It is currently Mon Apr 21, 2014 7:50 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 447 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 22  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2012 11:20 pm 
the very elect
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:07 pm
Posts: 5041
Damn.

I picked the wrong week to stop reading the board.

This is gonna be epic.

*grabs popcorn*

_________________
New name: Boaz


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 4:58 am 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 13126
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
RayAgostini wrote:
I see no reason why John, and others, will not be able to reply, even on the FAIR blog. I know it's not exactly the most friendly place for people like John (nor MDDB), but MDB isn't exactly the most friendly place for apologists, either. They have all the free speech they want here, but they're always vastly out-numbered, and consequently most of them have given up. So it works both ways. To say, or think, that John will be denied an opportunity to reply, doesn't wash with me. What are they going to do? Say "sorry but you're not allowed to reply here?" So how will his free speech be denied?


Ray, this isn't a discussion of your pet topic of how terrible MDB is.

In terms of protecting John Dehlin's membership, all it takes is a group of highly motivated local leaders who have been fed the message through Church-approved BYU channels that Dehlin is an enemy of the faith and bingo! Church court. This is how Sonja Johnson lost her membership. A zealous local bishop, much the same kind of personality as Greg Smith, decided to play hero.

I am not saying that free speech doesn't exist in the U.S. and on the internet. I am saying that it does not exist in the LDS Church, which means that the Church controls those venues of speech that it has conditioned members to trust. While the internet has eroded its ability to control the message, it is still fair to say that items published by the Church or one of its organs like BYU will carry far more weight with bishops and stake presidents, and will have more potential in the short run to lead to Church discipline of some kind, than a discussion here or on the FAIR blog.

That is because of the weight publication by the Church holds. Just look at bcspace's obsession. It doesn't come from nowhere.

RayAgostini wrote:
So I say bring on the "hit piece" and let's scrutinise it. I'm sure it won't go unnoticed here on Mormon Discussions!


If Greg wants to publish it online in some unofficial online forum, let him. I don't have a problem with that. What I have a problem with is a slam on John Dehlin that has the appearance of Church approval and looks like a run up to excommunication proceedings. Understand?

Still, it is easy for you to sit back and sound off on having Greg Smith publish his attack piece on Dehlin, but what does it feel like to have 100 pages of paper publication attacking you out there? It has to be an awful experience. This is the most immediate impact it has, and it is the very kind of bullying effect that these apologetic publications thrive on. It's SOP for these apologists, and it gets nasty. They set themselves up as the arbiters of orthodoxy, and if they decide that you are a threat of some kind, look out.

And they operate under the BYU masthead. None of us do.

_________________
"[T]here are other values that underpin Mormon leadership even more deeply — and they're the same ones espoused by Harvard Business School. I am fortunate to have been one of a number of Mormons who studied at the Harvard Business School." ~ Professor Clayton M. Christensen, Harvard Business School


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:48 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 3:33 pm
Posts: 12064
Location: Kli-flos-is-es
Image

_________________
Parley P. Pratt wrote:
We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:
There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:52 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:27 pm
Posts: 1454
Polygamy-Porter wrote:
Damn.

I picked the wrong week to stop reading the board.

This is gonna be epic.

*grabs popcorn*


I just popped about 15 pounds after reading this thread.

I am excited, yet concerned, regarding the prospects of an apologist such as Will Shryversererer or DCP responding. Furthermore, I would not be surprised if one of the inner circle's h1tmen respond first, such as Scott Lloyd.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 8:03 am 
the very elect
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:07 pm
Posts: 5041
Based on their experience with Grant Palmer and Simon Southernton, Danno and his posse know that the sheep will be far less affected by work from a person who has suffered a church court.

Attacking the author/creator is the easy way out.

Coercing the unwitting leaders of John's ward and stake to pass John through a church court will help place a stain(recognizable only by the sheep) on anything John Dehlin has touched.

Now when a investigating member brandishes books from Simon the bishop will throw up the defense of "you know he was exed for personal conduct issues?, DO YOU WANT TO FOLLOW HIS EXAMPLE??"

Or a ward member asks about Palmers book, "You know he was disfellowshipped and he eventually left the church!" OR they will lie and say he was exed.

Now with Bro Dehlin and his website and conferences.. "You know that he was.........."

Same ol mo'pologetics. Attack the author/creator rather than the issues!

