The Long and Winding Road (To Ruin) or Eight Days a Week (Of Woe): Mormon Apostle Blames the Beatles for Society's Ills

[huckelberry]

Who?

There is a story, possibly apocryphal, of the distinguished British biologist, J.B.S. Haldane, who found himself in the company of a group of theologians. On being asked what one could conclude as to the nature of the Creator from a study of his creation, Haldane is said to have answered, “An inordinate fondness for beetles.”

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/06/23/beetles/

I have always had a chuckle with this observation but my picture of God sees fondness there ample to spare on beetles.

[MG 2.0]

It's really simple Huck, Mormons have actual prophets like Isaiah and Paul walking the earth today. Their voices are literally the voice of God himself on this earth. If God were to come down in a cloud of glory and declare that the Beetles are the root of many of societies ills, it would be no different than his servant David B. Height doing it.

The fact that Mormons disregard their prophets and don't really believe that they are prophets is fine with me. If MG really lived his faith he might be dangerous, so I agree that it's good the "true church" nonsense isn't something they take seriously in real life. It's an identity marker for their in-group and that's about it.

I'm just pointing out if MG doesn't believe his own prophets, while it's good, it's very strange that he would so dogmatically insist that they are prophets in this context where his social credit isn't affected.

I hear you as testing this idea of a prophet, sharply. I have never understood prophet this way though some fundamentalists do. It has never made sense to me. Prophets all sound to me like humans doing their best to think. (Even if I think God is pushing that along)

I have some impression Joseph Smith agreed, perhaps my memory is editing but I do not think he pushed fundamentalism as long as followers were not trying to one up his authority.

In the past I've made it rather clear that I believe that many critics, especially some of the older ones, have a rather fundamentalist view of things.

Very little wiggle room for exploring. I've mentioned Claude Monet the artist and that critics tend to look at isolated brushstrokes rather than the larger picture to make more/greater sense out of it.

I haven't changed my mind.

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

I have never understood prophet this way though some fundamentalists do. It has never made sense to me. Prophets all sound to me like humans doing their best to think. (Even if I think God is pushing that along)

If you went on a mission you know what the Church teaches in regards to what a prophet is. Prophets ARE doing "their best" as humans because there is no God and they aren't really prophets. So it totally makes sense that they look like fallible men doing what they can. This isn't what the church teaches, however, about what a prophet is. Sure, they'll pull the old, "hey, he was still human" card as an excuse to get them off the hook for failing as needed.

In the past I've made it rather clear that I believe that many critics, especially some of the older ones, have a rather fundamentalist view of things.

Very little wiggle room for exploring. I've mentioned Claude Monet the artist and that critics tend to look at isolated brushstrokes rather than the larger picture to make more/greater sense out of it.

I haven't changed my mind.

You think you know more than the prophets do. That's fine. In some ways you probably do. David B. Height is a fool. You rightfully reject his opinions about music. But it is proof that nobody should take your obsession with the truthfulness of the Church seriously. You don't seem to see the contradiction between your own freedom to explore and think whatever you want with your instance that the Church and its leaders are everything and people must sacrifice everything if possible to come to that understanding.

[MG 2.0]

I have never understood prophet this way though some fundamentalists do. It has never made sense to me. Prophets all sound to me like humans doing their best to think. (Even if I think God is pushing that along)

If you went on a mission you know what the Church teaches in regards to what a prophet is. Prophets ARE doing "their best" as humans because there is no God and they aren't really prophets. So it totally makes sense that they look like fallible men doing what they can. This isn't what the church teaches, however, about what a prophet is. Sure, they'll pull the old, "hey, he was still human" card as an excuse to get them off the hook for failing as needed.

In the past I've made it rather clear that I believe that many critics, especially some of the older ones, have a rather fundamentalist view of things.

Very little wiggle room for exploring. I've mentioned Claude Monet the artist and that critics tend to look at isolated brushstrokes rather than the larger picture to make more/greater sense out of it.

I haven't changed my mind.

You think you know more than the prophets do. That's fine. In some ways you probably do. David B. Height is a fool. You rightfully reject his opinions about music. But it is proof that nobody should take your obsession with the truthfulness of the Church seriously. You don't seem to see the contradiction between your own freedom to explore and think whatever you want with your instance that the Church and its leaders are everything.

So, I'm free to think whatever I want...but everything I think must align with what the leaders say? That's a freedom that isn't free. It goes against the very idea of free agency. God has given us free agency, in my opinion. The world itself seems to demonstrate that this is true. It can be limited, sure, but I can't see a God that would limit the freedom to choose. That's why prophets have always asked...sometimes forcefully...that members of the church think, ponder, and pray in regard to what the prophets say.

Oh, by the way, I wasn't even familiar with Elder Haight and what he or anyone else was saying in regard to music. I was just living life and enjoying the music.

Not accountable.

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

Well that's great MG because I can believe anything I want also and I can do whatever I want. The difference between me and you is that you pay 10% of your income in order to do whatever you would already have done anyway.

[Marcus]

In the past I've made it rather clear that I believe that many critics, especially some of the older ones, have a rather fundamentalist view of things.

Very little wiggle room for exploring. I've mentioned Claude Monet the artist and that critics tend to look at isolated brushstrokes rather than the larger picture to make more/greater sense out of it.

