Anyone else get this email from Mormon Stories?

[pogi]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

I have listened to quite a few MS podcasts and I am not sure your summation is entirely accurate and that especially in the early years.

I am referring to what he stated in the email about informed consent:

Quote

2) listening to the stories of people the Mormon church continues to harm in some significant way.

I think my description of that as "subjective anecdotal gripes about the church" is a perfect summation of his stated methods of "informed consent".   Informed consent is about educating a patient about the risks AND benefits of a medical procedure.  His biased intent to shame the church is not an honest attempt at comprehensive and well rounded informed consent at all.  

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Yet not many are willing to go on his podcast anymore.  

Like I said, "one sided". 

Edited January 20, 2023 by pogi

[Dario_M]

15 hours ago, Calm said:

Isn’t there something illegal about spamming this way?

I am sure it is. ⬆️ And it is also just a rude way to make yourself known. 

Edited January 20, 2023 by Dario_M

[smac97]

13 hours ago, Peppermint Patty said:

I'm very confused by MS. I know of one very prominent (ex BYU and NFL football player) that has been donating for the last few years. This person and his family are very active in the Church.

I've always though MS was very critical to our faith, but it seems like some members have the impression that it's worthy of donated to. 

Dehlin was excommunicated in early 2015.  A few "believers" have since then appeared on the podcast:

• Dan Wotherspoon has been repeatedly interviewed, in March 2015, September 2015, and April 2019.
• Greg Prince was interviewed in March 2018.
• David Ostler was interviewed in September 2019.
• Jared Hess was interviewed in March 2021.
• Rick Bennett (of "Gospel Tangents") interviewed John Dehlin in August 2022.
• Patrick Mason was interviewed in September 2022.

Other faithful members appeared on the podcast prior to Dehlin's excommunication.  For example, Dr. Richard Bushman was interviewed in 2007, and Daniel Peterson was interviewed in 2011.

In years past he was a non-correlated outlet of information, and so attracted some fairly prominent Latter-day Saint voices.  Nothing wrong with that, IMO.  I think Latter-day Saints have become markedly less provincial and insular in the last several decades.  We have become more willing to more openly participate in the Marketplace of Ideas, which may involve going to venues that allow for a diversity of perspectives on the Church and the Restored Gospel.  Mormon Stories was an update on Dialogue.

That may have changed, or is in the process of changing.  I think Dehlin has, in recent years, become more obviously strident and oppositional and harsh in his treatment of the Church.  I also think he may have burned some bridges in his treatment in recent years of Dr. Bushman (see here for a summary).  Mormon Stories has become less like Dialogue and more like the Tanners, or even Ed Decker.  This overt antipathy may end up estranging more and more faithful Latter-day Saints.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

9 hours ago, Teancum said:

Quote

I listen to the Saints Unscripted TikTok.  It doesn't have as many followers.

I also go to church. It's doing better than Dehlin.

Is Dehlin in competition with the church? 

I think the more apt question may be "Is Dehlin in opposition against the Church?"  And the answer to that would be . . . yes.  Yes he is.

Also, the comment to which you are responding compared Dehlin's Mormon Stories with Saints Unscripted (not "the church").

9 hours ago, Teancum said:

Does he claim to be a prophet, apostle, bringing forth new scripture, require 10% of income to listen to his stuff or to attend the place where one needs to go to get to the highest heaven? 

No.  But then, neither to the folks at Saints Unscripted.

9 hours ago, Teancum said:

When he does maybe you have a point. 

I think there's a point here even if Dehlin never makes such claims.

That said, Dehlin is presenting himself as a voice of authority and expertise about "the Church" that is both alternative and superior to that of "the Church."  He seems to be trying very hard to persuade people to turn away from it.  Hearts and minds.  In that sense, yes, Dehlin is "in competition with the church."

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

11 hours ago, Teancum said:

I just go by what he says.  Do you have evidence?

Well, 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.  