Why?

They know the issues are indefensible.

_________________
New name: Boaz


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 8:38 am 
High Priest
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:08 pm
Posts: 367
Joe Geisner wrote:
I am quite glad that Scratch is keeping these apologists feet to the fire. I am particularly glad that John was able to express himself in this forum and gives us some more information.

I agree. Doctor Scratch is truly doing God's work. I can only hope that he will be able to continue fighting this fight until the seedy and rotten underbelly of Mopologetics is exposed for everyone to see. God's speed Doctor Scratch!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 9:32 am 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:44 am
Posts: 6443
Location: Cassius University
There is a basic difference in approach and belief that's in conflict here. Dehlin wants to help people who have been disturbed or upset by problems in Church history and doctrine; the Mopologists want to marginalize or ridicule those same people. This is so obvious (imo) that it baffles me that otherwise decent people would want to defend the apologists and their behavior. Of course The Hon. Rev. Kishkumen is completely right: an MI-published smear of Dehlin would have a horrific effect on his standing in the LDS community. Every LDS "Yes Man" would look at this and would extend the whisper campaign that Peterson, Midgley, and Smith began. This is how these apologists work: they've done similar things to Grant Palmer, to Mike Quinn, and countless others.

_________________
"[T]here I was with this...anti-Mormon, and we went at it for a long time and by the time I went to the pageant and sat down, the steam was coming out of my ears. I don’t remember anything about the pageant...I was so furious at some of the things he had said." DCP, FAIR Conference 2013


Last edited by Doctor Scratch on Mon May 07, 2012 9:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 9:35 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:27 pm
Posts: 1454
Doctor Scratch wrote:
There is a basic difference in approach and belief that's in conflict here. Dehlin wants to help people who have been disturbed or upset by problems in Church history and doctrine; the Mopologists want to marginalize or ridicule those same people. This is so obvious (imo) that it baffles me that otherwise decent people would want to defend the apologists and their behavior. Of course The Hon. Rev. Kishkumen is completely right: an MI-published smear of Dehlin would have a horrific effect on his standing in the LDS community. Every LDS "Yes Man" would look at this and would extend the whisper campaign the Peterson, Midgley, and Smith began. This is how these apologists work: they've done similar things to Grant Palmer, to Mike Quinn, and countless others.


I agree Professor Scratch.

Also...I am not sure if you noticed but there are 19 guests on this board. I imagine I can name 4 or 5 of the 19 guests.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 10:05 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 9:06 am
Posts: 9388
Location: Kershaw, SC
Dehlin is an apostate from the Church. He has spent many years attacking, impuginng, and damning it. D. Quinn is an apostate who has spent much of his adult life in hostility and criticism of the Church. The same is true of all of the September Six, and many others like them.

All brought their marginalization within the Church and with respect to the main body of the membership of the Church upon themselves. All who were excommunicated brought their excommunication upon themselves of their own free volition. All left the church and then turned against it. All have reaped the whirlwinds they have sown.

Apologetics is not attack (although it can be, and sometimes, of course, a good offense is the best defense) but necessary defense against the attacking wolves, who, strange as it may seem, although wolves they be, are very well practiced at playing a very different part, when the battle is joined and the exposing them for what they really are begins:

Image


Scratch is adept at playing this game, as well as leaping out of his own sheepskin and going for the throat at the first smell of real blood.

_________________
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 10:41 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 12:10 pm
Posts: 1569
Location: Outside The Cult
Doctor Scratch wrote:
There is a basic difference in approach and belief that's in conflict here. Dehlin wants to help people who have been disturbed or upset by problems in Church history and doctrine; the Mopologists want to marginalize or ridicule those same people.


I absolutely agree Scratch. Straight up example that anyone here can agree with is the MDD board. Ask a serious question, get banned - even if the question was with absolute sincerity concerning truly troubling doctrines. Look at how blatantly Peterson attacked me years ago when he saw the Mormon Curtain.

And the kicker is this. The Q15 made a statement stating that they would no longer accept letters written by members concerning doctrine. Members were to refer to Bishops and Stake Presidents. B's and SP's then generally refer people where? To FARMS/NWI and FAIR where the member is then immediately kicked to the curb. And so where do those members end up? On my site and others - and then the whole can of worms is open.

