The Dehlin Affair–The Current Uncivil War

[Libs]

Yes, I did...sorry. And, yes, I know the GA told him he wanted even those who had doubts.

Did you miss my post about how the GA answered John's question about being welcome in the church? The symbolism of the tent?

I did see it, yes, whyme, and thank you. I did know that, about the GA...but this thing, written against John, doesn't seem very "welcoming"...

[Calm]

I am.

Glenn

You are. Glenn.

[Calm]

Interesting. How is he different?

People react based on their level of needs combined with the level of resources combined with the level of their circumstances so if one looks beyond one environment, you will tend to have a huge variety of behaviours that depend on a large amount of variables. The more intelligent, or creative, or stable/secure will be willing to try larger varieties of experiences. Yes, there are people who see all tools as hammers and all people as nails, but even with them if they have average intelligence and not abusive upbringings, I don't think it would take to look to teach them the merit of trying another way. And this is without much emotion, throw in some strong motivations and you get complex situations.

With Dehlin, until you can explain to me why he is so willing to put endless hours and endless hard work leaving him at times exhausted in his search for the perfect comfort level for him and for others....I just don't see him as simple. The simple comfort seeker is one who comes home and does the same thing every day whether it is goes out to play in his workshop, go out on a boat, go for a walk with the dog or a jog with a wife, or just takes off his shoes and plumps down in front of the TV. Simple comfort people live through their habits because that requires the least effort to ether change themselves or change their environment or change others.

It should be obvious that Dehlin isn't simple simply by what he accomplished, not the community, but the first community, not the podcasts but making them popular first among the various LDS online social communities. His appeal is broadspread, including those who are not comfort seeking.

Edited March 5, 2013 by calmoriah

[Kevin Christensen]

Yes, I think, you make some very good points, here. Mike Ash talks a lot about how some have expectations of leadership that are very unrealistic...making it very easy to be disappointed, when we discover they are as prone to error, as anyone. I was guilty of that (high expectations) of both church leadership (including Joseph Smith) and the church, in general. I made myself (my testimony) very vulnerable, by putting all of it up on a pedestal. I expected perfection, because this was Christ's Church, afterall.

Unfortunately, when one is in that mode and it starts coming down...it really comes crashing down all around you. Difficult to put the pieces back, after that.

We all have to start somewhere, typically in this life as babies who require a lot of nurture and growing. I don't think "guilty" is quite the right term. It's not a sin, but rather a typical stage of human development. Have you read the little summary of the Perry Scheme on my profile? I think you'd find it helpful in putting pieces together.

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[sheilauk]

Yes, I did...sorry. And, yes, I know the GA told him he wanted even those who had doubts.

I did see it, yes, whyme, and thank you. I did know that, about the GA...but this thing, written against John, doesn't seem very "welcoming"...

And its not written by the Church, for the Church nor to represent the Church's views. It is Mr. Smith's views and he is entitled to express them. The Church is made up of individuals and each individual has to decide things for themselves and some will not be as welcoming as others and some will be more. No Church, congregation, ward, presidency etc should be judged on the actions of one individual. The GA's have continually expressed that we should be welcoming to all and be loving and fellowship. They continue to say this because it is hard for all of us to do so all the time! John asks why isn't the Church more welcoming. But the Church does welcome all. The question is why are some people not more welcoming, what makes them that way and how can we deal with accepting their faults? Kevin references the Perry Scheme and Kuhn as an excellent way to examine those questions.

[ERayR]

He seeks for acceptance of those who are struggling in the church. I have seen him ask church leaders over and over...do you want us? Do you want those who struggle and can't, for whatever reason, believe ever jot and tittle that the church teaches. Does the church want these people?

Where do I live, in the Twilight Zone or is it the other way? In over 60 years in the church, some of which were spent in inactivity, I have never seen anyone, myself or others, not accepted. Instead I have seen endless reaching out to them. Countless acts of kindness. Untold hours of conversation and discussion. In a word acts of Christian kindness. So when anyone talks of not being accepted I am mystified. More often I have seen those with doubts separate themselves from the church, family and friends.

