are the ones that are focused on interesting and challenging discussion, whether it's negative or not. When people start catering their stuff to their audience because they want to be "positive," they lose a lot. Not that it counts for much, but I appreciate what you do and don't think you're too negative. 2
Rivers Posted October 4, 2017 Posted October 4, 2017 2 hours ago, rockpond said: If you are willing to give it another shot, you might really enjoy Radio Free Mormon's two part podcast (episodes 14 and 15 from July 2017) titled "Apostolic Coup-d-etat" about the succession crisis. Lots of fascinating research. I actually really enjoyed the podcast on the Adam-God doctrine. I think that one was also with Radio Free Mormon.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 4, 2017 Posted October 4, 2017 2 hours ago, jkwilliams said: IMO, the best podcasts and blogs are the ones that are focused on interesting and challenging discussion, whether it's negative or not. When people start catering their stuff to their audience because they want to be "positive," they lose a lot. Not that it counts for much, but I appreciate what you do and don't think you're too negative. Apparently, that's what rockpond would have Elder Oaks do. He said Elder Oaks made him want to "distance" himself from the Church (presumably because Elder Oaks was so direct and unequivocal in his conference sermon on the family proclamation).
Robert F. Smith Posted October 4, 2017 Posted October 4, 2017 3 hours ago, jkwilliams said: IMO, the best podcasts and blogs are the ones that are focused on interesting and challenging discussion, whether it's negative or not. When people start catering their stuff to their audience because they want to be "positive," they lose a lot. Not that it counts for much, but I appreciate what you do and don't think you're too negative. The best interviewers are provocative but even-handed. One doesn't have to be positive or negative, but rather incisive and witty. The best interviewers I can think of offhand are Tavis Smiley, Charley Rose, Doug Fabrizio, Terry Gross, et al. Bill Reel and John Dehlin could learn something from them -- if they were of a mind to. However, they are so naive that it will never occur to them that they might need to listen to helpful critiques. 3
readstoomuch Posted October 4, 2017 Author Posted October 4, 2017 This thread has been critical or at least had a number of different opinions about MDP. I`m sure that is irritating, but that`s what happens through most of MDP podcasts. The Church and its leaders are subject to criticism and opinions about its supposed wrongdoings continuously. One of the latest podcasts/posts is directed at Elder Oaks recent conference talk. There is extensive presentism concerning what happened in the past. Because something happened in the past, how do we defend the Church`s present position. In particular Elder Oaks must become a historian and answer the questions. If not to MDP directly, then down the chain of command. I have no idea if Elder Oaks reads the website. Do you have to have a Phd in Church history to be an apostle. At least some history is reasonable, but to what level of knowledge? Many of these historical issues have no black and white answers, often just opinions. Isn`t the Spirit the most important thing the Apostle should have. I was a fan of MDP and have trouble being one now. It seems like it is spinning out of control and I just hope it doesn`t drag too many people with it. People will say ignore the podcast. Fine. MDP sees its mission to keep the issues in the Church`s face. Who is supposed to keep MDP honest in what it does? 4
Calm Posted October 5, 2017 Posted October 5, 2017 (edited) On 2017-10-02 at 7:32 PM, rockpond said: I think those who find Bill's podcast to be negative ought to just ignore it. rtm: "People will say ignore the podcast...Who is supposed to keep MDP honest in what it does?" It always seems strange to me when people say this who engage in criticism themselves (whether fulltime or parttime). Would a "just ignore it" response to criticism of the Church be received as an appropriate suggestion? Edited October 5, 2017 by Calm 3
Popular Post Bob Crockett Posted October 5, 2017 Popular Post Posted October 5, 2017 (edited) 12 hours ago, rockpond said: If you are willing to give it another shot, you might really enjoy Radio Free Mormon's two part podcast (episodes 14 and 15 from July 2017) titled "Apostolic Coup-d-etat" about the succession crisis. Lots of fascinating research. I kept asking the author and Bill to identify the target of the coup. Neither would. Just sort of unlearned jargonesque arm waving. You seem to have listened to the podcast. Does the author identify anybody? My point, which neither would address, is that you can't have a coup where common consent prevails and common consent is what is required. By definition. Bill refused to respond. I don't think the podcast even mentioned the term. The Nauvoo conference could have voted for anybody and it would not have been a coup. A coup occurs when power is usurped. Not sure the mormondiscussion group knows the term. Edited October 5, 2017 by Bob Crockett 5
Bob Crockett Posted October 5, 2017 Posted October 5, 2017 More. At the Nauvoo conference the saints were given the recommendations of the Q12 and Rigdon. People had a month to get there. The Saints voted. Who was usurped?
