- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Wondering what your opinion is on this. Clearly this is talking about many of the concerns we have….but it is a pretty standard debate tactic to take a credible concerns and then list it along aside a bunch of nutty ones to make the concern seem less credible. Thats what this feels like….which was a very disappointing thing for me to hear from Uchtdorf…I am hoping like Rebecca Said that this was because Boyd was staring over his shoulder as this sounds so much like something he would say. It certainly does not give me the feeling that the church is going to come clean anytime soon.
JohnH
For an example, President Uchtdorf said that Satan has caused many members of the Church to stumble when they discover information about the Church that seems to contradict what they had previously learned.“If you experience such a moment, remember that in this age of information there are many who create doubt about anything and everything, at any time and every place,” he said. “You will find even those who still claim they have evidence that the earth is flat, that the moon is a hologram, and that certain movie stars are really aliens from another planet.”
President Uchtdorf also reminded listeners that just because something is printed on paper, appears on the Internet, is frequently repeated, or has a powerful group of followers does not make it true.
“Sometimes untrue claims or information are presented in such a way that appear quite credible,” he said. “However, when you are confronted with information that is in conflict with the revealed word of God, remember that the blind men in the parable of the elephant would never be able to accurately describe the full truth.”
Further, he noted, “We simply do not know all things—we can’t see everything. What may seem contradictory now may be perfectly understandable as we search for and receive more trustworthy information. Because we see through a glass darkly, we have to trust the Lord, who sees all things clearly.”
Although the world is full of confusion, eventually all questions will be answered and all doubts will be replaced with certainty because of the one complete, correct, and incorruptible truth—an infinitely wise and all-knowing Heavenly Father.
“Now, what is this truth?” he asked. “It is His gospel. It is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ—He is the way, the truth, and the life.”
Probably neither, given everything Pres. Uchtdorf has said since he was called as an apostle. Seriously, I would say it is neither obfuscation nor calling us out. Remember, quote mining and interpreting out of context also are standard debate tactics. Sincere questions:
Is there anything in what he said that is factually incorrect? Are there multiple possible meanings and/or messages that could be taken from what he said – or is this the only possible interpretation?
I think you know how I would answer those questions, and I think the commentary says as much, if not more, about the commentator as about Pres. Uchtdorf.
Sincere request:
Please disclose the source of the commentary on the talk. It’s standard procedure in group discussions, and it’s important to understand the perspective of the person making the interpretation. Just as an example,
and not making any kind of charge in saying this, if we didn’t require such disclosure, people could get away with circumventing our rule about linking to blatantly anti-Mormon sites simply by quoting from them without including links. Sincere point:
Pres. Uchtdorf has said over and over and over again things that clarify what he probably meant in what is quoted in the post. Those multiple statements are missing from this summary – and things are claimed about what he meant that aren’t in the words he said. As a general rule, I am very wary of commentary about what someone has said that make the leaps in this summary and reach conclusions that aren’t in harmony with so many other things the person in question has said, especially when I’m not told anything about the person writing the summary.
Final observation:
I didn’t get those messages from the totality of the talk, and I don’t like disparaging one person (Elder Packer) in the way he was disparaged in this summary. He is FAR more complicated than such a caricature portrays. It’s not fair, and you (and everyone else in this forum) would scream in protest if it was done to you. I know for a fact that people here would go ballistic if someone essentially called them and their words the result of someone else looking over their shoulder. If we don’t want others to do it to us, we shouldn’t be doing it to them.
I don’t think this was calling out the person struggling, I think this was a hope to convince the believer that there was no good to be had outside the authorised sources. The characterisation, even mocking of online information made him seem a little at a stretch. Everyone knows the ‘celeb alien loons’ are in the minority, as are some of the more spurious messages about the church. On the other hand, I could go to wikipedia and spend a whole day reading very difficult information about the church. The brethren persist in pretending there’s nothing to see but groundless slander. I’ve never even heard an official reference to fairmormon.org, even though that’s one of the only pro-LDS sites available to answer stuff that kids might hear at school or accidentally find while googling for a talk/lesson.
Ray, I watched the whole talk and this part felt strangely out of kilter to the start and end.
I agree that it’s unfair to point at Elder Packer. He gets an unfair bad rap from the other NOM/ex-mo boards.
For what’s it’s worth, there were some good ‘quotes’ to keep on file if nothing else. Especially ‘seek truth wherever it may be’ (paraphrased?).
He also didn’t use the phrase ‘the church is true.’ He said the gospel of Jesus Christ is true. The gospel of Christ (love God, love each other etc) is a universal truth. I’m ok with that part.
This is a church news article about his recent CES talk, (the comments/summary are from the newsroom): This article has quite a different focus to the earlier one posted here:
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/president-uchtdorf-ces-truth-understanding-others The full talk is here, but no transcript I can find yet:
http://www.lds.org/broadcasts/watch/ces-devotionals/2013/01?lang=eng Sorry..I was going to post the link then forgot. I apologize for being mean to elder packer.
I grabbed a whole section to not quote pick. The article link was on the front page of lds.org…figures it was safe to assume it is church approved.
http://www.lds.org/church/news/president-uchtdorf-encourages-young-adults-to-discover-truth?lang=eng I love pres uchtdorfs talks. I agree this part seemed out of spirit with the rest…and this is pretty obviously putting church history questioned in the same boat as alien watchers.
