Excommunicatin'

[Avatar4321]

Perhaps it would give us chance to discuss and (heaven forbid) speculate on the meatier things of the gospel instead of getting bogged down in whether or not Joseph Smith had sex with his wives (he did) or whether or not we are Christians (we are, but not traditional).

 

It would be nice to move on to more interesting topics.  And before someone says "well why don't you start a topic", I have.  They aren't as interesting apparently as whether or not the Church will allow gay marriage one day. 

oh how I would love that.

[JLHPROF]

oh how I would love that.

 

That could be the first time you and I ever agreed...

Who knows, we might even agree on something doctrinal next!

[mormonnewb]

when you say no man has been given the power to bind and loose on earth and in heaven despite Jesus Christ specifically saying otherwise, then yes you are speaking against the Word of the Lord.

I make no such claim. If I didn't believe that man had binding authority, I wouldn't have bothered getting baptized. We simply disagree about the definition of "loose" for these purposes.

I see "loosing" as the act of freeing one from bondage that prevents salvation not as an act of "loosing" someone FROM salvation. Interestingly, the Catholics agree with this interpretation and they've been excommunicating folks for quite some time now. Their excommunications do not sever the act of baptism. And while I understand that Mormons might see it differently, I don't want you to think that my view was made up out of whole cloth. Or that I was intentionally disregarding scripture because I just don't like how it reads.

[mormonnewb]

in other words he admits he hasn't been given any authority to act and speak on behalf of the Lord. We on the other hand have been called by the spirit of prophecy to speak the word of the Lord to the people and to administer the ordinances on His behalf.

No, he admits that he is a HUMAN BEING and therefore, like all such beings is prone to error at times. In fact, I think this is the FORMAL position of the leaders of this Church as well. The only difference is that the Baptists believe their leaders.

[Avatar4321]

No, he admits that he is a HUMAN BEING and therefore, like all such beings is prone to error at times. In fact, I think this is the FORMAL position of the leaders of this Church as well. The only difference is that the Baptists believe their leaders.

who is claiming otherwise?

I'm claiming we have been called and given the authority to speak the Lords words on His behalf.

you for some reason seem to think it's arrogant to do what we are called to do.

[mormonnewb]

who is claiming otherwise?

I'm claiming we have been called and given the authority to speak the Lords words on His behalf.

you for some reason seem to think it's arrogant to do what we are called to do.

It's arrogant to overstep the bounds of your calling. Last night, I "ordained" my son to buy pizza for family dinner. Had he come back with a motorcycle, or worse, had SOLD our home for a handful of magic beans, that would have been QUITE arrogant of him.

We have all been commissioned to make DISCIPLES of the nations, not to declare APOSTATES of the saints.

Edited January 18, 2015 by mormonnewb

[Duncan]

It's arrogant to overstep the bounds of your calling. Last night, I "ordained" my son to buy pizza for family dinner. Had he come back with a motorcycle, or worse, had SOLD our home for a handful of magic beans, that would have been QUITE arrogant of him.

We have all been commissioned to make DISCIPLES of the nations, not to declare APOSTATES of the saints.

 

 

Does John want to be a Disciple of Christ?

 

this is always a great reminder, Doctrine and Covenants 10:63-69

 

"63 And this I do that I may establish my gospel, that there may not be so much contention; yea, Satan doth stir up the hearts of the people to contention concerning the points of my doctrine; and in these things they do err, for they do wrest the scriptures and do not understand them.

 64 Therefore, I will unfold unto them this great mystery;

 65 For, behold, I will gather them as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, if they will not harden their hearts;

 66 Yea, if they will come, they may, and partake of the waters of life freely.

 67 Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and comethunto me, the same is my church.

 68 Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church.

 69 And now, behold, whosoever is of my church, and endureth of my church to the end, him will I establish upon my rock, and thegates of hell shall not prevail against them."

[Avatar4321]

It's arrogant to overstep the bounds of your calling. Last night, I "ordained" my son to buy pizza for family dinner. Had he come back with a motorcycle, or worse, had SOLD our home for a handful of magic beans, that would have been QUITE arrogant of him.

