What Mormons Believe--according to a Former BYU Professor

[4Jesus]

A whistle blower and an axe grinder are two different things.

I disagree; one could be a whistle-blower with an axe to grind.

Definition of axe grinder: working for an ulterior purpose or toward a selfish end - Definition of AX-GRINDING

What makes a person an axe-grinder is the hugely biased agenda and the willingness to put a huge skew on information. That's why their intrinsically such a problematic source.

I think the word you're looking for is "deceiver", because if they're putting a skew on information and the "skew" isn't truthful, then they are lying, purposefully.

A person can be critical of someone / something else, but still not be an axe-grinder.

The above definition says that's exactly what someone is, in this instance (to be clear, was your statement "Axe grinding makes someone/something a bad source."). "working for an ulterior motive" = "person can be critical of someone /something else"

 

[Jane_Doe22]

​

Because she and her husband have been there, done that, and unless I am shown different, I believe her testimony. Now you can disparage her all you like... But the question is.. Is her testimony wrong, and if so, how? She goes into great detail of her experience in the temple... Vetted and approved by those in charge... And her story is similar to others I have heard who are still Mormons. So... Why the angst against prayer warrior and the writer of the book?

As always, I am happy to happy any question:

Prayer Warrior: as I've made very clear, I'm tired of being treated as an object rather than a person.
Lynn Wilders's book: Is grossly inaccurate and skewed, which is annoying as a person who's OCD honest. I would have / do have the same issue with axe-grinder anti SDA books, anti-Catholic, anti-Baptist, etc.

Thus far you have gone to great lengths to minimise any impact @Prayer Warrior may have in this thread by casting aspersions on her, and her source. But I note that not once have you denied the truthfulness of what she is quoting. Is what she quoted am accurate description of the ceremonies, or don't you know because you haven't gone through them?

Every passage is very misconstrued, missing critical context, purpose, and other aspect. ​

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I disagree; one could be a whistle-blower with an axe to grind.

Definition of axe grinder: working for an ulterior purpose or toward a selfish end - Definition of AX-GRINDING



I think the word you're looking for is "deceiver", because if they're putting a skew on information and the "skew" isn't truthful, then they are lying, purposefully.



The above definition says that's exactly what someone is, in this instance. "working for an ulterior motive" = "person can be critical of someone /something else"

An axe-grinder includes the skewing.

 

[4Jesus]

An axe-grinder includes the skewing.

That definition does not include that, not even inherently. Which dictionary are you using that has "skewing" = "working for an ulterior purpose"?

Defition of skewing: to distort especially from a true value or symmetrical form -https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skew

"to distort especially from a true value" != "working for an ulterior purpose", because, "working for an ulterior purpose" could not include distortion from a true value...but it could, but that doesn't automatically/inherently mean it does which is why they are not always equal.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

That definition does not include that, not even inherently. Which dictionary are you using that has "skewing" = "working for an ulterior purpose"?

Here let me explain terms as I am using them:
An axe-grinder is somebody that is agenda driven, usually in some type of angst wanting to pain something/someone in a negative light, and skews information to suit their purpose.
Not all folks that are critical of someone/something else are axe-grinders. Not remotely. You can be critical, and present things without any skew, giving points where they are due as well as rational criticisms.

Does that make sense?

 

[brakelite]

Every passage is very misconstrued, missing critical context, purpose, and other aspect.

But accurate in as much as it is presented. Right? So what you have a beef with is that you believe those ceremonies are meaningful, have value, etc etc but you are offended that others do not. Sorry, but tough. I don't see them as having any value either... Except as a vehicle by which the church binds you to itself.
You remind me of myself when deciding to leave Catholicism. The RCC taught in my young days that anyone outside is lost. So when deciding to leave, one must be willing to place His complete trust in Christ for salvation regardless of the church. You see the LDS church as essential to your salvation. And any criticism of it is a criticism that you take personally... Much like the way BOL does. I understand that. But let me assure you, Christ does not need the LDS CHURCH TO SAVE ANYONE. and He certainly doesn't need you or anyone else to go through demeaning and humiliating rituals in order for you to earn higher honours and eternal life.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

But accurate in as much as it is presented. Right?