I haven't changed my mind...

Yes we know. Mentalgymnast will not ever stop stereotyping groups of people, even when that stereotype serves nothing more than to buttress his personal bigotry.

[bill4long]

Many of today's problems can be traced to the music of the Beatles?

I always heard it was Elvis's fault...



Or perhaps Jerry Lee Lewis's fault...



Or perhaps Little Richard's fault...



Or perhaps Chuck Berry's fault...

[I Have Questions]

If you went on a mission you know what the Church teaches in regards to what a prophet is. Prophets ARE doing "their best" as humans because there is no God and they aren't really prophets. So it totally makes sense that they look like fallible men doing what they can. This isn't what the church teaches, however, about what a prophet is. Sure, they'll pull the old, "hey, he was still human" card as an excuse to get them off the hook for failing as needed.



You think you know more than the prophets do. That's fine. In some ways you probably do. David B. Height is a fool. You rightfully reject his opinions about music. But it is proof that nobody should take your obsession with the truthfulness of the Church seriously. You don't seem to see the contradiction between your own freedom to explore and think whatever you want with your instance that the Church and its leaders are everything.

So, I'm free to think whatever I want...but everything I think must align with what the leaders say? That's a freedom that isn't free. It goes against the very idea of free agency. God has given us free agency, in my opinion. The world itself seems to demonstrate that this is true. It can be limited, sure, but I can't see a God that would limit the freedom to choose. That's why prophets have always asked...sometimes forcefully...that members of the church think, ponder, and pray in regard to what the prophets say.

Oh, by the way, I wasn't even familiar with Elder Haight and what he or anyone else was saying in regard to music. I was just living life and enjoying the music.

Not accountable.

Regards,
MG

MG can you think of an example where you openly disagreed with a living President of the Church about something significant that would demonstrate you are a free, unrestricted thinker?

[Gadianton]

MG can you think of an example where you openly disagreed with a living President of the Church about something significant that would demonstrate you are a free, unrestricted thinker?

Hasn't he done so on this thread? A prophet of the Lord has declared the Beatles are the cause of most modern ills in society. MG virtually laughed in his face just as I would have.

Now, you may be thinking, this statement from an apostle isn't significant. MG is thinking the same thing you are. What is significant and why? You hint at something when you say "openly disagree". Well sure, if there's something really important in November of 2025 that the Brethren are pounding from the pulpit and MG goes on a crusade against it, he'll get in trouble. But would a public crusade against his church necessarily be a mark of free thinking? Am I not a free thinker if I disagree with something my company promotes yet I don't dare publicly go on a crusade against them and risk getting fired?

The institutional church runs itself just like any other billion-dollar corporation. MG is free to believe whatever he wants because all the company cares about is profits. MG just can't be vocal about certain kinds of beliefs if it is seen as endangering the ledger, and the calculations for what constitutes unacceptable behavior really are the exact same any place of business would make. Quinn explained that heavy-handedness in general doesn't work. When the Church tried to put strict numbers on tithing, tithing shrank. The reason why the prophet doesn't get up and declare exactly how much tithing should be paid is because the members won't do it. They have found a certain level of preaching combined with making it on-your-honor brings in the most tithes. This is a model for all the supporting commandments, and predicts certain mistakes the Church has made in coming up with crusades over the years.

It's hard to pin down exactly what constitutes apostasy. If I begin an online crusade against my company's core product line, that will get me fired. However, I might reap the same outcome if I target something totally unimportant, such as an employee engagement program that is probably objectively lame, and that doesn't contribute to profits.

But in the model of prophets the Church teaches, as opposed to the profit-maximizing corporation they run, nobody is free to believe what they want. Why should they be and why would they even want to? I don't want to believe "whatever I want" in regard to physics, I want to find myself convinced by the best ideas. If I believed in the model of prophets and God's pattern of truth as we taught as missionaries, then I'm paying 10% in order to get the pure undefiled truth straight from the horse's mouth. I want the prophets to tell me things I wouldn't have expected or that sound odd or are uncomfortable. They must be things I wouldn't have come up with on my own, otherwise why have a prophet? This is what the Church teaches. God has true ideas, they are verbalized by himself or his prophets, they are written down, and we either hear these words directly or read them. This is the pure information the rest of the world doesn't have. If a prophet says the Beatles are the cause of most modern ills, then that's pretty huge, and if I believe in God's pattern, then I immediately burn my records with enthusiasm because I've learned something significant. My 10% has got me information that only God himself knew about 1 minute before that statement was made by Elder HATE.

[Shulem]

Just for kicks, crazy apostle Benson slamed rock music in General Conference and pretty much chalked it up as the devil's music that drags kids down to hell for finding enjoyment in listening to it. Let's be clear, Benson was simply another Mormon (Mormon = Victory for Satan) cult leader, he was a bat-poop crazy apostle of a church that has (for me) little to no relevance whatsoever. Like Donald Trump, nothing good ever came out of that man's mouth because everything was mixed with falsehoods.

Satan’s Thrust—Youth

Through his many agents, his Satanic majesty has proclaimed his intentions to destroy one whole generation of our choice young people...

Screw u Benson. Rot in hell.




Jimmy Page