and what the real message is...the leaders of the LDS church get to say whatever they want truthful or not and the members cannot criticize...just do what you are told. the one true doctrine that has never changed is members are to do what they are told.
I gave the statement from "The Mormons" doc back in 2007 where Elder Oaks said members should not criticize church leaders even when they are wrong. I asked class members why the church considers this a valid statement from Elder Oaks. It was like I had asked directions to Mars.
Not to engage the world of scholarship with learning?!? LOL! No wonder so many of us are questioning the church then. With actual revelation (again, if it actually occurs), engaging with the world and SHOWING it its own errors is THE THING God would do, since we are told he so loved the world he gave His only Begotten Son.
Part of the problems come from past GAs who have no use for history. Some have stated the church should not even have a history department. They want the feel good church you get from General Conference. That idea of a church does not really make room for anything controversial from history or doctrine. It would challenge member beliefs and lead to declining membership. Since the church is no longer seeing the growth it had in the past, that would be a logical conclusion.
"deliberately self-consciously and methodically brought us into better engagement with our history"...??? is this code for members found out what was being taught wasn't true so the leaders then had to admit it ?
"apostles aren't historians and that isn't their primary responsibility",,,,,but they do PROCLAIM they speak for God right? They couldn't find out the truth about the history while they are communicating with God? They do know when they are deceiving/lying and when they are telling the truth right? Especially as to what missionaries are told to keep quiet about when trying to get people to join the LDS church.
@@GospelTangents But I see things as Kat Smith appears to Gospel Tangents... the leadership is awfully hard to trust these days with all their sneaky and weird exchanges and changes concerning what history happened, and what actual doctrine is, etc.
I would also add there is a first presidency vault where key documents were stored in the past. That would mean any historian that wanted to get answers to some topics could not find material in church general archives.
But if Ballard admits the leaders have not done a good job educating the youth, then WHY have the leaders continued doing almost nothing about it for years since then?! I am just not impressed that there is actual revelation going on anymore, if it ever did.
I've noticed that it can depend on one's presentation of the hard questions. Some people are better than others at it. For me, it's easier to avoid asking questions at Church, but I know some people can do it much better than me.
@@GospelTangents I think the topic also needs to address the issue of where do members ask hard questions? If a member goes to the stake or bishopric they might not even have the answers. I would recommend each stake has a person in such a calling where members can get answers to difficult questions.
@@scottbrandon6244 I think many go to the bloggernacle. It is a much safer space to ask (and answer) difficult questions. It's too bad the Church doesn't have a place like this, but that opens up opportunities for others.
It depends what you mean about hard questions. Some may be admissible by academics such as issues on history or older doctrine. However members are not to criticize current GAs publicly like across the pulpit or on some social media. If Terryl is that confident, I would like him to ask why none of the 15 knew ahead of time about the pandemic.
and what the real message is...the leaders of the LDS church get to say whatever they want truthful or not and the members cannot criticize...just do what you are told. the one true doctrine that has never changed is members are to do what they are told.
I gave the statement from "The Mormons" doc back in 2007 where Elder Oaks said members should not criticize church leaders even when they are wrong. I asked class members why the church considers this a valid statement from Elder Oaks. It was like I had asked directions to Mars.
I don't have 'Heroes' but if I did, it would be a Faithful Free Thinker like Gene.
Gene had the high road with both knowledge and action. I would have not been graceful to Bruce had he tried to treat me that heinous way.
Terryl Givens also holds a research chair position in Mormon Studies.
Not to engage the world of scholarship with learning?!? LOL! No wonder so many of us are questioning the church then. With actual revelation (again, if it actually occurs), engaging with the world and SHOWING it its own errors is THE THING God would do, since we are told he so loved the world he gave His only Begotten Son.
Part of the problems come from past GAs who have no use for history. Some have stated the church should not even have a history department. They want the feel good church you get from General Conference. That idea of a church does not really make room for anything controversial from history or doctrine. It would challenge member beliefs and lead to declining membership. Since the church is no longer seeing the growth it had in the past, that would be a logical conclusion.
"deliberately self-consciously and methodically brought us into better engagement with our history"...??? is this code for members found out what was being taught wasn't true so the leaders then had to admit it ?
I thought the same. Would the Church have moved into better engagement had the internet not been invented?
"apostles aren't historians and that isn't their primary responsibility",,,,,but they do PROCLAIM they speak for God right? They couldn't find out the truth about the history while they are communicating with God? They do know when they are deceiving/lying and when they are telling the truth right? Especially as to what missionaries are told to keep quiet about when trying to get people to join the LDS church.
my, my you're quite salty.
@@GospelTangents But I see things as Kat Smith appears to Gospel Tangents... the leadership is awfully hard to trust these days with all their sneaky and weird exchanges and changes concerning what history happened, and what actual doctrine is, etc.
I would also add there is a first presidency vault where key documents were stored in the past. That would mean any historian that wanted to get answers to some topics could not find material in church general archives.
But if Ballard admits the leaders have not done a good job educating the youth, then WHY have the leaders continued doing almost nothing about it for years since then?! I am just not impressed that there is actual revelation going on anymore, if it ever did.
Ballard is the one making changes. Sure they are slower than you or I would like, but he is not the one dragging his feet
It is absolutely not OK to ask hard questions. We are labeled as apostate and ostracized.
I've noticed that it can depend on one's presentation of the hard questions. Some people are better than others at it. For me, it's easier to avoid asking questions at Church, but I know some people can do it much better than me.
@@GospelTangents I think the topic also needs to address the issue of where do members ask hard questions? If a member goes to the stake or bishopric they might not even have the answers. I would recommend each stake has a person in such a calling where members can get answers to difficult questions.
We are also labelled weird for wanting to ask those questions. That is because there is no where to ask those questions.
@@scottbrandon6244 I think many go to the bloggernacle. It is a much safer space to ask (and answer) difficult questions. It's too bad the Church doesn't have a place like this, but that opens up opportunities for others.
It depends what you mean about hard questions. Some may be admissible by academics such as issues on history or older doctrine. However members are not to criticize current GAs publicly like across the pulpit or on some social media. If Terryl is that confident, I would like him to ask why none of the 15 knew ahead of time about the pandemic.