CA Steve Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 6 minutes ago, not_my_real_name said: You would be in favor of referring this matter the ecclesiastical authorities of those who administer this board? You are in favor of silence? You are in favor of not being your brother’s keeper? Hopefully I am in favor of not casting the first stone or any stone for that matter. 1
not_my_real_name Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 1 minute ago, CA Steve said: Hopefully I am in favor of not casting the first stone or any stone for that matter. A bit of hyperbole to compare my inquiry into why the board has yet to fall in line with the Lord’s directive to stoning. Are we that averse to criticism that simple questions and objections are viewed as a death sentence.
stemelbow Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 45 minutes ago, not_my_real_name said: See the style guide on the Newsroom site. The use of the term “Mormon” is a material departure from the revealed name of the Church. Not so with the names “The Church of Jesus Christ” or “The Chirch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” Did satan inspire the church to embrace that material departure? When it was adopted by the church was t god offended?
Calm Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 2 hours ago, not_my_real_name said: Again I ask, is the tone and moderation of this board tilt toward a faithful views or dissenting views? Do the “contributors,” on average present a faithful view or a dissenting view? I’m shocked that the idea that this Board is a faithful board is so controversial. Quote BANNED TOPICS include but are not limited to:• Proselyting, witnessing or other one sided posts intended to preach not discuss 3
not_my_real_name Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 4 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Did satan inspire the church to embrace that material departure? When it was adopted by the church was t god offended? Well, I’ve never talked to Satan so I couldn’t tell what he’s done. But if I ever do I’ll be sure to fill you in.
Calm Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 2 hours ago, not_my_real_name said: I was under the impression that this board was created and is administered by those who are faithful to the directives of the Lord as given through His Prophet, including clear direction to cease using terms for the Church, its members, and doctrines that have been explicitly noted as inappropriate. Among banned behaviours from the guidelines: Quote Judging others worthiness, questioning sincerity, mind reading or psychoanalyzing Judging the faithfulness of moderators or making their faithfulness the topic of conversation is likely a variation of the above. 3
not_my_real_name Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 4 minutes ago, Calm said: This is not one-sided. I’ve solicited discussion regarding an observation. I’ve asked questions that were not rhetorical. Again I fail to see why this so controversial.
not_my_real_name Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 10 minutes ago, Calm said: Among banned behaviours from the guidelines: Judging the faithfulness of moderators or making their faithfulness the topic of conversation is likely a variation of the above. Exactly my point, why are people permitted to mind read the Prophet? I have not judged others’ worthiness or faithfulness. I have assumed that this was a faithful board and noted that the Prophet has asked the faithful to use the proper, revealed name of the church. Again, why is this so controversial?
not_my_real_name Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 14 minutes ago, Calm said: Among banned behaviours from the guidelines: Judging the faithfulness of moderators or making their faithfulness the topic of conversation is likely a variation of the above. I have condemned no one. I have simple inquired as to an observed inconsistency. If I have erred in my assumptions then I admit my mistake, but I will not be accused of things I did not do.
bluebell Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 Just now, not_my_real_name said: I have condemned no one. I have simple inquired as to an observed inconsistency. If I have erred in my assumptions then I admit my mistake, but I will not be accused of things I did not do. I think the condemnation comes with the suggestion that by not changing the name of the board, the board is not being a faithful board. Pointing out the inconsistency (to use your term) is essentially saying "You are not being faithful like you have claimed to be." 1
stemelbow Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 19 minutes ago, not_my_real_name said: Well, I’ve never talked to Satan so I couldn’t tell what he’s done. But if I ever do I’ll be sure to fill you in. I suppose that’s why I reject Nelson’s position too. Satan getting wins because of the name and god getting offended is kind of absurd stuff.
not_my_real_name Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 5 minutes ago, bluebell said: I think the condemnation comes with the suggestion that by not changing the name of the board, the board is not being a faithful board. Pointing out the inconsistency (to use your term) is essentially saying "You are not being faithful like you have claimed to be." Again with the hyperbole. Asking a question regarding a perceived inconsistency is now condemnation? Have I suggested that the moderators be stoned, as another another poster claimed? I think you’re great people, just wondering why the directive has yet to implemented with regards to the name of this board. Again, why the controversy and the unnecessary defensiveness? It’s like your making an ad hominem attacked on yourselves for me.