We have all been commissioned to make DISCIPLES of the nations, not to declare APOSTATES of the saints.

and the the scriptures clearly give those with the keys to excommunicate and discipline rebellious saints. Was alma wrong when the Lord told him to excommunicate those who refuse to repent?

[Kenngo1969]

Newb,

 

I call 'em like I see 'em.  One way you could forestall accusations that you're often passive-aggressive is to quit being ... I dunno ... passive-aggressive?

 

Just sayin'!

[carbon dioxide]

It's arrogant to overstep the bounds of your calling. Last night, I "ordained" my son to buy pizza for family dinner. Had he come back with a motorcycle, or worse, had SOLD our home for a handful of magic beans, that would have been QUITE arrogant of him.

We have all been commissioned to make DISCIPLES of the nations, not to declare APOSTATES of the saints.

We don't declare apostates of the saints.  They generally declare themselves by their own actions.  Apostates do exist do they not?  If they exist, should nothing be done about them?  Should we just pat them on the back and say "Good job, keep up the good work"?

[smac97]

So still a yes......

 

Still a question beneath contempt.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

[smac97]

President Uchdorf disagrees with you.

 

I don't think President Uchtdorf was proposing that local leaders should abdicate their responsibilities as judges in Israel and let apostasy run rampant and unchecked in the Church.  I think to suggest or imply otherwise is to wrest his words.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

[why me]

I guess that explains why members of that church did NOT set up a web page discussion forum to talk about their church and its policies. If so, I can guarantee you that it would be far more contentious than this board could even fathom.

So tell me, what would this forum look like if not for us "enemies" of the Church? Would it be just a series of threads about archeological finds in Central America? Or would you all just take turns starting threads like, "How perfect do YOU think the Church is?"

And yes, I understand that this forum was around long before my appearance and will continue long after my departure, but without "enemies" like me to fight, you wouldn't have much to DISCUSS.

I think that the board had some interesting discussions before you arrived to the forum. Now, it is just bickering and more bickering on threads that you participate in. Quite amazing really. I see no discussion at all...just attack and defend type posts on this thread. With genuine critics, there were discussions and debates. But not now. I find it all rather sad really. But then again, I do believe that some people get joy in sowing contention. It is all part of the internet game. I don't think that the church members are perfect at all and they do make up the church. But likewise for the baptists which you have referenced.

 

You seem to place more importance on yourself by claiming just what this forum would be without guys like you. Well, I can only go by what it has been before you came on the scene. It was functioning well. Usually when people post negatives over and over again to get a reaction, I call it a windup. Not good for discussion as we can see from this thread. If there were more guys like you on this forum, the forum would be destroyed from contention and bickering, especially if such people were active in the church. If one would then think of this forum as a ward, it would certainly be a ward of loonies with all the contention and bickering among the saints of that ward.

 

My point was simple to you. If you were to start a podcast as a member of  a particular baptist church and this podcast was overwhelmingly negative about that church and its pastor, and yet, you still wished to be a member of that church so that you can claim membership while leading people away by continuing to sow contention within that said church, well..I don't know what I would make of you. Friend or enemy of that church?

Edited January 18, 2015 by why me

[Pahoran]

President Uchdorf disagrees with you.

 

Call for references, please.

 

I'm afraid your previous citation of what President Uchtdorf actually said doesn't pass muster.  You've so far quoted him saying nothing at all that contradicts anything I've posted here, so I can only assume you have some other quotation in mind.

 

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

It's arrogant to overstep the bounds of your calling. Last night, I "ordained" my son to buy pizza for family dinner. Had he come back with a motorcycle, or worse, had SOLD our home for a handful of magic beans, that would have been QUITE arrogant of him.

We have all been commissioned to make DISCIPLES of the nations, not to declare APOSTATES of the saints.

 

Which has not been done, and nor is it likely to be.

 

Mister Dehlin, at best, has been a MINO.  It is a very long time since anyone has mistaken him for a Latter-day Saint in any meaningful sense of the term.

