Enough of the Infalliblity Nonsense

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by T Blue

That is freaking sick.

People going along with something they are not socially required to, just in case it could possibly be what God wants?

How freaking S A D of a life is that?

Is that truly what you believe the "liberal" mo mo thinks about the direction of the church?

That is completely messed up.

T Blue I would ask you not to comment in my thread if you are going to act like that. There are plenty of other threads where people seem to enjoy banter of this kind. But I do not.

[Flystripper]

The problem I have with people that would follow the model of Pelagius is that when the prophet is wrong on weighty matters (racism and polygamy/polyandry and IMHO prop 8) they just go along with the incorrect position and perpetuate the problem all because the prophet is correct most of the time.

It really matters what the prophet is wrong about. For example, racism in the church does much more harm than prohibiting visual aides. Yet according to the model it is rational and appropriate to just go along with both. This is where the model fails.

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

The problem I have with people that would follow the model of Pelagius is that when the prophet is wrong on weighty matters (racism and polygamy/polyandry and IMHO prop 8) they just go along with the incorrect position and perpetuate the problem all because the prophet is correct most of the time.

It really matters what the prophet is wrong about. For example, racism in the church does much more harm than prohibiting visual aides. Yet according to the model it is rational and appropriate to just go along with both. This is where the model fails.

See my second model which I believe captures this idea rather well.

My response would be that I think most conservatives would agree that one can find examples of bad decisions from an ex post perspective but that it is much more difficult from an ex ante perspective particularly when we limit the scope of the model to cases where the 1st presidency and the quorum of the twelve agree. So an unconditional decision rule may still be optimal.

[T Blue]

That's great, just great, now you've boiled down the LDS church and it's followers into some numbers probabilities forumla.

Sorry you don't enjoy the banter, carry on with the numbers and classifying of the members.

Carry on.........

[T Blue]

Is the word of wisdom one of those where the prophet got it wrong?

Surely the WOW is something that could not possibly have been inspired for the people in this time, after all who wouldn't enjoy a nice Sam Adams after a hot day in the sun, or a nice hot Starbucks Mocha on a chilly morning?

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by T Blue

That's great, just great, now you've boiled down the LDS church and it's followers into some numbers probabilities forumla.

Sorry you don't enjoy the banter, carry on with the numbers and classifying of the members.

Carry on.........

Thanks for a more civil response ... I honestly think you are being a bit unfair to my post. Despite its use of numbers (which I understand some people find off-putting and I can understand that, people often find economists off putting even when we are not trying to be) it is actually an apologetic for faithfully following the prophet within the context that the prophet has a spiritual advantage relative to me but also recognizing that he is human and not perfect (it not a rationale for following the prophet when you don't really believe).

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by T Blue

Is the word of wisdom one of those where the prophet got it wrong?

Surely the WOW is something that could not possibly have been inspired for the people in this time, after all who wouldn't enjoy a nice Sam Adams after a hot day in the sun, or a nice hot Starbucks Mocha on a chilly morning?

I wonder if Sam Adams will come out with Danish Beer, we will all be ready to imbibe!

Seriously, was the Word of Wisdom not applying to alcoholic "Danish Beer" one of the ones the prophet got right or wrong?

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by pelagius

I don't want to have to defend who it actually applies to but judging by Indy's reaction to it earlier I would guess that it approximates the approach of at least some of the the more conservative members of the board. That said it isn't per say a model about liberals or conservatives. Its really a model that rationalizes why it may be optimal to behave as if the prophet is inffallible when you don't believe he actually is. Plus, I am glad you liked the model.

I really like the model. It explains why I (a semi-liberal mormon) still go to church and obey counsels that I may not totally agree with--I have faith that I don't know everything and there are a lot of people who know more than me, even if they are imperfect. I guess that's why I characterized it like I did; Indy may feel it applies to him similarly.

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by T Blue

Is the word of wisdom one of those where the prophet got it wrong?

Surely the WOW is something that could not possibly have been inspired for the people in this time, after all who wouldn't enjoy a nice Sam Adams after a hot day in the sun, or a nice hot Starbucks Mocha on a chilly morning?

T Blue you clearly don't understand my post. Your response here makes no sense relative to the implications of my original model.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

The problem I have with people that would follow the model of Pelagius is that when the prophet is wrong on weighty matters (racism and polygamy/polyandry and IMHO prop 8) they just go along with the incorrect position and perpetuate the problem all because the prophet is correct most of the time.

It really matters what the prophet is wrong about. For example, racism in the church does much more harm than prohibiting visual aides. Yet according to the model it is rational and appropriate to just go along with both. This is where the model fails.

The question is how do any of us really know that the prophet has been wrong on polygamy and Prop 8? Has God authoritatively weighed in on this?