cinepro Posted June 15, 2018 Posted June 15, 2018 2 hours ago, clarkgoble said: Further it's really an argument for infallibility but if there's one thing we know it is that there's not prophetic infallibility. Clarity isn't the same as infallibility. And if the question is "What if this is from God?", the only rational answer is "Great, get back to me when you know for sure."
Ahab Posted June 15, 2018 Posted June 15, 2018 3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: When church members can't tell the difference between an utterance from a prophet being God's will, or personal opinion it creates a problem. It suddenly requires church members to treat the prophet's personal opinion as if it is God's law. No it doesn't. When you can't tell the difference between the utterings of a man and the utterings of a prophet, your inability to tell the difference doesn't require you to treat that mans' words as if they are coming from a prophet. You may choose to do so if you want to, but you aren't required to do that. What I do, personally, is find out from God if he approves of that man's message, and not until then do I accept what that man says as if he is speaking as a prophet who is proclaiming a law of God, or something God would want me to follow. Until then it's just what that man says, as that man's personal opinion and belief, and if that man has a leadership position in the Church I acknowledge his position in the Church organization just as I acknowledge the position of a supervisor or manager or CEO in another organization. I don't accept the Church as God's organization for his believers just because some man has said so either, even if that man has the office of a President of the Church. I found out from God that it is, and only when God told me did I accept it. 3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: Sometimes prophets may not even recognize where inspiration and their own reasoning comes in to play so they may not always recognize what is God's will and what is their own. Why are you even calling them "prophets"? If you don't believe they are, you should refer to them simply as "men". When you suggest they are prophets, and speaking as prophets, you should recognize which part of their message was inspired by God, and if you don't know, you just don't know then whether they are speaking as a fallible man or as a prophet who is speaking for God. 3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: IMO- for a messenger from God to be useful, it must be clearly understood what is from God and what is from the messenger. If there is inconsistency or unreliability in the message it will either cause people to treat the messenger's words as if they are God's or dismiss God's words as if they are the messenger's. Yes, and each person makes up their own mind and comes to their own understanding, either with God's help or without it. It is your job to find out for yourself. I'm reminded now of this statement in one of my favorite talks: The Church is structured for eternal progression, and that takes place as we all feel our way forward along a broad front. Seeking and searching are among the most common words in our scriptures; we are all supposed to be seeking all the time. Just as missionaries go forth as an amateur army, searching out the honest in heart in the most scattered and unlikely places, on the widest possible front, so the rest of us increase in knowledge, here a little and there a little, not by trusting a few experts to come up with the answers, but by all of us searching, all along the line, finding out a fact here and a document there, and reporting the discovery to the whole body. http://www.zionsbest.com/amateur.html 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 15, 2018 Posted June 15, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, 6EQUJ5 said: Your argument here is really weak, Scott. You are trying to argue that the Board of Trustees actively endorses University dress codes. But the problem is, if they really cared that much about the particulars, there would be unity of standards across all the BYU campuses. There isn't. So clearly they don't care enough about the minutia to make sure BYU-I students can wear shorts too, just like their provo counterparts. Obviously the bulk of these rules are formed by University administrations and simply signed off on. And I'm guessing that unless the rules don't include anything absurd, the BoT just goes with it. From President Hinckley: “By an evolutionary process it has continued, with modifications, until it has become the standard behavior of those of the university and has been endorsed by its board of trustees. It is for all students to accept and agree to live by—astatement of principleconcerning honesty,charity, purity, modesty,andcommitment.” (Emphasis mine) “https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/gordon-b-hinckley_codes-covenants/ Edited June 15, 2018 by Scott Lloyd 1
USU78 Posted June 15, 2018 Posted June 15, 2018 12 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: From President Hinckley: “By an evolutionary process it has continued, with modifications, until it has become the standard behavior of those of the university and has been <endorsed by its board of trustees.> It is for all students to accept and agree to live by—astatement of principleconcerning honesty,charity, purity, modesty,andcommitment.” (Emphasis mine) “https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/gordon-b-hinckley_codes-covenants/ I've been reluctant to weigh in here, and I'm certainly no great friend of yBu, but seriously folks, a contract is a contract. It's not like the behavior and dress code at yBu is or ever has been a big secret. Scott's absolutely correct on this point. Get over yourselves. On the other hand, the Zoobee nickname is well earned: 2
Ahab Posted June 15, 2018 Posted June 15, 2018 3 minutes ago, USU78 said: I've been reluctant to weigh in here, and I'm certainly no great friend of yBu, but seriously folks, a contract is a contract. It's not like the behavior and dress code at yBu is or ever has been a big secret. Scott's absolutely correct on this point. Get over yourselves. On the other hand, the Zoobee nickname is well earned: Romper Room! YaY! I wanna watch Captain Kangaroo next, with Mr. Green Jeans! 3
