John Dehlin And Faith Reconstruction

[robuchan]

And let me assure you, that not in my wildest dreams, or most arrogant days, would I ever suggest to you, or my own children, for that matter, that they should focus their attention on finding whether you can ride a tapir into battle. I might, however, suggest to that it would help a lot to know whether anyone in the Book of Mormon ever rode anything into battle. And perhaps, I might mention my experience in England in discovering that they used words differently than I thought. Boots there weren't what I put on my feet. Nor bonnets on my head. Nor were chips crisp and thin, nor were cookies called biscuits. A prerequisite for disillusion, is holding to illusions. A prerequisite to enlightenment, is a willingness to let one's mind expand. Brittleness is not conducive to expansion, but rather, to shattering.

Hmm...so, you're not really saying "Duh you should have already known that." "You're saying, yeah but that's not that big of a deal." Much, much, much different message. Much more productive and honest. A lot less offensive, too.

[Tacenda]

I don't know how you could go to general conference, with what goes on on the streets, and NOT know there were "alternative views" of the gospel.

I found Utah, at least SLC, very polarized actually. You either saw garment lines or no shirts and tattoos, Deseret News or the Tribune. That is of course an exaggeration but not much of one. Maybe it has changed.

I remember during a conference seeing someone holding a sign that said mormons were going to hell. Now I understand why, it was because they say we believe in a different Jesus.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I still miss a lot of things about the church, including the Temple.

You really should come back. It's all still waiting here for you.

[robuchan]

Kevin Christensen:

Before Joseph Smith received the Gold Plates, he borrowed a green peepstone from his friend Sally Chase to go on a treasure hunting expedition. On this expedition, he found a chocolate colored peepstone, which he later used to translate a portion of the Book of Mormon. I think if you took a poll of LDS adults in the year 1995, less than 1% would know this fact. Maybe less than 1/1000.

Do you think a fair response to someone surprised by this fact is to tell them they are lazy and that you knew all this stuff from a young age and to smugly say:

I never found a scripture that said, "Blessed are they who sit like lumps, for they shall be spoon fed, and never caught of guard, and never, ever disappointed by anyone."

[Tacenda]

Kevin Christensen:

Before Joseph Smith received the Gold Plates, he borrowed a green peepstone from his friend Sally Chase to go on a treasure hunting expedition. On this expedition, he found a chocolate colored peepstone, which he later used to translate a portion of the Book of Mormon. I think if you took a poll of LDS adults in the year 1995, less than 1% would know this fact. Maybe less than 1/1000.

Do you think a fair response to someone surprised by this fact is to tell them they are lazy and that you knew all this stuff from a young age and to smugly say:

I never found a scripture that said, "Blessed are they who sit like lumps, for they shall be spoon fed, and never caught of guard, and never, ever disappointed by anyone."

Kind of makes me think I was raised to believe a fairy tale. It's time I re-learn my religion from the beginning since historians were probably very restricted in their time. Can't for wait to see what happens for the generation after us. No surprises left for them to uncover, but that's a good thing, to be sure!

[Libs]

You really should come back. It's all still waiting here for you.

Thanks, Hamba. That would be complicated. But, I do keep in touch through my visiting teacher and other friends I have in the church.

[Libs]

Can someone please tell me what is meant by "self-selected"? Do you mean that the participates of the study were too selective (like from John Dehlin's group of followers)?

It would be really interesting for the church to have some kind of survey that could be filled out, when members leave the church. Just mail it to them and ask some basic questions? That might get to a more rounded look, at why people leave.

[robuchan]

Can someone please tell me what is meant by "self-selected"? Do you mean that the participates of the study were too selective (like from John Dehlin's group of followers)?

It would be really interesting for the church to have some kind of survey that could be filled out, when members leave the church. Just mail it to them and ask some basic questions? That might get to a more rounded look, at why people leave.