[ERayR]

Yes, I did...sorry. And, yes, I know the GA told him he wanted even those who had doubts.

I did see it, yes, whyme, and thank you. I did know that, about the GA...but this thing, written against John, doesn't seem very "welcoming"...

It is not his doubts that are the problem but rather his very public actions.

[ERayR]

I am.

Glenn

Move over brother I am here to take my place on the bench beside you.

[ERayR]

People react based on their level of needs combined with the level of resources combined with the level of their circumstances so if one looks beyond one environment, you will tend to have a huge variety of behaviours that depend on a large amount of variables. The more intelligent, or creative, or stable/secure will be willing to try larger varieties of experiences. Yes, there are people who see all tools as hammers and all people as nails, but even with them if they have average intelligence and not abusive upbringings, I don't think it would take to look to teach them the merit of trying another way. And this is without much emotion, throw in some strong motivations and you get complex situations.

With Dehlin, until you can explain to me why he is so willing to put endless hours and endless hard work leaving him at times exhausted in his search for the perfect comfort level for him and for others....I just don't see him as simple. The simple comfort seeker is one who comes home and does the same thing every day whether it is goes out to play in his workshop, go out on a boat, go for a walk with the dog or a jog with a wife, or just takes off his shoes and plumps down in front of the TV. Simple comfort people live through their habits because that requires the least effort to ether change themselves or change their environment or change others.

It should be obvious that Dehlin isn't simple simply by what he accomplished, not the community, but the first community, not the podcasts but making them popular first among the various LDS online social communities. His appeal is broadspread, including those who are not comfort seeking.

Does continuous futile efforts trying to make a difference on internet message boards count?

Edited March 5, 2013 by ERayR

[Darren10]

Yes, he is saying those who wanted to do those things were a very small minority.

What does that matter? He explicitly reserves casting negative judement upon them and outwardly praises their moral character. Not so true for good moral people like Louis Midgley, Dan Peterson, and Bill Hamblin.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Darren10

[Darren10]

The judgments seem to be flying in both directions, don't you think?

A-B-S-O-L-U-T-E-L-Y- not!!! Nobody is judging John Dehlin so far as his Church worthiness or moral character without citing speicifc refrences to substantiate their claim. Dehlin, on the other hand, has made outrageous negative judgments against those he deems as his enemies or in the way of his Mormon Stories goals and I do not see any remorse from him whatsoever.

[Darren10]

People react based on their level of needs combined with the level of resources combined with the level of their circumstances so if one looks beyond one environment, you will tend to have a huge variety of behaviours that depend on a large amount of variables. The more intelligent, or creative, or stable/secure will be willing to try larger varieties of experiences. Yes, there are people who see all tools as hammers and all people as nails, but even with them if they have average intelligence and not abusive upbringings, I don't think it would take to look to teach them the merit of trying another way. And this is without much emotion, throw in some strong motivations and you get complex situations.

OK. Then how does this make John Dehlin something other than one who desires to make all people, whether for or agaist the LDS Church comfortable?

The simple comfort seeker is one who comes home and does the same thing every day whether it is goes out to play in his workshop, go out on a boat, go for a walk with the dog or a jog with a wife, or just takes off his shoes and plumps down in front of the TV. Simple comfort people live through their habits because that requires the least effort to ether change themselves or change their environment or change others.

I said nothing of John Dehlin procuring personal comfort. Only that he seeks to make all others comfortable standing for or against the Church. Note that as Libs has posted, I've no desire to make him feel comfortable entering the Church or returning with the unrighteous judgements he's cast upon others. I fully desire for him to return to full fellowship in the gospel but that does not mean nor necessitate that I ignore his flaws that he deliberately made public.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Darren10

[Calm]

Does continuous futile efforts trying to make a difference on internet message boards count?