And that was say back in January 2015.  His hostility toward the Church has gone way up since then.  Not to difficult to connect the dots and make reasonable inferences.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Teancum]

12 hours ago, bluebell said:

Yes, that is the main reason that people seek subscribers or followers on social media platforms.  Youtube won't even let you monetize your videos until you hit a certain number of scribers and views, and then the amount of money you make goes up depending on the number that you have.  That's why channel creators almost always ask viewers to subscribe to their youtube channels every time they produce a video.

So it can be a money maker. I don't watch much on YouTube and don't subscribe to anything. Podcasts are easier for me.  And I don't pay for YouTube either. It is I think $60 per month or something like that.

12 hours ago, bluebell said:

And I agree that there is nothing wrong with making money from these videos.  I just thought it was interesting that someone who was really into informed consent didn't mention that upping subscribers to 100,000 is also a way to increase revenue.  Because the more views you get the more money you make on each video.

Oh I don't know.  The bolded item seems nitpicky and I hardly think a disclosure like this and disclosure is anything like disclosure and informed consent before someone commit their entire life to the church. 

12 hours ago, bluebell said:

(The money comes from the ads, so it is possible that Dehlin doesn't have ads on his videos and if not then they might not be making money at all.  I have never watched any of them.)

I think there are ads on a few of the YouTube MS videos I have watched.

[Teancum]

12 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

I have no clue what your issue is here.

I was responding to what I perceived was a snide remark directed at Dehlin.

12 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

 

  Saints Unscripted doesn't claim any of that stuff - does that mean I'm back in the running for whatever point it is you think I'm making?

I have no idea what Saints Unscripted is.

I find it rather amusing how much vitriol Dehlin gets from the believers here. Apparently he is successful at being a thorn in your people's side as well as the Church since they single him out as well.

 

Edited January 20, 2023 by Teancum

[bluebell]

11 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So it can be a money maker. I don't watch much on YouTube and don't subscribe to anything. Podcasts are easier for me.  And I don't pay for YouTube either. It is I think $60 per month or something like that.

Oh I don't know.  The bolded item seems nitpicky and I hardly think a disclosure like this and disclosure is anything like disclosure and informed consent before someone commit their entire life to the church. 

I think there are ads on a few of the YouTube MS videos I have watched.

I don’t pay for YouTube either. I think you can pay to not have ads. I have no idea how that effects the revenue streams of their channels. 

[bluebell]

6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I was responding to what I perceived was a snide remark directed at Dehlin.

I have no idea what Saints Unscripted is.

I find it rathe amusing how much vitriol Dehlin gets from the believers here. Apparently he is successful at being a thorn in your people's side as well as the Church since they single him out as well.

 

It’s also kind of interesting that he gets so much vitriol from a few ex members here. But we can’t blame that on his success at being a thorn in the side of the church. 

[Teancum]

11 hours ago, pogi said:

I am referring to what he stated in the email about informed consent:

Ok.

 

11 hours ago, pogi said:

I think my description of that as "subjective anecdotal gripes about the church" is a perfect summation of his stated methods of "informed consent".   Informed consent is about educating a patient about the risks AND benefits of a medical procedure.  His biased intent to shame the church is not an honest attempt at comprehensive and well rounded informed consent at all.

Like I said, "one sided". 

I think informed consent is a poor choice of words. I refer full disclosure of which the LDS Church historically  and even currently his intentionally avoided while expecting a huge level of time,money and devotion from its members. And your leaders have even said they are not obliged to give both sides of the story. So excuse me for finding your complaints against Dehlin shallow and hollow. When you provide equal criticism then maybe I won't feel that way.  And let us not forget Dehlin does no demand one total life devotion to his cause.  And I will ask again what or how much have you listened to from his podcasts?  And if more people like Patrick Mason or Givens would go on his podcasts it would be less "one sided"

[Teancum]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

I think the more apt question may be "Is Dehlin in opposition against the Church?"  And the answer to that would be . . . yes.  Yes he is.