Scott Lloyd Posted June 15, 2018 Posted June 15, 2018 (edited) 18 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: I don't in the least dispute the importance of having a written record. I'm just not prepared to say it never happens that a commandment is conveyed verbally and perhaps not recorded until some later date. 16 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said: Perhaps you'll also agree that if the practice were widespread, it would be a poor way to govern a church of 14,000,000 members speaking literally dozens of languages and scattered across six continents and the isles of the seas? Maybe "commandment" is too strong of a word, but I dare say there is a great deal of inspired counsel conveyed in the course of Church administration that never gets codified in the scriptures or the handbooks or bulletins or any other written source. Indeed, we may be in a sorry state if we never did anything unless it could be documented in print first. The late, beloved Elder Boyd K. Packer gave several illustrations in his address titled "The Unwritten Order of Things." Here's one: Quote Principle: A prime attribute of a good leader is to be a good follower. In a meeting with bishops, a new and struggling bishop once asked me, “How do I get people to follow me? I have called nine sisters to be president of the Primary and none has accepted.” There was a good humor and pleasant spirit in the meeting which made it an ideal teaching moment. I answered that I doubted that he had “called” any of the nine sisters. He must only have asked or invited them. I told him that if he had earnestly prayed and counseled with his counselors as to who should preside over the Primary, the first sister would have accepted the call. Perhaps he might have discovered in the interview some reason why it was not advisable or timely for that sister to serve and excused her from serving. But surely not more than one or two. If that many sisters turned down the call, something was out of order—the unwritten order. Because there was such good spirit in the meeting, I said to him, “Bishop, I know something else about you. You’re not a good follower, are you? Aren’t you the one who is always questioning what the stake president asks of his bishops?” The other bishops in the room started to chuckle and nodded their heads—he was the one. He chuckled and said he supposed that was right. I said, “Perhaps the reason your members don’t follow their leader is because you don’t follow yours. An essential attribute of a leader in the Church is faithful and loyal followship. That is just the order of things—the unwritten order of things.” Is conveying such a thing through an informal process of mentorship -- an "unwritten order of things" as it were -- necessarily a "poor way to govern" in a global church? I don't think so, not with the genius of the Lord's pattern of leadership, with central administration through a Quorum of Twelve Apostles directing a worldwide ministry through a cadre of seventies in an expandable number of quorums to meet the needs of the Church membership as it grows. I think that has worked pretty well up to now. Edited June 15, 2018 by Scott Lloyd
Bernard Gui Posted June 15, 2018 Posted June 15, 2018 (edited) 51 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: From President Hinckley: “By an evolutionary process it has continued, with modifications, until it has become the standard behavior of those of the university and has been <endorsed by its board of trustees.> It is for all students to accept and agree to live by—astatement of principleconcerning honesty,charity, purity, modesty,andcommitment.” (Emphasis mine) “https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/gordon-b-hinckley_codes-covenants/ How hard is it to refer to the actual statements about the Honor Code and its approval published on the CES and university admissions websites? Quote Brigham Young University, Brigham Young University-Hawaii, Brigham Young University-Idaho, and LDS Business College exist to provide an education in an atmosphere consistent with the ideals and principles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That atmosphere is created and preserved through commitment to conduct that reflects those ideals and principles. Members of the faculty, administration, staff, and student body at BYU, BYU-H, BYU-I, and LDSBC are selected and retained from among individuals who voluntarily live the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Observance of such is a specific condition of employment and admission. Those individuals who are not members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are also expected to maintain the same standards of conduct, except church attendance. All who represent BYU, BYU-H, BYU-I, and LDSBC are to maintain the highest standards of honor, integrity, morality, and consideration of others in personal behavior. By accepting appointment on the faculty, continuing in employment, or continuing class enrollment, individuals evidence their commitment to observe the Honor Code standards approved by the Board of Trustees "at all times and…in all places" (Mosiah 18:9). Quote Ecclesiastical Endorsement The Board of Trustees of BYU-Idaho requires every student attending the university to have an annual ecclesiastical endorsement from the bishop of the ward in which he or she resides. The endorsement fosters communication between students and ecclesiastical leaders. It gives bishops an opportunity to review a student’s understanding of and commitment to the Honor Code. Edited June 15, 2018 by Bernard Gui 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 15, 2018 Posted June 15, 2018 12 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: How hard is it to refer to the actual statements about the Honor Code and its approval published on the CES and university admissions websites? Thank you, Bernard. In addition to what you have emphasized, I would like to highlight this passage: Quote That atmosphere [one consistent with the principles and ideals of the Church] is created and preserved through commitment to conduct that reflects those ideals and principles.
