Dehlin's In The News? What?

[rockpond]

It would be great to hear President Monson in his next talk mention how paying tithing allows him to continue to serve as President of the Church.  Or how making a donation now will keep general conference on the air.  Perhaps a PO Box number could even flash up on our TV screens at the same time.  

 

The prophet generally isn't the one to deliver the tithing message...

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/the-windows-of-heaven?lang=eng

[stemelbow]

I agree people are multi-intentioned.  Are you willing to take the same sentence but instead of Dehlin insert the name of one of the 15?  If Why Me can't write it about one of our prophets/seers/apostles who likely make more than Dehlin, he shouldn't be saying it about Dehlin without something to back up the statement.

How much do the prophets/apostles make?

But sure, the apostles and prophets are multi-intentioned.

[Buckeye]

She what? I don't even see Dehlin referenced. I see Kate Kelly referenced: "Please be clear that I am not calling Kate Kelly a Korihor, nor would I..."

Where does she call Dehlin an antichrist?

 

She doesn't call him out by name. She simply says that there are smart, clever-sounding, folks with blogs who will lead people away from Christ. Considering what's in the news today, it's not hard to see what she's talking about.

[rockpond]

How much do the prophets/apostles make?

But sure, the apostles and prophets are multi-intentioned.

 

We don't know.  Unlike Dehlin, they don't publish their salaries.

[Buckeye]

How much do the prophets/apostles make?

But sure, the apostles and prophets are multi-intentioned.

 

A common rumor says that each apostle gets $1 million so that they can focus on their work and never worry about financials. Considering how long they stay in office, that seems like a rather modest amount to me. But obviously none of us really knows.

[stemelbow]

She doesn't call him out by name. She simply says that there are smart, clever-sounding, folks with blogs who will lead people away from Christ. Considering what's in the news today, it's not hard to see what she's talking about.

Does warning about someone else's teachings mean that the warner is calling the other person an antichrist? Seriously, playing this game is not going to go well for dialogue on this topic. That seems irresponsible and unfair. Unless she calls Dehlin an antichrist it is wrong and unfair to say she is calling him an antichrist.

[rockpond]

She what? I don't even see Dehlin referenced. I see Kate Kelly referenced: "Please be clear that I am not calling Kate Kelly a Korihor, nor would I..."

Where does she call Dehlin an antichrist?

 

Here's the opening line of her article:

"What if Nehor and Korihor had had blogs, created podcasts, collected comments, solicited letters on their behalf, and formed candlelight vigils of their supporters when they were called before Nephite chief judges?"

 

Gee... I wonder who she is referring to.

[stemelbow]

We don't know.  Unlike Dehlin, they don't publish their salaries.

Well help me understand then. How do you know enough to say, "who likely make more than Dehlin"? Also, you only know how much Dehlin got from his OSF thing. Who knows how much he makes?

[stemelbow]

A common rumor says that each apostle gets $1 million so that they can focus on their work and never worry about financials. Considering how long they stay in office, that seems like a rather modest amount to me. But obviously none of us really knows.

Sure. 1 Million in 15 years would be much less than the 90,000 Dehlin made. I wonder where that rumor comes from. That's quite a sum to be calling a modest living expense stipend.

[stemelbow]

Here's the opening line of her article:

"What if Nehor and Korihor had had blogs, created podcasts, collected comments, solicited letters on their behalf, and formed candlelight vigils of their supporters when they were called before Nephite chief judges?"

 

Gee... I wonder who she is referring to.

Well one person she mentions is Kate Kelly and she makes certain she does not mean Kate is a Korihor, Nehor, nor antichrist. Rockpond, this was very irresponsible of you, I'd say. That's disappointing. We don't need to go this route.

[rockpond]

Well help me understand then. How do you know enough to say, "who likely make more than Dehlin"? Also, you only know how much Dehlin got from his OSF thing. Who knows how much he makes?

 

Because my parents served as mission presidents and I know what they received.

 

Sure. 1 Million in 15 years would be much less than the 90,000 Dehlin made. I wonder where that rumor comes from. That's quite a sum to be calling a modest living expense stipend.

 

The unsubstantiated rumor is that the apostles receive that $1m as an initial payment to get them out of all debts but that there is still the annual "stipend" after that.  Looking at Pres. Packer for example, he'd need a lot more than $1m to sustain he and his family for all the time that he has served.

