Elders Oaks, Ballard, and the Sixteen Questions

[_moksha]

There was an event on November 19th in which Elders Oaks and Ballard met with select participants from the Church young single adults, to answer a series of questions about the Church in order to allay doubts and reestablish that it is all true. 4000 questions were submitted and these two apostles along with their helpers selected 16 questions to answer.

Scott Lloyd has a story about it that says the Church never hid its history or taught alternate facts.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865693063/Elder-Oaks-and-Ballard-answer-tough-questions-in-Face-to-Face-broadcast.html

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/69884-elder-oaks-and-elder-ballard-face-to-face-event-dealing-with-doubts/

Is there complete agreement with these sixteen answers? Was any pertinent evidence missed?

[_I have a question]

What advice/guidance would you give for answering tough questions about Church history when we are asked about them by someone who is struggling with their faith?

“I think the first thing is to distinguish between questions and doubts,” Elder Oaks said. “Some people merge those as if they were the same.”

Questions are a way to increase knowledge and understanding and are to be encouraged, while doubt, according to a dictionary definition, is accompanied by distrust, a rejection of something, he explained. “That’s the kind of thing that the scriptures have condemned” as pertaining to gospel truths, he added.

Elder Ballard spoke of criticisms to the effect that the Church has hidden the fact that there is more than one rendition of Joseph Smith’s First Vision.

“The facts are we don’t study; we don’t go back and search what has been said on the subject. For example, Dr. James B. Allen of BYU in 1970 produced an article in the Church magazines explaining all about the different versions of the First Vision.”

The best example Ballard could give in defence of the Church being accused of lacking transparency when it comes to informing members of the facts surrounding First Vision stories is an article that’s nearly 50 years old? Interesting, Allen wrote this article about the First Vision, casting doubt questioning the validity of Josephs claims of persecution due to the First Vision. Perhaps Ballard should have studied more...

He added, “We would have to say, as two apostles who have covered the world and know the history of the Church and know the integrity of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve from the beginning, there has been no attempt on the part of the Church leaders to try to hide anything from anybody.”

Mormon Leaks begs to differ. In fact, this statement is so demonstrably untrue that it is beyond belief that he even made it. Think as an example of the official Church statements made in and around Prop 8 about it’s lack of direct involvement versus the uncovered evidence of its direct involvement.

Thanks to the Joseph Smith Papers project, “we’re learning more about the Prophet Joseph; it’s wonderful we are,” Elder Ballard said. “Just trust us, wherever you are in the world, and you share this message with anyone else who raises the question about the Church not being transparent. We’re as transparent as we know how to be in telling the truth. We have to do that; that’s the Lord’s way.”

So why the need for the essays? Why is Mormon leaks a thing? Why was the leaking of the November Policy such a PR disaster? Where can I find the published financial records of the Church? Etc, Etc.

——————————————-

As for Scott Lloyd, he still believes popcorn pops on apricot trees around spring time...

[Guest]

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

An article in the SL Tribune written by the guys behind mormonleaks:

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentar ... must-stop/

The culture of mendacity and gaslighting needs to die a quick death. It is our plea to those that are in power to take a step back and engage in some self-reflection. Ask yourselves if you could do a better job with the messaging and then take the steps necessary to accept responsibility and correct the issues. To the average Mormon who may read this, it is our plea to you to take a step back from all of this and ask yourself, have I ever been misled through a church source? If so, it does not mean you must abandon the faith. But demand accountability from your leaders and stop demonizing those that have chosen to move on because of the deceptions.

The comment section is worth reading, by the way.

- Doc

[_Jesse Pinkman]

An article in the SL Tribune written by the guys behind mormonleaks:

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentar ... must-stop/

The culture of mendacity and gaslighting needs to die a quick death. It is our plea to those that are in power to take a step back and engage in some self-reflection. Ask yourselves if you could do a better job with the messaging and then take the steps necessary to accept responsibility and correct the issues. To the average Mormon who may read this, it is our plea to you to take a step back from all of this and ask yourself, have I ever been misled through a church source? If so, it does not mean you must abandon the faith. But demand accountability from your leaders and stop demonizing those that have chosen to move on because of the deceptions.

The comment section is worth reading, by the way.

- Doc

I completely agree with this quote. Thanks for sharing it, Doc.

[_Shulem]

RFM had a good response.

http://www.mormondiscussionpodcast.org/ ... ws-church/

Listening to it and loving it.

Are the different accounts of the first vision published on lds.org?

link please.

[_mentalgymnast]

Are the different accounts of the first vision published on LDS.org?

link please.

https://www.lds.org/topics/first-vision ... s?lang=eng

Regards,
MG

[_moksha]

Consiglieri was brilliant in that podcast. If only Elders Ballard and Oaks had confined themselves to short but honest answers or else lead the Young Single Adults in some camp songs, there would not be a so much effective ammunition in Consiglieri's assault Howitzer.

That proposed method of inoculating the Chapel Mormons is based on being totally honest about what is needed. The apologetic approach of continually pulling "fast ones" will ultimately sink this well-meaning inoculation effort.

[_Dr Exiled]

The complete history makes the church into complete nonsense. It's only "true" if the delusional side is told. So, I don't know what apologists or leaders can do other than gaslight, deny the gaslighting, gaslight again, etc. and mix in fluffy, sugary history that is good to the taste but highly misleading.

[Guest]