clarkgoble Posted June 15, 2018 Posted June 15, 2018 4 hours ago, cinepro said: Clarity isn't the same as infallibility. And if the question is "What if this is from God?", the only rational answer is "Great, get back to me when you know for sure." I think in this case they end up being the same for practical purposes. If God's message is clearly from God and clear enough rhetorically that it can't easily be misunderstood, then given God's knowledge and power it ends up as infallibility. Now you could quibble over the inherent limits of language and particular short generalities. But that's a pretty narrow area where it wouldn't be infallible. More to the point given the idea of this life as a training ground where we don't inherently know what God wants, such clarity would go against the plan of salvation.
Stargazer Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 On 6/15/2018 at 5:21 AM, Scott Lloyd said: But in the eyes of God, it may not be merely "busy work," even when we don't see the clear purpose of it and might not for a long time. That is where the test of faith comes in. Blessedly for most of us, those occasions are not constant or even frequent, but they do occur from time to time. I think for many of the early Church members, the command to practice plural marriage was an example of this. Wax on; wax off. 1
Stargazer Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 22 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: Yeah, this is part of the problem. What if? When church members can't tell the difference between an utterance from a prophet being God's will, or personal opinion it creates a problem. It suddenly requires church members to treat the prophet's personal opinion as if it is God's law. Sometimes prophets may not even recognize where inspiration and their own reasoning comes in to play so they may not always recognize what is God's will and what is their own. IMO- for a messenger from God to be useful, it must be clearly understood what is from God and what is from the messenger. If there is inconsistency or unreliability in the message it will either cause people to treat the messenger's words as if they are God's or dismiss God's words as if they are the messenger's. Yeah, I get grumpy when what are mere traditions somehow take on an aura of divine imprimatur, with nothing ultimately behind them. 3
Stargazer Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 16 hours ago, Ahab said: Romper Room! YaY! I wanna watch Captain Kangaroo next, with Mr. Green Jeans! Ah, those were the days, my friend! We thought they'd never end!
Scott Lloyd Posted June 16, 2018 Posted June 16, 2018 5 hours ago, Stargazer said: Wax on; wax off. Indeed. A good analogy.
6EQUJ5 Posted June 22, 2018 Posted June 22, 2018 On 6/15/2018 at 12:10 PM, Scott Lloyd said: From President Hinckley: “By an evolutionary process it has continued, with modifications, until it has become the standard behavior of those of the university and has been endorsed by its board of trustees. It is for all students to accept and agree to live by—astatement of principleconcerning honesty,charity, purity, modesty,andcommitment.” (Emphasis mine) “https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/gordon-b-hinckley_codes-covenants/ Weak sauce, Scott. You are intentionally missing the central point. If the trustees cared about the details of the dress codes they would be the same. The fact that they differ shows that they don't really care about details and leave that to the University admin. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 22, 2018 Posted June 22, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said: Weak sauce, Scott. You are intentionally missing the central point. If the trustees cared about the details of the dress codes they would be the same. The fact that they differ shows that they don't really care about details and leave that to the University admin. Total non sequitur. That the Board of Trustees gives some flexibility to the individual administrations of the four schools does not justify the conclusion that they don't care about the content of the respective dress codes at the schools. Edited June 22, 2018 by Scott Lloyd
6EQUJ5 Posted June 22, 2018 Posted June 22, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Total non sequitur. That the Board of Trustees gives some flexibility to the individual administrations of the four schools does not justify the conclusion that they don't care about the content of the respective dress codes at the schools. Stop moving the goalposts, Scott. I know you get flustered when you are losing an argument but let's stay reasonable. No one argued "they don't care" about the dress codes. So stop lying. You still haven't addressed the fact the difference in policies completely undermines your argument that the trustees are deeply involved in crafting and approving these policies. ETA: Anyone other than Scott want to wager how many posts it will take from this point for Scott to say: "I don't have time for this conversation. I won't be responding." That is Scott-speak for "I lost but am too prideful to admit it." Chick-fil-a certificates on the line! Edited June 22, 2018 by 6EQUJ5
Scott Lloyd Posted December 29, 2019 Posted December 29, 2019 On 6/13/2018 at 10:37 AM, Calm said: He put a lot of effort into that beard, good that exceptions are made for non permanent professors, imo. Given the cultural aspect of the rule (as opposed to moral aspects of the Honor Code), I see no reason why exceptions shouldn't be made for beards. How do you “put a lot of effort” into a beard? You simply do nothing, and it appears. Staying clean shaven is what takes the effort. And whether the beard looks good or not is mostly a matter of genetics, over which one has no control. (Pardon the thread necromancy. I ran across this old post in an old thread while Googling other stuff and couldn’t resist commenting.)
