Radio Free Mormon & Backyard Professor Take Elder David A. Bednar to the Limit

[wenglund]

Wade, it is good to see you have escaped that glacial crevasse after being trapped upside down for all these years. What spiritual stream of consciousness did you channel from Elder Bednar's talk?

I appreciate your jovial welcome, but my position hasn't changed over the years except by advancing in the same upward direction. It has been the world that has culturally and otherwise turned upside-down of late. And, I haven't so much escaped as I have learned the art of living in it rather than of it.

As for what spiritual stream of consciousness? Well, as indicated, it was God's Holy Spirit--i.e. the Holy Ghost.

Thanks, Wade Englund

[Marcus]

…Last night I composed in my head a rather lengthy post intended to disclose several of the insights and understandings. However, when I woke up this morning it occurred to me that posting such things, particularly in this venue (given its somewhat polemic, raucous, and adversarial dynamic), was at high risk of turning counterproductive, and that it would work best for those interested to personally employ Alma 32 in relation to the talk (as Bednar intended), and learn for themselves as I did. This, in itself was one of the insights--i.e. had Elder Bednar been prompted that it was wise to disclose such things in a highly receptive venue, he would have done so, but decided otherwise, and thus it would seem even more wise not to disclose such things in a less receptive environment….

That is precious.

…And, by extension, I could share that insight with others here so that they could correct and gain accurate understand if they were so inclined…

Seriously, what possesses people to talk like this? Is this a pearls before swine moment? Or is it simply the members-nonmembers divide that Mormons think exists? I grew up in the thick of this, so I recognize it all too well, but I also thank whatever powers that be that I managed to step away from such nonsense.

No offense, Wade. I’m sure you’re a lovely person.

[dastardly stem]

…Last night I composed in my head a rather lengthy post intended to disclose several of the insights and understandings. However, when I woke up this morning it occurred to me that posting such things, particularly in this venue (given its somewhat polemic, raucous, and adversarial dynamic), was at high risk of turning counterproductive, and that it would work best for those interested to personally employ Alma 32 in relation to the talk (as Bednar intended), and learn for themselves as I did. This, in itself was one of the insights--i.e. had Elder Bednar been prompted that it was wise to disclose such things in a highly receptive venue, he would have done so, but decided otherwise, and thus it would seem even more wise not to disclose such things in a less receptive environment….

That is precious.

…And, by extension, I could share that insight with others here so that they could correct and gain accurate understand if they were so inclined…

Seriously, what possesses people to talk like this? Is this a pearls before swine moment? Or is it simply the members-nonmembers divide that Mormons think exists? I grew up in the thick of this, so I recognize it all too well, but I also thank whatever powers that be that I managed to step away from such nonsense.

No offense, Wade. I’m sure you’re a lovely person.

No offense to Wade either, but this all comes off as a convenient way to escape meaningful discussion...perhaps to avoid being held accountable for ideas.

[wenglund]

Seriously, what possesses people to talk like this? Is this a pearls before swine moment? Or is it simply the members-nonmembers divide that Mormons think exists? I grew up in the thick of this, so I recognize it all too well, but I also thank whatever powers that be that I managed to step away from such nonsense.

No offense, Wade. I’m sure you’re a lovely person.

No offence taken. To me, the divide, at least in this instance, seems to be between those who are looking to dismiss and contend vs. those who genuinely seek to learn and understand, lovely people one and all.

Thanks, Wade Englund-

[Marcus]

Seriously, what possesses people to talk like this? Is this a pearls before swine moment? Or is it simply the members-nonmembers divide that Mormons think exists? I grew up in the thick of this, so I recognize it all too well, but I also thank whatever powers that be that I managed to step away from such nonsense.

No offense, Wade. I’m sure you’re a lovely person.

No offence taken. To me, the divide, at least in this instance, seems to be between those who are looking to dismiss and contend vs. those who genuinely seek to learn and understand, lovely people one and all.

Thanks, Wade Englund-

But of course it is! Determining which side one is on is the difficult part, is it not? On the other hand, what if there is no “divide,” but simply humans who think differently?