bluebell Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 Just now, not_my_real_name said: Again with the hyperbole. Asking a question regarding a perceived inconsistency is now condemnation? Have I suggested that the moderators be stoned, as another another poster claimed? I think you’re great people, just wondering why the directive has yet to implemented with regards to the name of this board. Again, why the controversy and the unnecessary defensiveness? It’s like your making an ad hominem attacked on yourselves for me. It's not hyperbole, it's just english. It seemed like you were censuring the board for not having changed it's name yet. That's the definition of condemnation. If that's not what you were doing, then it might serve you better to re-think your posting style since so many people are misunderstanding your intent. We don't know why the board's name hasn't been changed as the mods don't often communicate with us, other than handling problems. There is no way for anyone to answer your question. All anyone can share is speculation. 2
not_my_real_name Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) 10 minutes ago, bluebell said: It's not hyperbole, it's just english. It seemed like you were censuring the board for not having changed it's name yet. That's the definition of condemnation. If that's not what you were doing, then it might serve you better to re-think your posting style since so many people are misunderstanding your intent. We don't know why the board's name hasn't been changed as the mods don't often communicate with us, other than handling problems. There is no way for anyone to answer your question. All anyone can share is speculation. Finally a relevant answer. I appreciate your arriving to the point. Though your use of a thesaurus does not diminish the hyperbole of the claim that I’m condemning anyone. Edited March 8, 2019 by not_my_real_name
bluebell Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 1 minute ago, not_my_real_name said: Finally a relevant answer. I appreciate your arriving to the point. Though your use of a thesaurus does not diminish the hyperbole of the claim that I’m condemning anyone. Actually, I used a dictionary. 1
stemelbow Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, not_my_real_name said: Finally a relevant answer. I appreciate your arriving to the point. Though your use of a thesaurus does not diminish the hyperbole of the claim that I’m condemning anyone. You shouldn't ask tough questions. It usually gets people upset around here. BTW I'd agree with you for the most part. If the board owners are faithful Mormons than you'd think they'd feel obliged to abide by Nelson's directives. The problem for me is Nelson's a bit up in the night with this revelation about Satan getting happy and God getting offended. On the one hand we have leaders mocking people who get offended, giving counsel to not be offended when offense is not intended, in particular, and then on the other we have God so easily offended by someone labeling him/herself the name that everyone's familiar with. Edited March 8, 2019 by stemelbow
JAHS Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 The Associated Press has updated its style on references to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “We are changing our style on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The church in 2018 began moving away from the widely recognized terms Mormon church and LDS church, and now prefers that its full name be used and that members be referred to as Latter-day Saints,” the AP Stylebook account tweeted. The stylebook's Twitter account recommended the following guidelines for newsrooms and writers who follow AP style: "Use the full name of the church on first reference. For second references, use phrases such as "the church," "church members," "members of the faith" (without quote marks). "Mormon," "Mormons" and "Latter-day Saints" are acceptable only “when necessary for space or clarity or in quotations or proper name,” according to the AP. The AP recommends including a short explanation about the church when mentioning its full name. The account explains, “The term Mormon is based on the church's sacred Book of Mormon and remains in common use by members of the faith.”Associated Press updates style guide on references to church, Latter-day Saints, term 'Mormon' This update still gives them them the option to use the word "Mormon" for space, which I am sure they will do often. 2
MiserereNobis Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 14 minutes ago, JAHS said: The Associated Press has updated its style on references to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “We are changing our style on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The church in 2018 began moving away from the widely recognized terms Mormon church and LDS church, and now prefers that its full name be used and that members be referred to as Latter-day Saints,” the AP Stylebook account tweeted. The stylebook's Twitter account recommended the following guidelines for newsrooms and writers who follow AP style: "Use the full name of the church on first reference. For second references, use phrases such as "the church," "church members," "members of the faith" (without quote marks). "Mormon," "Mormons" and "Latter-day Saints" are acceptable only “when necessary for space or clarity or in quotations or proper name,” according to the AP. The AP recommends including a short explanation about the church when mentioning its full name. The account explains, “The term Mormon is based on the church's sacred Book of Mormon and remains in common use by members of the faith.”Associated Press updates style guide on references to church, Latter-day Saints, term 'Mormon' This update still gives them them the option to use the word "Mormon" for space, which I am sure they will do often. Now if we could only get the AP style guide to start using the Oxford comma, we'd be getting somewhere... 2
