Jump to content

The Dehlin Affair–The Current Uncivil War


Recommended Posts

No, I don't believe there is.

Libs, is there a defense for repeated name-calling? What would it be?

No, I don't believe there is.

Link to post

lol...I agree, he does. I have his first edition and plan on getting the 2nd edition, as well. :)

Mike Ash's first book inspired me to go back into the church for awhile. It didn't work out, but at least he got me back there for a few months. :)

Enjoy his books. I think they provide a valuable service to others.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post

What published author whom you have not read do you go out and say what he wrote attacks others and treats them unchrist like?

That is an intriguing question. I've observed at times in the Mormon culture, that once an author is given the label 'Anti-Mormon' that their published work is avoided like the plague and they are vilified.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Well, this would be the crux of our disagreement, because I don't believe that John is a "wolf in sheep's clothing". I believe he is a very sincere individual whose only intention is to help...not harm.

I believe that is true of Dr. Peterson and the other apologists, as well.

All of these men have good intentions, and all very human and make mistakes, at times. All of them.

I've mentioned this before (I don't remember if it was on this thread) but if any of my friends or family had a faith crisis would I want them to go to John Dehlin or Mormon Stories to help them work through it? No. Absolute not. I concede there are some good interviews on Mormon Stories but the rest would not be helpful. Just my opinion.

Link to post

I've mentioned this before (I don't remember if it was on this thread) but if any of my friends or family had a faith crisis would I want them to go to John Dehlin or Mormon Stories to help them work through it? No. Absolute not. I concede there are some good interviews on Mormon Stories but the rest would not be helpful. Just my opinion.

Maybe part of the problem is that there are different kinds of people, and different kinds of "faith crises."

Ultimately, anyone who has a "faith crisis" will probably end up in one of three spots (with the appropriate disclaimer about shades of gray, everyone's different, and people can't be put into categories):

1. Maintaining belief (and faith) in the Church and its truth claims. The faith crisis was more of a bump in the road.

2. NOMhood with continued activity in the Church, but a moderately (or severely) different change in the nature of their feelings towards the Church and its truth claims.

3. Discontinued activity in the Church.

I would be fascinated to know to what degree apologetics and contra-apologetics can change the result where people end up (to the degree that faith and belief aren't fluid and people "end up" anywhere).

For example, I'm probably a #2, but with greater exposure to better apologetics early on, would I be a #1? If I had exposure to worse apologetics (and better negative info), would I be a #3? Or is it other factors that have resulted in my current state (family and culture, personality, lack of conviction..)?

I don't think apologetics (and attacks against the faith) are irrelevant, but at a certain point, I think we might overestimate their influence.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...