The Paul H Dunn-ing of President Nelson

[Amulek]

32 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Have you listened to any RFM?

Not really. I'm pretty firmly in the anti-podcast camp.

I find the overwhelming majority of them to be tedious, boring, rambling affairs that are best enjoyed with the volume set to zero.

Sorry, not sorry.

 

[Fether]

27 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So apparently the spirit testified of a lie to you (an me)>  And they were not presented as parables.  Amazing the concessions you are willing to give when it comes to things LDS.

I’m actually on your side with this. Fake miracle stories can do more harm than not knowing any. I had a friend in my mission whose testimony was built on many of these stories. One day, he found out his favorite one, The Bill Carpenter Conversion Story used a bunch of fake names and he couldn’t find proof of it actually happening. He then learned that other popular Mormon legends were just that, legends. Stories like the seagulls eating the crickets, temple being built with elevator shafts, John Taylor’s pocket watch stopping a bullet, Japanese bomber not being able to bomb the Hawaii temple, many temple garment protection stories and stories of people suffering deaths after mocking or killing men of God are all stories that are impossible to prove, embellished, or straight up lies.

I cringe whenever I am at church and I hear a 2nd or 3rd hand story that the person Cannot provide proof for, or try to insist that an un-proven myth or legend is reality. We had a discussion in elders quorum about the constitution. One person shared the story of the unknown patriot as if it was factual.

I think we as Saints (and Christians as a whole) are too believing of miracle stories. I probably swing in The opposite direction. I’m extremely doubtful of most of them unless there is some reliable records of it.

Edited July 29, 2021 by Fether

[Teancum]

10 hours ago, secondclasscitizen said:

Just goes to show even the devil can make someone feel the spirit. 

You received a lot of down votes from this but you are not wrong.  True believers struggle with the cognitive dissonance this causes.

[Teancum]

10 hours ago, JAHS said:

Wrong. There was no devil involved, they were just stories that taught doctrines that were confirmed by the Holy Ghost. 

So the HG confirms lies. Thank  you for demonstrating how useless it is to use feelings from the "spirit" as a way to find truth.

[smac97]

56 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Have you listened to any RFM?

Skimmed a bit.  It's quite a slog.  

[Teancum]

9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I can get the same thing from reading other myths.

Apparently since you believe the BoM, BoA and the claims by JS.  All myths.

[Teancum]

8 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Skimmed a bit.  It's quite a slog.  

So that is a no. Maybe it would be well not to pass judgment on his defense attorney skills until you listen to him?

Edited July 29, 2021 by Teancum

[mgy401]

15 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Not really. I'm pretty firmly in the anti-podcast camp.

I find the overwhelming majority of them to be tedious, boring, rambling affairs that are best enjoyed with the volume set to zero.

Sorry, not sorry.

 

Podcasts are a pleasant diversion when one is doing a mindless task (driving, for example); but they’re a terribly inefficient way of conveying information.  Given the choice, why on earth would one spend two hours listening to a presentation one could read in ten or twenty minutes?

[Vanguard]

3 minutes ago, Fether said:

I’m actually on your side with this. Fake miracle stories can do more harm than not knowing any. I had a friend in my mission whose testimony was built on many of these stories. One day, he found out his favorite one, The Bill Carpenter Conversion Story used a bunch of fake names and he couldn’t find proof of it actually happening. He then learned that other popular Mormon legends were just that, legends. Stories like the seagulls eating the crickets, temple being built with elevator shafts, John Taylor’s pocket watch stopping a bullet, Japanese bomber not being able to bomb the Hawaii temple, many temple garment protection stories and stories of people suffering deaths after mocking or killing men of God are all stories that are impossible to prove, embellished, or straight up lies.

I cringe whenever I am at church and I hear a 2nd or 3rd hand story that the person Cannot provide proof for, or try to insist that an un-proven myth or legend is reality. We had a discussion in elders quorum about the constitution. One person shared the story of the unknown patriot as if it was factual.

I think we as Saints (and Christians as a whole) are too believing of miracle stories. I probably swing in The opposite direction. I’m extremely doubtful of most of them unless there is some reliable records of it.

I very much agree with this. Seek to inspire me but please do so with stories that are true and even if they're not that miraculous. The Dunn situation is interesting though. While I find his fabrications to be distasteful, I am not blind to the fact that it probably prompted many members to want to do better and serve. I was one of them as I remember his sermons when I was a boy. It does sound strange though to believe something like, "I went and served others out of compassion and as a result of something Elder Dunn said but when I heard he made up his story I realized my service was predicated on a lie." That kind of thinking gets a chuckle from me as though the person could not have expanded their Christian sensibilities based on a story Dunn made up. The bottom line is don't base your testimony on these kinds of stories - it's too shallow whether they're true or not. Go and gain your testimony from communing with & worshipping your God and from diligent service to your fellowman.

