New RFM Podcast--Dumbing Down Revelation

[consiglieri]

A new Radio Free Mormon Episode went up Sunday morning titled, "Dumbing Down Revelation."

http://www.mormondiscussionpodcast.org/ ... ent-222848

It deals specifically with the dumbing down of personal revelation LDS church leaders are willing to grant the individual members.

The argument is that the personal revelation allowed members has been made virtually meaningless by church leaders, who seem to want to hog it all for themselves.

Although they really don't receive any, either.

All the Best!

Consiglieri

[Zack Tacorin Dos]

Grazie amico mio!

Absolutely loves me some RFM. I now know what I'll be listening to on my commute tomorrow.

Ciao,
Zack

[blazerb]

This podcast made me think about Hugh Nibley. When I was a teenager, I discovered the talk ‘From Leaders to Managers: the Fatal Shift.” (https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/hugh-nib ... -managers/) In it he makes the point that the early church had to switch from encouraging spiritual gifts to a more bureaucratic spirituality. I don’t know that he was intending to criticize the changes that had been taking place in the church, and are largely complete today, but it reads that way when I look at it now. The problem with revelation is that it can’t be controlled by the elite. Nibley would certainly disagree with my take, but I see people receiving revelation to become polygamists or Catholic or Hindu. Our leaders had to switch from relying on revelation to give the rank-and-file membership a reason for staying faithful. Now they have to instruct us not to pray about anything that the prophet has not approved. We have to be warned about praying about topics that we have already supposedly received answers. We get a one-time opportunity to get an answer that the church is true. If we keep asking or seek answers beyond that, God will punish us by withdrawing his spirit.

At yesterday’s announcement, President Nelson made a comment about the need to “be square with Heavenly Father.” It is just assumed that doing exactly what the GA’s say will accomplish that. My own ability to reason morally is just negated by this type of talk. Like many here, I don’t have a lot of trust that the intermediaries between God and myself are really giving me God’s will. The promise of personal revelation was so important to me growing up. The rejection of it by the current rhetoric was a heavy item on my shelf.

[Hagoth]

President Oaks claims that one way to know whether it's revelation or the imposition of personal desires is that if we get an uncomfortable feeling it must be God's will? So, if President Oaks, being aware of his own prejudice against LGBT people, asks God if it's time to let gay people marry in the temple and he gets an uncomfortable feeling, that is revelation that we SHOULD let gay couples get temple marriages.

Another great piece of work, Consig!

[Zack Tacorin Dos]

Another great podcast!

I can only speculate on the motivation for "dumbing down" revelation, but it makes me wonder about the Influence Snufferite types and secular folks are having on the GAs. For the Sufferites I can see only one possibly efficacious strategy--"You can only receive confirmatory revelation." They could be trying to address the Snufferites head-on with their "only confirmatory revelation" approach.

On the other hand, if they're worried about the secular influence on how folks understand revelation, they seem to be sidestepping the issue. I feel for them on this one. I have tried to get apologists to address the demonstrable lack of reliability of revelation to get at what really is, was, or will be. The amateurs turn in circles with logically ineffective arguments. Those with a better understanding of the issue at best avoid the heart of the problem of Mormon revelation. So the Q15 has nothing rational to throw at the secularists regarding this prob.

The prob: Mormon revelation is indestinguishable from revelation that leads millions to beliefs that contradict Mormonism. It's also indistinguishable from the impressions this atheist, and many other secularist, get regarding things that contradict la Iglesias Mormón.

I was taught that a Mormon testimony was the most indelible and sure form of knowledge. Upon closer inspection, I find it useless for understanding reality. However, I find these impessions invaluable in developing meaning and purpose in life. I continue to have and appreciate beautiful "spiritual" experiences to this day.

Grazie Consigliere,
Zack

[RubinHighlander]

Just finished the podcast this morning; nice work! I appreciate the way you compare the original JS doctrines and teachings to the current admin. Although I don't believe in any of the JS dogma or current dogma anymore, I do find it an interesting topic. The IT comparison was also interesting.

As a TBM I never experienced anything metaphysical beyond strong emotional responses. I've learned to appreciate the power of confirmation bias in a large room of humans, all experiencing the same emotions. I think the most significant one I was on my mission when Neil A Maxwell came and talked to us and pronounced a holy apostolic blessing upon us; everyone was in tears. An area of cogdis was where to put these emotional experiences in light of the knowledge I gained that the church's truth claims were not true. However, since becoming a non believer I have since experience greater emotional metaphysical feelings, while alone out in the amazing wilderness areas of the western states.

[Emower]

I have a love/hate relationship with your podcasts Consig. I love the logic, the follow through on ideas, and the call-out that you do. I dont like the what seems to be frequent mischaracterization of what some of these guys said. I am with everyone who is tired of the double speak. I get it. And this is just my opinion, and perhaps how I take things. But sometimes you do legitimately have to look at what some of these guys are trying to say instead of what they say, and sometimes you need to not put words or meanings into places where they have no business.
What I reacted to was your statement that Elder Ballard said you cannot get a vision in response to prayer. He didn't say that. He said don't expect it, which is different, and what I consider to be a good admonition. I also think we should not expect visions in response to prayers. Is it possible, Sure. Elder Ballard said it was possible when he said it is not very common. He is right. It is not very common. Should you expect it? No. You will be disappointed every time. I stopped listening after that it seemed like you were willfully mischaracterizing what he said. And this is not the only time I have felt this way.
I dont mean to be antagonistic, just expressing why I dont get on the RFM bandwagon.

[redjay]

had been too long - good to see you back to work

[consiglieri]

But sometimes you do legitimately have to look at what some of these guys are trying to say instead of what they say, and sometimes you need to not put words or meanings into places where they have no business.
What I reacted to was your statement that Elder Ballard said you cannot get a vision in response to prayer. He didn't say that. He said don't expect it, which is different, and what I consider to be a good admonition.

Thanks so much for your post, and your kind words!

I take your comments seriously, Emower, and went back to listen to that podcast.

It is important to me to try to be as accurate and precise as possible. That is what I strive for. Sometimes I fall short.

I do not think this is one of those times.

I played the entire quote from Elder Ballard, including his final words that "those are very unusual" although I said "rare" a few times when recapitulating, but the meaning is the same.

There may have been one or two times when I was repeating what he said without putting in that (to me meaningless) caveat at the end, but in context, I believe I was completely fair in not quoting Elder Ballard out of context, and in giving meaning to his words.

You say that sometimes we need "to look at what some of these guys are trying to say instead of what they say."

This raises certain problems. First is how we can ascertain what it is they are trying to say when it is different from what they are actually saying.

In a sense, though, I did try to look at what Elder Ballard was trying to say, which is that he doesn't receive any visions or hear the voice of God and so he expects nobody else will, either.

Now, you and I may interpret what he said differently, and that is all well and good. You may be right. I may be right. Or we may both be wrong together.

But I just want to put it out there that, at least in this case, I do feel I was fair to Elder Ballard in quoting him correctly and, where I was interpreting what it was he was saying, I felt I made it clear that I was interpreting what he was saying; not that it was what he actually said.

I really do appreciate your comments and hope you will continue to listen.

There is always room for one more on the Radio Free Mormon Bandwagon!

All the Best!

--Consiglieri