John Dehlin Morphs Into Grant Palmer.

[readstoomuch]

So, on Mormon Stories John Dehlin is claiming that a famous person who works for the Church came out of the closet about their disbelief. He cannot disclose who they are, but since John posted it his "sheeples" are swallowing it hook, line and sinker. So I am comparing it to Grant Palmer`s tale about the GA who was meeting with him about his doubts. I understand that not all things are perfect in Church history and any one can have doubts. These stories always seem too convenient.

If you want more gossip from Mormon Stories there was a thread about President Monson and dementia. The last time I read that topic, he was spot on in Conference. I think he was having problems with his teeth for awhile. There are some of the crowd there that show empathy and balance in talking about the Prophet, but mostly not. It would be sad if he was to start having dementia. I have always liked President Monson and I get mad when people call him Tommy. Can`t critics still treat him with respect. The same would go for the pope or any religious order.

Finally, more about a blog on Millenialstar.org concerning the ways John does not believe in the Church or at least what he finds troubling in its history and theology. I didn`t read this blog, but I have read what John has posted himself. If the blog is mean-spirited about John, then I would agree with trying to keep comments about any one you disagree with balanced.

Nothing like reading Mormon Stories discussion group to make you feel good about the world.

Edited March 27, 2014 by readstoomuch

[Calm]

Conference approaches and the Mormon Rumour Mill goes into overdrive....

[Duncan]

well, Grant Palmer's disclosure about some GA coming out in disbelief has been a failure and I am surprised but not surprised that Dehlin would do this-I tend to think he like Palmer is trying to ramp up his sagging brand

[Kenngo1969]

I would feel bad if it were publicly disclosed that President Monson has dementia.  (Heck, I feel bad that the same disclosure was made about retired long-time Utah Jazz basketball play-by-play announcer "Hot Rod" Hundley, but even as avid of a Jazz fan as I am, I still don't have the same emotional investment in the Jazz as I do in the Church and in my testimony).  When speculation about President Monson's lucidity came up previously, though, someone on the Board (I believe it was MBeesley) said, essentially (though these are my words, not his), yes, it's nice when the Prophet can circulate worldwide, mingle with the Saints, preside at meetings (especially at temple dedications), dedicate temples, speak in Conference, and so on.  Still, we don't need a prophet to do any of those things: the only thing we really need a prophet to do is to hold the keys.  No matter what President Monson's health or mental state, he still holds the keys.  Personally, I am comforted by that thought.

[mormonnewb]

So, on Mormon Stories John Dehlin is claiming that a famous person who works for the Church came out of the closet about their disbelief. He cannot disclose who they are, but since John posted it his "sheeples" are swallowing it hook, line and sinker.

Sheeples? How ironic? I believe that's what a lot of them would call us. Considering that many of us are wearing the exact same underclothing at this very moment, we might want to keep this type of name-calling to a minimum.

[readstoomuch]

Well, if sheeples is offensive I am sorry. Considering some of the stuff I read there I thought I was measured.

[why me]

So, on Mormon Stories John Dehlin is claiming that a famous person who works for the Church came out of the closet about their disbelief. He cannot disclose who they are, but since John posted it his "sheeples" are swallowing it hook, line and sinker. So I am comparing it to Grant Palmer`s tale about the GA who was meeting with him about his doubts. I understand that not all things are perfect in Church history and any one can have doubts. These stories always seem too convenient.

If you want more gossip from Mormon Stories there was a thread about President Monson and dementia. The last time I read that topic, he was spot on in Conference. I think he was having problems with his teeth for awhile. There are some of the crowd there that show empathy and balance in talking about the Prophet, but mostly not. It would be sad if he was to start having dementia. I have always liked President Monson and I get mad when people call him Tommy. Can`t critics still treat him with respect. The same would go for the pope or any religious order.

Finally, more about a blog on Millenialstar.org concerning the ways John does not believe in the Church or at least what he finds troubling in its history and theology. I didn`t read this blog, but I have read what John has posted himself. If the blog is mean-spirited about John, then I would agree with trying to keep comments about any one you disagree with balanced.

Nothing like reading Mormon Stories discussion group to make you feel good about the world.

I think that like any brand name, the brand needs to find ways to be viable. And I think that we can see this with John. His campaign for gay rights, by calling himself an ally is a case in point. And now this. I think that the dehlim brand suffered when he came back to church. Many lost faith in his product. He gained some support for his stance on gay rights in the lds church. And he may gain more support for his brand if this is true about a famous person who works for the church. But in reality, it is no big deal if someone who works for the church and who is famous comes out with their disbelief. It happened often in the early days and there is no reason that it will not happen now.

[Bob Crockett]

So, on Mormon Stories John Dehlin is claiming that a famous person who works for the Church came out of the closet about their disbelief. He cannot disclose who they are, but since John posted it his "sheeples" are swallowing it hook, line and sinker. 

I notice that adherents to particular hobbyist views of the Church, the Gospel or its doctrine also quote unnamed General Authorities for their views.  It is common human nature.  Often the hearer hears what he or she wants to hear.  As in Pres. Uchdorf's talks; we quote what we want to hear but then don't read to the bottom of the talk.

