beastie wrote:I'm not sure I understand what you mean, Jersey Girl - justify them to whom?
To those segments of the LDS population who claim they were lying.
? 4 DCP: Will there be changes to the lesson manuals?
-
_Jersey Girl
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 34407
- Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am
-
_Some Schmo
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 15602
- Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:59 pm
Daniel Peterson wrote: They haven't been taught all of the history -- which would, in any case, be impossible to do even if we put every member through a Ph.D. program in Mormon history -- but what they have been taught is true.
This isn't even "technically" true. It is a bold-faced lie.
And even if what you were proposing was true (ie the church only tells the favorable, or "faith promoting" truths), that would still be a form of deception. Omission of key facts does not contribute to an accurate understanding. Omitting key facts is how lawyers build cases and get guilty people off "on a technicality" for instance.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
-
_guy sajer
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1372
- Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:16 am
Some Schmo wrote:Daniel Peterson wrote: They haven't been taught all of the history -- which would, in any case, be impossible to do even if we put every member through a Ph.D. program in Mormon history -- but what they have been taught is true.
This isn't even "technically" true. It is a bold-faced lie.
And even if what you were proposing was true (ie the church only tells the favorable, or "faith promoting" truths), that would still be a form of deception. Omission of key facts does not contribute to an accurate understanding. Omitting key facts is how lawyers build cases and get guilty people off "on a technicality" for instance.
One case in point. Some years ago, The Friend published an article in which a GA had discussion with some noted figure in which the GA argued that liars tend to change their story, which makes Joseph Smith' account of the First Vision so credible in that he never changed his story. (We discussed this in a thread some time ago, and Froggie provided a link to the article.)
I seriously doubt that the correlation committee was deprived of the fact that Joseph Smith did in fact change his story, and he did so multiple times.
This was a bold-faced lie told to our vulnerable and trusting children. But, hey, that's ok; after all, if we don't hold Joseph Smith accountable for telling the truth, why hold faceless Church bureaucrats accountable for telling the truth? (It still doesn't explain, however, why the Church holds the rank and file accountable for telling the truth.)
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."