NY Times blog piece on FLDS and LDS

[MikeWaters]

there wasn't enough to write the first book. I think he started writing about the Lafferty's but couldn't come up with a good enough story to stand on its own. So he put a bunch of "weird" things together and stamped it "this is the underpinnings of Mormonism", all of this in the context of 9/11.

It's a fundamentally dishonest and shoddy piece, not as much in the things he did say, but in the things he chose to exclude. In other words, he came up with his conclusion and looked for the pieces that would fit that conclusion, ignoring others. In science, we call this "fraud."

[YOhio]

Here's a funny response to Egan's piece.

http://www.nine-moons.com/2008/04/24...gamist-kettle/

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Adam

You are having a bad month. I'll give you a pass.

You are a Utahn. I'll give you a pass as well. Your views are severely distorted.

[MikeWaters]

If you grew up in Utah, you can't help but be affected.

Look, you are back in Utah, which is typical of Utahns. You have acted as a prototypical Utahn who gets a higher education. BYU, mission, BYU, go into the mission field for training/education, short stop in first job in mission field, back to Utah.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

Where in my post did I assert Mormons are worse than (or even equivalent to) Evangelicals?

How about here:

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

Just about everywhere else if a guy says he's been talking with & getting instruction from God others will look at him suspiciously, maybe even recommend professional help. In Utah County the same can lead many others to be swayed into investing in transparent pyramid schemes, or a crazed vision of a gold mine (which church leadership had to repeatedly disclaim and put down). How many families have been bankrupted by wayward personal revelations about financial decisions? More than just a few.

The LDS religion emphasizes personal revelation to an extent not seen in a lot of others.

I guess "just about everywhere else" and "a lot of others" can be considered qualifying language, but taken in context, you are implying that LDS are fairly unique in this world on personal revelation. Considering the disparity in sheer numbers between LDS and Evangelicals as well as many other religions (Christian or not) that allow for Godly inspiration, I think you are wrong.

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

Nonetheless, there are some significant differences between Mormons & EVs on personal revelation, mostly that Mormons have a built-in hierarchical orientation (eg, the Prophet is the Lord's public mouthpiece, the Priesthood hierarchy structure) whereas EVs all believe they're getting the direct scoop. This difference makes Mormons more likely to look for leaders, look to people who are more "select" than they are. The vast majority of LDS stay in the fold on religious matters, no doubt, but for those who are strong believers, but inclined to accept that SLC is in apostacy, look out... anything is possible.

So now the problem is we have leaders that profess revelation/inspiration from God. I thought the problem was personal revelation. I guess you're saying that it is an unhealthy relationship between the two.

What religion doesn't put forth the idea that their leaders have a link to the Allmighty? Elsewise, why follow these people?

The strength of LDS theology, from the time of good ole Joe Smith, is that it combines the two. Joseph said I received a vision and you can too. It may not be as grand and as glorious, but you are entitled to Godly communication. Each tempers the other, establishing limits to authority. Choosing to abandon this dynamic is what has led to such disasterous results.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by YOhio

Here's a funny response to Egan's piece.

http://www.nine-moons.com/2008/04/24...gamist-kettle/

That was great and it was spot on.

One of the things I love about the NY Times is it's penchant for ignorance. It's amusing how these alleged better papers depend on opinion rather than all the facts.

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

A principal point Krakauer made - which I find extraordinarily valid - is the troublesome & sometimes combustible results that frequently arise from belief and dependence upon "personal revelation".

Just about everywhere else if a guy says he's been talking with & getting instruction from God others will look at him suspiciously, maybe even recommend professional help. In Utah County the same can lead many others to be swayed into investing in transparent pyramid schemes, or a crazed vision of a gold mine (which church leadership had to repeatedly disclaim and put down). How many families have been bankrupted by wayward personal revelations about financial decisions? More than just a few.

I think alcoholism is a bigger threat to society than religion, using the above litmus test. If Krakauer would do an expose on the alcohol industry and support prohibition I would think he is an insightful journalist seeking to improve society.

Ma'ake, crazy people do crazy things. They did crazy things because they were crazy, not because the concept of personal revelation. Crazy people think they hear instructions from more than just God. God is just the vehicle and if it weren't God giving them crazy instructions it would be somebody else. Is there evidence available that mormons suffer a disproportionate amount of wacky types than other religions or society at large?

Not to mention that nobody has addressed Waters' point of the abusive upbringing the boys endured. I think that most experts in behavior would agree that the abusive childhood was more influential on them than a religious belief that one can communicate with God.

I mean I would hate to think Krakauer is the first person to point out that people do crazy things because God told them to. I thought folks knew that already before the book.

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

How about here:


So now the problem is we have leaders that profess revelation/inspiration from God. I thought the problem was personal revelation. I guess you're saying that it is an unhealthy relationship between the two.

What religion doesn't put forth the idea that their leaders have a link to the Allmighty? Elsewise, why follow these people?

The strength of LDS theology, from the time of good ole Joe Smith, is that it combines the two. Joseph said I received a vision and you can too. It may not be as grand and as glorious, but you are entitled to Godly communication. Each tempers the other, establishing limits to authority. Choosing to abandon this dynamic is what has led to such disasterous results.

That is a great post. Another advantage is we don't have many hyrums and look at how we treat exute. We police our own ranks, Cavalry by damn!

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

That is a great post. Another advantage is we don't have many hyrums and look at how we treat exute. We police our own ranks, Cavalry by damn!

Of course it was great. The tempering effects of an MP from the Gem State seered these lessons into my heart and mind. The school of hard knocks, Idaho Mormon style.

Frankly, my view is that the dynamic between personal and organizational revelation has indeed allowed us to police our own, keeping us from going all FLDS (despite SBU's citing of an occasional "inspired" pyramid scheme gone bad, at least we don't have the authorities hauling off our kids). What better testimony of the truth. For a cult, we've done a damn good job of being decidedly uncult-like (Danny Ainge getting bitten by Tree Rollins is exhibit #1). You'll find a greater proportion of blank-starers among the EVs.

[UtahDan]

I think Ma'ake and others may be overstating their case. On the other hand, I don't know who it was that first described the properties of the ocean, but I know it wasn't a fish.