For any interested, this is the transcript of an interview I had with one of the current 12 apostles: http://www.ldsorigins.com/myapostleinterview.htm

The previous discussion was closed because it reached a maximum amount of comments. I'm reposting in case more wanted to read it and discuss. Here is the other thread: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,3489

I realize some want to hear the actual audio from the interview, but I'm afraid that I am not yet prepared to put it online for a couple of reasons: fallout from my friends and family members, as well as a certain level of my own guilt for not getting the apostle's permission to record our meeting.

That being said, thanks for reading and I would love to hear any thoughts you have about what was said in the meeting.

Thanks for sharing this "discussion." Seeing as L. Tom Perry is now 88, most likely you won't have to wait too long until you can post the audio. I'd say you're lucky, of the the twelve he's probably the only one who would have listened to your concerns and not lambasted you for them!

How do you know it's L. Tom Perry?

I'm going to be honest, he's one of the Apostles that I know least about (along with Richard G. Scott, and the 2 newbies), but isn't he third in line to be prophet?

"An individual legally can record or disclose the contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication to which he is a party, or when at least one participant has consented to the recording, unless the person has a criminal or tortious purpose in making the recording. Utah Code Ann. § 77-23a-4."

In other words...a long as you know it was being recorded...that's all that matters. He can't sue.

He's not worried about getting sued (legal aspect), he's worried about the ethical aspect.

Also I assume your quote is from the Utah Criminal Code. That only means that he won't get arrested and charged with a crime. Getting sued is a different matter entirely.

not being able to sue =/= not being offended/ make trouble, etc

Interesting interview, I have a couple of guesses, but really it is not relevent, it was an intreting read, since I'm going thrugh some of the sae God quetions right now.

FWIW, I don't think it was Perry.

True, LDSOrigins could legally post it. Ida Smith posted a phone call with Jeffrey Holland. (Google "Ida Smith" "Holland" and "Nemelka" if you want to hear it.) But not getting sued is only one reason to refrain from posting it, the other being LDSOrigins' feelings about whether it would be ethical to do so, the circumstances under which the meeting occured, and the apostle's expectations of privacy.

I think LDSOrigins deserves to have his decision not to post the recording respected.

That is a fascinating conversation that Holland had with Ida. I had never heard of Nemelka before. I wonder if there is anything to Holland saying that Nemelka admitted to making it all up to see if people would follow him...

You are clearly very bright and these interviews were interesting reads.

I have to say that I was actually fairly impressed with the historian. For someone in his position, trying to defend what he "must" defend, without the facts on his side, he did well in being able to give enough ground to appear reasonable, logical, fair-minded, well-versed, wise and intelligent (mostly but not solely by virtue of not disagreeing with you), while maintaining enough ground for the church to still plausibly be true. And his advice seemed remarkably well-intentioned in that it seemingly sincerely encouraged a spiritual and intellectual journey marked by honesty and sincerity at all costs, even at the cost of the loss of testimony (although his advice is reflective of his confidence that this will not be the result, even if he knew that this would the cost it seems to me that he would still encourage the journey).

At any rate, the historian comes across as much more of a man specially called of God than the Apostle with his entirely tired, pathetically manipulative, and uninspired response.

Yeah, I thought similar actually. Plus, at least the historian has actually researched the truth about his religion. I actually can't believe an apostle couldn't even attempt to answer the questions. In this day and age, that should be a pre-requisite to becoming a Stake President, let along Apostle (although I suppose he wouldn't have started climbing the ladder in "this day and age"). That's another problem with apostles. Seriously, if the church was run by 20 year-olds, I'm almost certain the Prop 8 fiasco wouldn't have happened, for starters.

Both answered in the same way.

My assessments, not quotes:

Apostle. “Be careful about that intellect of yours but keep using it as long as you pray.” “I don’t know enough about the religion I stand for so I’ll defer you to our historian”.

Historian. “Be careful about that intellect of yours but keep using it as long as you pray.” “ I have some other appointments, thanks for stopping by”.

But LDSORIGINS knew that was exactly what he was going to get before the interviews. Amazin ain’t it!
Prophets Seers and Revelators that don’t have any answers, but they are real busy with nothingwork.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/27/2010 08:14PM by AmIDarkNow?.

I think that is a pretty fair sum-up of the conversations.

However, I actually did not expect the responses that I received. I thought the apostle would know more than he did, and I thought that the historian would be a bit more defensive- get a little more into the apologetics. I was hoping both of them would get into specifics more than they did. The answers I received were unexpected, but still very interesting in their own way.