John Dehlin And Faith Reconstruction

[Kenngo1969]

Touche. Typing too fast.

Any disagreement notwithstanding, thanks for taking my gentle needling in the spirit in which it was intended. (If it's any comfort to you, the same thing tends to happen to me rather frequently since I switched to a wireless keyboard. Sometimes, the letters get lost between [too-fast] finger, keyboard, wireless keyboard connection, and cyberspace. If you're like me, you probably find that rather annoying. )

[robuchan]

Come to think of it, growing up in SLC valley a divining rod wasn't considered odd, just mysterious. They were openly used so maybe this is a rural vs city thing. But hopefully this will help out....this issue, if it really is one, is water :snort:under the bridge when you can find it talked of matter of factly on the church website.

http://history.lds.o...owdery?lang=eng

Have you been following the conversation? The issue is that KC thinks I was lazy and that church has no blame for me not knowing all these facts before the internet age.

[nealr]

I did a search on "diving rod" and then "rod" on those articles and didn't get any hits.

Really? Because the first article has "rod" twice, in a portion that KC actually quotes in his post. It is being quoted in the original version of D&C 8:6-8. Might want to get your search function checked.

The point KC is making with the other articles has nothing to do with the rod itself, but are there to show that the broader issue of the Church talking about changes to the D&C and other historical tidbits commonly said to be "hidden" by the Church have been discussed in the past.

[nealr]

I wouldn't be surprised if you couldn't but I have been in some DB stores that had only very few FARMS published books. Deseretbooks these days seem very limited in the product they carry, I don't even bother to read their catalogues anymore, a third of the products are knickknacks, a third are fiction and a third are inspirational. It is one of the reason why FAIR has an online bookstore.

You would be surprised. The DBs around my area have a decent collection of FARMS/RSC/BYU Studies stuff, the whole CWHN, and a few things from Greg Kofford Books. The history section has Bushman's biography on Joseph Smith, Givens and Grows bio on Pratt, and I have even see John Turner's bio on Brigham Young.

It is still a minority of the books they have there, but you can find some good, historical/scholarly stuff there.

[Calm]

You would be surprised. The DBs around my area have a decent collection of FARMS/RSC/BYU Studies stuff, the whole CWHN, and a few things from Greg Kofford Books. The history section has Bushman's biography on Joseph Smith, Givens and Grows bio on Pratt, and I have even see John Turner's bio on Brigham Young.

It is still a minority of the books they have there, but you can find some good, historical/scholarly stuff there.

Glad to hear it.

[robuchan]

KC, did you give up? Do you or Lou Midgely want to offer an apology, or do you still think I'm lazy for not knowing D & C 8 was about Oliver using a divining rod to translate the BOM? You call me a passive victim. Call me lazy and that I demand to be spoon fed. Thousands of hours of studying the gospel. Thousands of hours of reading other LDS books (granted, I stuck to the mainstream sources like Talmage, Nibley, McConkie, Madsen, but remember I'm a child of the September 6 era, in a conservative Utah County/BYU environment and taught that Sunstone, etc, should be avoided). Thousands of hours attending church meetings. Thousands of hours of seminary and BYU religion. Thousand of hours of service. Thousands of hours pondering and praying. Thousands of hours shooting the bull with other active LDS on variety of uncorrelated subjects from whether or not Cain was Bigfoot to whether or not Jesus visited other planets. But somehow in all this I'm a passive victim because I never heard or understood any of the dozen or so tough historical issues I came to know in the internet age.

[juliann]

Have you been following the conversation? The issue is that KC thinks I was lazy and that church has no blame for me not knowing all these facts before the internet age.

Look up the meaning of "water under the bridge"....before or after the internet age. I could make a divining rod joke here but will refrain.

[robuchan]

Really? Because the first article has "rod" twice, in a portion that KC actually quotes in his post. It is being quoted in the original version of D&C 8:6-8. Might want to get your search function checked.

The point KC is making with the other articles has nothing to do with the rod itself, but are there to show that the broader issue of the Church talking about changes to the D&C and other historical tidbits commonly said to be "hidden" by the Church have been discussed in the past.

