Paul H Dunn - Lynn Packer

[bcuzbcuz]

Nope just trying to understand the terrible injuries that caused such disdain. Tell me what they were so I can understand how he damaged you.

I also visited Elder Kimball, long before he became president, in his home in SLC and have only fond memories of the visit. He didn't need deception to inspire.

I don't think Dunn damaged me or is responsible for any of my misdeeds, and simply state that, a liar is a liar, and worthy of no more credit than that and certainly deserves no honor.

And does it not state in scripture, "Thou shalt not bear false testimony"?

Edited August 17, 2012 by bcuzbcuz

[ERayR]

I also visited Elder Kimball, long before he became president, in his home in SLC and have only fond memories of the visit. He didn't need deception to inspire.

I don't think Dunn damaged me or is responsible for any of my misdeeds, and simply state that, a liar is a liar, and worthy of no more credit than that and certainly deserves no honor.

Have you ever told a lie?

[DBMormon]

I have a problem with dredging up something over with more than two decades ago and with dragging up and vilifying a man who has been dead for fourteen years and who repented and acknowledged his error before he died.

1.) length of time passed eliminates me from speaking on an issue even if I have only recently read the details?

2.) Because this is a discussion board you have a right to judge my intentions? even though it is against board rules??

3.) You criticize non-believers by the same standards you ask that no criticsm be extended to the church?

4.) you ask that we not judge but your words are extremely judgemental of others, that seems odd? do rules apply to you?

5.) I have no right to criticize your defense of Elder Dunn's actions of deception within his talks? What are my responsibilities to comment on blatant disregard of truth? If Hitler were LDS and was a seventy - could I speak out or must I keep my mouth shut until ... until when... until he no longer would be a member and then he is fair game, regardless how long that takes?

By the way my issue was not with Elder Dunn, it is with the group of you who rush to his defense and want to put him on your shoulders and parade his behavior as explainable or a small infraction.

[DBMormon]

No a case for your interpretation of event which by the way was made on a little evidence and a whole lot of biased conjecture.

all of a sudden conjecture is a bad thing.....

[DBMormon]

Nope just trying to understand the terrible injuries that caused such disdain. Tell me what they were so I can understand how he damaged you.

Kent Frogley says it best

The reaction from the general Church membership after the

story broke has been interesting, as far as I’ve been able to

assess. Some people tried to defend Paul Dunns behavior.

Many have reacted with anger. But most have shrugged their

shoulders and gone on. They’re busy raising families and

making a living and getting their Sunday School lessons ready.

Paul Dunn is a blip on their spiritual peripheral vision. Maybe

that is as it should be. Sometimes too much can be made of

another person’s weakness or lack of judgment. But I think

damage has been done. Paul Dunn has compromised the

believability of all stories and events spoken from the pulpit.

When I hear a story now, I wonder what little detail was

omitted or what little twist was inserted so that the story would

work just a little bit better, be a little more faith promoting.

Now, I am left to wonder, where does faith balance a healthy

skepticism? How much should I question? More than once I’ve

heard someone respond to a conference talk with, "I hope he’s

not Paul Dunning me."

Me - I want my testimony built on truth and not fables and fairytales

Edited August 17, 2012 by DBMormon

[ERayR]

all of a sudden conjecture is a bad thing.....

You do have selective vision it seems. Note the word biased preceding conjecture. Biased means: 1. Show prejudice for or against (someone or something) unfairly: "the tests were biased against women"; "a biased view of the world".

There does that help.

as for your post #228 You misunderstood, misrepresented, something because you misrepresented what I posted. Invoking Hitler does your argument no good. Neither can I believe you are so obtuse as to miss what I said.

Edited August 17, 2012 by ERayR

[ERayR]

Kent Frogley says it best

The reaction from the general Church membership after the

story broke has been interesting, as far as I’ve been able to

assess. Some people tried to defend Paul Dunns behavior.

Many have reacted with anger. But most have shrugged their

shoulders and gone on. They’re busy raising families and

making a living and getting their Sunday School lessons ready.

Paul Dunn is a blip on their spiritual peripheral vision. Maybe

that is as it should be. Sometimes too much can be made of

another person’s weakness or lack of judgment. But I think

damage has been done. Paul Dunn has compromised the

believability of all stories and events spoken from the pulpit.

When I hear a story now, I wonder what little detail was

omitted or what little twist was inserted so that the story would

work just a little bit better, be a little more faith promoting.