 

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

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.

 

Good thing that isn't being contemplated, then.  Mister Dehlin has been using the Church membership as his mission field for his anti-Mormon proselytizing.  It is grotesquely disingenuous to describe that as merely "stating their beliefs."

 

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

You're absolutely correct. I'm not the least bit worried for JD's eternal soul as a result of being ex'd from this Church. I strongly believe that his excommunication has about as much eternal effect as the rule requiring one to wait 30 minutes after eating before getting back in the pool.

You Dehlinites may see things that way if you wish. Among the Latter-day Saints, however, is is well understood that an excommunicated person is no longer able to receive the blessings of living according to the covenants he or she has made as a member of the Church.

Of course, when such a one has been flagrantly flouting those covenants, excommunication is actually a benefit to them.

 

My handwringing comes from the fact that I will be the one answering for this silliness. You BICers get a pass on stuff like this as people just assume that you've never known anything better. But as a convert, someone is going to ask ME, "So, let me get this straight. You're a well-educated man who converted to a church that is excommunicating people in the 21st century? What's wrong? Would the Amish not return your texts?"

Show me a man who has to appeal to the calendar, and I'll show you a man who hasn't got an argument.

 

I've just gotten used to answering for the priesthood ban, so I'm not looking forward to answering for the podcast ban as well.

 

What "podcast ban?" Aren't you getting just a tad hysterical?

Regards,

Pahoran

Edited January 18, 2015 by Pahoran

[mormonnewb]

I think that the board had some interesting discussions before you arrived to the forum. Now, it is just bickering and more bickering on threads that you participate in. Quite amazing really. I see no discussion at all...just attack and defend type posts on this thread. With genuine critics, there were discussions and debates. But not now. I find it all rather sad really. But then again, I do believe that some people get joy in sowing contention. It is all part of the internet game.

 

And you don't see that you enjoy contention just as much as I do, if not more?  There are so many people on this board that simply ignore my "bickering."  Yet, you are the person who responds to me most often.  If you really didn't like all this contention, you would do what others do and say, "Oh, Newb's at it again!  Let me find a more reasonable person to have a discussion with."

 

In fact, in this very thread, JLHPROF lamented that he couldn't get a good conversation going regarding the meatier aspects of doctrine and theology.  So why not take him up on his offer?  I promise that I will not bring any of my "nonsense" into a discussion of Egyptology, Mayan ruins or chiasmas (as you can see, I don't even know how to spell the word).  Nor will I bud into the meatier aspects of the second anointing, calling and election being made sure, or any other Master's level aspect of the Restored Gospel.  So have at it.  I pinky swear that I'll stay here in Milkville.  Deal?

 

Admit, pal!  You like to spar online every bit as much as I do.  In fact, I'd suggest that you enjoy it more because in almost every case, YOU are the one challenging one of my posts (or challenging my very identity).  I'm not the one jumping into a thread to tell you that you are all wrong.  That is your Internet game.  So we are not all that different, after all.

 

Well, except for one thing, I welcome your presence on the board. This board would be intolerably boring without you and the other members of Team Church.  It does not offend me that everyone in this Church does not see things the way I do (i.e., the right way).  Yet, for some reason, you believe that this isn't a Church unless everyone believes as you do (i.e., as the Brethren have told you to believe).

 

The problem is that this can't be the "one true Church" AND the Church of the like-minded.  Many of HF's children are just like me -- contentious and contrarian (although very few combine it so well with wit, charm and good looks).  So what are we to do with the misfits like me?  Just leave us to "rot" in one of the abominable churches?  Or did I read something about patience and long-suffering somewhere?

 

And finally, don't feel that all of your long-suffering is in vain.  Last week, we went round and round on this board about ETB being the subject of this year's teachings of the Presidents manual.  I was able to give voice to some of my frustrations, but then get some much needed perspective.  As a result, last Sunday, I give the most inspired lesson in the history of EQ ... and that's being modest (and it's not saying a whole lot).  But seriously, my participation on this board allows me to leave my natural contention here (amongst those who have volunteered for it) and to show up to the meetinghouse full of love and goodwill towards my fellow saints.