There was no reference to a divining rod with no way to reasonably suggest it could be implied or understood.

[juliann]

KC, did you give up? Do you or Lou Midgely want to offer an apology, or do you still think I'm lazy for not knowing D & C 8 was about Oliver using a divining rod to translate the BOM? You call me a passive victim. Call me lazy and that I demand to be spoon fed. Thousands of hours of studying the gospel. Thousands of hours of reading other LDS books (granted, I stuck to the mainstream sources like Talmage, Nibley, McConkie, Madsen, but remember I'm a child of the September 6 era, in a conservative Utah County/BYU environment and taught that Sunstone, etc, should be avoided). Thousands of hours attending church meetings. Thousands of hours of seminary and BYU religion. Thousand of hours of service. Thousands of hours pondering and praying. Thousands of hours shooting the bull with other active LDS on variety of uncorrelated subjects from whether or not Cain was Bigfoot to whether or not Jesus visited other planets. But somehow in all this I'm a passive victim because I never heard or understood any of the dozen or so tough historical issues I came to know in the internet age.

But I was in the same environment. I believe you* but you do have to account for those who didn't have your experience under the same circumstances before you can convincingly make a blanket condemnation.

* I have to admit that I find anyone claiming to have read Nibley's works and then claiming he never knew what is right on the pages to be a little suspicious. Tinkling Cymbals and Sounding Brass has about every anti-Mormon element you would ever hope to find for that era, Danites to peepstone in a hat.

[awyatt]

KC, did you give up? Do you or Lou Midgely want to offer an apology, or do you still think I'm lazy...

I'm trying to figure out why KC should apologize for something he didn't do.

-Allen

[Louis Midgley]

I had a quite striking success with a divining rod once, too. It shocked me.

I mentioned it publicly a number of years ago, and was roundly mocked by The Usual Suspects as a superstitious fool, etc. But their mockery doesn't convince me that I ought to ignore what I experienced just so that I can be accept by the self-anointed elite. I've drawn no sweeping conclusions from the experience, but I found it genuinely puzzling. And I've spoken to quite a few others who've had similar experiences.

My father, brother and brother-in-law were engineers. They decided to build a office for their business. It was on a street in Salt Lake which had old homes with deep lots. The took down the old home and then started to build the office. They needed new sewer and water connections, but the city had no idea were any utility lines were. The city engineer gave my father the name and phone number of a dowser. He came and used two L shaped rods made from coat hangers. He located exactly where the utility lines (gas and so forth) were with his rods. A well-known LDS bibliographer/historian told me about using exactly the same method of finding water lines when he worked as a student on the grounds crew at BYU. I could cite four or five other examples. But there is a literature arguing that this is all rubbish.

When my was once away visiting our daughter and her family, I actually made our of coat hangers two rods. They located all my water line in my yard. But, of course, I know were they are located. So I started doing this in my neighbor's yards. This made some members of my Ward nervous. But I could still tell them exactly where their water lines were located. My wife did not exactly approve of my troubling my neighbors with my rods. I have no idea how they work, or even if they actually worked, or I worked them.

[Louis Midgley]

I notice that robuchan is troubled by some language used by Kevin Christensen. I know Kevin quite well. He is a kind and gentle Saint. Robuchan should direct his complaints to me. I am the one who used the "lazy bum" remark. I did so to get his attention. If I remember correctly, I have already addressed his concern. Be that as it may, I will address it again. I include myself in the category of lazy bums for much of my own life. I spent a great deal of time being a full-time trout fisherman, and part time professor, at which time I was not anxiously engaged in pondering what Hugh Nibley called the terrible questions. I devoted a huge amount of time watching my two boys play basketball and baseball. My oldest boy played basketball summer and winter for many years, including two years in college. He did the same thing with baseball. I did not miss a game. During this time I rationalized my obsession with the attention I gave to this sort of thing as being a good father, but my obsession went beyond that. I never had any ability to do any sport. But, when my kids got into especially basketball and also baseball, I became what I believe one could truthfully call a Stake Door Dad. In some ways I do not regret this, but in others I can now see that I was not entirely seeking the Lord and his righteousness. So my "lazy bum" remark certainly applied to those who are twisted in a knot about something called the "church" did or did not do. But I simply cannot and will not target Sunday School teachers, or Bishops, or the Brethren, or something called the "church" for those things I did or did not do that I have sought divine mercy for. And when thinking of my own assessment of my sins, including what I have done and not done, I have much stronger language aimed at myself. Damn fool, or idiot come quickly to mind. But I have been blessed. I have, looking back, lived a charmed life. I have experienced the love of God in a host of ways. And I am profoundly thankful for the host of experiences of wonders that have come my way.

