NOM

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/8656 ... story.html

Interesting . . .

This from the beginning of Elder Holland's retraction:

"A few weeks ago when speaking to new mission presidents at the Missionary Training Center, I shared a story about two brothers, just as I heard it from individuals who knew the family and had heard it recounted by a family member."

But I thought he said he was preserving the anonymity of the parties at the request of the family members.

Maybe I have this wrong, because they are trying to wipe the record clean of the original story.

But if my memory is correct, how could Elder Holland be honoring the privacy request of the family when he never talked to any members of the family in the first place?

I went back and checked the original thread on this, where the Deseret News article reporting this story was preserved.

It looks like it doesn't actually say Elder Holland preserved their anonymity at the family's request.

So maybe he can slide on that.

But it does appear Elder Holland has told different variations of this story on numerous occasions, and never talked to any of the actual participants themselves!

He has only talked to people who know the family.

It wasn't until a family member actually contacted Elder Holland that he decided to withdraw the story.

Here is the first paragraph of his statement:

"A few weeks ago when speaking to new mission presidents at the Missionary Training Center, I shared a story about two brothers, just as I heard it from individuals who knew the family and had heard it recounted by a family member. Within a few days, my office was contacted by the family, who expressed concern that some elements of that account were not accurate due to embellishing by a family member."

So Elder Holland tells this miraculous story on several occasions without ever checking with any of the participants to see if it was really factual.

Not only did he not talk to either of the two brothers involved, he never even talked to any member of the family!

Then when this incarnation of the story gets published in the Deseret News and some degree of controversy arises over it, Elder Holland gets contacted by a different (and again anonymous) member of the same family who tells him that another (still anonymous) member of the family had embellished the account.

Too bad Scott Lloyd didn't investigate this story before publishing it like he should have . . .

After reading the spin effort made on Holland's behalf, I have to agree. There has been some serious embellishment going on in the church even since before it was organized.....

How did the false aspects of the story slip past Elder Holland's powerful apostolic powers of discernment?

Maybe Elder Holland should heed these words from Harold B. Lee:

I should like now to make reference to some of these. The first is the spread of rumor and gossip (we have mentioned this before) which, when once started, gains momentum as each telling becomes more fanciful, until unwittingly those who wish to dwell on the sensational repeat them in firesides, in classes, in Relief Society gatherings and priesthood quorum classes without first verifying the source before becoming a party to causing speculation and discussions that steal time away from the things that would be profitable and beneficial and enlightening to their souls...As I say, it never ceases to amaze me how gullible some of our Church members are in broadcasting these sensational stories, or dreams, or visions....

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... d?lang=eng

Double post...sorry...

If only the church would retract every incorrect story...it would take up a full week worth of Deseret News...

2bizE wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:01 pm If only the church would retract every incorrect story...it would take up a full week worth of Deseret News...

Also, there would be no church left.

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:38 pm How did the false aspects of the story slip past Elder Holland's powerful apostolic powers of discernment?

Maybe there's a reason he claims not to be a dodo after all...

So the real story is that a guy became active in the church and he also had a brother who went on a mission, but the two events were unrelated?

Kind of like when Lorenzo Snow didn't see anything special in the temple but his granddaughter started telling a story that he saw Jesus? Or how Warren Cowdry wrote in third person about his brother seeing Elijah and Moses and then someone changed it to first person?

You know, on the one hand, I guess Elder Holland deserves some credit for retracting the story. He knew doing so was going to make him look kind of stupid, so I'll give credit where credit is due.

But think about this for a minute - here is a "prophet, seer, and revelator" who excitedly repeated a frankly far-fetched story as though it were true. When I first heard it, I was skeptical. Not only does it call his powers of discernment into question, it calls his common sense into question. I generally doubt most of those fantastical stories about the gospel I hear - does Elder Holland lack the critical thinking skills to have a healthy dose of skepticism for stories like that?

Is he no better than the Ward crazy lady who tells all kinds of outrageous, unlikely stories that give the gullible goose bumps?

And think about this - he obviously thought he felt the Spirit when he heard the story - can't he tell the Spirit from ordinary emotions? Is his infamous "wrong road" story indicative of his general inability to discern when the Spirit is telling him something, and when he is just having an ordinary human emotional response?

Shouldn't this be kind of troubling to believing members?