[stemelbow]

Why does he think it's his right to bring up someone else's loss of faith?  Can't he hold his tongue until this unnamed authority comes out with it himself? 

 

Sheesh I don't get why people feel so entitled. 

[Duncan]

Why does he think it's his right to bring up someone else's loss of faith?  Can't he hold his tongue until this unnamed authority comes out with it himself? 

 

Sheesh I don't get why people feel so entitled. 

 

 

plus he has this privileged information thing hanging over everyone, like he's patting us on the head and he'll let us know when he's good and ready...

[Tacenda]

John Dehlin may be on his way down off the pedestal he's been put on.  I think he should have left that comment off FB.  That just wasn't necessary.  It only frustrates those that would do anything for a leader to come out and validate their faith crisis.  Sometimes John doesn't know when to quit.  And even though he went back to activity in the church, it definitely doesn't feel like his testimony came back.  I think it may have been to hold onto the "Staylds" crowd.  I feel like a traitor to John for saying this.  But I'm all for being who you are, even though I don't do it.  I hope John will be that.  Maybe he doesn't believe but feels it's best for his family to continue activity.  A lot of people are doing the same.  Maybe they don't believe in any faith, they just like the social scene or the good morals the church espouses.  Who knows exactly.  But John seems like the same John he was before, when he was leaning towards non belief of God or anything.  Hopefully he retains the belief in God.  I think his heart is right, but he is so public he must understand that people follow his lead and he must watch the things he puts out there.   

Edited March 27, 2014 by Tacenda

[Scott Lloyd]

I've started a project to document Dehlin's rumors with a time stamp to see which and how many of them turn out to be true within, say, a 10-year time frame. Over time it may turn out to be an interesting exercise.

[drums12]

I know I shouldn't judge...but how the hell has Dehlin been able to retain membership in the Church? It seems to me he wants whatever extra credibility critics give him because he's still a member, much like Palmer's "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins" (emphasis mine). 

[stemelbow]

I know I shouldn't judge...but how the hell has Dehlin been able to retain membership in the Church? It seems to me he wants whatever extra credibility critics give him because he's still a member, much like Palmer's "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins" (emphasis mine). 

 

No kidding, he should be excommunicated for saying he knows someone who lost his faith.  Just playing.  I disagree.  I hope the tent stays big enough to hold folks like him in it. 

 

Too bad he ain't the only Mormon who has bad form when it comes to talking about others.  Too many of us do the same type of stuff. 

[drums12]

No kidding, he should be excommunicated for saying he knows someone who lost his faith.  Just playing.  I disagree.  I hope the tent stays big enough to hold folks like him in it. 

 

Too bad he ain't the only Mormon who has bad form when it comes to talking about others.  Too many of us do the same type of stuff. 

The "tent" is big enough to hold everyone in.  I've had my doubts and issues with Church history, policies, etc.  I've honestly considered leaving at times.  The problem with Dehlin is he actively works to destroy faith.  Yes, I know he started "staylds" way back when.  I don't care.  He loves to take jabs at the Church every chance he gets.  There is a world of difference between having doubts and disagreements, and publicly nurturing hostility while feigning that you're just about "understanding, compassion, etc." 

[Tacenda]

http://www.millennialstar.org/john-dehlins-comprehensive-list-of-reasons-he-doesnt-believe-in-the-lds-church/

 

This was on FB, how timely.  Still feeling like a traitor.  I guess I was one of the so called "sheeples".     

[stemelbow]

The "tent" is big enough to hold everyone in.  I've had my doubts and issues with Church history, policies, etc.  I've honestly considered leaving at times.  The problem with Dehlin is he actively works to destroy faith.  Yes, I know he started "staylds" way back when.  I don't care.  He loves to take jabs at the Church every chance he gets.  There is a world of difference between having doubts and disagreements, and publicly nurturing hostility while feigning that you're just about "understanding, compassion, etc." 

 

 Well I haven't paid enough attention to him if that's the case.  I mean to say, I doubt he's being that deceptive.  There's probably something genuine coming from him.  So I'll just say I disagree at this point, while also granting you may be right. 

[Coreyb]

I know I shouldn't judge...but how the hell has Dehlin been able to retain membership in the Church? It seems to me he wants whatever extra credibility critics give him because he's still a member, much like Palmer's "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins" (emphasis mine). 

Because the church learned a lesson from the September six incident. Unless he comes out and openly opposes the LDS church I think they will stay their hand. I don't have a problem with him being a member. I think I have listened to 95% of his Mormon stories podcasts, and I do appreciate the fact that there are people talking about the things he discusses. He does come off as disingenuous, especially when he brings up the same topics that he has already had debunked or set in proper context by previous guests. Its also funny how when interviewing, especially believing members, he seems to bend over backwards trying to pull out negative experiences or critiques about the church from his guests. It seemed very obvious in his interview with Ed Kimball. He kept trying to find scandal but Ed just wouldn't say an unkind thing about his father. He is generous to the church at times however, even defending it somewhat when interviewing Paul Toscano. I enjoy most of his podcasts.

