Episodes

Mormonism LIVE: 045: Mormonism and Macbeth

Radio Free Mormon takes Bill Reel and the rest of us through Shakespeare’s Macbeth in order to connect some dot in Mormonism on two issues. The First is the Apologetic response that if the critic can’t explain how something is done then it must be a miracle and second how Church Leaders always seem ambiguous on the issue of having seen Christ.

RESOURCES:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1971/04/the-spirit-beareth-record?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2014/04/the-witness?lang=eng

https://youtu.be/g0js6xWv6bc?t=3453

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAt4Od0teNg&t=545s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrMJ2YZD62M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xRO4nPbrxk

Play

4 thoughts on “Mormonism LIVE: 045: Mormonism and Macbeth

  1. You missed the point. William Shakespeare didn’t write his plays —it was another guy with the same name!

  2. As supplemental content, I *highly* recommend RFM Episode 217 (“Elder Oaks is NOT a Liar!”) — https://radiofreemormon.org/2021/03/radio-free-mormon-217-elder-oaks-is-not-a-liar/ — in which RFM and Jonathan S. discuss how general authorities justify themselves in saying something that is both (1) true and (2) designed to mislead listeners by giving the listeners false impressions.

    Often, people lose their minds about general authorities’ statements that are allegedly “lies”. But a closer examination reveals that they are almost always *true* statements, but they are designed to mislead listeners by giving the listeners false impressions.

    What those carefully-worded statements reveal is church leaders’ deliberate cynicism and intent to mislead — because one cannot carefully craft such statements accidentally. It takes conscious/deliberate thought to choose those words carefully.

  3. I went to a leadership training as a bishop once. E’ Cook was the speaker. At the end of his speech he got very serious and looked out to the congregation and said about Jesus, “I have seen His face and I have heard His voice”. Of course everyone wet themselves as he said this. To me it seemed very strange, why not just say I have seen Him – why use this type of language. I found the answer in my studies some time later. Another apostle used the exact same language in a talk at a regional conference and then later said, “I see His face every time I see President Nelson. I hear His voice every time I hear the prophet speak”. Quite a difference in my opinion. It was obvious to me 1) this statement by Cook was meant to deceive, and 2) they have been trained and told what to say and how to justify what they say.

    • While anecdotal, I recall hearing about someone- I believe a stake president- once being told, “How dare you criticize President Hinckley! Don’t you know he’s next in line to become God!?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*