Calm Posted December 29, 2019 Posted December 29, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: How do you “put a lot of effort” into a beard? You simply do nothing, and it appears. Staying clean shaven is what takes the effort. And whether the beard looks good or not is mostly a matter of genetics, over which one has no control. Beards are often trimmed and shaped. Few I see just do nothing. My husband spends quite a bit of time on his, though more to stay clean shaven. Probably depends on the person and style of beard. There were also stages of discomfort he had to endure. Edited December 29, 2019 by Calm
Hamba Tuhan Posted December 29, 2019 Posted December 29, 2019 4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: How do you “put a lot of effort” into a beard? You simply do nothing, and it appears. No offence, Scott, but this sounds like a comment made by someone who has never in his life grown a good-looking beard. 3
Scott Lloyd Posted December 29, 2019 Posted December 29, 2019 50 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said: No offence, Scott, but this sounds like a comment made by someone who has never in his life grown a good-looking beard. You’ve only re-enforced my point. Whether one can “grow[ ] a good-looking beard” is a matter of genetics, not personal exertion. Do you mean the actual growing of the beard, or are you referring to grooming (what Calm calls “shaping and trimming), which is a separate matter — and which is why I said whether the beard looks good or not is MOSTLY (not entirely) a matter of genetics. So I don’t see what quarrel you would have with my point that would occasion an implied insult.
Hamba Tuhan Posted December 29, 2019 Posted December 29, 2019 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: So I don’t see what quarrel you would have with my point that would occasion an implied insult. No insult implied, just obvious lack of experience. Men with proper beards know just how much effort -- and investment -- it takes. Edited December 29, 2019 by Hamba Tuhan
Scott Lloyd Posted December 29, 2019 Posted December 29, 2019 3 hours ago, Calm said: Beards are often trimmed and shaped. Few I see just do nothing. My husband spends quite a bit of time on his, though more to stay clean shaven. Probably depends on the person and style of beard. There were also stages of discomfort he had to endure. So the “lot of effort” you speak of refers to “shaping and trimming” and enduring some measure of discomfort, then, not to actually growing the beard, which occurs not through exertion but through sustained lack thereof.
Scott Lloyd Posted December 29, 2019 Posted December 29, 2019 7 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said: No insult implied, just obvious lack of experience. What does experience (or lack thereof) have to do with the obvious, non-controversial point that (if the genetics are there) a beard will grow on its own if nothing is done to prevent it?
Scott Lloyd Posted December 29, 2019 Posted December 29, 2019 14 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said: No insult implied, just obvious lack of experience. Men with proper beards know just how much effort -- and investment -- it takes. Again, what investment? Grooming? That’s not the same thing as growing. I never denied that grooming may be required to enhance the look. That’s why I said “mostly” (not entirely) genetics.
Calm Posted December 29, 2019 Posted December 29, 2019 2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Do you mean the actual growing of the beard, or are you referring to grooming (what Calm calls “shaping and trimming), which is a separate matter — and which is why I said whether the beard looks good or not is MOSTLY (not entirely) a matter of genetics. The same person can look horrible in one beard style and gorgeous in another. Just like hair on the upper part of the head, it is a combo of genetics and care that create a good looking beard.
Recommended Posts