Also, the comment to which you are responding compared Dehlin's Mormon Stories with Saints Unscripted (not "the church").

No.  But then, neither to the folks at Saints Unscripted.

I think there's a point here even if Dehlin never makes such claims.

That said, Dehlin is presenting himself as a voice of authority and expertise about "the Church" that is both alternative and superior to that of "the Church."  He seems to be trying very hard to persuade people to turn away from it.  Hearts and minds.  In that sense, yes, Dehlin is "in competition with the church."

Thanks,

-Smac

Ahhh ok.  I misunderstood the post and thought is was saying the Church is doing better than Dehlin.  Thanks for the clarification.  As for the bolded point above I don't perceive it that way.  But as noted, it is amusing what a thorn in your side, and others here, that he is.

[Teancum]

10 minutes ago, bluebell said:

It’s also kind of interesting that he gets so much vitriol from a few ex members here. But we can’t blame that on his success at being a thorn in the side of the church. 

Yes there are ex members that are not Dehlin fans as well.

[Calm]

55 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Apparently he is successful at being a thorn in your people's side as well as the Church since they single him out as well.

I single him out because his cruelty to people, even those close to him, more than because of his work against the Church.  He is one of the few people I really, really dislike and I think the only one of those I haven’t had direct contact with myself….wait, I thought of one more, but they have nothing to do with the Church.  There are plenty of critics that I generally ignore, even when they are successful.  I make little to no judgment on their nonprofessional life, unlike my view of Dehlin.

I don’t find the pain he has caused in people’s lives the least amusing myself.  

Edited January 20, 2023 by Calm

[Eschaton]

5 hours ago, smac97 said:

Dehlin was excommunicated in early 2015.  A few "believers" have since then appeared on the podcast:

• Dan Wotherspoon has been repeatedly interviewed, in March 2015, September 2015, and April 2019.
• Greg Prince was interviewed in March 2018.
• David Ostler was interviewed in September 2019.
• Jared Hess was interviewed in March 2021.
• Rick Bennett (of "Gospel Tangents") interviewed John Dehlin in August 2022.
• Patrick Mason was interviewed in September 2022.

Other faithful members appeared on the podcast prior to Dehlin's excommunication.  For example, Dr. Richard Bushman was interviewed in 2007, and Daniel Peterson was interviewed in 2011.

In years past he was a non-correlated outlet of information, and so attracted some fairly prominent Latter-day Saint voices.  Nothing wrong with that, IMO.  I think Latter-day Saints have become markedly less provincial and insular in the last several decades.  We have become more willing to more openly participate in the Marketplace of Ideas, which may involve going to venues that allow for a diversity of perspectives on the Church and the Restored Gospel.  Mormon Stories was an update on Dialogue.

That may have changed, or is in the process of changing.  I think Dehlin has, in recent years, become more obviously strident and oppositional and harsh in his treatment of the Church.  I also think he may have burned some bridges in his treatment in recent years of Dr. Bushman (see here for a summary).  Mormon Stories has become less like Dialogue and more like the Tanners, or even Ed Decker.  This overt antipathy may end up estranging more and more faithful Latter-day Saints.  

Thanks,

-Smac

I think that's fair. The strident oppositional stuff is boring to me.

[pogi]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Ok.

 

I think informed consent is a poor choice of words.

So you agree with my criticism.  "Informed consent" is not his game, yet that is the platform he is marketing and soliciting from.  Not honest.  

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

I refer full disclosure

Nope.  That is not what he is doing either.  Full disclosure requires the "full" picture of good and bad, just like informed consent does. 

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

And your leaders have even said they are not obliged to give both sides of the story.

At least they are being honest about their one sided story.  They are at least making pretty significant strides in giving a more transparent and well rounded history after much criticism.  

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

So excuse me for finding your complaints against Dehlin shallow and hollow.

I thought you agreed with my criticism that "informed consent" is not what he is doing.  Yet that is what he is apparently selling. 

