Duncan Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) Did JD call this court of "love"? Will he render the final "verdict" on his excommunication?One might argue that JD left the SP no other CHOICE, but the SP is the one taking action. As the NRA would say, "Members don't excommunicate themselves, Church leaders do."what the heck is the NRA?, National Restaurant Association? well, unless the SP told JD to do all this flub dubbery then JD can say he was the front man in the operation. JD can say whatever he wants but he can find himself outside of the Church, JD took action first then the SP. It's like owning a license you do your part then the issuer does their part, do something wrong and you can face some penalties or losing your license altogether, but it isn't the issuer's fault you made a mistake or willful transgression Edited January 16, 2015 by Duncan 1
Boanerges Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 The standards to enter the temple should be a little higher than being just a member and there probably is no reason to ask the questions after baptism as it is assumed that one complies with those minimum standards. But if a member wants to come out and show the church he does not hold to those basic standards anymore he is free to do so. And at that point, the Church might have to decide to remove his membership. There are certain things that all members need to have in common and bind us together. If people can believe or not believe anything they want, membership in the Church is meaningless. I really do not see John to be as much different than if a member was to come out and declare that Joseph Smith was a false prophet and Mohammad as God true prophet. But are the standards to enter the temple actually higher? The questions, although there are more of them, are not as detailed. Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon are not mentioned at all, although there is a rather vague question about belief in the restoration. That question can be (and is) easily interpreted without conideration for either Joseph Smith or the Book of Mormon. Isn't the common belief in the Gospel of Jesus Christ what really should hold us together? FWIW, John does seem to assert that Joseph was not a prophet - but he also doesn't say Muhammad is so there is a difference in your hypothetical and actuality.
bluebell Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 Isn't the common belief in the Gospel of Jesus Christ what really should hold us together? FWIW, John does seem to assert that Joseph was not a prophet - but he also doesn't say Muhammad is so there is a difference in your hypothetical and actuality. John also asserts that God and Jesus probably aren't real, that the resurrection probably never happened, and that the idea that we need an Atonement greatly bothers him and makes no sense. I'm not sure what's left to hold John and believers in the gospel of Jesus Christ together? 3
Boanerges Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 We aren't sat down with a missionary or other authority figure and whatnot, but I'm pretty sure we are clear that the Sacrament is a continual renewal of baptismal covenants. It seems logical to me, at least, that by extension the things you did at baptism are are all repeated in ritual and metaphor each week. I don't think it's so clear about the sacrament. I do believe we take the sacrament to remember the Savior and His atonement, and I do agree that we are taught that we renew our covenants through the sacrament. I may be off base here because I only know what I think about during the sacrament (FWIW I usually read scriptures that have something to do with the atonement and other teachings of the Savior) - but I doubt most of us sit there and review the baptism questions in our minds. For one thing I'll wager most people don't know what those questions are (because we're not asked them again and because they change slightly over time). I would not be surprised if a very small number of people review the temple recommend questions in the their minds during the sacrament - a very small number. Truth is most people are not thinking about renewing any covenants at all and are most likely thinking about things that have nothing to do with the task at hand.
Avatar4321 Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 You know what's in the hearts of most people?
Boanerges Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 John also asserts that God and Jesus probably aren't real, that the resurrection probably never happened, and that the idea that we need an Atonement greatly bothers him and makes no sense. I'm not sure what's left to hold John and believers in the gospel of Jesus Christ together? I recognize this, and I think it's one of the reasons John is facing disciplne (that and that he publicly announces/teaches it). I agree, I'm not sure what is holding John and the general membership together other than his desire that his family continue to attend (which is very possible without him) and cultural ties he has with the church. But if he (or anyone else) did have a testimony of Christ and didn't believe anything else, wouldn't his testimony still be tall enough to enter?
Boanerges Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) Duplicate Edited January 16, 2015 by Boanerges
Boanerges Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 You know what's in the hearts of most people?No, I don't. That's why I qualified the statement. Do you review the baptism questions or your covenants during the sacrament? Have you honestly never thought about anything else during the sacrament?