It’s a bit more difficult to think through a discussion if you can’t arbitrarily label those who disagree with you as people who are doing nothing more than “looking to dismiss and contend.” A sure knowledge that YOU are the only one who is “genuinely seek[ing] to learn and understand” becomes much more difficult to support in that case, don’t you think?

[wenglund]

No offense to Wade either, but this all comes off as a convenient way to escape meaningful discussion...perhaps to avoid being held accountable for ideas.

Again, no offense taken. I can see how it may reasonably be viewed that way.

However, I can also see that it might be reasonably viewed as intellectual laziness on your part or fear that engaging in the suggested self-learning process might prove you wrong. No offense intended.

I am fine with each believing what they will. I have utilized the process and been greatly rewarded, and as such I have confidence that others so inclined will experience the same, and that is sufficient in itself. Others may chose or not to do likewise. It is up to them and what they value. My intent here isn't to convert, but rather, as with Elder Bednar and Austin Farrer, to provide an impetus for belief to flourish among those who wish it to be so.

Thanks, Wade Englund-

[malkie]

We have been judged and found wanting - not an uncommon experience with Mormonism.

[wenglund]

But of course it is! Determining which side one is on is the difficult part, is it not?

Yes. Absolutely. Just as it is equally difficult to determine the implied divide between those who have stepped away from the "nonsense" and those who may have stepped into the "nonsense."

On the other hand, what if there is no “divide,” but simply humans who think differently?

Yes, and what if there isn't any "nonsense", but simply humans who think differently?

It’s a bit more difficult to think through a discussion if you can’t arbitrarily label those who disagree with you as people who are doing nothing more than “looking to dismiss and contend.” A sure knowledge that YOU are the only one who is “genuinely seek[ing] to learn and understand” becomes much more difficult to support in that case, don’t you think?

Yes, just as it is difficult to consider it a "discussion" in which you are “genuinely seek[ing] to learn and understand,” when you arbitrarily dismiss as "nonsense" what I have said. Rather, it appears more like someone "looking to dismiss and contend."

The same seems true when you ask a snidely worded questions like, "what possesses people to talk like this?", and then follow it up with presumptuous questions that amount to a false dichotomy ("Is this a pearls before swine moment? Or is it simply the members-nonmembers divide that Mormons think exists?"), particularly when the correct answer had previously been given (i.e. the "somewhat polemic, raucous, and adversarial dynamic" of this venue).

Contrast this with the mutually respectful exchanges between Res Ipsa and I. The object lesson being, one reaps what one sows.

Thanks, Wader Englund

[Gadianton]

What some of us mistook for thesis statements, were simply declarations of beliefs intended to prepare the soil of the heart, mind, and soul, into which the seeds of faith were planted.

I haven't listened to the talk or the podcast, but my instincts tell me that Wade will be vindicated.

It would be a serious breach of protocol for a modern apostle to provide a clear thesis statement that nails down any position concretely, such that it can be falsified. I would expect the talk to prepare the mind of the listener for confirmation bias, just as Wade indicates. Airy beliefs that prepare soil in nonspecific ways, such that at some unspecified time in the future the listener might reflect back and affirm whatever was in that talk based on whatever happens to be going on at that time in the future.

Anyways, nice to see you back Wade, especially after the tragic loss of Gemli from SeN.

[Marcus]

What some of us mistook for thesis statements, were simply declarations of beliefs intended to prepare the soil of the heart, mind, and soul, into which the seeds of faith were planted.

I haven't listened to the talk or the podcast, but my instincts tell me that Wade will be vindicated.

It would be a serious breach of protocol for a modern apostle to provide a clear thesis statement that nails down any position concretely, such that it can be falsified. I would expect the talk to prepare the mind of the listener for confirmation bias, just as Wade indicates. Airy beliefs that prepare soil in nonspecific ways, such that at some unspecified time in the future the listener might reflect back and affirm whatever was in that talk based on whatever happens to be going on at that time in the future…

Well said. You’ve captured the revelatory nature of (lds) apostolic speech very well.