ttribe Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 This was on one of the above links: It's clear from this that they expected to be excommunicated but were going through the motions in order to make a public scene and try to force change in the Church. Sorry, but I have a hard time viewing them as oppressed and persecuted doubters. While I recognize others in this thread may (inadvertently?) be making that claim on their behalf, what little of the Calderwoods' writing I've ready (today) doesn't indicate to me they are making that claim for themselves.
Robert F. Smith Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 .....................................................As we know the Church and Church Leaders are forbidden to discuss the details of any excommunication, so we only get one side. However, It looks to me like he is locating people struggling with doctrinal issues, then encouraging them to be comfortable with apostasy.................................................... Hi George,So you mean just like John Dehlin?
jwhitlock Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 I fully agree with Smac's comments on the situation and his responses to those trying to portray the Calderwoods' situation as something it isn't. It's interesting when someone comes out publicly in opposition to the church, how some people think that makes them automatically above any scrutiny. Kind of like thinking that Peter was wrong in the way he dealt with Simon in the book of Acts. 1
Robert F. Smith Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 Last night, Carson & Marisa Calderwood were excommunicated (in the words of Carson) "Because we publicly share our doubts over core doctrines and that can cause others to doubt as well, we are apostates and have to be excommunicated." Here are the articles that Carson published: http://rationalfaiths.com/author/carcalderwood/............................................................................... Thoughts?Carson Calderwood says "I fall somewhere between an agnostic humanist and having faith (but not knowing) that God spoke to Joseph Smith as he stated." at http://rationalfaiths.com/dilemma-post-faith-reconstruction-missionary-work/ . Too bad that he wasn't able to make the acquaintance of Mark Bukowski or me on this board, since the basis of Mormonism is so congenial to humanists of the naturalistic persuasion. He sounds very confused and naive. 1
smac97 Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 Hi George,So you mean just like John Dehlin? Well, John Dehlin has bragged about how "many more people have left the church than have stayed because of (his) Internet work," and how he is "perfectly happy" about that. Thanks, -Smac 1
Calm Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) I believe this is entirely unfair. How would you like it if someone trolled through all your internet comments over time and found the most outrageous statements and put a list together to prove that you are something that you aren’t? This kind of behavior is when discussion boards like this are at their worst, exercising self righteous judgments with a piling on mentality. This doesn’t make me laugh, it makes me sad that our culture has produced such behavior.Given that the quotes were all able to be documented from one document that Carson himself published as a statement of his and his wife's beliefs and which John Dehlin linked to in the introduction to his 2 month old interview with the description of "and after publicly expressing his doubts about several LDS church truth claims" this would appear to be a misrepresentation of Smac's behavior that you are criticizing. Do you see the misrepresentation of Smac as "entirely unfair" and if not, why not? Edited May 22, 2015 by calmoriah 3
Scott Lloyd Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 While I recognize others in this thread may (inadvertently?) be making that claim on their behalf, what little of the Calderwoods' writing I've ready (today) doesn't indicate to me they are making that claim for themselves.I didn't say they were making the claim for themselves, though I don't rule out the possibility.
Thinking Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences from that speech. If you don't believe in an organization, why get upset when they kick you out? 3
carbon dioxide Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Why would they want to strengthen testimonies of things they were convinced were both false and harmful to believe? If one wants to make a stronger bacteria, they subject that bacteria to antibiodics. Those that do not die come out stronger. It is a sound theory.
DonBradley Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 As we know the Church and Church Leaders are forbidden to discuss the details of any excommunication, so we only get one side. A fact that can be used by people who want to believe that excommunications are always right to justify not believing the one side they do get. If excommunications were always right, there wouldn't be an appeals process. Don 4
ttribe Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 I didn't say they were making the claim for themselves, though I don't rule out the possibility.Gotcha. Just clarifying, then.
Robert F. Smith Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 ...........................................................Too much of a Potemkin Village mentality in the church, .................................................Nonsense, the late Prof. Sterling McMurrin was an apostate who saw Mormon culture as very healthy, and he praised it and defended it.
Robert F. Smith Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Carson was, as he states, a VERY dedicated missionary. He is not just blowing smoke. Maybe that falls under a previous discussion about ultra-dedication setting you up for major disappointment?Yes. He was built up to a great let down. Maturity is supposed to help us avoid such puerile responses to real life. I wonder what happened in that Temple visit on his so way home that made everything flip so dramatically?So do I.
rockpond Posted May 23, 2015 Author Posted May 23, 2015 Well, John Dehlin has bragged about how "many more people have left the church than have stayed because of (his) Internet work," and how he is "perfectly happy" about that. Thanks, -Smac Bragged about it? Why not provide the entire quote with a little context rather than your selective clippings... Per your link, Dehlin actually said: "I now believe that people should follow their joy...period. In or out of the church. That said, I would guess that many more people have left the church than have stayed because of my Internet work -- and I'm perfectly happy if they're happy." He didn't say he was happy that his work had led more people out than it had kept in. He said that he is happy if they're happy. 2
rockpond Posted May 23, 2015 Author Posted May 23, 2015 I wonder what happened in that Temple visit on his so way home that made everything flip so dramatically? So do I. I believe he discusses it in his MS podcast but I can't recall the details now.