Bob Crockett Posted October 6, 2017 Posted October 6, 2017 On 9/29/2017 at 2:50 PM, DBMormon said: I welcome an IQ test where the loser cancels their internet and never posts on this board again. lol Well, I shouldn't have referred to "lack of intelligence" as a possible option. But, you're open to criticism about your podcasts, right?
DBMormon Posted October 6, 2017 Posted October 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Bob Crockett said: you're open to criticism about your podcasts, right? sure. If that goes both ways. for example Scott Lloyd avoided talking and answering to the criticism of his sharing the Holland story that was a far fetched tale while he still wants to join in when he wants to criticize. If you feel you deserve answers and deserve to be able to hold others accountable to where you see them worthy of criticism, then should also be present when you do something worthy of criticism.
Bob Crockett Posted October 6, 2017 Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, DBMormon said: sure. If that goes both ways. for example Scott Lloyd avoided talking and answering to the criticism of his sharing the Holland story that was a far fetched tale while he still wants to join in when he wants to criticize. If you feel you deserve answers and deserve to be able to hold others accountable to where you see them worthy of criticism, then should also be present when you do something worthy of criticism. I am not Scott Lloyd. I don't really know who he is; never spoken with him; emailed him. He isn't me. I don't give a hoot what Deseret News says. I don't subscribe. I think I often disagree with Scott Lloyd. Perhaps he was out of line reporting on a newsworthy event in keeping with Deseret News' mission. As I recall, Deseret News isn't really a traditional newspaper any more after it folded a number of operations in recent history. It is one thing and one thing only -- the mouthpiece of the Church. So, when a general authority gives a speech somewhere it is newsworthy for the Deseret News to report it. If Scott Lloyd misreported what Elder Holland said then I condemn Scott Lloyd and the horse he rode in on. Shame on him for doing that, if it happened. (Actually, I think your post demonstrates some naivete about what reporters actually do. A reporter reporting a speech Pres. Trump makes to the U.N. isn't responsible for Trump's lies and exaggerations.) You can criticize me all you want. I don't think you accept criticism; you report all the time, including for this thread? Edited October 6, 2017 by Bob Crockett
Scott Lloyd Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) 17 hours ago, Bob Crockett said: I am not Scott Lloyd. I don't really know who he is; never spoken with him; emailed him. He isn't me. I don't give a hoot what Deseret News says. I don't subscribe. I think I often disagree with Scott Lloyd. Perhaps he was out of line reporting on a newsworthy event in keeping with Deseret News' mission. As I recall, Deseret News isn't really a traditional newspaper any more after it folded a number of operations in recent history. It is one thing and one thing only -- the mouthpiece of the Church. So, when a general authority gives a speech somewhere it is newsworthy for the Deseret News to report it. If Scott Lloyd misreported what Elder Holland said then I condemn Scott Lloyd and the horse he rode in on. Shame on him for doing that, if it happened. (Actually, I think your post demonstrates some naivete about what reporters actually do. A reporter reporting a speech Pres. Trump makes to the U.N. isn't responsible for Trump's lies and exaggerations.) You can criticize me all you want. I don't think you accept criticism; you report all the time, including for this thread? You make a number of good, fair and intelligent points here, Bob Crockett, which I will let stand without comment (Reel has been sniping, but I won’t let him bait me). I must correct you, though, about the character of the Deseret News. It is obvious without you’re having to say so that you don’t subscribe to or read it, for you seem largely ill informed about the newspaper. The fact is, it is still very much a “traditional newspaper” in a number of ways. True, it, like newspapers across the country, has been hit strongly with economic realities of a changing market and industry. It has coped by combining and consolidating news gathering operations with KSL-TV and Radio news in Salt Lake City and with Deseret Digital Media. Since the corporate restructuring seven years ago, the Deseret News has more or less thrived with both a print and an online product, increasingly emphasizing online content as the public continues to turn away from print news sources. Notwithstanding, the Deseret News has expanded