Comments on: The new useless statement on church doctrine http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/ Truth Will Prevail Thu, 24 May 2012 19:37:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: mlu http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223591 mlu Wed, 09 May 2007 06:15:51 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223591 Ardis, I hope you didn't think I was dissing you. I wasn't. The thread just reminded me of how often, reading philosophy, I've been made to laugh at how sure those guys sometimes seem that the right answer must be one of the ones they've imagined, when it seems to me there are billions and billions of possibilities that they didn't and couldn't even consider. . . Just musing. . . The basic structure of my paragraph above is either/or. . .logic is woefully inadequate to the complexity of reality. Ardis,

I hope you didn’t think I was dissing you. I wasn’t. The thread just reminded me of how often, reading philosophy, I’ve been made to laugh at how sure those guys sometimes seem that the right answer must be one of the ones they’ve imagined, when it seems to me there are billions and billions of possibilities that they didn’t and couldn’t even consider. . .

Just musing. . .

The basic structure of my paragraph above is either/or. . .logic is woefully inadequate to the complexity of reality.

]]> By: annegb http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223586 annegb Wed, 09 May 2007 04:19:12 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223586 Mormon Stories has a podcast (I think that's what it's called) of a talk Robert Millett gave on how to talk to people about the church. I thought it was awesome. I especially like his comment that we don't have to answer everyone's questions, we can't answer their questions, and we all have questions that will probably never be answered. He also spoke highly of a big cheese who always directed the questioner back to The First Vision in a friendly manner. Mormon Stories has a podcast (I think that’s what it’s called) of a talk Robert Millett gave on how to talk to people about the church. I thought it was awesome. I especially like his comment that we don’t have to answer everyone’s questions, we can’t answer their questions, and we all have questions that will probably never be answered.

He also spoke highly of a big cheese who always directed the questioner back to The First Vision in a friendly manner.

]]> By: DavidW http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223430 DavidW Mon, 07 May 2007 01:56:28 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223430 “\'This is why the world needs more legal analogies…\' Or more lawyers… \" Oh yes, if there\'s one things this world needs it\'s more lawyers. That would fix just about everything. “\’This is why the world needs more legal analogies…\’

Or more lawyers… \”

Oh yes, if there\’s one things this world needs it\’s more lawyers. That would fix
just about everything.

]]> By: Wacky Hermit http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223425 Wacky Hermit Sun, 06 May 2007 22:30:46 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223425 The barber of Seville shaves every man of Seville who does not shave himself. Who shaves the barber of Seville? The best piece of advice a young mother can be given is to not take anyone's advice, including this piece, unless it feels right to her. And yet, despite these paradoxes, people continue to raise children and be shaved. Doctrinal? Who cares if this announcement is doctrine? Certainly not the kind of journalists who would fall for the erroneous thinking that is described in this press release. The barber of Seville shaves every man of Seville who does not shave himself. Who shaves the barber of Seville?

The best piece of advice a young mother can be given is to not take anyone’s advice, including this piece, unless it feels right to her.

And yet, despite these paradoxes, people continue to raise children and be shaved.

Doctrinal? Who cares if this announcement is doctrine? Certainly not the kind of journalists who would fall for the erroneous thinking that is described in this press release.

]]> By: Joseph Walch http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223414 Joseph Walch Sun, 06 May 2007 16:30:18 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223414 This is another good example of the over-intellectualization of doctrine that does more to siphon the spirit from the law, and leaves a shallow legal philosophy in its place. I fear that it is exactly this type of legalism (no offense Nate—no Anti-law bias here—really) and intellectualism that leads to creedal (i.e. dead) Christianity. People can read this press release and probe its merits by the sprit and find ways to apply it in their lives. We might feel better about ourselves when we catch those little weaknesses or logical fallacies in the scriptures, conference addresses, or church publications, but I think the admonishment of Moroni and Nephi applies here; that we not demean the merits of what the church produces because we find mistakes or weaknesses. Otherwise, we may be standing on some very shaky ground indeed. This is another good example of the over-intellectualization of doctrine that does more to siphon the spirit from the law, and leaves a shallow legal philosophy in its place. I fear that it is exactly this type of legalism (no offense Nate—no Anti-law bias here—really) and intellectualism that leads to creedal (i.e. dead) Christianity. People can read this press release and probe its merits by the sprit and find ways to apply it in their lives.