We live in a world where Mormon Nice kicks in and we tend to insist on being told how wonderful we are. We even tend to grade the Brethren by how nice we think they are, rather than how much they scold and warn us, which is what we really need and deserve, I believe. I am, of course, fully willing to offer an abject apology to robuchan, if he is genuinely harmed by the language I used and especially if my language got in the way of his finding his way into fully fellowship with the Saints and also into the love of God. In fact, having said that I will do that is my clumsy way of saying that I am doing this right now. Please keep in mind that the word "church" is, when it is understood the way it is used in our scriptures, not the leaders, or the Other, but is all of those who once were baptized, who have ever offered their sacraments to the Lord as they renew their covenants by partaking of the bread and water understood as emblems of our Lord's brutal death and subsequent resurrection and hence stunning and life-giving victory over death of our bodies for all and from sin on certain strict conditions. We are invited to become his servants/slaves so that we can, when purged, purified and sanctified become his seed and his children.

[Tacenda]

I notice that robuchan is troubled by some language used by Kevin Christensen. I know Kevin quite well. He is a kind and gentle Saint. Robuchan should direct his complaints to me. I am the one who used the "lazy bum" remark. I did so to get his attention. If I remember correctly, I have already addressed his concern. Be that as it may, I will address it again. I include myself in the category of lazy bums for much of my own life. I spent a great deal of time being a full-time trout fisherman, and part time professor, at which time I was not anxiously engaged in pondering what Hugh Nibley called the terrible questions. I devoted a huge amount of time watching my two boys play basketball and baseball. My oldest boy played basketball summer and winter for many years, including two years in college. He did the same thing with baseball. I did not miss a game. During this time I rationalized my obsession with the attention I gave to this sort of thing as being a good father, but my obsession went beyond that. I never had any ability to do any sport. But, when my kids got into especially basketball and also baseball, I became what I believe one could truthfully call a Stake Door Dad. In some ways I do not regret this, but in others I can now see that I was not entirely seeking the Lord and his righteousness. So my "lazy bum" remark certainly applied to those who are twisted in a knot about something called the "church" did or did not do. But I simply cannot and will not target Sunday School teachers, or Bishops, or the Brethren, or something called the "church" for those things I did or did not do that I have sought divine mercy for. And when thinking of my own assessment of my sins, including what I have done and not done, I have much stronger language aimed at myself. Damn fool, or idiot come quickly to mind. But I have been blessed. I have, looking back, lived a charmed life. I have experienced the love of God in a host of ways. And I am profoundly thankful for the host of experiences of wonders that have come my way.

We live in a world where Mormon Nice kicks in and we tend to insist on being told how wonderful we are. We even tend to grade the Brethren by how nice we think they are, rather than how much they scold and warn us, which is what we really need and deserve, I believe. I am, of course, fully willing to offer an abject apology to robuchan, if he is genuinely harmed by the language I used and especially if my language got in the way of his finding his way into fully fellowship with the Saints and also into the love of God. In fact, having said that I will do that is my clumsy way of saying that I am doing this right now. Please keep in mind that the word "church" is, when it is understood the way it is used in our scriptures, not the leaders, or the Other, but is all of those who once were baptized, who have ever offered their sacraments to the Lord as they renew their covenants by partaking of the bread and water understood as emblems of our Lord's brutal death and subsequent resurrection and hence stunning and life-giving victory over death of our bodies for all and from sin on certain strict conditions. We are invited to become his servants/slaves so that we can, when purged, purified and sanctified become his seed and his children.