Does it make you comfortable to do so?

[William Schryver]

I've used this analogy elsewhere, but here's my take:

Years ago, a family member hit a rough spot in their marriage and went through counseling. In addition to couples counseling, she also went to personal counseling. As the personal counseling continued, she found herself becoming more and more enthused with the idea of ending the marriage. The couples counselor noticed this (the tone of the couples counseling had changed over the months as well). Upon further reflection, and after a few direct conversations with the person providing the individual counseling, she realized that this counselor actually had a very negative attitude towards marriage (and men in general), and felt it was her job to help women become more "independent" and live without relying on a male partner. My family member decided this wasn't her goal, and stopped seeing that counselor.

Likewise, John Dehlin has set himself up as a counselor for LDS who are having doubts about the Church. It seems obvious that such a counselor's views on God, Jesus, and the LDS Church would be pretty dang important to someone seeking such counseling. If Dehlin was being totally upfront and honest about his beliefs and goals, Greg Smith could have saved a lot of time and effort. People would read his essay and say "Hey dummy, we already know that" (which, I suspect, a lot of RFM/former-LDS did). But John had not been totally upfront and publicly honest about the degree of his doubts, and his feelings about the Church; the only way to find these things out was to read his postings in forums and on Facebook, or listen to hours of podcasts, which relatively few people are going to do.

Stop it already! I am getting just a bit irked at giving you any more rep points. You will immediately assume a hard-core apostate posture on these questions, or I will hire a private investigator to find out who you really are and what you did with the cinepro we all used to know and love ... well, at least know.

[Senator]

OK. Then how does this make John Dehlin something other than one who desires to make all people, whether for or agaist the LDS Church comfortable?

I said nothing of John Dehlin procuring personal comfort. Only that he seeks to make all others comfortable standing for or against the Church. Note that as Libs has posted, I've no desire to make him feel comfortable entering the Church or returning with the unrighteous judgements he's cast upon others. I fully desire for him to return to full fellowshi p in the gospel but that does not mean nor necessitate that I ignore his flaws that he deliberately made public.

You seem to have quite a bit of ire against the man. Has he offended you in some personal way?

[Tacenda]

ERayR, I thought you were having a faith crisis, when you said you were in a Twilight Zone! That's how I've felt for the past 5 or 6 yrs. I'd drive down my street in my neighborhood (every house LDS) and think these people don't know what I know. That might be wrong, but that's how it felt. So Darren, I think that's how John Dehlin came to be. He was in that state of mind, he wanted to help those like me. I think that you and ERayR will never understand unless you've been there. It's a very lonely position to be in if you're in a mindset like that. That state of mind is so uncomfortable. You almost feel like you are in an episode of the "Twilight Zone". It's a freaky feeling. Probably how some athiest feel, when they no longer believe in God because they feel there is evidence to suggest there isn't a God (evolution, human bones before the Fall). That's why I hold onto Mormonism, because even though there is no real evidence, it's a nice way to live so far and thankful to still hold onto the belief in God.

[Darren10]

In other words, calmoriah, John Dehlin makes between right and wrong on a moral level except, of course, certain peple who have stood for what is right. Thus is a natural result of becoming amoral.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Darren10

[Darren10]

You seem to have quite a bit of ire against the man. Has he offended you in some personal way?

Nothing personal, just reacting to his method of which I've no liking as well as defending my assesment of Dehlin. If people do not think my assesment's correct than I'd like to know why.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Darren10

[Atomic Punk]

If any member of my family had a faith crisis would I want them to turn to John Dehlin and his resources? Absolutely and emphatically not. I would hope that they would allow me to help them. I would have no hesitation in using the NAMI and FAIR and would encourage them to use those resources along with Michael Ash's Shaken Faith Syndrome. However sincere John Dehlin might be, I would not view what he offers as helpful in restoring faith.