its print circulation and reach with its national edition launched a few years ago. Contrary to your assertion, the Deseret News could not accurately be characterized as “the mouthpiece of the Church.” Like most other newspapers it maintains its own distinct voice and position on issues of the day. For example, during the presidential campaign of last year, when the Deseret News called for the withdrawal of Donald Trump from the race, it did so without consulting the Church leaders or even informing them in advance. That is pretty much routine. Some of what you said in your post would apply with greater accuracy to the LDS Church News, which is the section I write for and which is an official, correlated news publication of the Church. But it is only a weekly supplement (with daily online content these days) to the main newspaper and amounts to only a small fraction of the overall operation. Edited October 7, 2017 by Scott Lloyd 2
readstoomuch Posted October 7, 2017 Author Posted October 7, 2017 I think your post and a link as an advertising gimmick is against board rules. This is a CES Letter knockoff. You are accomplished at gathering the biggest hits of anti-Mormonism. You are not balanced in giving the best LDS arguments or being balanced. You have good hair, though. It spikes quite nicely. After looking at this I have to say MDP is so much more balanced than you my friend. I know I started this thread about the negativity, but he puts far more effort in that you do in that direction. His sources are generally so much better and reliable, even if I disagree with him sometimes. So, I think Bill could do more good without the negativity, but I think maybe it is time to stop the vinegar myself about MPD. Introspection is good for the soul and we all need it. 1
Calm Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, LetterToApostle said: Just a note to let you know there is a reply to your response to 'A Letter to an Apostle' For those who are wondering where this came from: https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Criticism_of_Mormonism/Online_documents/A_Letter_to_an_Apostle This is one of many spinoffs to Runnells' stuff, imo. PS: you (LtA) appear to think this board is FairMormon...otherwise your "reply to your response" makes no sense. It is not and has not been for many years. There are a couple of FM volunteers who post on the board, I am the only regular one these days. Others are much more sporadic . Edited October 7, 2017 by Calm 2
Hamba Tuhan Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 4 hours ago, LetterToApostle said: Just a note to let you know there is a reply to your response to 'A Letter to an Apostle' Hey, Paul. At which institution did you earn your PhD?
Popular Post Daniel Peterson Posted October 8, 2017 Popular Post Posted October 8, 2017 On October 2, 2017 at 10:44 PM, Rivers said: LDS podcasts that are both intellectually stimulating and positive are getting harder to come by. http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/category/podcasts/ 5
DBMormon Posted October 9, 2017 Posted October 9, 2017 On 10/6/2017 at 2:14 PM, Bob Crockett said: I am not Scott Lloyd. I don't really know who he is; never spoken with him; emailed him. He isn't me. I don't give a hoot what Deseret News says. I don't subscribe. I think I often disagree with Scott Lloyd. Perhaps he was out of line reporting on a newsworthy event in keeping with Deseret News' mission. As I recall, Deseret News isn't really a traditional newspaper any more after it folded a number of operations in recent history. It is one thing and one thing only -- the mouthpiece of the Church. So, when a general authority gives a speech somewhere it is newsworthy for the Deseret News to report it. If Scott Lloyd misreported what Elder Holland said then I condemn Scott Lloyd and the horse he rode in on. Shame on him for doing that, if it happened. (Actually, I think your post demonstrates some naivete about what reporters actually do. A reporter reporting a speech Pres. Trump makes to the U.N. isn't responsible for Trump's lies and exaggerations.) You can criticize me all you want. I don't think you accept criticism; you report all the time, including for this thread? i reported this thread? CFR. Mods did I report this thread? I have only reported you when you have broken board rules and the board has agreed and warned you. But you are always the victim right? you are so over the top, for example claiming me reporting all the time? Mods anyone care to notify him the last time I reported anyone? My guess I have reported someone perhaps a half dozen times in the multiple years of participating here. but by all means, claim more things you have zero evidence for. whats new!
Recommended Posts