Now, I am left to wonder, where does faith balance a healthy

skepticism? How much should I question? More than once I’ve

heard someone respond to a conference talk with, "I hope he’s

not Paul Dunning me."

Me - I want my testimony built on truth and not fables and fairytales

Perhaps you should then build your testimony on scripture study and personal revelation. Oops the Bible has that talking donkey thing but then I can get the message anyway. Hey but that is just me.

Edited August 17, 2012 by ERayR

[ERayR]

I also visited Elder Kimball, long before he became president, in his home in SLC and have only fond memories of the visit. He didn't need deception to inspire.

I don't think Dunn damaged me or is responsible for any of my misdeeds, and simply state that, a liar is a liar, and worthy of no more credit than that and certainly deserves no honor.

And does it not state in scripture, "Thou shalt not bear false testimony"?

I believe that goes Thou shalt not bear false witness.

[bcuzbcuz]

Have you ever told a lie?

And what? exactly does that have to do with anything?

I believe that goes Thou shalt not bear false witness.

And your point is? I read the scripture in Swedish and may not have an accurate English translation. Is that a problem for you? IS the message different as you read them?

Edited August 17, 2012 by bcuzbcuz

[DBMormon]

You do have selective vision it seems. Note the word biased preceding conjecture. Biased means: 1. Show prejudice for or against (someone or something) unfairly: "the tests were biased against women"; "a biased view of the world".

Now your unbiased as well? got it

[KevinG]

I don't defend Elder Dunn or what I see as a sad case of someone starting to believe in their own celebrity at the expense of their calling...

However, I tend to praise publicly and correct privately. Given the public nature of the stories Elder Dunn was censured publicly but that should be the extent of it. The attempts to use his errors as a means to gain notoriety are despicable.

Don't confuse the LDS leaderships protection of Elder Dunn and the Churches dignity beyond the damage already done with any desire to hide sins.

[DBMormon]

Perhaps you should then build your testimony on scripture study and personal revelation. Oops the Bible has that talking donkey thing but then I can get the message anyway. Hey but that is just me.

by your standard I can read Grimms Fairy Tales and hold them as scripture because honest intentions and truth teling are secondary to the lesson learned.

Jack and Jill went up the hill.........

[DBMormon]

I don't defend Elder Dunn or what I see as a sad case of someone starting to believe in their own celebrity at the expense of their calling...

However, I tend to praise publicly and correct privately. Given the public nature of the stories Elder Dunn was censured publicly but that should be the extent of it. The attempts to use his errors as a means to gain notoriety are despicable.

Don't confuse the LDS leaderships protection of Elder Dunn and the Churches dignity beyond the damage already done with any desire to hide sins.

Kevin, I can't agree more

[ERayR]

And what? exactly does that have to do with anything?

And your point is?

If you have told a lie it puts you right there with Paul Dunn and that '"...for whatsoever judgement ye mete so shall it be measured unto you" thing comes into play.

Nothing, only that you quoted it wrong. Oh by the way what evidence have you that Paul Dunn bore a false testimony? His stories were fiction but what leads you to believe his testimony was anything other than real?

Edited August 17, 2012 by ERayR

[ERayR]

Now your unbiased as well? got it

Keep it up you have almost a perfect record of getting wrong everything I write. It appears that with that kind of record you have to be really trying hard to misrepresent what I say.

[ERayR]

by your standard I can read Grimms Fairy Tales and hold them as scripture because honest intentions and truth teling are secondary to the lesson learned.

Jack and Jill went up the hill.........

If you want you can do that. It's my opinion that it is not one of your better ideas.

[ERayR]

Kevin, I can't agree more

As do I.

[DBMormon]

If you want you can do that. It's my opinion that it is not one of your better ideas.

Well I have to give you credit, you know a bad idea when you see one, and some way you just acknowledged that most of my ideas are better then this one. I'll take that as a compliment whether intended or not.

[ERayR]

Well I have to give you credit, you know a bad idea when you see one, and some way you just acknowledged that most of my ideas are better then this one. I'll take that as a compliment whether intended or not.

Now we are making headway. For the first time in several posts you haven't misrepresented what I wrote.

[selek1]

Each day on here faithful amateur apoligists demean the intentions and motives of those who are critical of the church.

Not always. Sometimes we demean their fashion sense.

But to be honest- a standard you laud but have not yet mastered- we criticize the actions and behaviors of people we have dealt with first hand. We don't rely on hearsay, or someone else's version of events. If we call you out on something- it's something we saw you do or say- not something an anti-Mormon hack with an axe to grind claims is the "undiluted truth".