So I do think the writer of this church approved Sunday did quote picking.. I note they left out the Brigham young quote about not just believing the leaders.
It seems the church sits not transcribe the devotionals as the others don’t have transcripts either.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2
Thanks for the links, john. Sorry my last post was so illegible. Dumb phone auto correct is always wrong johnh wrote:“Now, what is this truth?” he asked. “It is His gospel. It is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ—He is the way, the truth, and the life.”
I think this is the most important piece of the quote above. While there may be debates, blog posts, investigations, etc. surrounding the founding of the church, its early leaders, its current leaders, etc., there is one pure, honest, unsullied truth – that Jesus is the Christ. And that’s a position that is remarkably similar to my own: I don’t know all there is to know about JS, some of the things I’ve read make me uneasy; there are lots of things about the Church that bother me. However, I have a witness of the truth that Jesus is the Christ. The church is where I go to learn about Christ, so I can put up with a bunch of ancillary questions so long as that truth is at the core.
Just my $.02.
I really loved this talk. I apologize for the reference to President Packer (since it was I that originally said it) I was using him as an example of someone who I think to be in authority and wanting a very traditional interpretation and people walking a very narrow line. It was lazy and unkind. In all I think that this portion of his talk, read alone, is not indicative of the message or the spirit of his talk as a whole. That he was talking about the need to find truth and the difficulties of doing so. That each individual is on their own journey and starting from their own place and we will never all have all of the truth. Because of that, many people will have two totally different viewpoints, with nothing in common, and both have a portion of truth.
I think this portion of the talk was meant to be a counterbalance, to say that just because truth is this difficult and complicated thing, doesn’t mean that everything is true, and we need to be careful on our journey of finding truth.
Here’s a personal experience a friend of mine had with Pres. Packer. Several apostles were visiting my friend’s stake in another country. My friend was one of the local leaders hosting the visit. A different local leader asked an administrative / policy question, and one of the more junior apostles (junior to Packer, but well known to all of us – I won’t say which one) quickly gave an answer. Pres. Packer stopped him and said to hold on, that they (the apostles) need to be very thoughtful when answering these types of questions because local leaders will often take a stray comment that didn’t have that much thought in it and turn it into a rigid rule, and it was important to realize that their stray comments could have that much influence. My friend who was there took it as Pres. Packer having some humility and encouraging more flexibility among the apostles, not being the rigid hardliner he is sometimes seen to be, especially in online conversations. In reading this article summarizing the talk ( https://www.lds.org/church/news/preside … h?lang=eng), it seems like a different talk.All the quotes in the context in which they are given seem to mean – The “plan of salvation” is the unchanging and eternal truth. People should seek after truth and if they do it with the help of the HG they will find it in “the plan.” Belief is not the same thing as truth. If your belief is not based upon truth, you should be prepared to modify your beliefs to better stand upon truth. For those that have accepted “the plan” they stand upon truth. Even if not everything makes sense just yet don’t worry about it because it will some day. Contradictory evidence is put forward by Satan to confuse you.
So back to the original talk that Pres. Uchtdorf gave. If we interpret everything in the talk through the lens of the TBM paragraph in the middle then we get a very different meaning. OTOH, if we look at the talk from a more middle way perspective, then this paragraph is out of place.
I suppose that taken as a whole this talk is just more of the same. It is good to learn and get an education and be respectful of other’s opinions – as long as those things do not contradict or hinder our testimony. The blind men describing the elephant each have a different perspective that adds to our understanding, but none of these perspectives can hold a candle to the divinely revealed picture of the elephant.
A little bit of a tangent – President Packer does seem to get called out negatively and frequently by feminists, some “middle-wayers”, and even church musicians. I have a middle way friend who knows President Packer well and thinks very highly of him. I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt. Pres. Packer’s statements about sexuality tend to overshadow SO many middle of the road and even progressive statements on lots of other topics over the years. What is surprising for lots of people in the President Uchtdorf quote is that he is SO aware of allowing honest differences in just about everything he says that it jars to hear something that doesn’t seem that way from him.
I see both examples as evidence that neither of them is a caricature – that both of them are walking their own path – and that trying to put them on any kind of a pedestal is harmful to who each of them really is.
It’s instructive that our natural tendency toward Pres. Uchtdorf is, at the core, no different than more conservative members’ tendency toward Joseph Smith. We just tend to be OK with our own caricaturing because we like them more than we like others’ caricaturing – and we forget too easily that President Uchtdorf hasn’t changed one bit as a result of this talk from before he gave it.
The issue isn’t him; it’s our expectations of him and our interpretations of what we are afraid he might have meant. In this case, the issue is us.
Well said Ray. I must admit that it was President Packer who gave me permission (through his talks…not directly) to say no to callings I deemed too burdensome. Still resent his approach to sexuality
:thumbdown: as it has provided negative impact on me directly. I think we do need to work harder on being forgiving. Though it is hard to appreciate the guy who kicked you in the shins just because he gave your friends a cookie.
The very same people who are good sometimes are the very same people who are bad sometimes. Now where have I read that before?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.