John Dehlin...Giant Killer

[Libs]

No. The apologist wants the argument to have an impact.

Yes, I agree.

[Libs]

And yet, those other influences may not be so important when looking at the big picture. And that was my point. The critics certainly want to make them important since they repeat them over and over again like a broken record. But the foundation of mormoniism is strong, etched in stone...(when we think of david whtimer's tombstone. He went to his maker believing he was making things right for him before giving an account of his earthly life to his maker.

None of those influences should be larger than our own relationship with God/Spirit, I agree. But, sometimes that gets lost in a tangle of conflicting information.

[Libs]

I think that many members forget to keep it simple. What is simple? We have the book of mormon. We also have 11 witnesses. And we have emma. I find it hard to believe that all these people were duped.

I agree with you, to a point, but do you see what you have done, here? You started out with what I thought was going to be a plea to lean on the spirit (our own testimony), but end up giving, what is essentially, an "apologetic" solution. You find it hard to believe that these people were duped. That can be argued seven ways to Sunday, by critics AND apologists. That's where the trouble begins, for those searching for answers.

Edited June 25, 2012 by Libs

[Calm]

Of course, decisions to stay in the church or leave are always, ultimately, up to the individual. That doesn't negate what I have said, about others influencing those decisions.

The ideal society that God has told us of is one where all are one with each other and with God.

It is a balancing act between allowing our relationships to be front and center in importance in our lives and ensuring we take our individual accountability for our actions seriously and not shift that responsibility to others.

Some people dislike the idea of becoming one with God because they see that as a loss of individuality. To me, I think it will actually increase individuality as it will maximize the expression of all that is potentially good within us.

However, maintaining individuality and relationships at one and the same time is difficult. Perhaps that is why true unity is only a gift that is offer to those at the higher levels of the heavenly kingdoms because such unity would lead to a loss of individuality for anyone of lesser spiritual strength.

[TomesD]

I think some people are claiming that the ad homs in the apologetics actually turned them off and away from the church. That's something I never really saw much of and was not an issue for me.

I understand the desire to denigrate individuals that are denigrating something one holds sacred. It is easier to dismiss the things someone says if one can dismiss them as crackpots etc.

But the original purpose of organizations like FAIR was to provide scholarly responses to criticisms of the Church and Church doctrines and to remove the possibility of ad hom attacks by virtue of the scholarly responses having to pass through reviews; ad hom attacks do nothing to promote faith in any way. The truth is that some of the answers to questions we may have are not available to us since HF has not provided those answers. I'm ok with that. In my opinion, if one let's either the attacks of the anti's or the ad hom responses to them diminish one's faith, then perhaps one should focus more on scriptures etc. and not on these verbal wars.

Just my two cents.

[TomesD]

On the flip side, I personally know of at least 5 people who were questioning their faith and turned to FAIR/FARMS for answers and decided the church was false based on the apologists writings. Is FAIR and FARMS a wolf in sheep's clothing? Probably just as much John Dehlin which is hardly.

I do not believe this to be the case. It doesn't make sense to me. How can the apologists' writings have such a result?

[John Ping Pong]

I would like to say why Dehlin's Mormon Stories has been of benefit to me personally.

It has been my experience that LDS church meetings continue to teach Primary lessons until we are old and gray, as evidenced by the fact that the priesthood/relief society manual for this year is the same as for the investigator's class.

There is so much more to the gospel than this, and Dehlin talks about the other 95% fearlessly.

By his example, I find I am more able to face the less attractive aspects of Mormonism in a similarly stalwart fashion.

While I do think Dehlin is perhaps a tad too cynical in his interviews of believers (such as the recent podcast featuring Brant Gardner) while swallowing whole whatever a critic may say (such as the podcast featuring Michael Coe, which was good, but in which Michael Coe presented some pretty basic errors relating to the text of the Book of Mormon with no correction or follow up from Dehlin), I nevertheless find that overall Dehlin's presentations are thought-provoking and stimulating and well worth the time to download and give a listen.

[Libs]

I understand the desire to denigrate individuals that are denigrating something one holds sacred. It is easier to dismiss the things someone says if one can dismiss them as crackpots etc.