Self selected, means the people that took the poll sought out the opportunity to take the poll. This kind of poll will always have bias, because it's not from a random sampling. If I show up at a Baltimore Ravens Superbowl celebration and take a poll on people's favorite NFL team, the results will obviously be skewed vs calling random telephone numbers across the country. I still think JD's study is very valuable, it just can't be considered a random sampling.

[rongo]

Kevin Christensen:

Before Joseph Smith received the Gold Plates, he borrowed a green peepstone from his friend Sally Chase to go on a treasure hunting expedition. On this expedition, he found a chocolate colored peepstone, which he later used to translate a portion of the Book of Mormon. I think if you took a poll of LDS adults in the year 1995, less than 1% would know this fact. Maybe less than 1/1000.

Do you think a fair response to someone surprised by this fact is to tell them they are lazy and that you knew all this stuff from a young age and to smugly say:

I never found a scripture that said, "Blessed are they who sit like lumps, for they shall be spoon fed, and never caught of guard, and never, ever disappointed by anyone."

No, I think a fair response would be to ask why you swallow all of the peepstone lore hook, line and sinker ---- while never giving the pro-Church version the benefit of the doubt, or at least a fair hearing. The Sally Chase/green peepstone stories are just one of a swirling myriad of peepstone stories, about a veritable rainbow of different-shaped stones. So, how do *you* decide which stories you lend credance to, and which ones you dismiss?

You should read the section of Nibley's "The Myth Makers" titled "J. Smith --- peepstones for all ocassions." It's about 1/3 of the way down at this link:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=77&chapid=967

[robuchan]

No, I think a fair response would be to ask why you swallow all of the peepstone lore hook, line and sinker ---- while never giving the pro-Church version the benefit of the doubt, or at least a fair hearing. The Sally Chase/green peepstone stories are just one of a swirling myriad of peepstone stories, about a veritable rainbow of different-shaped stones. So, how do *you* decide which stories you lend credance to, and which ones you dismiss?

You should read the section of Nibley's "The Myth Makers" titled "J. Smith --- peepstones for all ocassions." It's about 1/3 of the way down at this link:

http://maxwellinstit...d=77&chapid=967

Thanks. I've read it.

The issue is not whether or not this is an issue that should justifiably shake someone's faith. The issue is whether or not it's fair to accuse an active LDS of being lazy and neglectful because they had never learned of this fact until the internet age.

[bluebell]

Thanks. I've read it.

The issue is not whether or not this is an issue that should justifiably shake someone's faith. The issue is whether or not it's fair to accuse an active LDS of being lazy and neglectful because they had never learned of this fact until the internet age.

I think Rongo might be calling into question your use of the term 'fact' when it might only be a myth, and then stating that the real issue is whether or not it's fair to give non-church sources the benefit of the doubt when they produce negative things about JS or the church when you're not willing to do that for church sources?

[robuchan]

I think Rongo might be calling into question your use of the term 'fact' when it might only be a myth, and then stating that the real issue is whether or not it's fair to give non-church sources the benefit of the doubt when they produce negative things about JS or the church when you're not willing to do that for church sources?

Oh. Which part of the "fact" is a myth? I thought this was well accepted. I think it's in RSR, isn't it?

[Ahab]

Thanks. I've read it.

The issue is not whether or not this is an issue that should justifiably shake someone's faith. The issue is whether or not it's fair to accuse an active LDS of being lazy and neglectful because they had never learned of this fact until the internet age.

Fair? As in fair play, or someone doing to a LDS as a LDS has done unto them?

The question can be answered by seeing whether or not a LDS accused someone else of being lazy and neglectful because that person had never leared of some fact until the internet age. If a LDS did, then it would be fair for someone to say that to that LDS.

Wouldn't necessarily mean it was right, but it would be fair.

[bluebell]

Oh. Which part of the "fact" is a myth? I thought this was well accepted. I think it's in RSR, isn't it?

Honestly i don't know. It just seemed from what rongo said-"The Sally Chase/green peepstone stories are just one of a swirling myriad of peepstone stories, about a veritable rainbow of different-shaped stones. So, how do *you* decide which stories you lend credance to, and which ones you dismiss?"-that he was implying that the stories were still up for debate on how accurate they were (otherwise asking which ones to believe and which ones not to believe doesn't make much sense if they were all already accepted as true).