Not remotely, for all of the reason I listed above.

So what you have a beef with is that you believe those ceremonies are meaningful, have value, etc etc but you are offended that others do not.

No. As I have said a million times, I don't give a rat's tail if somebody else disagrees/dislikes with my beliefs.

​

You see the LDS church as essential to your salvation.

No.

And any criticism of it is a criticism that you take personally

Not remotely.
​

Please quit trying to "inform" me what I think and believe. It is beyond disrespectful.

 

[4Jesus]

Here let me explain terms as I am using them:
An axe-grinder is somebody that is agenda driven, usually in some type of angst wanting to pain something/someone in a negative light, and skews information to suit their purpose.

I understand what you're saying, that's just one specific possibility however. The other possibilities are that what you're saying is wrong, context of this instance ignored.

One can be an axe-grinder that does not distort the true value. Agreed?

In this case, you're saying the axe grinding is to purposefully skew the information. But what I'm saying is, if said information isn't skewed, then it doesn't matter if they're axe-grinding (and not to "paint something/someone in a negative light", just "painting something/someone"). You're binding the two concepts, when I'm saying, in this case, they could not be bound.

Not all folks that are critical of someone/something else are axe-grinders. Not remotely. You can be critical, and present things without any skew, giving points where they are due as well as rational criticisms.

Does that make sense?

So we do agree. And this is what I'm saying. The only reason why I'm discussing axe grinding at all, is because of your statement, in this argument of course, of "Axe grinding makes someone/something a bad source."

So where we differ, is on the skew, that someone is purposefully distorting truth, in this case. The argument I have is, what if they're not distorting the truth?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

One can be an axe-grinder that does not distort the true value. Agreed?

In this case, you're saying the axe grinding is to purposefully skew the information. But what I'm saying is, if said information isn't skewed, then it doesn't matter if they're axe-grinding (and not to "paint something/someone in a negative light", just "painting something/someone"). You're binding the two concepts, when I'm saying, in this case, they could not be bound.
​

So we do agree. And this is what I'm saying.

So where we differ, is on the skew, that someone is purposefully distorting truth, in this case. The argument I have is, what if they're not distorting the truth?

As I am using the term, an axe-grinder by definition includes the skew.
Not all critical people are axe-grinders.
Lynn Wilder is an axe-grinder.
Other people are not. For a personal example: my favorite aunt is an ex-Mormon and critical of the faith. But not remotely an axe-grinder.

 

[4Jesus]

As I am using the term, an axe-grinder by definition includes the skew.
Not all critical people are axe-grinders.
Lynn Wilder is an axe-grinder.
Other people are not. For a personal example: my favorite aunt is an ex-Mormon and critical of the faith. But not remotely an axe-grinder.

But you just contradicted yourself in acknowledgement, as I bolded in the last post. And you just skewed my previous response to you, by not including it in your response to that! You're skewing here!

Ok, you've got your own compilation of axe-grinding + skewing = axe-grinding here.

Sorry for all the back and forth; was just trying to ensure I wasn't misunderstanding you here.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

But you just contradicted yourself in acknowledgement, as I bolded in the last post.

Ok, you've got your own compilation of axe-grinding + skewing = axe-grinding here.

Sorry for all the back and forth; was just trying to ensure I wasn't misunderstanding you here.

I'm happy to clarify

 

[4Jesus]

I'm happy to clarify

Na, you just skewed my post in your response to that post. You completely removed a crucial piece. Now you're skewing, with an axe to grind!

You kept this part of my post in your quote "So we do agree. And this is what I'm saying." And you removed this part: "The only reason why I'm discussing axe grinding at all, is because of your statement, in this argument of course, of "Axe grinding makes someone/something a bad source.""

When it contradicted you're earlier "Not all folks that are critical of someone/something else are axe-grinders. Not remotely. You can be critical, and present things without any skew, giving points where they are due as well as rational criticisms." statement.



You are literallly removing words from my mouth here...

 

[Grailhunter]

I understand what you're saying, that's just one specific possibility however. The other possibilities are that what you're saying is wrong, context of this instance ignored.