But the original purpose of organizations like FAIR was to provide scholarly responses to criticisms of the Church and Church doctrines and to remove the possibility of ad hom attacks by virtue of the scholarly responses having to pass through reviews; ad hom attacks do nothing to promote faith in any way. The truth is that some of the answers to questions we may have are not available to us since HF has not provided those answers. I'm ok with that. In my opinion, if one let's either the attacks of the anti's or the ad hom responses to them diminish one's faith, then perhaps one should focus more on scriptures etc. and not on these verbal wars.

Just my two cents.

I don't, at all, disagree with that TomesD. I still believe one must turn to God, ultimately, for the bottom line answers.

But, I am also very familiar with the stumbling blocks some people/issues can be (even the prophets, themselves, at times). It does matter how we treat people, how we talk to them and respect or disrespect them, because if you are not allowing the spirit to express through you, you(your ego) may very well be a stumbling block for others.

Edited June 25, 2012 by Libs

[ERayR]

I would like to say why Dehlin's Mormon Stories has been of benefit to me personally.

It has been my experience that LDS church meetings continue to teach Primary lessons until we are old and gray, as evidenced by the fact that the priesthood/relief society manual for this year is the same as for the investigator's class.

There is so much more to the gospel than this, and Dehlin talks about the other 95% fearlessly.

By his example, I find I am more able to face the less attractive aspects of Mormonism in a similarly stalwart fashion.

While I do think Dehlin is perhaps a tad too cynical in his interviews of believers (such as the recent podcast featuring Brant Gardner) while swallowing whole whatever a critic may say (such as the podcast featuring Michael Coe, which was good, but in which Michael Coe presented some pretty basic errors relating to the text of the Book of Mormon with no correction or follow up from Dehlin), I nevertheless find that overall Dehlin's presentations are thought-provoking and stimulating and well worth the time to download and give a listen.

If you are still only getting the primary level understanding of these principles Your not learning very well, By the time you reach Melchizedek Priesthood age you should be into the much deeper aspects of these same principles.

[John Ping Pong]

If you are still only getting the primary level understanding of these principles Your not learning very well, By the time you reach Melchizedek Priesthood age you should be into the much deeper aspects of these same principles.

Which is why the aged adults and long-time LDS are being taught the same thing as non-members?

[TomesD]

I don't, at all, disagree with that TomesD. I still believe one must turn to God, ultimately, for the bottom line answers.

But, I am also very familiar with the stumbling blocks some people/issues can be (even the prophets, themselves, at times). It does matter how we treat people, how we talk to them and respect or disrespect them, because if you are not allowing the spirit to express through you, you(your ego) may very well be a stumbling block for others.

Well, I agree. In my opinion, one can best be an example if one avoids those personal attacks. I totally agree that it matters how we treat people. Attacking those who disagree often (in my experiences anyway) drives them further into their desire to disagree, even when reasonable arguments are discussed.

[Deborah]

Which is why the aged adults and long-time LDS are being taught the same thing as non-members?

The temple ceremony is the same every time you go yet I can get something different from it each time. If you feel that it's too simple maybe you missed the point. In any case what is wrong with doing your own study and research. And there is always the Fair Conference.

[Libs]

Well, I agree. In my opinion, one can best be an example if one avoids those personal attacks. I totally agree that it matters how we treat people. Attacking those who disagree often (in my experiences anyway) drives them further into their desire to disagree, even when reasonable arguments are discussed.

Exactly.

[USU78]

Sadly, the giant that Dehlin allegedly slew is the Bran the Blessed of our times. Doubtless, we will have twenty years with his noble head to advise and feast with us before we have to bury it in the sacred mound where it will protect us as long as ravens fly above.

Until, of course, Arthur, in his youthful arrogance, digs it up . . . allowing the Saxons a foothold in Prydain.

[DispensatorMysteriorum]

It has been my experience that LDS church meetings continue to teach Primary lessons until we are old and gray, as evidenced by the fact that the priesthood/relief society manual for this year is the same as for the investigator's class.

You clearly haven't been to church this year....

[wenglund]

Of course, decisions to stay in the church or leave are always, ultimately, up to the individual. That doesn't negate what I have said, about others influencing those decisions.

What I said goes further than making choices to stay or leave. It has to do with with the course one chooses, the set of one's sails, how one responds to the elements, which navigational tools to use or not, what things are of highest priority, what distraction that may be attended to and the degree to which they are attended, etc. In other words, I am not just talking about a final decision, but numerous decision leading thereto.