As for President Nelson, his situation is sufficiently different. He probably recounted what he remembered and put words to what he felt in that moment. Was some of it an embellishment? I wouldn't be surprised in the least. But I can forgive him for that. ; ) I listened to the podcast. I found some of the details to be quite interesting but none of it prompted me to conclude the prophet is a liar. I believe that was one of the points they were trying to drive home. : (

[secondclasscitizen]

9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So the HG confirms lies. Thank  you for demonstrating how useless it is to use feelings from the "spirit" as a way to find truth.

Apparently he does. Not even one general authority with the massive amounts of discernment they supposedly have figured it out either. You don’t need to feel bad about it. Just think how some feel who bought the deception of mark Hoffman.

[smac97]

4 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So that is a no.

No, it's a "I've skimmed a bit."  

4 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Maybe it would be well not to pass judgment on his defense attorney skills until you listen to him?

What I have listened to does not impress.  Lots of smug, lots of ridicule, lots "You Go Girl!" backslapping between him and Bill Reel.  Not much in the way of substantive analysis.

And it really drags.  Oi.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[Vanguard]

9 minutes ago, smac97 said:

No, it's a "I've skimmed a bit."  

What I have listened to does not impress.  Lots of smug, lots of ridicule, lots "You Go Girl!" backslapping between him and Bill Reel.  Not much in the way of substantive analysis.

And it really drags.  Oi.  

Thanks,

-Smac

Yes, I thought the same thing. It's distasteful to me hearing others sarcastically ridiculing/lampooning the prophet when one of their points is to paint him a liar. I'm all for 'ribbing' even the prophet when it is good-natured but not in the service of casting character aspersions against him. : (

Edited July 29, 2021 by Vanguard

[Amulek]

30 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So the HG confirms lies.

I don't believe so.

 

[Amulek]

25 minutes ago, mgy401 said:

Podcasts are a pleasant diversion when one is doing a mindless task (driving, for example); but they’re a terribly inefficient way of conveying information.  Given the choice, why on earth would one spend two hours listening to a presentation one could read in ten or twenty minutes?

I've listened to the occasional good podcast, but it's like panning for gold.

 

[CV75]

On 7/28/2021 at 11:19 AM, Fair Dinkum said:

I believe this is a real threat to President Nelson and had hoped someone might want to tackle it. 

What is the threat, and what the worst that could happen?

[bOObOO]

16 hours ago, JAHS said:

I sure hope nobody checks on some of the stories I have embellished a little on.   They still illustrated the point I was making, just like the parables of Jesus, which He made up.
 

What!?!  Jesus made up stories?  Which ones?  The prodigal son?  The good Samaritan story?  All of that stuff he said in his sermon on a mountain?  Which stories?  And what makes you think he made them up?

If I can't trust Jesus to always tell the truth then who I am supposed to trust?  I consider your allegation to be outlandish and, well, hard to bear.

[Fair Dinkum]

For the record, I want to add, That I believe President Nelson to be a good, decent, well meaning, Christian man.  I applaud all of the steps he has taken to help heal the past racist doctrines of the church by reaching out to the NCAAP and forming a bond of commonality with them.  I also believe that his intentions come from a good place as seen through his particular worldview.

I do not believe that he intends to harm anyone but it is that same worldview that allows him to see his world only through the prism of faith that often does result in causing harm to others. 

I fear that the thoughts and dreams in his mind that he interprets as revelation, while often good, does also have an opposite effect when they cause harm and pain to many.

Any human being who views their own thoughts as communication from God coupled with the platform that is available to him as president of the church is a great power afforded to only a few individuals. It is a two way sword that gives him the power to do much good but also inflict great harm and pain on those who view him as God's spokesperson through many of the policies he implements.

 

[Fair Dinkum]

21 minutes ago, CV75 said:

What is the threat, and what the worst that could happen?

To his reputation

[Vanguard]

13 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

For the record, I want to add, That I believe President Nelson to be a good, decent, well meaning, Christian man.  I applaud all of the steps he has taken to help heal the past racist doctrines of the church by reaching out to the NCAAP and forming a bond of commonality with them.  I also believe that his intentions come from a good place as seen through his particular worldview.

I do not believe that he intends to harm anyone but it is that same worldview that allows him to see his world only through the prism of faith that often does result in causing harm to others. 

I fear that the thoughts and dreams in his mind that he interprets as revelation, while often good, does also have an opposite effect when they cause harm and pain to many.