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

When you provide equal criticism then maybe I won't feel that way. 

There are some active members on this board who have compared me to Dehlin and others for my efforts in advocating for more transparency and for a safe space for members to be open and honest about their concerns and to address mistakes that they perceive.  I want a church where we not only acknowledge human fallibility as a general rule, but where we can acknowledge specifics without being shamed or compared to Dehlin.    So, I think your criticism of me is rather "shallow and hollow" honestly.  I am not afraid to voice my concerns.  I just see way more good in the church than bad.  Hence my membership. 

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

And let us not forget Dehlin does no demand one total life devotion to his cause.  And I will ask again what or how much have you listened to from his podcasts?  And if more people like Patrick Mason or Givens would go on his podcasts it would be less "one sided"

Again, I am addressing his email.   He admittedly and explicitly is trying to paint the church in a bad light without highlighting any good qualities according to his email, and calls that "informed consent".  That is nonsense. 

Edited January 20, 2023 by pogi

[Teancum]

12 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

I have no clue what your issue is here.  Saints Unscripted doesn't claim any of that stuff - does that mean I'm back in the running for whatever point it is you think I'm making?

Second response here.  Apologies. I thought you were referring to the church.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Eschaton said:

I think that's fair. The strident oppositional stuff is boring to me.

Same here.  To be candid, though, Dehlin is one of the very few who has threaded the needle in terms of longer-term monetization of anti-mormonism.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I single him out because his cruelty to people, even those close to him, more than because of his work against the Church.  He is one of the few people I really, really dislike and I think the only one of those I haven’t had direct contact with myself….wait, I thought of one more, but they have nothing to do with the Church.  There are plenty of critics that I generally ignore, even when they are successful.  I make little to no judgment on their nonprofessional life, unlike my view of Dehlin.

I don’t find the pain he has caused in people’s lives the least amusing myself.  

He can be a lightening rod.  I am really not a Dehlin apologist. I have found his podcasts useful but I listen selectively. And I donate because I listen. I figure if a podcast is add free and does not require a subscription and is ad free if I listen more than periodically I should support it.  I have interacted with John a few times over the years.  He was someone I reached out to in 2006 or 2007 timeframe when my faith transition started and I did not know where to turn.  He was more neutral then and I think trying to find his way and make things work like I was then.  If I was in the same position as I was then and John where he was at now I do not know that I would have reached out. Maybe.  Not sure.  I an see there is a lot the bothers you about him because I rarely or really never see you respond towards other people like this.

 

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

He can be a lightening rod.  I am really not a Dehlin apologist. I have found his podcasts useful but I listen selectively. And I donate because I listen. I figure if a podcast is add free and does not require a subscription and is ad free if I listen more than periodically I should support it.  I have interacted with John a few times over the years.  He was someone I reached out to in 2006 or 2007 timeframe when my faith transition started and I did not know where to turn.  He was more neutral then and I think trying to find his way and make things work like I was then.  If I was in the same position as I was then and John where he was at now I do not know that I would have reached out. Maybe.  Not sure.  I an see there is a lot the bothers you about him because I rarely or really never see you respond towards other people like this.

 

In my heart I feel like I'd still be in the church had it not been for Dehlin. First thing popping up after I saw the Joseph Smith's Wives website come up was StayLDS.com forum. I think that's how quickly his stuff came up. This was clear back when he was starting out in his podcast too. And I watched from the beginning. I even felt like a dark presence when I started reading the forum he created. And it was really tame, even close to this forum but with more doubting people vs. faithful. I now know that I was experiencing Cog Dis. And then after that I attribute Fair Mormon or Fair LDS can't remember what it was called back then, for my finding things I'd never known at all before reading and I even discussed with Gregory Smith through email with my questions. I still have the emails too. This was back in 2005/06 I believe. 

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

I a see there is a lot the bothers you about him because I rarely or really never see you respond towards other people like this.

