tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post244722261976859481..comments2023-12-26T10:22:04.630-05:00Comments on Things of My Soul: Pres. Hinckley's Interview with Mike Wallace: He Never LiedPapa Dhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-5113558031735493792010-01-04T15:40:47.781-05:002010-01-04T15:40:47.781-05:00Alan Rock Waterman: It was still a weasel answer. ...<i><b>Alan Rock Waterman:</b> It was still a weasel answer. A prophet should speak boldly, not welcome ways to skirt the doctrine.</i><br /><br />Right, because Jesus Christ never gave cryptic or context-determined answers. His answers in public were always the same as his answers in private. When people asked whether he was the Messiah, he always boldly and unequivocally proclaimed, "Yep, Nathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14498290529550647229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-81086404848361397602009-12-30T19:00:19.041-05:002009-12-30T19:00:19.041-05:00I use that phrase myself once in a while and I am ...I use that phrase myself once in a while and I am not quite as old as Pres. Hinckley. When I use it, it is usually to buy time, because someone has said something that requires more than a simple response. I don't use it for deception and I am sure Pres. Hinckley didn't either.Nora Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10507586370996781147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-83374278487771128562009-12-29T23:38:16.098-05:002009-12-29T23:38:16.098-05:00"I would love it if the Church would step up ..."I would love it if the Church would step up and formalize its doctrine"<br /><br />I have thought this a time or two as well, but ultimately I am VERY glad there is no "Mormon Doctrine." I suppose it's a personal issue for me, but the Doctrine of the Gospel is ANYTHING that is true, regardless of the source. I think formalizing this would, at least for me, damage the adamfhttp://shenpawarrior.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-20906746351970070102009-12-29T14:57:25.522-05:002009-12-29T14:57:25.522-05:00I like to differentiate between our doctrine and e...I like to differentiate between our doctrine and everything else, and I sometimes call everything else "the tapestry of Mormon thought.". The tapestry is colorful with lots of ideas -- lots of thoughts that influence us generally as a people -- but just as every religious idea espoused by a Roman Catholic thinker doesn't automatically qualify as Roman Catholic dogma or doctrine, andjinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-20154006690177785512009-12-29T09:51:34.437-05:002009-12-29T09:51:34.437-05:00"the tapestry of Mormon thought"
I re..."the tapestry of Mormon thought" <br /><br />I really like that phrase, ji. Thanks!Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-91187523171612156302009-12-29T09:47:07.560-05:002009-12-29T09:47:07.560-05:00Thanks for that input, Firebyrd. I totally respec...Thanks for that input, Firebyrd. I totally respect that and agree it might be the case. As I said in the post, however, I grew up hearing that phrase constantly ("I don't know that . . .), so that is how I understood it immediately. <br /><br />Just for the record, I'm not saying he didn't "dodge" the question a bit. He did. All I'm saying at heart is that I Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-24393239406704179732009-12-29T04:56:37.076-05:002009-12-29T04:56:37.076-05:00Oh, and just as a funny side note, I would have sw...Oh, and just as a funny side note, I would have sworn on my life that the exchange happened during one of his interviews on Larry King Live. So many interviews, so easy to mix up!Firebyrdnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-39775674966924693062009-12-29T04:51:05.073-05:002009-12-29T04:51:05.073-05:00Ray, normally I very much appreciate your view of ...Ray, normally I very much appreciate your view of things, and I'm hardly one who's trying to look at the church through "&%$# colored glasses," but I have to disagree with you here. He messed up. What he said was, at the very least, extremely badly worded, and at worst, dishonest about what the church does and doesn't teach. He was normally so easy to understand and Firebyrdnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-26411843511899561982009-12-29T01:35:43.921-05:002009-12-29T01:35:43.921-05:00President Hinckley's statement was right on --...President Hinckley's statement was right on -- there are a lot of threads that together form the tapestry of Mormon thought, but many of those threads are more of folklore and less of doctrine. The notion "as man is, God once was" very simply is not doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Some saints might believe it, but such doesn't make it doctrinal. jinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-85556649779205455222009-12-28T21:58:15.520-05:002009-12-28T21:58:15.520-05:00Ken, that seriously is not worth answering. God b...Ken, that seriously is not worth answering. God bless!Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-3077769022520815712009-12-28T21:22:13.470-05:002009-12-28T21:22:13.470-05:00Doesn't it get tiring doing all those mental g...Doesn't it get tiring doing all those mental gymnastics?Kennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-31003580466121969242009-12-28T16:47:53.807-05:002009-12-28T16:47:53.807-05:00anonymous, I think he phrased his answer the way h...anonymous, I think he phrased his answer the way he did because he honestly doesn't know about that part of the couplet - since it's something that never has been revealed, imo. <br /><br />I agree, Aquinas - which is why I never quote that couplet. I have NO problem with the second half of it - the statement that as God is man may become, since I believe it is a central teaching of thePapa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-54644150194560440782009-12-28T14:43:59.271-05:002009-12-28T14:43:59.271-05:00I think it was a well-crafted response, but don...I think it was a well-crafted response, but don't think he was trying to deceive anyone with his answer. I hope I am so eloquent if I ever field questions in front of a national audience.<br /><br />What bothers me about it is not this point specifically, but that it is a perfect example of the quagmire that is Mormon "doctrine". Nobody knows what "we" are expected to Paulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-63483706737510860092009-12-28T14:27:22.700-05:002009-12-28T14:27:22.700-05:00One of the difficulties is that it is not enough m...One of the difficulties is that it is not enough merely to state that it is doctrine that God was once a man because that could be interpreted to mean that God was once a man and not God, or that God once experienced a mortal experience. Now, I would suggest that most all Christians understand the Bible to teach that Jesus is God incarnate. This is the whole point of the doctrine of the aquinashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06858455717777971953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-80923546597748584612009-12-28T12:30:02.846-05:002009-12-28T12:30:02.846-05:00The concept that 'As God is,man may become'...The concept that 'As God is,man may become',is central to my testimony.Unfortunately,I have misinterpreted this response as a backpeddling on this concept,so this clarification has been very helpful.I can take or leave the 'as man is ,God once was' bit.However,I am not much inclined to dissing prophets of God,yet this does seem to lack transparency as a statement to me.I'd Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-88590397923309784212009-12-28T11:08:00.766-05:002009-12-28T11:08:00.766-05:00You're welcome, Tony.
Alan, it's not a ...You're welcome, Tony. <br /><br />Alan, it's not a weasel answer if it's totally honest and correct. That's my point. That concept simply isn't part of core doctrine, imo - and I know MANY members who don't believe it. Remember, also, Pres. Hinckley was responded only to the second part of the couplet - NOT the concept that we can become like God. THAT is core Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-74140861589635886012009-12-28T10:54:19.027-05:002009-12-28T10:54:19.027-05:00We all find what we're looking for. People who...We all find what we're looking for. People who want to find fault can find it, not just where it actually exists, but many other places as well. <br /><br />Imho, it's not that different in relationships with something called "negative sentiment override." This occurs with some couples who have been together for sometime, when they interpret not only negative actions as negativeadamfhttp://shenpawarrior.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-24007616936506403102009-12-28T04:28:50.178-05:002009-12-28T04:28:50.178-05:00Taken all around, it was still a weasel answer. A...Taken all around, it was still a weasel answer. A prophet should speak boldly, not welcome ways to skirt the doctrine.Alan Rock Watermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04971243364867111868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3199387660357003170.post-50741197605379752782009-12-28T01:25:35.385-05:002009-12-28T01:25:35.385-05:00Thank you! I was wondering how to approach those w...Thank you! I was wondering how to approach those who accuse him of this. Thank you.Tonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03960519151863517265noreply@blogger.com