Excommunicatin'

[Avatar4321]

Not all prophets Prophecy.... if that is an in stone rule than many latter day Prophets fail that round hole.  Prophecy is a one possible outlet God may work through a prophet.

really? Can you name a prophet who hasn't testified of Christ?

[Avatar4321]

because you have it all figured out? and anyone who believes differently than you is absolutely wrong?

of course I haven't figured it all out. I never claimed to. I just am no going to pretend Christ didn't give men power to bind and loose simply because of my pride.

[carbon dioxide]

JS said other churches abominable. I don't think that sits too well with a lot of people, we aren't the persecuted per se. People don't want someone saying they just want to add to what people already have and then bit by bit it's not the religion they began with.

There are reasons for this hatred for Mormonism, not for Mormons themselves.

There is plenty of reason for Mormons to hate other religions and Christian sects but should we and Joseph Smith did not say that other churches were abominations.  He said that Jesus told him the creeds (not churches) were abominations.

Edited January 17, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[bluebell]

Never mind, I found the pdf files he put up responding and from his stake president. Wow, reading it is painful. Him making a new website to help people in "transitioning way from the current view of LDS orthodoxy" (6) kind of says that he's already ready to be out. 

 

Glad you found it because i was having no luck.  I agree reading his own words quoted back really puts into perspective just how far JD has gone.

[carbon dioxide]

I believe the reason John Dehlin wants to remain a members is that if he is exed, he becomes part of the anti-mormon/ex mormon movement and loses part of his following.  Being a "member" helps him avoid the label and gain a little more credibility among some members than otherwise.  This is a part of his branding.  Many might disagree but my spidey sense tells me not to trust this guy at all.

[Stone holm]

With the huge system that is Dehlin's podcasts, his role as a public figure, his alignment with a secular worldview, the space between his constant criticism and his desire to stay connected to the LDS faith ... it's just a lot of speculation of what's in his heart as people look at him from the outside.

Still it's a little sad to excommunicate people for stating their beliefs, even if they are a bit off. We put up with people saying egregiously wrong things about blacks for years without exing them.

[Rob Osborn]

I believe the reason John Dehlin wants to remain a members is that if he is exed, he becomes part of the anti-mormon/ex mormon movement and loses part of his following.  Being a "member" helps him avoid the label and gain a little more credibility among some members than otherwise.  This is a part of his branding.  Many might disagree but my spidey sense tells me not to trust this guy at all.

I completely agree.

[carbon dioxide]

Still it's a little sad to excommunicate people for stating their beliefs, even if they are a bit off. We put up with people saying egregiously wrong things about blacks for years without exing them.

I think John Dehlin does a little more than state his beliefs that are a bit off at times.  All of us have the opportunity to do it here.   How many people in the Church say bad things about blacks constantly and have a website and podcast to advocate their racist position?  It is the same issue I have with Kate Kelly.  I have no problem with her thinking that women should be ordained.  I have a problem with her starting an organization and waging a crusade to get the Church to comply with her demands.  It is what John does beyond his personal beliefs that I have a problem with.

Edited January 17, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[Avatar4321]

I believe the reason John Dehlin wants to remain a members is that if he is exed, he becomes part of the anti-mormon/ex mormon movement and loses part of his following.  Being a "member" helps him avoid the label and gain a little more credibility among some members than otherwise.  This is a part of his branding.  Many might disagree but my spidey sense tells me not to trust this guy at all.

which is the bottom line. He wants to remain a member and others want him to, not because of any love for the church at this point, but to be in a better position to pick off sheep.

if his membership was important to him, he would repent and stop leading people away. Of course, he still can repent, and I hope he does. But he cannot continue the way things are and hope to remain a member of the church.

[Avatar4321]

Still it's a little sad to excommunicate people for stating their beliefs, even if they are a bit off. We put up with people saying egregiously wrong things about blacks for years without exing them.

except it's not just stating ones beliefs. It's advocating for the positions when we have been instructs contrary and encouraging people to leave the church

[Calm]

JS said other churches abominable.

For someone who regularly condemns the Church for not being accurate, you can be really sloppy.

