Mormon WikiLeaks (MormonLeaks)

[creekster]

I think God allowing a predator to be called by one of His prophet, seers, and revalators is a different conversation then the one about him allowing bad things to happen to children.

Why is it different? You think God should never let callings be wrong or bad? Or just callings made by the first presidency? Is it ok for 70s to et it wrong? Ok for SPs to get it wrong? Or must everyone get it right every time to satisfy you? How predictive must they be? And about what offenses? Which ones must always be predicted accurately? Should God cause a veil of sterility to descend over endowed members who would end up being abusive parents? It is very easy to sit here, look at this Bishop case, and take potshots at everyone and the process. But life is short, nasty and brutish for everybody and it always has been. God has never intended to rescue us from that until after we are dead.

[falafel]

I think God allowing a predator to be called by one of His prophet, seers, and revalators is a different conversation then the one about him allowing bad things to happen to children.

God allows people to exercise their agency that is part of the plan and why bad things happen to his children. That is a different conversation than God not activating an Apostle's superpower when he is making a large calling. Is the argument that the Apostle used his agency to ignore his superpower?

Its not any different. I know you want it to be different, but its just not. You are asking for perfection, in one form or another, and that is not what God made us to be and not what he expects of us.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I agree. However, I find it weird that you would call the spirit of discernment a special superpower. Do we as a church no longer believe in spiritual gifts?

Fine, call it whatever you like. That doesn't change my point at all.

Yes, we still believe in spiritual gifts. I don't think we ever believed that those gifts are perfectly executed, or that we can predict the mind and will of God.

[MartyFunkhouser]

Its not any different. I know you want it to be different, but its just not. You are asking for perfection, in one form or another, and that is not what God made us to be and not what he expects of us.

I'm not asking for perfection. I'm making a distinction that I do think is significant.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Dude, you asked one of the most problematic question in Judeo-Christian theology. What do you mean by a normal conversation? I can have it at whatever level you want. I just assume that you're as intelligent as you were the time we had dinner together and can handle what I put up on here.

Can you answer the question without trotting out all of the academic windbaggery?

And don't imply that someone is not intelligent if they prefer things explained in more simple and direct language.

[smokymountainrain]

I'm not asking for perfection. I'm making a distinction that I do think is significant.

seems like you are, in fact, expecting perfection when they are in the business of extending callings.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Against my better judgement...

I was asked to sustain that Hinckley had the ability to receive revelation from God about Bishop, his abilities and deficiencies and past choices. (The prophet/seer part would seem to say he could also have the ability to know what would happen as Nephi was shown the beginning to the end and all detail in between, without that changing anyone’s agency, but I’ll accept your belief that prophesy or acting as a seer requires infallibility of the person sustained to those callings as well as that it would’ve limited Bishop’s agency.)

Does saying that Hinckley could’ve asked the Lord to reveal to him if the grey area of Bishop’s past might disqualify him from service require a belief of infallibility? Do we not believe that the 1P and Q12 have this spiritual gift for items such as callings or only certain callings? What things are they able to see trough the grey on?

Am I allowed to be a TR holder who says that I believe they have this power except for when they don’t? Because, it has always been a yes or no belief question to me in the interview. If we believe they only have it at certain times, are we as members allowed to know what times this power is used and what times it isn’t?

I’m truly happy that you and others don’t find any incongruity in this event. Sadly, I do. Cardiac ealrlier said stop believing in mystical powers, Lebowski and Creek seem to be hedging between don’t believe in mystical powers all the time just sometimes. I love the church, it makes me happy to be a member and attend. Am I asked to sacrifice all I have to God leading all decisions, or a group that is very good people doing their absolute best? Because I’m in, but I’d like to know which one I belong to.

HFN, do you believe that prophets are infallible? Yes or no.

[tooblue]

For those who are outraged, can I ask what is the appropriate level of risk the church, or for that matter any organization, can assume when allowing or calling people to positions of authority? Not even taking into account the notion of discernment, where is the threshold?

Are you saying that any person, who can be perceived as a risk, should never be permitted to be in a position of authority over vulnerable groups? For example, as a comparator, are you saying anyone who was abused as a child can never be permitted to work with children? There are studies to potentially back up such actions:

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/24/s...-remedies.html

Studies also now indicate that about one-third of people who are abused in childhood will become abusers themselves.

Is that how far your ideas about who can and who cannot be called should go?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Here she is:

https://www.heraldextra.com/news/loc...ntent=headline

Press conference today.

[Moliere]

So then why are you suggesting that God should have stopped Bishop from becoming MTC President? Are you a Mormon deist who is dissatisfied with deism?

I’m trying to understand the issue from an orthodox Mormon as it fits into the belief system I used to have. Sorry for trying. My own belief is that GBH was trying to fill a calling vacancy and got Bishop to fill it and probably didn’t know about the past issues because he’s human with no more access to the divine than me, which is very little. Which then led to the sexual abuse. That’s my belief and I’m glad the church is changing policies and hope the church pays a lot of cash if the allegations turn out to be true.

I don't think he is calling the Power of Discernment a superpower. I think he is saying that what you are demanding, an instant, constant and always accurate discernment, would be a superpower that no one has ever claimed to have nor has God ever promised, per se.

My mission president claimed he had that power. He went as far as telling us exactly how many people in each zone had the spirit with them. Danimal could corroborate it if he ever visited this place again.

[smokymountainrain]

My mission president claimed he had that power. He went as far as telling us exactly how many people in each zone had the spirit with them. Danimal could corroborate it if he ever visited this place again.

wow there are some batshit crazy mission presidents out there.

[creekster]

I'm not asking for perfection. I'm making a distinction that I do think is significant.

Then what is your distinction? I asked you to flesh it out above and you, so far, have not responded. If you think this distinction you are drawing makes any sense, then delineate its scope and limits. I don't think you can, really.

[tooblue]

Can you answer the question without trotting out all of the academic windbaggery?

And don't imply that someone is not intelligent if they prefer things explained in more simple and direct language.

His purpose is to obfuscate, precisely because "academic language" is designed to do the opposite; to provide clarity.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I’m trying to understand the issue from an orthodox Mormon as it fits into the belief system I used to have. Sorry for trying. My own belief is that GBH was trying to fill a calling vacancy and got Bishop to fill it and probably didn’t know about the past issues because he’s human with no more access to the divine than me, which is very little. Which then led to the sexual abuse. That’s my belief and I’m glad the church is changing policies and hope the church pays a lot of cash if the allegations turn out to be true.

My mission president claimed he had that power. He went as far as telling us exactly how many people in each zone had the spirit with them. Danimal could corroborate it if he ever visited this place again.

Oh, no you don't. This is what you said:

Yep. My issue isn’t that I think he was predestined to commit sexual assault. It’s that he had done it before or had confessed to church leaders about serious sexual issues and they still put him into a calling that required daily interaction with vulnerable young adults.


Even f he hadn’t previously confessed before the calling, I still think church leaders should have some inkling through the spirit of discernment that he shouldn’t have been called to that calling. Notice I’m not saying hutch leaders should be fortune tellers or see the future, but should have some indication of past sins or issues.

EDIT: And by the way, you are guilty of the Appeal to Orthomo fallacy.

[creekster]

My mission president claimed he had that power. He went as far as telling us exactly how many people in each zone had the spirit with them. Danimal could corroborate it if he ever visited this place again.

Do you believe that now? Did you even believe it then? Moreover, I bet that is not exactly what he said, but how you took it at the time. Although SMR is right, there are some crazy Mission Presidents out there.