Who is "we"? I categorically reject your presumptive arrogance in claiming the right to speak for me- or any other faithful Mormon. And I do so because of your behavior, not what someone else whispered about you from anonymity or in an article published more than two decades ago.

He was dishonest and deceptive and he then when cornered lied some more to cover his tracks.

That is YOUR interpretation of events based on second-hand testimony and your own biases.

Given your procilivities and biases, we honestly expected nothing more of less from you.

Unfortunately for your self-proclaimed role as Arbitor of All Truth Concerning Paul H. Dunn, reasonable minds can and do disagree with your conclusions.

While I realize we all make mistakes and fall short and need a redeemer, I will not excuse what he did.

Nor have any of us here. Not a single FAITHFUL Mormon has alleged, implied, or stated that Elder Dunn was justified in what he did.

Not one.

What we have done is stated that roots of his error lie in something other than the pride, mendacity, and guile that mind-readers such as yourself seem so desperate to attach to his character.

We do not- and have not- sought to excuse his sin. But we have sought to show that his actions- while wrong- are comprehensible and that they need not stem from an inherently bad character.

Dunn's critics have no such charity or discretion- the only answer they find acceptable is that Dunn was a villain- along with the Church he loved.

No other conclusion will be tolerated- as you have so amply demonstrated.

While nice and kind and christlike in personality, His life story is full of deception and dishonesty.

"Full of" is a highly arbitrary and inescapably subjective measure.

One wonders how you measure it.

Suffice it to say you are compressing three quarters of a century of the man's life into a single sound-bite- and cherry picking the incidents which suit your agenda.

If you are going to call out critics for their dishonesty then at least have the courage to call a spade a spade.

Where have we failed to do so? Where have we sought to justify or excuse his sins?

No- in this instance it is you who is being dishonest- about both our actions and our motives.

We have not sought to justify Elder Dunn, nor to excuse him. We have, however, sought to put a human face on the two-dimensional cartoon villain you and others have attempted to pass off as Elder Dunn.

If unwilling to do that then please speak no longer on those outside the church who have the same struggle.

While your allies and fellow travellers in the Great and Spacious Building are no doubt grateful to you for championing their cause, it is not their struggle with dishonesty with which we take issue- it is their wholesale embrace of it.

Lastly, This is a completely separate issue from the church's handling of it and I see no reason to confuse the two.

On the contrary- the smears of Elder Dunn's character were a mere prelude to attacks on the Church- a Trojan Horse or "gateway drug:, if you will.

In that sense they are part-and-parcel, and must be examined in that context.

[why me]

I just read the article in Sunstone written by Packer about Dunn.

While I will be criticized for saying this, I want it said. Each day on here faithful amateur apoligists

Who are the amateur apologists? Care to list names?

[KevinG]

Who are the amateur apologists? Care to list names?

That would be me. I haven't gone pro yet but I hope someone notices my talent, drafts me to a pro team and pays me handsomely.

[why me]

He was dishonest and deceptive and he then when cornered lied some more to cover his tracks. While I realize we all make mistakes and fall short and need a redeemer, I will not excuse what he did. While nice and kind and christlike in personality, His life story is full of deception and dishonesty. If you are going to call out critics for their dishonesty then at least have the courage to call a spade a spade. If unwilling to do that then please speak no longer on those outside the church who have the same struggle.

Lastly, This is a completely separate issue from the church's handling of it and I see no reason to confuse the two.

Now DB let me explain something to you. No one is excusing Dunn. And yes, we can call out the critics because they attempt to disparage the whole church with what Dunn did. And it is here that our ganders can get raised. No one is defending Dunn. However, I think that we also need to understand that he was human and he got caught up in his own fiction. It happens. He needed to be humbled and he was humbled.

[ERayR]

That would be me. I haven't gone pro yet but I hope someone notices my talent, drafts me to a pro team and pays me handsomely.

Will disgust and vitriol do.

[why me]

That would be me. I haven't gone pro yet but I hope someone notices my talent, drafts me to a pro team and pays me handsomely.

Well, you may be a triple A ball player located in Newark, New Jersey. I think that you may have to play in Bear Stadium for awhile before being called up for the big leagues. As for myself, I am in the big leagues but...I am the bat boy.

How do you like your stadium?

http://www.newarkbears.com/

Oh... I like the honey bears. Maybe I will join you....

http://brickcitybears.com/?page_id=1059

Edited August 17, 2012 by why me