[rockpond]

Well one person she mentions is Kate Kelly and she makes certain she does not mean Kate is a Korihor, Nehor, nor antichrist. Rockpond, this was very irresponsible of you, I'd say. That's disappointing. We don't need to go this route.

 

Honestly, who do you think she was indicating with that opening line?  Podcasts?  Solicited Letters?   A candelight vigil while meeting before the "judges"?  She posted the article the day after the candlelight vigil was held outside Dehlin's disciplinary council.  It's quite clear who she was referring to.

 

But out of respect for you, I'll edit my original comment.

Edited February 9, 2015 by rockpond

[stemelbow]

Because my parents served as mission presidents and I know what they received.

What did they receive?

 

 

The unsubstantiated rumor is that the apostles receive that $1m as an initial payment to get them out of all debts but that there is still the annual "stipend" after that.  Looking at Pres. Packer for example, he'd need a lot more than $1m to sustain he and his family for all the time that he has served.

Alright...I don't care anymore. I don't care that Dehlin get's paid for his work with OSF. Not at all. I just thought the comment about not getting as much was interesting and wondered what insight you might have.

[stemelbow]

Honestly, who do you think she was indicating with that opening line?  Podcasts?  Solicited Letters?   A candelight vigil while meeting before the "judges"?  She posted the article the day after the candlelight vigil was held outside Dehlin's disciplinary council.  It's quite clear who she was referring to.

 

But out of respect for you, I'll edit my original comment.

That opening line does not in any way say Dehlin is antichrist. That would be a terrible way to read that. It asks a question about what if Nehor and Korihor were doing what Dehlin does. That does not in anyway say Dehlin is a Nehor, Korihor nor antichrist.

[rockpond]

That opening line does not in any way say Dehlin is antichrist. That would be a terrible way to read that. It asks a question about what if Nehor and Korihor were doing what Dehlin does. That does not in anyway say Dehlin is a Nehor, Korihor nor antichrist.

 

From that same opening paragraph... "...but their [Nehor/Korihor] arguments sounding from the pages of the Book of Mormon seem remarkably similar to today’s assaults upon the Church."

 

Her first line clearly implies that she's talking about Dehlin (podcasts, letters, vigil) and then she goes on in the article with the "what if" about Nehor and Korihor being like the implied person.

 

If you read the comments, it is clear that I am not the only person who got that message.  Even those who agree with the article comment about how she is referring to Dehlin/Kelly.

Edited February 9, 2015 by rockpond

[stemelbow]

From that same opening paragraph... "...but their [Nehor/Korihor] arguments sounding from the pages of the Book of Mormon seem remarkably similar to today’s assaults upon the Church."

 

Her first line clearly implies that she's talking about Dehlin (podcasts, letters, vigil) and then she goes on in the article with the "what if" about Nehor and Korihor being like the implied person.

 

If you read the comments, it is clear that I am not the only person who got that message.  Even those who agree with the article comment about how she is referring to Dehlin/Kelly.

It's irresponsible to claim someone is calling another an antichrist when that other does not call another an antichrist. You can read it how you want, I guess. But it's an assault on thoughtful dialogue to claim the position of another when that other never makes that position. Even if Dehlin posed similar arguments to Korihor and Nehor, in her mind, doesn't mean she views him as antichrist. That's not to say she does not think he is or isn't.

[Buckeye]

Sure. 1 Million in 15 years would be much less than the 90,000 Dehlin made. I wonder where that rumor comes from. That's quite a sum to be calling a modest living expense stipend.

 

It's not a living expense. It's essentially a retirement fund for someone who often "retires" at a very early age - Bednar was 54, Andersen was 58. Ask any investment professional if $1 million is enough to retire before age 60 in Utah and I'm bet they'll also say that is a reasonable, but not extravagant, amount to retire on.

 

Edit to add: To be clear, I'm not confirming the rumor. I honestly have no idea. I'm just saying that if it's true it doesn't bother me at all. And neither would a $90,000 salary for Dehlin.

Edited February 9, 2015 by Buckeye

[stemelbow]

It's not a living expense. It's essentially a retirement fund for someone who often "retires" at a very early age - Bednar was 54, Andersen was 58. Ask any investment professional if $1 million is enough to retire before age 60 in Utah and I'm bet they'll also say that is a reasonable, but not extravagant, amount to retire on.

 

Edit to add: To be clear, I'm not confirming the rumor. I honestly have no idea. I'm just saying that if it's true it doesn't bother me at all. And neither would a $90,000 salary for Dehlin.