 Wish I could share everything I know, but it is not my story. And I know it is very annoying to do the I know something that you don’t know shtick, but I feel the need to make it clear criticism in and of itself is not something I see as inherently wrong, critics can be criticizing for the right reasons even when I believe their criticisms are wrong because they lack info or misunderstand as I can understand why some interpret what they see differently than I do.  Of course if critics are dishonest, that is something different and I wholeheartedly condemn that. 
 

For example, I don’t see your criticism as vile or anything, because I believe you are honest in your discussion even if I believe you are wrong. 
 

I also don’t expect people to agree with me just because I say something. In no way am I saying “trust me on this”.  I am saying “be very careful in your judgement and involvement with Dehlin as he is not always as he appears” though I assume that is not an issue for the vast majority of readers here. 

Edited January 20, 2023 by Calm

[Teancum]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

 Wish I could share everything I know, but it is not my story. And I know it is very annoying to do the I know something that you don’t know shtick, but I feel the need to make it clear criticism in and of itself is not something I see as inherently wrong, critics can be criticizing for the right reasons even when I believe their criticisms are wrong because they lack info or misunderstand as I can understand why some interpret what they see differently than I do.  Of course if critics are dishonest, that is something different and I wholeheartedly condemn that. 
 

For example, I don’t see your criticism as vile or anything, because I believe you are honest in your discussion even if I believe you are wrong. 

You are a good person.  😀

[Teancum]

5 hours ago, pogi said:

So you agree with my criticism.  "Informed consent" is not his game, yet that is the platform he is marketing and soliciting from.  Not honest.  

Nope.  That is not what he is doing either.  Full disclosure requires the "full" picture of good and bad, just like informed consent does. 

Based on my experience with the podcasts I think Dehlin give far more disclosure that the church ever has or does.

 

5 hours ago, pogi said:

At least they are being honest about their one sided story. 

Recently they have hadd not other choice.  Before that not so much.

5 hours ago, pogi said:

 

They are at least making pretty significant strides in giving a more transparent and well rounded history after much criticism.  

I think they have made some strides while at the same time discouraging members from looking at non LDS or friendly sources.  I think they are a far cry from significant strides.

5 hours ago, pogi said:

I thought you agreed with my criticism that "informed consent" is not what he is doing.  Yet that is what he is apparently selling. 

I am referring to the podcasts and the history I have had which over all I find more balanced than anything I have ever seen from the church.

5 hours ago, pogi said:

There are some active members on this board who have compared me to Dehlin and others for my efforts in advocating for more transparency and for a safe space for members to be open and honest about their concerns and to address mistakes that they perceive.  I want a church where we not only acknowledge human fallibility as a general rule, but where we can acknowledge specifics without being shamed or compared to Dehlin.    So, I think your criticism of me is rather "shallow and hollow" honestly.  I am not afraid to voice my concerns.  I just see way more good in the church than bad.  Hence my membership. 

I apologize. I do think you are willing and wanting such things as you describe and you being compared to Dehlin is silly and wrong.

5 hours ago, pogi said:

Again, I am addressing his email.   He admittedly and explicitly is trying to paint the church in a bad light without highlighting any good qualities according to his email, and calls that "informed consent".  That is nonsense. 

I think his email was nonsense as well.

[Calm]

36 minutes ago, Teancum said:

You are a good person.  😀

Thanks for saying that. I try to keep my mouth shut about Dehlin because I can’t share much of my info and that just isn’t fair even to him,  but my distaste for him is stronger than my self discipline. 

[2BizE]

Could a list of individuals and their email addresses have come from purchasing them from a company like Deseret Book, or another LDS themed company?  Selling is this type of mailing list data is pretty common.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

I am referring to the podcasts and the history I have had which over all I find more balanced than anything I have ever seen from the church.

Can you show me a historical podcast of his about the church which highlights the positive historical accounts and potentially faith-promoting history? 

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

I think they are a far cry from significant strides.

Relative to how it was, I think the gospel topics essays and the Saints books are extremely significant strides.