 

Would you rather that I do the opposite?  Or should I just go away to one of those "false" churches?  And if I did, who would you have to feel morally superior to around here?

 

To paraphrase Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men, "You want me on this board!  You need me on this board!"

[Pahoran]

Ah so you are able to over ride a member of the FP and decide who his comments apply to you.

I regret that you have no good faith basis on which to claim to believe what you assert. I'm not attempting to "over ride" anything.

President Uchtdorf talked about welcoming people regardless of the size of their testimony. That doesn't describe Mister Dehlin, whose "testimony" of his false doctrines is cyclopean in scale.

And you think his integrity is small?

I'm afraid Mister Dehlin's two-facedness is too well documented for you to sweep it under the rug.

 

You really don't know what a person's testimony is like unless you walk in their shoes now do you Pahoran?   My guess is you have never talked to nor communicated with Dehlin yet you think you know him?  Tell us what how many of his podcasts have you listened to?  Or have you just read the awful articles by Greg Smith about him?

 

Why are Greg Smith's articles "awful," T? Because they pull aside the sheepskin to show the wolf hair, and you can't refute them?

The problem really is he just does not fit your mold so you loathe him.  You refuse to take him at his word and impune his character. Really no surprise but all the same it is very bad form.

Your mind-reading is faulty. Maybe you should try reading some sources instead.

I don't "loathe" Mister Dehlin. I just acknowledge the plain facts about him.

Regards,

Pahoran

[mormonnewb]

What "podcast ban?" Aren't you getting just a tad hysterical?

Regards,

Pahoran

 

Not hysterical, but hyperbolic.  No, there is no podcast ban for saints ... at least, not yet.  However, we should be clear that Dehlin is being ex'd for his actions SOLELY as they relate to his activities as a podcast host.

 

He is not being ex'd for creating a disturbance in real-life LDS meetings.  He isn't being ex'd for organizing the saints into protests and demonstrations against the Church.  He isn't being ex'd for trying to start his own church.  He's being ex'd for hosting a podcast that members can only hear by seeking it out on their own.

 

I believe we are breaking new ground here.  I'm not sure that ANY other church has punished one of their members for interviewing people with views contrary to the Church.  Actually, I take that back.  Recently, a Saudi man was sentenced to 10 years in prison (and I believe 10,000 lashes) for posting a website where OTHER people could be critical of Islam.

 

And yes, I will grant you that we would never lash a wayward saint.  That would be cruel.  We show our more evolved sensibilities by severing their ties to their loved ones ... and God almighty ... for all of eternity (or until, they have begged for forgiveness to the SP's satisfaction).

[readstoomuch]

Thanks for the perspective. I want to like you, but struggle and at least once scolded you pretty harshly. I respect people who think and you do think. I do feel strongly that all those who call themselves saints should build the kingdom of God. That seems to come out in you. Are you going to stay in the Church? I get mixed messages.

And you don't see that you enjoy contention just as much as I do, if not more? There are so many people on this board that simply ignore my "bickering." Yet, you are the person who responds to me most often. If you really didn't like all this contention, you would do what others do and say, "Oh, Newb's at it again! Let me find a more reasonable person to have a discussion with."

In fact, in this very thread, JLHPROF lamented that he couldn't get a good conversation going regarding the meatier aspects of doctrine and theology. So why not take him up on his offer? I promise that I will not bring any of my "nonsense" into a discussion of Egyptology, Mayan ruins or chiasmas (as you can see, I don't even know how to spell the word). Nor will I bud into the meatier aspects of the second anointing, calling and election being made sure, or any other Master's level aspect of the Restored Gospel. So have at it. I pinky swear that I'll stay here in Milkville. Deal?

