Event: Special Fireside for Disaffected Swedish LDS Saints

[_Kishkumen]

I have a lot of respect for Elder Jensen and Brother Turley, but I can't believe they traveled half-way around the world and didn't come better prepared. It's almost like they're still in the 1970s, and expecting Church members to start asking about "The Godmakers" or something.

I feel badly for everyone except the seventy who issued the ultimatum to reconcile or leave.

[_consiglieri]

I was able to skim through the transcript and felt similarly to cinepro--The horror!

The first thing I didn't like was where Elder Jensen tried to set things up with the two spirits (Christ and the devil) with the obvious preemptive strike that anybody who actually pays attention to the bad stuff is listening to the spirit of the devil.

That didn't go over so well, did it?

I like the fact that one of the questioners understood exactly where he was going with that and didn't take too kindly to it, even bringing up his daughter's first trip to the temple and how badly she felt about the experience--so was that of the devil?

The other thing I thought was poorly done was fielding all the questions up front to write on a board, and saying they actually intended to get at least ten of those questions up there. It was obvious that they wouldn't have the time to cover them in depth, and I am left with the impression that was the idea from the outset.

It would have been much better to handle one or two questions in depth than do the shotgun approach which looked like they have answers for nothing.

And all the times they kept saying, "Let's move on," sounded like the local constabulary ushering rubberneckers past a particularly gruesome motor vehicle accident.

Not completely inappropriately, either.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_angsty]

Here is the audio...

http://www.mediafire.com/download/ot7rh ... -part1.mp3

http://www.mediafire.com/download/xif11 ... -part2.mp3

Thank you grindael!

[_Doctor Scratch]

I have to echo Cinepro and others: this transcript is a remarkable document. There are lots of quotable moments, like this, from Elder Turley:

Q: Do we believe in polygamy?

RT: We do believe in polygamy; we don’t practice polygamy. That’s what I’m trying to say.

Quite stunning! I was also intrigued by this, from Elder Jensen:

MJ: We’ve brought a handout for you. These are the five very best websites for authentic answers to those questions. Let me just say if you spend as much time on these five websites as you spent on other websites cause I have visited as has Brother Turley some of these anti-Mormon websites. And they’re very dark to me. And Brother Turley and I know many of the people who maintain these websites, and I can say to you they’re not the people whose teachings I’m going to follow.

First, does anyone know which "five websites" he's referring to? Is he sending people to FAIR, or to Mormon Interpreter? Second, who are these "people" who are "very dark" to Jensen? Is he talking about Dr. Shades? Or David Twede? Or Richard Packham?

This was intriguing as well:

RT: The document you’re talking about has been misunderstood by many people, OK? It’s the alphabet and grammar that I was talking about. It’s actually, people have concluded early that that was the document Joseph Smith used to prepare the Book of Abraham. It’s not true. That document was prepared after the Book of Abraham. You need to look at this new research coming out in the next year on this. There’s a radical shift in the scholarly thinking on that.

So, is this the Schryver research?

Towards the end, Elder Jensen related the story of his daughter attending the temple pre-1990s, and how devastated she was. I thought that was admirably frank and very, very sad.

Finally, I was somewhat bothered by the way that Turley kept rushing past people's questions. It's as if his stock answer was, "It's complicated, OK? We don't have time to discuss this, OK? But there are a lot of details--it gets squishy."

In any case, I found this rather invaluable as a means of comparison with what the Mopologists have been doing for the past few decades.

[_Kishkumen]

RT: The document you’re talking about has been misunderstood by many people, OK? It’s the alphabet and grammar that I was talking about. It’s actually, people have concluded early that that was the document Joseph Smith used to prepare the Book of Abraham. It’s not true. That document was prepared after the Book of Abraham. You need to look at this new research coming out in the next year on this. There’s a radical shift in the scholarly thinking on that.

So, is this the Schryver research?

I bet it was, Doctor. Who else has pushed that thesis so stridently in recent years?

[_Blixa]

I have a lot of respect for Elder Jensen and Brother Turley, but I can't believe they traveled half-way around the world and didn't come better prepared. It's almost like they're still in the 1970s, and expecting Church members to start asking about "The Godmakers" or something.

I feel badly for everyone except the seventy who issued the ultimatum to reconcile or leave.

Me too. This has been the most depressing moment in Mormonism for me not just recently, but maybe ever. I don't think Jensen and Turley are of the ilk associated with "mopologetics." I've always respected them, even when I didn't necessarily agree with them. I associate them with sincerity not sleaziness.

My guess is they were not prepared for what they were asked and floundered as I had to think on their feet. Or worse--they knew that there would be a sword hanging over the heads of these members and the stress of that was overpowering.

I can not believe how badly this was handled. And frankly, why could they have not set the whole thing up on a different foundation? How hard would it have been to say "Yes. It's all true. Mistakes were made, prophets were human beings and the church has not handled its educational programs with the best transparency. In fact, most of the questions you now have, and even the fact that you have these questions, is a result of the misguided decisions in the early 70's toward correlation and making the archives less accessible. But things are going to change because the kind of questions you have raised make it clear that we cannot delay rethinking how the church disseminates its history and how it well it answers the needs of its members. We need to find better ways to communicate in order to help strengthen members, and the church as a whole, in terms of its mission to spread the gospel. Thank you, Brothers and Sisters for your help."

The result? Renewed confidence and more committed members.

But they prefer trauma and excommunication?

That this might have happened 40, 30, 20 years ago is conceivable. But that this went down in 2010 is simply shocking.

[_Polygamy-Porter]

Here is the audio...

http://www.mediafire.com/download/ot7rh ... -part1.mp3

http://www.mediafire.com/download/xif11 ... -part2.mp3

Mediafire.com has been taken OFF LINE.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Mediafire.com has been taken OFF LINE.

Do you think the Church had something to do with this, such as threatening the host with legal action for publishing an unauthorized recording?

[_Willy Law]

Here is the audio...

http://www.mediafire.com/download/ot7rh ... -part1.mp3

http://www.mediafire.com/download/xif11 ... -part2.mp3

Thank you grindael!

Listening to the fireside, I can't help but notice Turley has a haughty tone while addressing this group. I realize this sometimes happens when a native English speaker is addressing a non native English speaker in English, but it comes off as really condescending and douche baggy.

[_Kishkumen]

I can not believe how badly this was handled. And frankly, why could they have not set the whole thing up on a different foundation? How hard would it have been to say "Yes. It's all true. Mistakes were made, prophets were human beings and the church has not handled its educational programs with the best transparency. In fact, most of the questions you now have, and even the fact that you have these questions, is a result of the misguided decisions in the early 70's toward correlation and making the archives less accessible. But things are going to change because the kind of questions you have raised make it clear that we cannot delay rethinking how the church disseminates its history and how it well it answers the needs of its members. We need to find better ways to communicate in order to help strengthen members, and the church as a whole, in terms of its mission to spread the gospel. Thank you, Brothers and Sisters for your help."

The result? Renewed confidence and more committed members.

But they prefer trauma and excommunication?

That this might have happened 40, 30, 20 years ago is conceivable. But that this went down in 2010 is simply shocking.

Hopefully something was learned as a result of this experience. At the Provo meeting with Bushman and Terryl & Fiona Givens there was no axeman and no ultimatum. No local leaders were present to my knowledge.