Hinkley says church history is an open book

[helemon]

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635171604,00.html
Associated Press: Some scholars say historical records point to discrepancies with the official church history. How do you reconcile the differences? And what is the church's position on historical scholarship?

President Hinckley: Well, we have nothing to hide. Our history is an open book. They may find what they are looking for, but the fact is the history of the church is clear and open and leads to faith and strength and virtues.

Associated Press: If that's so, why have some people either been disfellowshipped or excommunicated for the things they have written?

President Hinckley: There have been very few of them. It's only when they begin to teach what they believe to try to influence others that action is taken against them.

Associated Press: Because by extension they try to damage the church in some way?

President Hinckley: Try to damage the church, yes.

[silverfox]

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635171604,00.html

I've always been rather disappointed in the interviews with Hinkley. Why not more depth? He skirts around EVERYTHING, IMO.

I would like to see him go into detail WHY he thinks what has been written is damaging to the church. I'd like to hear his viewpoint regarding this. Why does he feel those views are unacceptable.

I'd really like to see him pushed on some things. It'll never happen because I am sure the interview is outlined by him or his PR dept.

[helemon]

I've always been rather disappointed in the interviews with Hinkley. Why not more depth? He skirts around EVERYTHING, IMO.

I would like to see him go into detail WHY he thinks what has been written is damaging to the church. I'd like to hear his viewpoint regarding this. Why does he feel those views are unacceptable.

I'd really like to see him pushed on some things. It'll never happen because I am sure the interview is outlined by him or his PR dept.

I agree completely. The church leaves the character assasination to the FARMS researchers. There is never a point for point discussion by the brethren about what parts of these peoples scholarship is "damaging" to the church. Furthermore, if the material was false then the church could legitimately criticize it, but if it is true and is damaging to the church then I say the church deserves to be damaged.

[peter_mary]

Associated Press: If that's so, why have some people either been disfellowshipped or excommunicated for the things they have written?

President Hinckley: There have been very few of them. It's only when they begin to teach what they believe to try to influence others that action is taken against them.
Yeah, these days, rather than blame it on what they write, they excommunicate them for OTHER things...ask Simon Southerton... :slap:

[hamar]

I've always been rather disappointed in the interviews with Hinkley. Why not more depth? He skirts around EVERYTHING, IMO.

I would like to see him go into detail WHY he thinks what has been written is damaging to the church. I'd like to hear his viewpoint regarding this. Why does he feel those views are unacceptable.

I'd really like to see him pushed on some things. It'll never happen because I am sure the interview is outlined by him or his PR dept.

I'd like to see a good ole Bill O'Reilly type interview with the Hinkster. Wouldn't that be interesting?

[helemon]

I'd like to see a good ole Bill O'Reilly type interview with the Hinkster. Wouldn't that be interesting?

Good old biased bill. Mr. SPIN himself. I doubt Bill would be too hard hitting on Hinckley, after all UT is predominantly conservative and Republican. He would be alienating a large number of his core fans. I have little respect for Bill or his interviewing technique, or his moral character based on how he sexually harassed that woman that worked on his show.

[Born Free]

Yeah, these days, rather than blame it on what they write, they excommunicate them for OTHER things...ask Simon Southerton... :slap:

The theology-based excommunication you have, when you are not having a theology-based excommunication!

Daryl

[free thinker]

Gordon B Hinckley, as usual, proves that he follows the overriding philosphy of all mormon leaders when asked pointed questions. "Be harmless as a serpent, and wise as a dove". :cool:


ft

[elder_nomo]

Associated Press: If that's so, why have some people either been disfellowshipped or excommunicated for the things they have written?

President Hinckley: There have been very few of them.
.......
This is the same kind of weak defense offered by LDS Inc for polygamy - "Yes, LDS practiced polygamy, but it was never more than X percent at any one time. "

Now it's for dissenting historians: "Yes, we unjustifiably dis'd and ex'd people, but there have been very few of them."

This is so intellectually dishonest. Look, if polygamy was "right" then it shouldn't matter how many practiced it. If it was right, it was right whether 1% or 100%.

Ditto for ex-ing dissenting historians. If it's the right thing to do, then stand up and say so. Be a f##king man and stand up for what you believe in and quit trying to hide it. :mad:

[lunaverse]

This is the same kind of weak defense offered by LDS Inc for polygamy - "Yes, LDS practiced polygamy, but it was never more than X percent at any one time. "

Now it's for dissenting historians: "Yes, we unjustifiably dis'd and ex'd people, but there have been very few of them."

This is so intellectually dishonest. Look, if polygamy was "right" then it shouldn't matter how many practiced it. If it was right, it was right whether 1% or 100%.

Ditto for ex-ing dissenting historians. If it's the right thing to do, then stand up and say so. Be a f##king man and stand up for what you believe in and quit trying to hide it. :mad:

And actually, only allowing your "inner circle" to do something that is considered a sin by the rest of the congregation is typical of cult structures... It's hypicritical and elitest... Making such statements doens't help their cause at all.

Luna

[silverfox]

This is the same kind of weak defense offered by LDS Inc for polygamy - "Yes, LDS practiced polygamy, but it was never more than X percent at any one time. "

Now it's for dissenting historians: "Yes, we unjustifiably dis'd and ex'd people, but there have been very few of them."

This is so intellectually dishonest. Look, if polygamy was "right" then it shouldn't matter how many practiced it. If it was right, it was right whether 1% or 100%.

Ditto for ex-ing dissenting historians. If it's the right thing to do, then stand up and say so. Be a f##king man and stand up for what you believe in and quit trying to hide it. :mad:

And I am sure he has never mentioned in any of the interviews that the church believes in polygamy in the celestial kingdom for "worthy" members, of course.

[free thinker]

The mormon church has yet to open it's archives. It cannot claim it has an open history until it does.

Also let's be frank about this. The church is not interested in the truth, but organizing certain facts, while hiding others, to maintain a storyline. Remember that one of the top leaders has stated that the truth is not always helpful.

Enough said.

ft

[bobcat]

GBH is a media mastermind. I used to wonder how the church could grow so quickly and become relatively mainstream in so few years. GBH is one of the big reasons for it. He knows how to (not) answer the questions that are tossed at him, in a way that most people are going to accept without doing any extra research. "There have been very few of them" isn't alarming enough to send most TBMs flocking to websites such as this. But it is faith-promoting enough that the next time someone accuses the church of being anti-intellectual, they'll be able to say that it's simply not true, cause GBH said very few people were ex-ed for dissenting historical beliefs.