I mean, go back to what he said about the story in what was dubbed "The Missionary Speech of All Time" - doesn't it sound like he doesn't know much about the Holy Ghost? Isn't it weird he said the Holy Ghost did all this stuff that it turns out never even happened?

Commenting on the account, Elder Holland said, “This is a story of the role of Almighty God, the Savior of the World, and the Holy Ghost involved in the work of the ministry to which we’ve been called.

“The Holy Ghost prompted those parents to keep praying, to keep believing, to keep trusting. … The Holy Ghost inspired that rebellious boy to come to himself like the prodigal he was and to head for California. … The Holy Ghost influenced that younger son to serve a mission and be willing to accept a call to Southern California. … The Holy Ghost inspired one of my brethren in the Twelve, who was on the assignment desk that Friday, to trust his impression and assign that young man for service not a great distance from his native-born state. The Holy Ghost inspired that mission president to assign that young missionary to that district and that member unit. The Holy Ghost led those missionaries to that street, that day, that hour, with big brother sitting on the porch waiting, and, with Doberman Pinschers notwithstanding, the Holy Ghost prompted those to elders to stop, talk and in spite of their fear, to go back and present their message. …

“And, through the elders, the Holy Ghost taught repentance and brought true conversion to one coming back into the fold.”

Geez, how embarrassing.

McBride said Elder Holland had an obligation to set the record straight. If he had not done so, she said, it would have had the potential to harm his relationship with his audience. On the other hand, stepping forward with a correction can improve that relationship.

Hmmmm ya think? Let's keep improving that relationship.

Don't forget the story will live on in the minds of the members like the oral sex ban even though both have been "retracted".

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2017 6:14 am And think about this - he obviously thought he felt the Spirit when he heard the story - can't he tell the Spirit from ordinary emotions?

Is there a difference between "the Spirit™" and ordinary emotions?

Oh yeah... "The Spirit™" IS just ordinary emotions. I guess the difference in the case of "the Spirit™" is that it IS ordinary emotions that have been manipulated by a religious organization for that organization's benefit.

(Sorry for my thread-jack of typing my stream of consciousness, instead of just batting it around in my tiny brain...)

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Tue Aug 01, 2017 6:14 am You know, on the one hand, I guess Elder Holland deserves some credit for retracting the story. He knew doing so was going to make him look kind of stupid, so I'll give credit where credit is due.

I agree that he's doing the right thing here, but I doubt he would have without his hand being forced. I'd imagine that family members were talking and the word would have gotten out that the "miracle" part of the story was fabricated. And, Holland would have never told it without that part of the story (the younger brother finding the older brother who didn't even know he had a younger brother, and so on). Without that part it just becomes a story of a rebellious son coming back home.

With the attention this story got this time, there is simply no way that the truth would not have gotten out. There have to be many friends and family members of this man who know the truth.

I think it stinks that Holland blames a family member and insinuates that they lied. How about he just owns up to his mistake and corrects the story with a warning not to repeat stories unless one know they are true. It would have been very easy to fact check the story before he told it (told at least 3 times with different details added to the fabricated part each time).

This has to undermine his credibility in a lot of member's minds. But there will still be a lot more who will continue giving him the "hero worship" treatment.

I have had this thought many times over the years when it comes to Jeffery R. Holland:



Embarrassing.

His main mistake was to tell a story that is recent enough that it can easily be fact-checked. I thought we all learned this lesson from the example of Paul H. Dunn. He should follow the example of Thomas Monson who told stories about widows that died many decades ago. There is no way to fact-check any of those stories. Always stick to the non-falsifiable.

There is actually quite a bit of pressure on members to come up with faith promoting stories that can be told in talks and lessons. It is not uncommon for a Sunday School teacher to call on someone without warning to relate a spiritual experience related to the lesson: "Brother Johnson, can you relate a personal story where you received a tithing blessing?" There is even more pressure in a case like this to exaggerate or even make stuff up. Usually no one cares if there is some embellishment involved as long as the story is faith promoting or puts the church and its leaders in a favorable light.

One other thing I noticed about this incident with Elder Holland:

Elder Holland closed by relating a story — being careful to protect the privacy and anonymity of the participants — of a young man from southern Idaho.

Why was he careful to protect the privacy and anonymity of the participants? Maybe he had some doubts about the story and didn't want anyone looking into the details.