We might feel better about ourselves when we catch those little weaknesses or logical fallacies in the scriptures, conference addresses, or church publications, but I think the admonishment of Moroni and Nephi applies here; that we not demean the merits of what the church produces because we find mistakes or weaknesses. Otherwise, we may be standing on some very shaky ground indeed.

]]> By: Ardis Parshall http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223412 Ardis Parshall Sun, 06 May 2007 15:53:47 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223412 I'm purdy shure I've just been dissed, but I'm too danged dumb to know exactly how. I’m purdy shure I’ve just been dissed, but I’m too danged dumb to know exactly how.

]]> By: mlu http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223411 mlu Sun, 06 May 2007 15:38:10 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223411 Philosophy (and law and theology) usually proceed through systematic oversimplification. The either/or fallacy is the bedrock of much logical thinking, including the original post and this response. It can be useful, except for people who take it too seriously and think their ever so logical conclusions can trump experience, including the experience of revelation. Philosophy (and law and theology) usually proceed through systematic oversimplification. The either/or fallacy is the bedrock of much logical thinking, including the original post and this response.

It can be useful, except for people who take it too seriously and think their ever so logical conclusions can trump experience, including the experience of revelation.

]]> By: Ardis Parshall http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223405 Ardis Parshall Sun, 06 May 2007 09:20:07 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223405 The "passive aggressive" approach, if you want to call it that, of neglecting, say, home teaching or family history because for whatever reason you "disagree" with those things does not, of course, change the fact that they are prescribed practices promoted by the church and based on core doctrine; no journalist should make the mistake of writing that home teaching or family history is not doctrinal just because some unconverted member distances himself from its practice. That's a very different circumstance from the one addressed by this press release, which asks journalists to distinguish between core, mainstream doctrine, and something that was once said by somebody somewhere, or which may be true but which is hardly as important as other beliefs are. The “passive aggressive” approach, if you want to call it that, of neglecting, say, home teaching or family history because for whatever reason you “disagree” with those things does not, of course, change the fact that they are prescribed practices promoted by the church and based on core doctrine; no journalist should make the mistake of writing that home teaching or family history is not doctrinal just because some unconverted member distances himself from its practice.

That’s a very different circumstance from the one addressed by this press release, which asks journalists to distinguish between core, mainstream doctrine, and something that was once said by somebody somewhere, or which may be true but which is hardly as important as other beliefs are.

]]> By: comet http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223402 comet Sun, 06 May 2007 07:53:00 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223402 I think DavidH (#31) nails it on the passive aggressive approach adopted by most members when they are in disagreement with a promulgated doctrine or policy. It's a greater sin to steady the ark than to withdraw support which can always be passed off as mere slacking. Also, I like the voting with your feet image too. I think DavidH (#31) nails it on the passive aggressive approach adopted by most members when they are in disagreement with a promulgated doctrine or policy. It’s a greater sin to steady the ark than to withdraw support which can always be passed off as mere slacking. Also, I like the voting with your feet image too.

]]> By: Allen Lambert http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2007/05/the-new-useless-statement-on-church-doctrine/#comment-223393 Allen Lambert Sun, 06 May 2007 03:12:45 +0000 http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3851#comment-223393 So, KW seems to want a formal "doctrine" about what constitutes doctrine. Presumably that means an official statement by 1st Pres., sustained by members in Conference, and published in the D&C as a Proclamation. Yet, the point is well taken that the statement is not signed or issued by 1st Pres. (at least not so far as we know). However, it is useful, especially the reminder about statements from individual Apostles not being doctrine. I suspect that this thing was issued as much in rsponse to the PBS program, including the statement by Elder Oaks, as anything else. So, KW seems to want a formal “doctrine” about what constitutes doctrine. Presumably that means an official statement by 1st Pres., sustained by members in Conference, and published in the D&C as a Proclamation.

Yet, the point is well taken that the statement is not signed or issued by 1st Pres. (at least not so far as we know).

However, it is useful, especially the reminder about statements from individual Apostles not being doctrine.

I suspect that this thing was issued as much in rsponse to the PBS program, including the statement by Elder Oaks, as anything else.

]]>