[why me]

I don't think they hate the church for any other reason but that they won't be looked at the same or they will be shunned ever so slightly if they aren't in step with it's teaching or don't believe in or participate in, speaking of the disaffected here..

And the non members who lose a child to Mormonism, that were in another faith. Our missionaries are converting family members, how would we like it if our son or daughter became a Muslim, or a Jehovah's Witness or fill in the blanks.

JS said other churches abominable. I don't think that sits too well with a lot of people, we aren't the persecuted per se. People don't want someone saying they just want to add to what people already have and then bit by bit it's not the religion they began with.

There are reasons for this hatred for Mormonism, not for Mormons themselves.

Joseph did not call other churches abominable. He repeated what he was told by heavenly father. So, who said it? Of course, if one does not believe in the first vision, then it was Joseph Smith. But if one believes in the first vision, then it was the heavenly personage. Also, we need to ask ourselves a very important question: was christianity abominable at that time? When we consider the religious wars that recked havoc across europe, the crusades, the burning of heretics, the inquistition and corruption. The colonialism of peoples and the forced conversions etc, the word abominable may be too kind.

 

The church has real enemies out there. Such was the case from the very beginning.

[Calm]

Still it's a little sad to excommunicate people for stating their beliefs, even if they are a bit off.

A bit off?

Not believing that God and Jesus Christ likely exist is a bit off?

Edited January 17, 2015 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Joseph did not call other churches abominable. He repeated what he was told by heavenly father. So, who said it? Of course, if one does not believe in the first vision, then it was Joseph Smith. But if one believes in the first vision, then it was the heavenly personage. Also, we need to ask ourselves a very important question: was christianity abominable at that time?.

Christianity and its churches are more than just creeds. JS nor Christ did not say either the churches or Christianity was abominable, but rather the creeds.

[ERayR]

JS said other churches abominable. I don't think that sits too well with a lot of people, we aren't the persecuted per se. People don't want someone saying they just want to add to what people already have and then bit by bit it's not the religion they began with.

 

How many times must you be reminded, Tacenda, Joseph Smith DID NOT say other churches abominable.  He said their CREED's were.

[ERayR]

Still it's a little sad to excommunicate people for stating their beliefs, even if they are a bit off. We put up with people saying egregiously wrong things about blacks for years without exing them.

 

You are being disingenuous.  You know this is not for stating his beliefs.  Question - Why would someone want to continue to hold membership in and organization in which they no longer believed or supported?

[Spammer]

was christianity abominable at that time? When we consider the religious wars that recked havoc across europe, the crusades, the burning of heretics, the inquistition and corruption. The colonialism of peoples and the forced conversions etc, the word abominable may be too kind.

 

 

 

The fact that some creedal Christians behaved as if they weren't followers of the Christian gospel has zero relation to whether the Creeds are valid. 

[Kenngo1969]

Why have you assumed that the motivation here is to benefit the Church?

 

By the way, I don't for one second believe that you genuinely believe that excommunication would cut John off from God, nor do I for one second believe that John worries about that either, so why all the pretend anxiety and hand-wringing over supposedly terrible spiritual consequences you don't actually accept as real?

It's part of Newb's schtick.

[DBMormon]

really? Can you name a prophet who hasn't testified of Christ?

I didn't say testify of Christ.  I said Prophecy -  Of course one could pull the LDS definiton of prophecy which allows anything and everything or the standard definition which is to foretell a future event.  I am speaking of the latter as the former is a watered down term that pretty much means nothing and defines almost anything anyone says in gospel context.  

 

Though by your definition I believe Habakuk fits. 

 

[Avatar4321]

I didn't say testify of Christ.  I said Prophecy -  Of course one could pull the LDS definiton of prophecy which allows anything and everything or the standard definition which is to foretell a future event.  I am speaking of the latter as the former is a watered down term that pretty much means nothing and defines almost anything anyone says in gospel context.  

 

Though by your definition I believe Habakuk fits. 

 

and yet the spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Christ.

we prophesy when we testify of Christ.

and we are using the biblical definition here.

[The Nehor]

I think that there is a tendency to conflate questioners/doubters/critics with the "enemy."