[Darren10]

So Darren, I think that's how John Dehlin came to be. He was in that state of mind, he wanted to help those like me.

I would agree.

I think that you and ERayR will never understand unless you've been there.

I have far more empathy than you think. Perhaps it's my fault for not showing it more.

It's a very lonely position to be in if you're in a mindset like that. That state of mind is so uncomfortable. You almost feel like you are in an episode of the "Twilight Zone". It's a freaky feeling.

I've actually been there though not in a "crisis" because I always had faith that God will answer my doubts and concerns and so I placed my trust in Him and rendered unto Him my concerns. And He has answered me many many ties.

That's why I hold onto Mormonism, because even though there is no real evidence, it's a nice way to live so far and thankful to still hold onto the belief in God.

Here I would say that there is most assuredly very real evidence that Mormonism is true. These real evidences edify both the mind and the spirit.

[Libs]

A-B-S-O-L-U-T-E-L-Y- not!!! Nobody is judging John Dehlin so far as his Church worthiness or moral character without citing speicifc refrences to substantiate their claim. Dehlin, on the other hand, has made outrageous negative judgments against those he deems as his enemies or in the way of his Mormon Stories goals and I do not see any remorse from him whatsoever.

He has judged their method...just as they have judged his.

[ERayR]

ERayR, I thought you were having a faith crisis, when you said you were in a Twilight Zone! That's how I've felt for the past 5 or 6 yrs. I'd drive down my street in my neighborhood (every house LDS) and think these people don't know what I know. That might be wrong, but that's how it felt. So Darren, I think that's how John Dehlin came to be. He was in that state of mind, he wanted to help those like me. I think that you and ERayR will never understand unless you've been there. It's a very lonely position to be in if you're in a mindset like that. That state of mind is so uncomfortable. You almost feel like you are in an episode of the "Twilight Zone". It's a freaky feeling. Probably how some athiest feel, when they no longer believe in God because they feel there is evidence to suggest there isn't a God (evolution, human bones before the Fall). That's why I hold onto Mormonism, because even though there is no real evidence, it's a nice way to live so far and thankful to still hold onto the belief in God.

OK it is a lonely position. Who put you there? Who keeps you there? Hint Look in a mirror. My journey has not been without its hills and valleys. Some of the valleys were actually chasms. I have never thought to blame somebody else for where I was at spiritually. Regardless of exterior causes I knew that my spiritual well being was my own responsibility.

[William Schryver]

If any member of my family had a faith crisis would I want them to turn to John Dehlin and his resources? Absolutely and emphatically not. I would hope that they would allow me to help them. I would have no hesitation in using the NAMI and FAIR and would encourage them to use those resources along with Michael Ash's Shaken Faith Syndrome. However sincere John Dehlin might be, I would not view what he offers as helpful in restoring faith.

There is a young couple in our ward who I know were struggling with their faith (especially the wife). But they were still remaining active in the Church. At least they were until a certain point in time, when they stopped coming to Church altogether. About a month after they stopped coming to Church, my wife just happened upon Dehlin's Facebook page (directed there by one of her FB "friends"). Coincidentally, the newly inactive couple's names and photos appeared on Dehlin's page as two of his new "friends." We have never seen this couple in Church since then.

[Libs]

OK it is a lonely position. Who put you there? Who keeps you there? Hint Look in a mirror. My journey has not been without its hills and valleys. Some of the valleys were actually chasms. I have never thought to blame somebody else for where I was at spiritually. Regardless of exterior causes I knew that my spiritual well being was my own responsibility.

Ray, if individuals are completely responsible for their own behavior, then how can anyone blame John Dehlin for anything other than his own decisions, regarding the church?

[Darren10]

He has judged their method...just as they have judged his.

Calling someone a thug is not only attacking one's method but also one's character. Could he at least muster up the courage to say that adultery is immoral and not at all tolerated at Mormon Stories events?

Edited March 5, 2013 by Darren10