One can be an axe-grinder that does not distort the true value. Agreed?

In this case, you're saying the axe grinding is to purposefully skew the information. But what I'm saying is, if said information isn't skewed, then it doesn't matter if they're axe-grinding (and not to "paint something/someone in a negative light", just "painting something/someone"). You're binding the two concepts, when I'm saying, in this case, they could not be bound.



So we do agree. And this is what I'm saying. The only reason why I'm discussing axe grinding at all, is because of your statement, in this argument of course, of "Axe grinding makes someone/something a bad source."

So where we differ, is on the skew, that someone is purposefully distorting truth, in this case. The argument I have is, what if they're not distorting the truth?

No usually an axe grinder is an idiot....the source don't matter. Axe grinder -- grudge -- hate -- mindless, it all goes together.

 

[4Jesus]

No usually an axe grinder is an idiot....the source don't matter. Axe grinder -- grudge -- hate -- mindless, it all goes together.

So "go along with what I say or else you're a hateful, mindless, vindictive idiot"?

 

[Grailhunter]

So "go along with what I say or else you're a hateful, mindless, vindictive idiot"?

No the term....axe grinder....the tactics....the innuendo....the demeanor...

 

[Grailhunter]

So "go along with what I say or else you're a hateful, mindless, vindictive idiot"?

Discussions are good....but I give her an A+ for patience on this one. Is there something you want to know or is your intent to only harass?

 

[brakelite]

Not remotely, for all of the reason I listed above.


No. As I have said a million times, I don't give a rat's tail if somebody else disagrees/dislikes with my beliefs.

​

No.

Not remotely.
​

Please quit trying to "inform" me what I think and believe. It is beyond disrespectful.

So her personal testimony of her many visits to at least two different temples and the description of those ceremonies, regardless of what they actually mean, was a lie? That her description of the manner and means for preparation for the taking of oaths etc was not accurate? How can she already physical description of something she experienced? She isn't offering any context or explaining the meaning of the ceremony...I realise that... But is her actual description of the experience accurate? Of not, what is different?

 

[4Jesus]

No the term....axe grinder....the tactics....the innuendo....the demeanor...

Na, you're making up definitions on your own here. That's not even close to the dictionary's view on that term.

Axe grinder:
-https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ax-grinding: "working for an ulterior purpose or toward a selfish end"
-https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/have+an+ax+to+grind:"1. To have a complaint or dispute that one feels compelled to discuss.
2. To have a personal motivation or selfish reason for saying or doing something."
-https://www.answers.com/Q/What_does_it_mean_if_you_have_an_axe_to_grind: "An axe to grind means a complaint, something that you need to talk over with someone." and "he phrase is "Axe to grind" and it means that you have a grievance to settle or a job to do, so you need to go and grind your axe (i.e. sharpen it) so that it is up to the necessary task"

Perhaps you are meaning the definition by Biblical standards? If so, could you please point it out to me (seriously asking here)?

 

[4Jesus]

Discussions are good....but I give her an A+ for patience on this one. Is there something you want to know or is your intent to only harass?

So now I'm harassing her? Asking for what she means is harassing now?

In what way is that harassment? Especially since she has replied...

 

[Grailhunter]

Na, you're making up definitions on your own here. That's not even close to the dictionary's view on that term.

Axe grinder:
-https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ax-grinding: "working for an ulterior purpose or toward a selfish end"
-https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/have+an+ax+to+grind:"1. To have a complaint or dispute that one feels compelled to discuss.
2. To have a personal motivation or selfish reason for saying or doing something."
-https://www.answers.com/Q/What_does_it_mean_if_you_have_an_axe_to_grind: "An axe to grind means a complaint, something that you need to talk over with someone." and "he phrase is "Axe to grind" and it means that you have a grievance to settle or a job to do, so you need to go and grind your axe (i.e. sharpen it) so that it is up to the necessary task"

Perhaps you are meaning the definition by Biblical standards? If so, could you please point it out to me (seriously asking here)?

Lets just call it the spirit of the intent --- which is transparent and apparent. Again...discussion or interrogation?