For instance, I am VERY critical of many US policies, foreign and domestic. But I don't consider myself an "enemy" of America. In fact, just about everyone that I know or care about is an America. I am critical of the nation's policies to the extent I believe they hurt my fellow countrymen and others.

In the same way, I can see someone being a critic of some Church policies without being an "enemy" to the Church. The fact that some of us love gay Mormons causes us to be critical of a doctrinal position that dooms them to lives of isolation and loneliness. The fact that some of us want the Church to be better makes us critical of a doctrinal position that posits that only half of God's children can be trusted with His power on earth. And so on. We don't hate the Church or want to destroy it because many of the people we love most would be "buried in the rubble."

So if you take away genuine critics of Church policies, how many actual enemies are left -- people who want the Church to die, leaving mayhem and ruin for its members -- the Tanners, the Deckers, the six people holding up garments outside of GC, the eight pastors still giving annual anti-Mormon sermons in their churches?

 

No, I would say 99% of our "genuine critics" are enemies. They may not feel hatred. They may even think they are being helpful but they are still enemies.

 

The analogy does not work. The US political system is a gigantic mess with no one really in charge and plenty of room to disagree and screw up. The church is led by God. It makes minor mistakes due to the people leading it but it is the sole source of exaltation in this life. To criticize it is to fight God. You are not disagreeing with fallible Senator John Q Idiot who believes we need 200 aircraft carriers because his constituents build naval ships. You are dealing with the infallible. He admits his servants can make errors but reserves to himself and to those who hold keys of leadership over those fallible people to correct them.

 

Our critics are our enemies. All of them are not seething balls of salivating hatred who thirst for our blood. It is kind of a shame. It would be easier if they were.

[why me]

The fact that some creedal Christians behaved as if they weren't followers of the Christian gospel has zero relation to whether the Creeds are valid. 

But joseph was told to join none of them because their creeds were abominable. So my question still stands: were they an abomination in the site of god based on their history, their actions and their creed?

 

Cal, point taken. However, he was told to join none of the churches and this where the confusion rests.

Edited January 17, 2015 by why me

[DBMormon]

and yet the spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Christ.

we prophesy when we testify of Christ.

and we are using the biblical definition here.

If you substitute "any testimony of Christ" in place of the word Prophecy in the Scriptures, very few of those sentences make any sense any longer

consider

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/prophecy-prophesy

and substituting "any kind of testimony of Christ" in it's place

 

• Your sons and daughters shall "have any kind of testimony of Christ":Joel 2:28; ( Acts 2:17–18; )
• No"any kind of testimony of Christ" of the scripture is of any private interpretation:2 Pet. 1:20;
• The Nephites had many revelations and the spirit of "any kind of testimony of Christ":Jacob 4:6, 13;
• Alma and Amulek knew the intents of Zeezrom’s heart by the spirit of "any kind of testimony of Christ":Alma 12:7;
• Wo unto him who says the Lord no longer works by "any kind of testimony of Christ" 3 Ne. 29:6;
• Search the "testimonies of Christ" of Isaiah:Morm. 8:23;
• The "any kind of testimony of Christ" shall all be fulfilled:D&C 1:37–38;
• Man must be called of God by "any kind of testimony of Christ":A of F 1:5;                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

It seems to me that in at least 90% of the wording that uses the word Prophecy, it is clear they are speaking of foretelling future events.  So yes I grant the Church has defined it one way, I simply think that based on Biblical scripture that definition doesn't hold much water.  I respect one's right to hold such view, I simply do not see it as defensible as one would like it to be.

Edited January 17, 2015 by DBMormon

[Pahoran]

Dieter F. Uchtdorf: "The Church is a home for all to come together, regardless of the depth or the height of our testimony. I know of no sign on the doors of our meetinghouses that says, 'Your testimony must be this tall to enter'"

That's very true, but it doesn't apply to Mister Dehlin.

 

His problem isn't that his testimony is small.  His problem is that his integrity is small.

 

He has an active un-testimony, and he proselytes within the Church to convert people to it.

 

He markets himself as a fellow Latter-day Saint who's just trying to help people out, but he's really trying to help people out -- all the way out -- of the Church.

 

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

You know what's in the hearts of most people?

 

Blood.

 

Regards,

Pahoran