Hopefully rongo will reappear and clarify and hopefully i didn't completely misunderstand what he was saying.

[robuchan]

Honestly i don't know. It just seemed from what rongo said-"The Sally Chase/green peepstone stories are just one of a swirling myriad of peepstone stories, about a veritable rainbow of different-shaped stones. So, how do *you* decide which stories you lend credance to, and which ones you dismiss?"-that he was implying that the stories were still up for debate on how accurate they were (otherwise asking which ones to believe and which ones not to believe doesn't make much sense if they were all already accepted as true).

Hopefully rongo will reappear and clarify and hopefully i didn't completely misunderstand what he was saying.

He can explain, but as far as I know, no scholar disputes the fact as I state it. The interpretation or the meaning or the significance is certainly up for debate. But if someone challenges what I say as an accepted fact, then that's fine, my point is that there are all kinds of these little Easter eggs from Book of Abraham to masonic influences to BOM issues to angelic visitation issues to polygamy issues, etc, that simply were not reasonably knowable to mainstream, conservative LDS before the internet age who were taught to avoid anti-Mormon material. It's rude and arrogant to tell these good LDS that they were lazy and neglectful for never knowing any of these things.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Thanks, Hamba. That would be complicated.

Sometimes the best things in life are complicated ... especially in the beginning.

I was thinking of this point just last night. After a week of working 10+ hours every day, I managed to knock off yesterday evening at 6:30. It was my plan to stop by the shops on my way home and buy some fresh veg (especially ripe tomatoes!), make a huge salad when I got home, and eat it whilst working on plans for the next several weeks of sacrament meetings. Before I could even make it to the shops, though, I got a TXT from one of the men whom I home-teach informing me that his wife was in the emergency department and asking me to help give her a blessing. Consequently, I turned my car around and immediately headed to the hospital, where I assisted this good brother in giving his wife a blessing before she could be taken off to surgery. And that made me think about all I've been through with these friends of mine. When I was first assigned to be their home teacher eight years ago, the wife was active but inconsistent. The husband, on the other hand, drank profusely, grew marijuana in his back garden, and was belligerent toward us, his wife, his kids, and generally everyone else. Every month our visit to their home turned into a one-sided argument. I would listen to this man rant on about the Church and its members until he was spent, and then I would calmly assure him that he was wrong. Often this was followed by more angry charges. And on it went. It was indeed complicated then, but we never gave up. And now this good man and his wife both hold callings which place them on the ward council, they often make the 600 km return trip to the temple several times a month, and last night I was able to assist him in performing a much-desired priesthood ordinance for his wife, who no longer lives in fear of him. Good stuff!

Edited February 8, 2013 by Hamba Tuhan

[wenglund]

I wish John Dehlin and his family all the best.

I share this edifying sentiment.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Libs]

Sometimes the best things in life are complicated ... especially in the beginning.

I was thinking of this point just last night. After a week of working 10+ hours every day, I managed to knock off yesterday evening at 6:30. It was my plan to stop by the shops on my way home and buy some fresh veg (especially ripe tomatoes!), make a huge salad when I got home, and eat it whilst working on plans for the next several weeks of sacrament meetings. Before I could even make it to the shops, though, I got a TXT from one of the men whom I home-teach informing me that his wife was in the emergency department and asking me to help give her a blessing. Consequently, I turned my car around and immediately headed to the hospital, where I assisted this good brother in giving his wife a blessing before she could be taken off to surgery. And that made me think about all I've been through with these friends of mine. When I was first assigned to be their home teacher eight years ago, the wife was active but inconsistent. The husband, on the other hand, drank profusely, grew marijuana in his back garden, and was belligerent toward us, his wife, his kids, and generally everyone else. Every month our visit to their home turned into a one-sided argument. I would listen to this man rant on about the Church and its members until he was spent, and then I would calmly assure him that he was wrong. Often this was followed by more angry charges. And on it went. It was indeed complicated then, but we never gave up. And now this good man and his wife both hold callings which place them on the ward council, they often make the 600 km return trip to the temple several times a month, and last night I was able to assist him in performing a much-desired priesthood ordinance for his wife, who no longer lives in fear of him. Good stuff!