Any human being who views their own thoughts as communication from God coupled with the platform that is available to him as president of the church is a great power afforded to only a few individuals. It is a two way sword that gives him the power to do much good but also inflict great harm and pain on those who view him as God's spokesperson through many of the policies he implements.

 

Welcome back from your extended sabbatical! ;o I can actually hang with this rendering. Indeed, it is a powerful mantle the prophet holds. I would ask all general leadership to continue being careful in how they characterize events in their life and especially when speaking from the pulpit of a worldwide church. Impressionable minds are listening. At the same time, I would ask the general membership not to become so pedantic as to suggest he is a liar because he has embellished (intentionally or not) an account from a half century ago about whether 'a woman started crying when an engine caught fire as they landed in a rural runway with four (or was it five?) cows looking on' kind of thing. ; )

Note: Remember also that just because others are hurt/pained from claimed revelation does not mean therefore said revelation was not true. Certainly we can agree that can't be the criteria. ; )

[smac97]

16 hours ago, ttribe said:

Your readings on these two items are incorrect. 

As to the first, the CAB report was prepared by the CAB summarizing the results of an FAA investigation, not self-reporting by SkyWest.

Could you elaborate on this?

There may have been a "Service Difficulty Report" generated about this (use this link and type in the airplane number - 74985 - as a search operator, then scroll down to the report dated 1977-01-20) :

Note here that the report was dated January 20, 1977, or more than two months after the incident. 

The "Date of Occurrence" field is left blank. 

The "Air Carrier Name" (presumably the name of the airline, SkyWest) is also blank.  

Let's look again at the CAB report:

Quote

Second incidence occurred Nov. 11, 1976 involving Piper PA 31 N74985. Pilot experienced rough engine on scheduled flight between Salt Lake City and St. George. 3 passengers on board. Engine was feathered and precautionary landing made at Delta, Utah, per instructions in company manual. Investigation revealed cylinder base studs sheered. As result of occurrence Sky West change maintenance procedures by checking torque studs at each 100 hour inspection. No damage to aircraft. No injuries to crew or passengers.

CAB Report: "No damage to aircraft."

Also CAB Report: "Investigation revealed cylinder base studs sheered."

SDR Report: "Extreme internal damage to eng{ine}."

16 hours ago, ttribe said:

As to the second, there is a distinction in the reporting of aviation incidents between the aircraft proper and the engines.  A damaged engine, by itself, would not be considered damage to the aircraft. 

Okay.  That sounds reasonable.  CFR, though.  How do you know this?

16 hours ago, ttribe said:

The CAB report makes clear that all damage in these incidents was confined to the engine.

I'm not sure the CAB report, comprised of a grand total of 78 words, was necessarily comprehensive and definitive.

Meanwhile, the SDR report is also lacking in some meaningful information and details.

Ah, the 70s.  

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited July 29, 2021 by smac97

[pogi]

23 hours ago, cinepro said:

As someone who understands (just a little) how memory works, I don't find these discoveries about the stories to be surprising or disturbing. I find them to be expected. In fact, I would be more surprised if objective investigation showed the memories to be absolutely accurate. That would be unexpected!

You may find the discussion around the Brian Williams situation (the NBC news anchor who had his career destroyed over an inaccurate memory) to be relevant:
 

Scientists explain how Brian Williams’ memory may have failed him

 

The science behind Brian Williams’s mortifying memory flub

Reposting this here for @Fair Dinkum to respond to.  I don’t see that he has responded to Cinepro’s  very valid point. 

What do you think?  A reasonable explanation without intentional deceit?  Is there anyway for you to discount this explanation?  Wouldn’t it require a leap of faith to suggest that there was intentional deceit?  

Relying on faith (from a secularist point of view) to discount faith (from a religious point of view) seems like rather weak ground to discredit a prophet on.

Edited July 29, 2021 by pogi

[Calm]

2 hours ago, mgy401 said:

Podcasts are a pleasant diversion when one is doing a mindless task (driving, for example);

No, they are not. They just make the time seem to go slower. 

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Apparently since you believe the BoM, BoA and the claims by JS.  All myths.

Some myths actually happened.

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

No, it's a "I've skimmed a bit."  

What I have listened to does not impress.  Lots of smug, lots of ridicule, lots "You Go Girl!" backslapping between him and Bill Reel.  Not much in the way of substantive analysis.

And it really drags.  Oi.  

Thanks,

-Smac

You are such an equivocating attorney.  So you have skimmed.  What does that mean?  And based on your skim you have concluded nothing substantive.  Pardon me if I now conclude you really don't spend much time viewing things that challenge your position.

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, Amulek said:

I don't believe so.

 

Others do.