_________________
Read: MormonCurtain. Resign: MormonResignation. Recover: ExMormonForums.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 10:57 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 3:53 pm
Posts: 1574
Droopy wrote:
D. Quinn is an apostate .


In your opinion what is the difference between what Quinn wrote and what Bushman wrote?

_________________
It is my province to teach to the Church what the doctrine is. It is your province to echo what I say or to remain silent.
Bruce R. McConkie


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:11 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:44 am
Posts: 2500
Location: Dallas, Texas
Droopy wrote:
Dehlin is an apostate from the Church. He has spent many years attacking, impuginng, and damning it. D. Quinn is an apostate who has spent much of his adult life in hostility and criticism of the Church. The same is true of all of the September Six, and many others like them.

All brought their marginalization within the Church and with respect to the main body of the membership of the Church upon themselves. All who were excommunicated brought their excommunication upon themselves of their own free volition. All left the church and then turned against it. All have reaped the whirlwinds they have sown.

Apologetics is not attack (although it can be, and sometimes, of course, a good offense is the best defense) but necessary defense against the attacking wolves, who, strange as it may seem, although wolves they be, are very well practiced at playing a very different part, when the battle is joined and the exposing them for what they really are begins:



Image

_________________
"[A] con game with sincere motives is still a con game."--Darth J.
"The lds church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:24 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 8:49 am
Posts: 4891
Location: Somewhere between bemused and curious.
Willy Law wrote:
Droopy wrote:
D. Quinn is an apostate .


In your opinion what is the difference between what Quinn wrote and what Bushman wrote?



15-20 years of internet exposure.

_________________
"The most disturbing kind of thinking I've seen is from people who are certain. This is the kind of thinking I am trying to subvert"
Steven L. Peck


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:43 am 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 9:44 am
Posts: 6443
Location: Cassius University
I'm still very curious about what Scott Gordon said in response to John's "warning."

Meanwhile, we have been met with a stone wall of silence from Dr. Peterson, who instead has opted to write blog posts about how much he enjoys hearing vulgarity and profanity (even though he himself is too much of a milquetoast chicken to actually ever use expletives). It's psychologically fascinating to behold.

_________________
"[T]here I was with this...anti-Mormon, and we went at it for a long time and by the time I went to the pageant and sat down, the steam was coming out of my ears. I don’t remember anything about the pageant...I was so furious at some of the things he had said." DCP, FAIR Conference 2013


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:46 am 
God

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:40 pm
Posts: 5872
Doctor Scratch wrote:
Interestingly, it seems that Allen "The Slug" Wyatt set up a kind of "gotcha" situation, where with the camera rolling, he seemed ready to catch Dehlin in all his "evil"

http://www.fairblog.org/2012/05/02/look ... ment-76459


Allen Wyatt wrote:
On March 29, 2012, Utah Valley University hosted a fascinating conference entitled Mormonism and the Internet. Perhaps the most interesting exchanges, for me, were those in session five of the conference, which was a panel discussion among John Dehlin, Scott Gordon, and Rosemary Avance. UVU has just posted this particular conference session online, and I just watched it again.

Rather early in the panel discussion, I asked a question of John Dehlin, as a follow-up to his presentation earlier in the day.You can hear my question beginning at about 13:05 into the video:


Quote:
People often study the same facts or issues and come to vastly different conclusions—some have their faith strengthened, while others have their faith destroyed. To what do you attribute this difference in outcome, and why do you feel that the stories of those who have suffered a negative outcome should be privileged over those with a positive outcome?


I don't see what the "gotcha" was, as you paint it. it seems like a pretty fair question.

Scathing Scratch wrote:
Dehlin gives a rather lengthy reply, but Wyatt finds his answer unsatisfying, and he immediately assumes that Dehlin is prevaricating:


Allen Wyatt wrote:
At first I thought that John was being evasive; he didn’t really answer my question which was how people can study the same data and come to differing conclusions.


Quote:
Does he have a point, though? Dehlin, in his response, lays out a whole set of different reasons why people would approach the "study" (strange word choice, no?) of unpleasant Church history and doctrine in different ways. He explains that people come to different conclusions largely because of their personal situation within the Church: especially the extent to which their life station allows them to fully "question" the Church's truth claims. (For example, Dehlin implies at one point that it is probably impossible for BYU professors to openly and honestly question the Church's claims, because their employment is dependent upon their obedience.)