Great post here and so decent of you to apologize like that. I was a little surprised at the last sentence here, stating that we "become" His children after we do such and such. This seems more a teaching of the EV that I've run across while listening or reading. And had always thought that LDS sentiment was that we are His children immediately. Can you help me understand a little bit?

[Calm]

Great post here and so decent of you to apologize like that. I was a little surprised at the last sentence here, stating that we "become" His children after we do such and such. This seems more a teaching of the EV that I've run across while listening or reading. And had always thought that LDS sentiment was that we are His children immediately. Can you help me understand a little bit?

We are Heavenly Father's children by our past spiritual birth/creation, we can become Christ's children by the spiritual birth process/recreation into a finer thing that can take place in this mortal existence.

[bluebell]

Great post here and so decent of you to apologize like that. I was a little surprised at the last sentence here, stating that we "become" His children after we do such and such. This seems more a teaching of the EV that I've run across while listening or reading. And had always thought that LDS sentiment was that we are His children immediately. Can you help me understand a little bit?

Cal beat me.

We become Christ's children when we covenant with Him through baptism, and then remain His children as we seek to fulfill that covenant for our entire lives.

[why me]

I think that we all need to listen to John's new podcast which I posted on a different thread. He explains himself and gives more background to new research. I will also post the link here:

http://mormonstories.org/top-5-myths-and-truths-about-why-committed-mormons-leave-the-church/

[robuchan]

I notice that robuchan is troubled by some language used by Kevin Christensen. I know Kevin quite well. He is a kind and gentle Saint. Robuchan should direct his complaints to me. I am the one who used the "lazy bum" remark. I did so to get his attention. If I remember correctly, I have already addressed his concern. Be that as it may, I will address it again. I include myself in the category of lazy bums for much of my own life. I spent a great deal of time being a full-time trout fisherman, and part time professor, at which time I was not anxiously engaged in pondering what Hugh Nibley called the terrible questions. I devoted a huge amount of time watching my two boys play basketball and baseball. My oldest boy played basketball summer and winter for many years, including two years in college. He did the same thing with baseball. I did not miss a game. During this time I rationalized my obsession with the attention I gave to this sort of thing as being a good father, but my obsession went beyond that. I never had any ability to do any sport. But, when my kids got into especially basketball and also baseball, I became what I believe one could truthfully call a Stake Door Dad. In some ways I do not regret this, but in others I can now see that I was not entirely seeking the Lord and his righteousness. So my "lazy bum" remark certainly applied to those who are twisted in a knot about something called the "church" did or did not do. But I simply cannot and will not target Sunday School teachers, or Bishops, or the Brethren, or something called the "church" for those things I did or did not do that I have sought divine mercy for. And when thinking of my own assessment of my sins, including what I have done and not done, I have much stronger language aimed at myself. Damn fool, or idiot come quickly to mind. But I have been blessed. I have, looking back, lived a charmed life. I have experienced the love of God in a host of ways. And I am profoundly thankful for the host of experiences of wonders that have come my way.

We live in a world where Mormon Nice kicks in and we tend to insist on being told how wonderful we are. We even tend to grade the Brethren by how nice we think they are, rather than how much they scold and warn us, which is what we really need and deserve, I believe. I am, of course, fully willing to offer an abject apology to robuchan, if he is genuinely harmed by the language I used and especially if my language got in the way of his finding his way into fully fellowship with the Saints and also into the love of God. In fact, having said that I will do that is my clumsy way of saying that I am doing this right now. Please keep in mind that the word "church" is, when it is understood the way it is used in our scriptures, not the leaders, or the Other, but is all of those who once were baptized, who have ever offered their sacraments to the Lord as they renew their covenants by partaking of the bread and water understood as emblems of our Lord's brutal death and subsequent resurrection and hence stunning and life-giving victory over death of our bodies for all and from sin on certain strict conditions. We are invited to become his servants/slaves so that we can, when purged, purified and sanctified become his seed and his children.