[rameumptom]

The post at Millennial Star is a good one by Bruce Nelson.  You should read it.  He does quote Dehlin, who recently wrote on Facebook that we should "doubt those who tell us to doubt our doubts" - an apparent attack on Pres Uchtdorf.

[Bernard Gui]

http://www.millennialstar.org/john-dehlins-comprehensive-list-of-reasons-he-doesnt-believe-in-the-lds-church/

 

This was on FB, how timely.  Still feeling like a traitor.  I guess I was one of the so called "sheeples".     

Thanks for the link. What do you think of this?

 

Of course religions replicate themselves culturally! If you are an active LDS parent you send your children to Primary right off the bat to teach them your beliefs. You do a lot more than that. You hold Family Home Evening, send them to seminary, possibly send them on a mission, maybe even send them to a Church owned university. As a parent you have no delusions that you are doing this in hopes that your child will grow up believing in the LDS religion. You are literally ‘replicating’ the religion from one generation to another. And so what? You are offering the best of yourself and there is nothing wrong with that, despite the Dehlin-sphere insistence on calling this ‘indoctrination’ or worse ‘brain washing.’ Any guesses as to if they are talking their own moral worldview and trying to replicate it to their children?

 

[David T]

well, Grant Palmer's disclosure about some GA coming out in disbelief has been a failure and I am surprised but not surprised that Dehlin would do this-I tend to think he like Palmer is trying to ramp up his sagging brand

 

Didn't that end up being Hans Mattsen, emeritus Area Seventy, who did "come out in disbelief"?

[Tacenda]

Bernard said: "What do you think of this?" (quote below)

I think the meat should be before the milk, the milk is needed to wash it down. The milk is the fun, social part of church etc. I as an 8 yr. old or several converts now, didn't know the meat before baptism. I do believe I was conditioned to believe, but so is the Catholic, Jew, etc. In our church it's the air we breath, so- to-speak. Or the church is the air. That's why it's so devastating at first to hear of things not understood before. We feel we're drowning, out of breath, or we feel like dying. Sorry, some of us just saw the Fairytale or took it very serious. It will be good to stay in the church with the doors open (vaults too), maybe one day!

Religion is something to hold onto, that helps us believe in a God, who loves us. Btw, the end

of the quote that I bolded, they may just be doing that!!

Of course religions replicate themselves culturally! If you are an active LDS parent you send your children to Primary right off the bat to teach them your beliefs. You do a lot more than that. You hold Family Home Evening, send them to seminary, possibly send them on a mission, maybe even send them to a Church owned university. As a parent you have no delusions that you are doing this in hopes that your child will grow up believing in the LDS religion. You are literally ‘replicating’ the religion from one generation to another. And so what? You are offering the best of yourself and there is nothing wrong with that, despite the Dehlin-sphere insistence on calling this ‘indoctrination’ or worse ‘brain washing.’ Any guesses as to if they are talking their own moral worldview and trying to replicate it to their children?

Edited March 28, 2014 by Tacenda

[Scott Lloyd]

Didn't that end up being Hans Mattsen, emeritus Area Seventy, who did "come out in disbelief"?

No. In his tall tales, Palmer has alleged secret meetings with a prominent General Authority (not an Area Seventy), one who is still serving.

 

By the way, there is no such thing as an "emeritus Area Seventy." Mattsson (note the correct Swedish spelling) was mistaken when he identified himself as such. Area Seventies, after they have served for a period, are simply released, as with other Church callings. Emeritus status is only given to members of the First Quorum of the Seventy, after they have reached age 70.

Edited March 27, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[stemelbow]

No. In his tall tales, Palmer has alleged secret meetings with a prominent General Authority (not an Area Seventy), one who is still serving.

 

By the way, there is no such thing as an "emeritus Area Seventy." Mattson (note the correct Swedish spelling) was mistaken when he identified himself as such. Area Seventies, after they have served for a period, are simply released, as with other Church callings. Emeritus status is only given to members of the First Quorum of the Seventy, after they have reached age 70.

 

Also, when Palmer first came out to expose some unnamed leader, speaking on his behalf or whatever it was, I thought he had indicated that this leader was of the opinion that a number of other high profile authorities also did not believe.  Can't remember if Mattson suggested that after he came out, though.

[Okrahomer]

No. In his tall tales, Palmer has alleged secret meetings with a prominent General Authority (not an Area Seventy), one who is still serving.

 

By the way, there is no such thing as an "emeritus Area Seventy." Mattson (note the correct Swedish spelling) was mistaken when he identified himself as such. Area Seventies, after they have served for a period, are simply released, as with other Church callings. Emeritus status is only given to members of the First Quorum of the Seventy, after they have reached age 70.

 

You beat me to it:  Area Seventies are not "General Authorities" and they are not given emeritus status.  But the correct spelling actually appears to be:  Mattsson--with a double "t" as well as a double "s".  (From his sustaining during April 2002 General Conference.)