Maestrophil Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 John also asserts that God and Jesus probably aren't real, that the resurrection probably never happened, and that the idea that we need an Atonement greatly bothers him and makes no sense. I'm not sure what's left to hold John and believers in the gospel of Jesus Christ together? Which brings us to the probem. The public at large knows what John believes and does not. Any one with any level or lack of testimony is welcome to fellowship and worship with the saints - but not to come and spread doubt and venom. I would never go attend Jewish Temple every Saturday to repeatedly declare how the Jews had missed the boat on the entire Messiah thing. If I did, I would greatly expect to be expelled from their congregation, and rightly so. 4
bluebell Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) I recognize this, and I think it's one of the reasons John is facing disciplne (that and that he publicly announces/teaches it). I agree, I'm not sure what is holding John and the general membership together other than his desire that his family continue to attend (which is very possible without him) and cultural ties he has with the church. But if he (or anyone else) did have a testimony of Christ and didn't believe anything else, wouldn't his testimony still be tall enough to enter? Absolutely. Edit to add after thinking about this some more: I don't know if their testimony would be tall enough to 'enter at the straight gates' simply because just believing in Christ is not always enough to covenant with Him for our salvation. I think under every circumstance such people would be tall enough to enter the doors of our churches though. As long as they weren't advocating and publicly pushing/teaching that those who believe differently (the church included) were wrong. Edited January 16, 2015 by bluebell
Mars Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 I think we have divergent understandings of what it means to "enter."
Jeanne Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 From one who has communicated with John..I didn't buy into it...but left the church of my own accord. One thing I can say is that John does give people choices simply because he gives alternatives to remain or stay. He didn't make choices for all of us..he just gave us a choice; which is something that the black and white LDS does note do.,
bluebell Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 From one who has communicated with John..I didn't buy into it...but left the church of my own accord. One thing I can say is that John does give people choices simply because he gives alternatives to remain or stay. He didn't make choices for all of us..he just gave us a choice; which is something that the black and white LDS does note do., I'm not sure i understand what you're saying Jeanne. How did Dehlin give you choices that you didn't have while a member of the LDS church? 2
Popular Post juliann Posted January 16, 2015 Popular Post Posted January 16, 2015 Like it or not, the church has a duty to police its borders. I don't think it is any more complicated than that. If he is helping people stay in the church, he can still do that. But it is the people he is leading out (and even he doesn't deny it) that the church should be concerned about. He functions as an exit counselor, formerly known as deprogrammers. Although this endeavor has been discredited, some still exist. http://undermuchgrace.blogspot.com/2008/12/finding-exit-counselor.html Unlike the days when I first exited my own group, though we no longer have a current CAN directory, there are far more resources more readily available to those seeking assistance and information today. Exit counseling is NOT what was once known as “deprogramming,” and there is no coercion or confinement involved. Exit counseling is most simply an education process in the common ways that idealistic groups manipulate circumstances and the environment to draw in unsuspecting rational and intelligent people. By using these factors to their advantage, groups bypass the normal and reasonable process of scrutiny that individuals would normally exercise, lulling critical thought to sleep, so to speak. Exit counseling simply aims to reawaken a person’s intrinsic ability to evaluate situations and messages apart from the pressures and expectations of the group. Just like waking from sleep, you might be groggy when you first become conscious, but you eventually become fully alert without much effort. Exit counseling can be like your morning coffee, and it frees you to choose to continue in your group or walk away but under conditions of fully informed consent. Exit counselors simply point you toward additional information that will facilitate the continued process of the examination of your own beliefs, your reasons for maintaining these beliefs, and whether your group has possibly imposed beliefs upon you under duress – ideas that you would otherwise reject or ideas that do not make sense to you It requires quite a build up of evangelistic fervor and relies on black and white thinking even as it claims to correct it. So what he is doing is nothing new at all...it is only new in Mormonism. 5
ERayR Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 From one who has communicated with John..I didn't buy into it...but left the church of my own accord. One thing I can say is that John does give people choices simply because he gives alternatives to remain or stay. He didn't make choices for all of us..he just gave us a choice; which is something that the black and white LDS does note do., Everybody has choices. John gives/gave you nothing. The "the black and white LDS" does not take away any choice. 1
gtaggart Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) That's false. From end to end. There are no foregone conclusions at a Disciplinary council. You are parrotting apostate propaganda. That said, in Mister Dehlin's case, an excommunication would simply rubber-stamp a pre-existing reality. Regards,Pahoran Pahoran is exactly right. I have sat on three separate disciplinary councils. In not one of them was the person excommunicated, though in all three there was reason to do so. Edited January 16, 2015 by gtaggart 1
Jeanne Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 I'm not sure i understand what you're saying Jeanne. How did Dehlin give you choices that you didn't have while a member of the LDS church? He gave me some reasons to stay LDS. A way to compromise my knowledge without hurting my family.