I believe you are sincerely sorry for the tone and the language, but not necessarily for the content or accuracy of the message, which you repeat in your post. But I do appreciate the apology for tone.

On the content/accuracy of the message, I don't want to give up here. I want to push this until you guys see how wrong you are. I'm typing up an analysis of the issue, and I'm going to start a new thread with it because it's a tangent for this thread and with John Dehlin's new ppt update, I think this thread should focus on JD.

[Jude2]

Actually, if you look at it closely, he is proof one can STAY IN and still hold an almost agnostic view. He is the poster boy for this!

A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. James 1:8

[Tacenda]

A double minded man is unstable in all his ways. James 1:8

I agree and alot of his Mormonstories friends do too, but maybe he'll make it work!

[Louis Midgley]

We are Heavenly Father's children by our past spiritual birth/creation, we can become Christ's children by the spiritual birth process/recreation into a finer thing that can take place in this mortal existence.

Calmoriah has it exactly right.

If we pay attention to our scriptures, we begin by making a covenant with God, which includes a promise of blessings if and only if we obey and keep the commandments, and a cursing if we don't.. Since we are all prone to surrender to temptations and hence sin, we must constantly repent--that is, turn to or return to God and then put our trust in him. If we do this fully, he will forgive our sins, since he is merciful. He is willing to forgive our sins again and again, if we genuinely repent.. This is why we renew our covenants regularly. We do this by partaking of the emblems of his body and blood in recognition of his love for us. We do this in order that we will have the Holy Spirit with us to guide, support, warn, and console us (and even give us a boot in the bum when necessary). The fruit of repentance is a necessarily often a very long and difficult purging, cleansing, refining, regenerating rebirth leading to what is called called sanctification. We are known as Saints, which word (hagio) means holy ones, or those who are longing for sanctification..If and when this takes place, then we will have the Holy One of Israel--Jesus Christ--who was for Israel and then the Jews Yahweh (YHWH) as our Advocate in the final judgment. At which time we will, if we have repented fully of our sins, be judged according to our works or deeds and get justice (what we deserve). And if we have repented and hence can are found found true and faithful to our covenant promises, then we will be justified. We will then become his sons and daughters, his seed, and he will become our Father. All of this is possible in part already, but not fully yet. We must all sustain and defend the Kingdom, then and only then will he be our advocate.

Conservative Protestant churchmen, preachers and theologians think that one becomes a Christian, not by making a covenant with God and then being regenerated through a slow and painful process of rebirth resulting eventually in sanctification, but that totally depraved sinners are instantly justified by having the righteousness of God imputed to them at the very instant that they confess Jesus as Lord and Savior--that is, say a sinner's prayer or answer an altar call. Because we clearly believe, if we have not been lazy, that we must repent constantly, put our entire trust in God--that is, have faith--and do all that we can possibly do, we are accused of dreaded works righteousness by Fundamentalists and evangelicals. But the "all we can do" that must necessarily come before we are saved by a divine gift freeing us from both sin and guilt is our way of having Christ in us. Put another way, our best effort effort to honor and serve the Lord is our way of showing our genuine love for the merciful God from whom we seek salvation in every sense of that word. We must all flee from a carnal, devilish world where we easily become enemies of the Lord, and hence not his obedient servant/slaves. Only God can save us from death, in which category is included both our mortal condition, and our alienation or estrangement from God brought on by our own sins against the Lord.

What our scriptures teach and our prophets proclaim in much closer to the Roman Catholic notion of a necessary purging from sin and hence the idea of purgatory, or the Orthodox notion of sanctification leading eventually to theos, than the theology fashioned out of a profound misunderstanding of two of the letters of the Apostle Paul.

[robuchan]

Calmoriah has it exactly right.