Calm Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 40 minutes ago, JAHS said: The Associated Press has updated its style on references to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “We are changing our style on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The church in 2018 began moving away from the widely recognized terms Mormon church and LDS church, and now prefers that its full name be used and that members be referred to as Latter-day Saints,” the AP Stylebook account tweeted. The stylebook's Twitter account recommended the following guidelines for newsrooms and writers who follow AP style: "Use the full name of the church on first reference. For second references, use phrases such as "the church," "church members," "members of the faith" (without quote marks). "Mormon," "Mormons" and "Latter-day Saints" are acceptable only “when necessary for space or clarity or in quotations or proper name,” according to the AP. The AP recommends including a short explanation about the church when mentioning its full name. The account explains, “The term Mormon is based on the church's sacred Book of Mormon and remains in common use by members of the faith.”Associated Press updates style guide on references to church, Latter-day Saints, term 'Mormon' This update still gives them them the option to use the word "Mormon" for space, which I am sure they will do often. I think that is a decent compromise, respectful to the desires of what leadership and members probably in general now want to be called even if not in the habit yet themselves while not forcing its own AP members into awkwardness. No suggestions on alternatives to Mormonism? I think if this remains the same, common usage will remain Mormon.
MiserereNobis Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 4 minutes ago, Calm said: No suggestions on alternatives to Mormonism? I think if this remains the same, common usage will remain Mormon. I think that's the tough one. The LDS church's suggestions really aren't workable, especially "the restored gospel of Jesus Christ." That's not neutral and it doesn't really cover the cultural aspects that the word Mormonism does. 1
Robert F. Smith Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 4 hours ago, not_my_real_name said: You want quotes supporting why I don’t qualify the Prophet’s counsel? Read his words; he offers no qualifications, including those you claim. But please share how you have gained special insight into his thought processes. I asked you first.
mfbukowski Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 7 hours ago, Spammer said: Next time the missionaries knock on my door and say ‘We’re from the Church of Jesus Christ,’ I’ll respond with ‘Really? You’re Orthodox? Me too! Which jurisdiction do you belong to?’ Can’t wait! 😃 As long as they give you the right stake name, their answer would be sufficiently correct... Considering they would not know what you're talkin about. 😄
Robert F. Smith Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 5 hours ago, not_my_real_name said: Again with the mind-reading of the Prophet. Perhaps you could comment on how you are qualified to provide commentary on what the Prophet thinks. If you think that I have missed the meaning of that directive, perhaps you could show that via actual quotations. 1
CV75 Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 On 3/6/2019 at 8:05 PM, california boy said: Got that. It is more about Pres Nelson making such a big deal about using the proper name of the Church as God instructed and then going to all the work of changing the name of the Church web site but still not using the proper name of the Church as God instructed. Isn't the Church still not meeting the goal that Pres. Nelson felt must take place? It just seems like adding more confusion to those trying to Google the Church web site by now throwing it in with all the other web sites that are the Church of Jesus Christ, and still the proper name of the church is not being used. Seems like a disconnect to me. But hey, personally I have no skin in this issue. So whatever. It's not about that at all. but about carrying out the change as he said it would be carried out from the start. So yes, you are adding more to your confusion as you seem to be overlooking the actual purpose for the changes and how it is accomplished. And if you had no skin in it, you wouldn't be commenting in the first place, no? 2
Scott Lloyd Posted March 8, 2019 Posted March 8, 2019 8 hours ago, mfbukowski said: So it should remain the same, to continue giving the same impressions? At this point I don’t know what it is you want. You disparage s beloved hymn that honors the Prophet Joseph Smith and his divinely mandated role in the restoration of the gospel, the gathering of Israel and the events of the last days, declaring, “It’s got to change,” and then insist you are not calling for a de-emphasis of the Prophet Joseph Smith.
Recommended Posts