bluebell Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 He gave me some reasons to stay LDS. A way to compromise my knowledge without hurting my family. Thanks for clarifying, though I thought you left the church?
Jeanne Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 Everybody has choices. John gives/gave you nothing. The "the black and white LDS" does not take away any choice.I agree that everyone has choices..that is relatively my point. John did not persuade or make me leave the church..but he gave me enough to hang on without hurting my father and family should I wanted to stay. The LDS church pretty much is you're in or you're out church..don't know that thwe Savior would agree with that do you?
Avatar4321 Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 He gave me some reasons to stay LDS. A way to compromise my knowledge without hurting my family.forgive me for being so bold, but if a man gives you reasons to stay, a man can take them away. It's quite likely that you will fall away if your foundation is built on the reasoning of men.for a firm foundation, the reasons must be given to you by Christ. Only the witness of the Holy Spirit can put you on the firm foundation of Christ the Lord.
bluebell Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 I agree that everyone has choices..that is relatively my point. John did not persuade or make me leave the church..but he gave me enough to hang on without hurting my father and family should I wanted to stay. The LDS church pretty much is you're in or you're out church..don't know that thwe Savior would agree with that do you? I read all the time about ex and inactive members complaining that they can't get the church to leave them alone no matter what they do. How do you see the church pushing people out too easily? I guess i still don't really understand what you are saying.
Rob Osborn Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 I read all the time about ex and inactive members complaining that they can't get the church to leave them alone no matter what they do. How do you see the church pushing people out too easily? I guess i still don't really understand what you are saying.Inactive members and those who are excommunicated and those who just leave the church can't seem to leave the church alone. I know a few members locally that left the church and then complain and complain about how damaging the church was and on and on and on. Usually, its one or two things that another church member said and they use that as an excuse to blame the entire church. Then, in the end, they end up being the only ones spreading ill will.
Ham Clam Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) I started a thread on FB so I could sort out my feelings about Mormon Stories.Some people are trying to connect his talking about historical issues with his excommunication threat. I think this is over-blown with the amount of LDS scholars contributing to LDS History. They point to September Six and censorship (?) at BYU to try to make their point.What do you all think of this?Someone also said he and his family has stop attending Church a couple of weeks ago. Edited January 16, 2015 by Ham Clam
DBMormon Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) I have not heard any of them advocating accepting and changing Mormonism into Islaam.Why is it that black and white why can't mohammed be a prophet and we DONT have to change to islam. Isaiah is a prophet and you haven't left mormonism for Judaism In fact ERAYR - CFR for where I stated That the prophets advocated "accepting and changing Mormonism into Islaam" ??? Edited January 16, 2015 by DBMormon
Mars Posted January 16, 2015 Posted January 16, 2015 I think that's a long stretch, Ham Clam. If you go about trying to convince people that the truth claims of the Church are false, and you are a member of the Church, the conditions and criteria for convening a disciplinary council are met. Dehlin didn't seem to be just exploring and publishing his findings in sticky issues in Mormon history.
Recommended Posts