Storms, and tempests tossed, shoals, or doldrums, or even the sirens songs may have varied impact on a ships travels, but they are not what truly define the ship and its travels. Such is the purview of the captain--though some captains may errantly blame certain storms and distractions for not reaching the desired destination.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[ERayR]

Which is why the aged adults and long-time LDS are being taught the same thing as non-members?

Wow as one of those aged adults and a regular church attender I guess I am just one of the lucky ones who attends classes that teach the same principles but on an adult level. The discussion level gets quite interesting at times.

[wenglund]

If you are still only getting the primary level understanding of these principles Your not learning very well, By the time you reach Melchizedek Priesthood age you should be into the much deeper aspects of these same principles.

...particularly if one is attending the temple with a humble mind and heart open to the Spirit.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Libs]

What I said goes further than making choices to stay or leave. It has to do with with the course one chooses, the set of one's sails, how one responds to the elements, which navigational tools to use or not, what things are of highest priority, what distraction that may be attended to and the degree to which they are attended, etc. In other words, I am not just talking about a final decision, but numerous decision leading thereto.

Storms, and tempests tossed, shoals, or doldrums, or even the sirens songs may have varied impact on a ships travels, but they are not what truly define the ship and its travels. Such is the purview of the captain--though some captains may errantly blame certain storms and distractions for not reaching the desired destination.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

You are waxing very poetic, Mr. Englund, but I'm left wondering how a "captain" could be blamed for a storm that overturned his ship? Poor navigating, perhaps? Or perhaps it was a freak storm that came suddenly upon him. That's kind of how I felt about certain information about Mormonism. Then, all you can do is try and deal with the "storm", as best you can.

[Mark Beesley]

Which is why the aged adults and long-time LDS are being taught the same thing as non-members?

The vast majority of your learning about varous Gospel topics should be taking place at home during your personal scripture study, meditation, and prayer time. If you are looking to Church classes to teach you anything beyond what they are now teaching, you may be misunderstanding the function of the Church and Church meetings.

[Brian 2.0]

The vast majority of your learning about varous Gospel topics should be taking place at home during your personal scripture study, meditation, and prayer time. If you are looking to Church classes to teach you anything beyond what they are now teaching, you may be misunderstanding the function of the Church and Church meetings.

or you may just be wishing church meetings were more like the way they were in the early church, years before correlation took place.

[wenglund]

You are waxing very poetic, Mr. Englund, but I'm left wondering how a "captain" could be blamed for a storm that overturned his ship? Poor navigating, perhaps? Or perhaps it was a freak storm that came suddenly upon him. That's kind of how I felt about certain information about Mormonism. Then, all you can do is try and deal with the "storm", as best you can.

Dealing with the storm can be important, though not as important as striving towards one's desired destination. Storm may be blamed for flipping the boat, but not for preventing us from returning to our home shore.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited June 26, 2012 by wenglund

[Libs]

Dealing with the storm can be important, though not as important as striving towards one's desired destination. Storm may be blamed for flipping the boat, but not for preventing us from returning to our home shore.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Really? You must be quite a good swimmer!

[Calm]

or you may just be wishing church meetings were more like the way they were in the early church, years before correlation took place.

Maybe if the Church members were willing to go through the hardships they went through in the early days, we might have similar church meetings. Until then if you want that level of spiritual growth, then it is easy (or rather hard) enough to seek it out on your own.

Be prepared for receiving more than just knowledge though as much is required where much is given.

[CASteinman]

Read my post again. I never claimed that anyone decided the church was true solely by reading apologists. I prefaced it with the fact that these people were already questioning the faith and went to apologetics with answers. The answers did not suffice and they left. Apologetics aren't a magic pill that can bring everyone back around just as John Dehlin is not some catalyst that makes people apostatize.

I read your post and here is what you said:

On the flip side, I personally know of at least 5 people who were questioning their faith and turned to FAIR/FARMS for answers and decided the church was false based on the apologists writings. Is FAIR and FARMS a wolf in sheep's clothing?

The basis of their decision that the Church was false is the apologists writings -- hence they are suspect as wolves in sheeps clothing.

However, your revised explanation -- that it was their own internal doubt which was the basis -- makes more sense than your original one, which laid the cause of their decision upon the words of the apologists. Which is nonsense to me.

Edited June 26, 2012 by CASteinman