If we pay attention to our scriptures, we begin by making a covenant with God, which includes a promise of blessings if and only if we obey and keep the commandments, and a cursing if we don't.. Since we are all prone to surrender to temptations and hence sin, we must constantly repent--that is, turn to or return to God and then put our trust in him. If we do this fully, he will forgive our sins, since he is merciful. He is willing to forgive our sins again and again, if we genuinely repent.. This is why we renew our covenants regularly. We do this by partaking of the emblems of his body and blood in recognition of his love for us. We do this in order that we will have the Holy Spirit with us to guide, support, warn, and console us (and even give us a boot in the bum when necessary). The fruit of repentance is a necessarily often a very long and difficult purging, cleansing, refining, regenerating rebirth leading to what is called called sanctification. We are known as Saints, which word (hagio) means holy ones, or those who are longing for sanctification..If and when this takes place, then we will have the Holy One of Israel--Jesus Christ--who was for Israel and then the Jews Yahweh (YHWH) as our Advocate in the final judgment. At which time we will, if we have repented fully of our sins, be judged according to our works or deeds and get justice (what we deserve). And if we have repented and hence can are found found true and faithful to our covenant promises, then we will be justified. We will then become his sons and daughters, his seed, and he will become our Father. All of this is possible in part already, but not fully yet. We must all sustain and defend the Kingdom, then and only then will he be our advocate.

Conservative Protestant churchmen, preachers and theologians think that one becomes a Christian, not by making a covenant with God and then being regenerated through a slow and painful process of rebirth resulting eventually in sanctification, but that totally depraved sinners are instantly justified by having the righteousness of God imputed to them at the very instant that they confess Jesus as Lord and Savior--that is, say a sinner's prayer or answer an altar call. Because we clearly believe, if we have not been lazy, that we must repent constantly, put our entire trust in God--that is, have faith--and do all that we can possibly do, we are accused of dreaded works righteousness by Fundamentalists and evangelicals. But the "all we can do" that must necessarily come before we are saved by a divine gift freeing us from both sin and guilt is our way of having Christ in us. Put another way, our best effort effort to honor and serve the Lord is our way of showing our genuine love for the merciful God from whom we seek salvation in every sense of that word. We must all flee from a carnal, devilish world where we easily become enemies of the Lord, and hence not his obedient servant/slaves. Only God can save us from death, in which category is included both our mortal condition, and our alienation or estrangement from God brought on by our own sins against the Lord.

What our scriptures teach and our prophets proclaim in much closer to the Roman Catholic notion of a necessary purging from sin and hence the idea of purgatory, or the Orthodox notion of sanctification leading eventually to theos, than the theology fashioned out of a profound misunderstanding of two of the letters of the Apostle Paul.

None of this has anything to do with what I should have been doing in my teens and 20's to avoid being surprised to learn that Joseph encouraged Oliver to take a shot at translating the BOM using a divining rod.

[Tacenda]

None of this has anything to do with what I should have been doing in my teens and 20's to avoid being surprised to learn that Joseph encouraged Oliver to take a shot at translating the BOM using a divining rod.

My fault, sorry to have derailed this very important issue...

[robuchan]

My fault, sorry to have derailed this very important issue...

Hah. No, sorry. I felt Lou's previous response to me, and this is an extrapolation from that.

[awyatt]

None of this has anything to do with what I should have been doing in my teens and 20's to avoid being surprised to learn that Joseph encouraged Oliver to take a shot at translating the BOM using a divining rod.

What you should have been doing? Reading; that's obvious. You don't like the answer, but it really is that simple.

-Allen

[ALarson]

What you should have been doing? Reading; that's obvious. You don't like the answer, but it really is that simple.

-Allen

It's really not simple at all. We know that with some digging, one could have discovered much of the unsettling parts of church history. But, it wasn't easy to find nor was it encouraged to read many of the sources where information could be found. We have been advocated over and over to only read church approved materials, books by apostles and leaders and so on. The huge majority of these books (I'd say 99%) contain none of the more controversial aspects of Mormon history.

The church would not be dealing with the huge problem of the members leaving over feeling deceived about church history if the information had been readily available, taught from the pulpit and in SS lessons. Thus the whole John Dehlin influence now with the leaders. They are finally paying attention and hopefully will do something about it.

As I mentioned in another thread, I just learned that in the January issue of the Ensign there is an article where they address "Oliver's rod" and the "seer stone translation" method Joseph Smith used (just in passing). This is a step in the right direction but there needs to be more.