Admit, pal! You like to spar online every bit as much as I do. In fact, I'd suggest that you enjoy it more because in almost every case, YOU are the one challenging one of my posts (or challenging my very identity). I'm not the one jumping into a thread to tell you that you are all wrong. That is your Internet game. So we are not all that different, after all.

Well, except for one thing, I welcome your presence on the board. This board would be intolerably boring without you and the other members of Team Church. It does not offend me that everyone in this Church does not see things the way I do (i.e., the right way). Yet, for some reason, you believe that this isn't a Church unless everyone believes as you do (i.e., as the Brethren have told you to believe).

The problem is that this can't be the "one true Church" AND the Church of the like-minded. Many of HF's children are just like me -- contentious and contrarian (although very few combine it so well with wit, charm and good looks). So what are we to do with the misfits like me? Just leave us to "rot" in one of the abominable churches? Or did I read something about patience and long-suffering somewhere?

And finally, don't feel that all of your long-suffering is in vain. Last week, we went round and round on this board about ETB being the subject of this year's teachings of the Presidents manual. I was able to give voice to some of my frustrations, but then get some much needed perspective. As a result, last Sunday, I give the most inspired lesson in the history of EQ ... and that's being modest (and it's not saying a whole lot). But seriously, my participation on this board allows me to leave my natural contention here (amongst those who have volunteered for it) and to show up to the meetinghouse full of love and goodwill towards my fellow saints.

Would you rather that I do the opposite? Or should I just go away to one of those "false" churches? And if I did, who would you have to feel morally superior to around here?

To paraphrase Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men, "You want me on this board! You need me on this board!"

Edited January 18, 2015 by readstoomuch

[readstoomuch]

My statement is towards the top. This dang thing doesn't always work for me.

[mormonnewb]

My statement is towards the top. This dang thing doesn't always work for me.

I'm currently in the Church. I have not resigned my callings and I still attend regularly. I'm trying to determine how active I can be with my local Baptist church in its social justice efforts and still be a Mormon.

[Calm]

Not hysterical, but hyperbolic.  No, there is no podcast ban for saints ... at least, not yet.  However, we should be clear that Dehlin is being ex'd for his actions SOLELY as they relate to his activities as a podcast host.

 

He is not being ex'd for creating a disturbance in real-life LDS meetings.  He isn't being ex'd for organizing the saints into protests and demonstrations against the Church.  He isn't being ex'd for trying to start his own church.  He's being ex'd for hosting a podcast that members can only hear by seeking it out on their own.

 

 

I wasn't going to post this because I thought the other link was enough, but apparently not.  From his stake president, from a letter JD apparently left out of the stuff he gave to the media:

 

https://seesangelsinthearchitecture.wordpress.com/2015/01/17/john-dehlin-and-media-manipulation/

 

I am focused on five core doctrines of the Church: (1) The existence and nature of God; (2) Christ being the literal Savior of the World and his Atonement being absolutely necessary to our salvation; 3) the exclusive priesthood authority restored through the Church; (4) The Book of Mormon as scripture and the revealed word of God; and (5) the governance of the Church by doctrine and revelation through inspired leaders. As you know, and as my letter outlined, in the past you have written and spoken out against these core doctrines on numerous occasions and in numerous public contexts…. If you are prepared to renounce your previous statements we can move forward together.

 

It is not just podcasts, he has spoken about his beliefs on Facebook, at demonstrations, at various conferences, on message boards, on radio, in newspapers and practically every other form of media.

Edited January 18, 2015 by calmoriah

[why me]

I'm currently in the Church. I have not resigned my callings and I still attend regularly. I'm trying to determine how active I can be with my local Baptist church in its social justice efforts and still be a Mormon.

You can be as active as you wish in the baptist social justice movement. No problem at all. I have been active in various social justice organizations over the years without a problem. I have even done some work for the catholic worker movement. However, you need to find some peace in the lds church and transfer that peace into your discussions. Then, you can do a great job with the baptists about any justice orientations that they are working on or in. Turmoil is bad for the health.

 

Also, when one looks below the surface, one can find negatives about any organization, especially if one is searching for them. It just depends on how deep one wishes to go.