Tacenda Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Bragged about it? Why not provide the entire quote with a little context rather than your selective clippings... Per your link, Dehlin actually said: "I now believe that people should follow their joy...period. In or out of the church. That said, I would guess that many more people have left the church than have stayed because of my Internet work -- and I'm perfectly happy if they're happy." He didn't say he was happy that his work had led more people out than it had kept in. He said that he is happy if they're happy.Good catch, it's amazing how a few words left out can change meaning. And see how both sides of the coin (from apologist to critic) can be frustrated by it. 1
Avatar4321 Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Physician Heal thy self! "After experiencing significant questions and doubts a few years go, Carson realized how many local LDS church members were struggling over matters of faith, and began trying to help local members of his ward and stake find joy and healing amidst their LDS faith crises." As we know the Church and Church Leaders are forbidden to discuss the details of any excommunication, so we only get one side. However, It looks to me like he is locating people struggling with doctrinal issues, then encouraging them to be comfortable with apostasy. Regards, George ClayBrother clay how are you? Never expected to see you here.
jwhitlock Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) Bragged about it? Why not provide the entire quote with a little context rather than your selective clippings... Per your link, Dehlin actually said: "I now believe that people should follow their joy...period. In or out of the church. That said, I would guess that many more people have left the church than have stayed because of my Internet work -- and I'm perfectly happy if they're happy." He didn't say he was happy that his work had led more people out than it had kept in. He said that he is happy if they're happy. Seems like you cut a little bit out yourself; perhaps you should have quoted the two pertinent paragraphs from the article for the full context: At one time Dehlin urged Mormons to stay in the Church, but in a discussion at ExMormon.org in 2010 he repudiated his former position: "This was my position for a time...but the StayLDS position is no longer something that I push...I now believe that people should follow their joy...period. In or out of the church. That said, I would guess that many more people have left the church than have stayed because of my Internet work -- and I'm perfectly happy if they're happy." Dehlin has openly repudiated core teachings of the Mormon faith, been instrumental (in his own estimation) in leading "many more people" to leave than to stay, and has garnered a reputation among the post- and ex-Mormon community for his deliberate work to do just that. .Sounds to me like smac was right on the money. Dehlin has bragged about it and he's happy about those who have left the church; his "I'm perfectly happy if they're happy" appears strongly to be limited to those who have left, in the full context of what he said. We really do need to check everything you spin claim. Edited May 23, 2015 by jwhitlock 1
Avatar4321 Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Don't know who they are. Didn't see anything that controversial on the web page but I don't have the time to go in depth and I'm fairly confident the local leaders are more aware of what is going on than I. I'm also confident prayer and revelation would have been part of the process.
Avatar4321 Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Wow..the Mormon Church keeps getting rid of the best in their religion. There are many ways to grow..teaching other to think and to adjust to doctrine, culture and personal experiences that are challenging is a better way...Someday, I hope that an authority in LDS faith will say: "If you have doubts, that is okay..study and be who are..this community is for everyone".How do you determine that they are the best?Seriously. Cause I know some pretty awesome saints who aren't going to ever be excommunicated. 2
rockpond Posted May 23, 2015 Author Posted May 23, 2015 Seems like you cut a little bit out yourself; perhaps you should have quoted the two pertinent paragraphs from the article for the full context: .Sounds to me like smac was right on the money. Dehlin has bragged about it and he's happy about those who have left the church; his "I'm perfectly happy if they're happy" appears strongly to be limited to those who have left, in the full context of what he said. We really do need to check everything you spin claim. All you added, of Dehlin's words, is this phrase: "...but the StayLDS position is no longer something that I push". The rest was written by the author of the article. That phrase doesn't change what I said. No spin. The spin came from Smac.
jwhitlock Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) All you added, of Dehlin's words, is this phrase: "...but the StayLDS position is no longer something that I push". The rest was written by the author of the article. That phrase doesn't change what I said. No spin. The spin came from Smac. Are you telling us that the author of the article was inaccurate? Perhaps you also don't understand the concept of "spin"; your interpretation that there was "no bragging" was your spin - and is not borne out by what he actually said and what the author of the article wrote. Edited May 23, 2015 by jwhitlock
Avatar4321 Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 Carson Calderwood says "I fall somewhere between an agnostic humanist and having faith (but not knowing) that God spoke to Joseph Smith as he stated." at http://rationalfaiths.com/dilemma-post-faith-reconstruction-missionary-work/ . Too bad that he wasn't able to make the acquaintance of Mark Bukowski or me on this board, since the basis of Mormonism is so congenial to humanists of the naturalistic persuasion. He sounds very confused and naive.That's what I don't understand. He says he is between agnosticism and faith but no knowledge. Who says you need knowledge at first to exercise faith? In fact, we are told we don't receive a witness until after the trial of our faith.
rockpond Posted May 23, 2015 Author Posted May 23, 2015 Are you telling us that the author of the article was inaccurate?Perhaps you also don't understand the concept of "spin"; your interpretation that there was "no bragging" was your spin - and is not borne out by what he actually said and what the author of the article wrote.The author doesn't claim that Dehlin was bragging. That's your interpretation (and Smac's). Or your spin if you prefer that word. You don't seem to have a problem with Smac's selective editing. But when I provide the quote without clipping key parts and explain that there is no evidence of bragging it is "spin"?If you want to claim that Dehlin was bragging, provide some evidence. Otherwise it's just your interpretation of what he said. And that's fine - when Smac did it, I thought that readers should get more of the context than how it was misrepresented by Smac. 1
hagoth7 Posted May 23, 2015 Posted May 23, 2015 NoI'm saying the LDS Church places more speech constraint on its membership, than the US government places on its citizenry.If you compare what might be apples to apples, the constraint the US government imposes is about the same. For example, if a soldier speaks critically of the Commander in Chief, he can be kicked out of the military. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0425/Marine-discharged-for-slamming-Obama-on-Facebook
Recommended Posts