I didn't say any of it bothers me either. I'm curious why it's an issue to Dehlin, though. He wants more?

[stemelbow]

If you read the comments, it is clear that I am not the only person who got that message.  Even those who agree with the article comment about how she is referring to Dehlin/Kelly.

Rockpond, I went ahead and read the comments as you suggested and found this from the author:

As I've stated above, I don't call either Kate or John anti-Christs.

No need to invoke harmful rhetoric and plant it into someone's else words.

[why me]

I agree people are multi-intentioned.  Are you willing to take the same sentence but instead of Dehlin insert the name of one of the 15?  If Why Me can't write it about one of our prophets/seers/apostles who likely make more than Dehlin, he shouldn't be saying it about Dehlin without something to back up the statement.

Well, my take on his podcasts was that if I gave 50 dollars to his paypal that 50 dollars would go to podcasting. I never would have thought that it would go to his pocket to buy food or his children's college funds. That was my point. Thus I would have given to his podcasts and not for his personal use. I think that it should work like this: money for his podcasts go to podcasts etc. Money from his job should go to his family. There needs to be a clear demarcation of money.

Edited February 9, 2015 by why me

[Buckeye]

I didn't say any of it bothers me either. I'm curious why it's an issue to Dehlin, though. He wants more?

 

It's an issue because some people are attacking John as insincere; that he only is doing the podcast for money. I think that attack is inaccurate and unfair. It also sounds eerily similar to those who attack church leaders' decisions as being motivated just to keep tithing receipts coming in.

[stemelbow]

It's an issue because some people are attacking John as insincere; that he only is doing the podcast for money. I think that attack is inaccurate and unfair. It also sounds eerily similar to those who attack church leaders' decisions as being motivated just to keep tithing receipts coming in.

But his compensation has nothing to do with the Church or it's leaders' compensation. He complains that they are compensated with more than he, as if that means anything other than an attempt to get people to talk about them.

I can understand he doesn't like being attacked for his above average income generated from a couple of monthly interviews. It's no fun at all when, at least, part of the money you make is a concern and question to others. But, it's out there. He wants people to believe he's sincere. But public statements may belie that, as in his defensive response to Stack's article. If he wants to make his sincerity a public issue then people have every right to question him on it. After all every single one of us are both sincere and insincere. None of us are perfectly running around with the most genuine and thoughtful of desires.

Edited February 9, 2015 by stemelbow

[Brian 2.0]

Well, my take on his podcasts was that if I gave 50 dollars to his paypal that 50 dollars would go to podcasting. I never would have thought that it would go to his pocket to buy food or his children's college funds. That was my point. Thus I would have given to his podcasts and not for his personal use. I think that it should work like this: money for his podcasts go to podcasts etc. Money from his job should go to his family. There needs to be a clear demarcation of money.

You must not have listened to his podcasts where he says explicitly that money was going to podcasting AND supporting his family.

ETA: when you buy a book or pay to see a play do you hope that the money only goes toward paper or stage rental?

Edited February 9, 2015 by Brian 2.0

[rockpond]

Well, my take on his podcasts was that if I gave 50 dollars to his paypal that 50 dollars would go to podcasting. I never would have thought that it would go to his pocket to buy food or his children's college funds. That was my point. Thus I would have given to his podcasts and not for his personal use. I think that it should work like this: money for his podcasts go to podcasts etc. Money from his job should go to his family. There needs to be a clear demarcation of money.

 

Well, if you listen to his podcasts you'll hear him state (as he has done many times) that the money is used to support he and his family... including such mundane things as buying groceries and paying for health insurance.

 

All the money goes into OSF.  OSF pays him a salary.  The demarcation is there and the financials are published.  That you didn't listen to him explain (repeatedly) how the money is used reflects on you, not him.

[why me]

You must not have listened to his podcasts where he says explicitly that money was going to podcasting AND supporting his family.

Well, I dont think that people who are giving to his podcasts are necessarily wishing to give to his personal finances. Why would  I give him 50 dollars so his children can go to college? It would be nonsensicle. Like I said, if the money that I sent to him goes like this: 30 percent to podcasts 70 percent to a new car, college funds, A trip to spain, and friday night ice creams, I may consider myself a fool. Of course, we have a lot of fools out there, I just wouldn't want to be one of them.

 

Also, I don't think that many of the people who do send money do so for his own personal expenses. And this is why the SLT made a big deal of it and john complained. Much better that the true figure is not known. 90k is quite a lot to play with.

Edited February 9, 2015 by why me