That's a very lovely story. I hope this man's wife survived her medical emergency okay? I know the church has countless untold stories just like this one.

My story is not nearly that dramatic. I think I'm just not ready....and not sure I ever will be. That doesn't stop me from appreciating some of what the church offers and teaches, to the degree that I can.

[Libs]

Self selected, means the people that took the poll sought out the opportunity to take the poll. This kind of poll will always have bias, because it's not from a random sampling. If I show up at a Baltimore Ravens Superbowl celebration and take a poll on people's favorite NFL team, the results will obviously be skewed vs calling random telephone numbers across the country. I still think JD's study is very valuable, it just can't be considered a random sampling.

Thank you. I was thinking it must mean something like that.

I agree that John's work has value. I wasn't surprised at the outcome. But, I do know there are a lot of LDS out there who just simply stop coming to church, having nothing to do with history or doctrine. My visiting teacher was one example. She was raised LDS, but married outside of the church. After a time, because her husband wasn't involved she just stopped going. She was still a believer for the 20 or so years she was out of the church (always had a VT, etc).. and finally reactivated, after she and her husband were divorced. Lots of stories like that...and other various reasons for leaving, as well.

[ERayR]

Kevin Christensen:

Before Joseph Smith received the Gold Plates, he borrowed a green peepstone from his friend Sally Chase to go on a treasure hunting expedition. On this expedition, he found a chocolate colored peepstone, which he later used to translate a portion of the Book of Mormon. I think if you took a poll of LDS adults in the year 1995, less than 1% would know this fact. Maybe less than 1/1000.

Do you think a fair response to someone surprised by this fact is to tell them they are lazy and that you knew all this stuff from a young age and to smugly say:

I never found a scripture that said, "Blessed are they who sit like lumps, for they shall be spoon fed, and never caught of guard, and never, ever disappointed by anyone."

How does this minutia affect the truth of the Book of Mormon message? What difference does the color make?

[Scott Lloyd]

How does this minutia affect the truth of the Book of Mormon message? What difference does the color make?

Yeah, I too was scratching my head and wondering "What's the problem?"

[ERayR]

Thanks. I've read it.

The issue is not whether or not this is an issue that should justifiably shake someone's faith. The issue is whether or not it's fair to accuse an active LDS of being lazy and neglectful because they had never learned of this fact until the internet age.

Again why is it important at all?

[robuchan]

Again why is it important at all?

I think it's important. But I don't want to get into it in this thread. The issue I'm addressing is Kevin Christensen calling people lazy that claim they never knew certain facts until later in life with the internet age.

[ERayR]

I think it's important. But I don't want to get into it in this thread. The issue I'm addressing is Kevin Christensen calling people lazy that claim they never knew certain facts until later in life with the internet age.

Some are and some are not but whichever it is, it is of no consequence. The only thing of consequence is the message he brought forth. The rest is really irrelevant.

[rockpond]

I agree that John's work has value. I wasn't surprised at the outcome. But, I do know there are a lot of LDS out there who just simply stop coming to church, having nothing to do with history or doctrine. My visiting teacher was one example. She was raised LDS, but married outside of the church. After a time, because her husband wasn't involved she just stopped going. She was still a believer for the 20 or so years she was out of the church (always had a VT, etc).. and finally reactivated, after she and her husband were divorced. Lots of stories like that...and other various reasons for leaving, as well.

Libs raises a good point in relation to our earlier discussion about why people leave the church... Maybe if we are going to try help the disenfranchised (for lack of a better, baggage-free term), we need to see from several different angles: those who believe but are not active, those who don't believe but are active, and those who don't believe and are not active. I think there could be some correlation between those categories and the reasons why people are disaffected. Or maybe not, but it could be worth studying.