Wyatt wraps up his inquiry/attack with a series of rhetorical questions:

So I thought I would pose the question here that John raises in the middle of his answer; the one that he seems to obliquely answer by his own faith journey: What happens when a person looks honestly at the facts or issues of Mormonism? Does honesty demand that such questions inevitably lead to a loss of faith, or can one be honest and remain a member of the church?


Quote:
So, whereas Dehlin's repsose confronts an array of problems and issues, Wyatt has worked to reframe all of this as a kind of black-and-white war, where anyone who stays in the Church is "dishonest." It appears that Wyatt is less interested in actually exploring the issues, and more interested in painting Dehlin as a villain, and in continuing the war with critics. Besides, I think the answer is fairly obvious, and that Wyatt already knows it: the answer is, "Yes." A clear example of this would be Terryl Givens, who appeared on Dehlin's podcast and openly admitted that the Church has basically lied by omission, and that people have every right to feel deceived if they don't learn about, say, polyandry until their forties (or whatever). Someone like Wyatt or DCP would never admit this, though. They may say that there are "problems" with CES, or something benign like that, but they would never, ever acknowledge the sense of betrayal that so many people feel--and this is what Dehlin has been trying to address and correct.


I would say the answer may be a "yes" too. But its still a fair question. Dehlin brought honesty and objectivity into it with his answer, at least according to the blog. On top of that, the question is definitely out there. I don't know how many times an ex-believer has brought up objectivity and honesty to me when discussion issues. It frequently turns to such terms. I think its unfair to say it was reframed by Wyatt himself. And I have yet to see any of these "attacks" as you continue to call them:

Scathing Scratch wrote:
In any case, it is interesting to watch these attacks on Dehlin playing out.


"Attacks" Coming from you and this place is delicious irony. Afterall, all you do is attack Wyatt on this thread. and from what I see Wyatt did nothing but ask a question, question whether the answer was really and answer, write a blog and ask another legitimate question. For that he's a slug whose offering all kinds of attacks on Dehlin. Sheesh.

[/quote="Scratch"]Perhaps the most telling thing on the thread was the first comment, from none other than Mike "Tuffy" Parker, of SHIELDS fame:[/quote]

Mike Parker wrote:
An important side note is that John Dehlin’s study — which he refers to when he speaks of “our data” — was not rigorously done. Instead of polling random former Mormons, he solicited responses from ex-Mormons who follow his podcast and run in the same circles with him. The bias here, from a polling standpoint, is enormous.

in short, his data tell us nothing because his survey sample is homogeneous and voluntary.


[quote='Scratch]Ah. So *that's* it. This is why Dehlin is threatening to them.

The Mopologists have always, always relied on the tactic of insisting that the "sense of betrayal" that I described above is false. We have seen evidence for this again and again: they accuse questioning posters of being trolls. They do what Wyatt did and insist that "smart people can still believe!" (hence "Mormon Scholars Testify"). They paint disaffected members as sinners, lazy, stupid, etc. So Dehlin's study--regardless of its methodological flaws--must be incredibly threatening to them, since it could potentially demonstrate just how real and concrete the problems actually are. If the study's results are true, it takes away one of the Mopologists' main avenues of attack. So of course Wyatt, Parker, Smith and others are freaking out.[/quote]

I would probably call your post here as more of a freak out. They didn't say any of this. They don't report being threatened, nor do they attack, at least from what you've shown. I think its a fair thing to bring up--is the study sound. That's not an attack. That's nothing but questioning the study itself.

scratch wrote:
And "Tuffy" Parker's criticisms seem somewhat overblown. Yes, it is a problem that the survey was "voluntary" (has there ever been a legit social science survey that wasn't techincally "voluntary"?), but I don't know why Parker is assuming that the sample set is somehow *not* indicative of wider trends in Mormonism. He complains that "[Dehlin] solicited responses from ex-Mormons who follow his podcast and run in the same circles with him," though it's not quite clear why Parker thinks this, or why it amounts to a legitimate criticism. As far as I can tell, Dehlin has an enormous audience that encompasses both believing LDS and ex-Mormons. He attracts people like Richard Bushman, Mike Quinn, and Terryl Givens as guests, so I see no reason to assume that the only respondents were "ex-Mormons ...[who]..run in the same circles." I bet that Parker himself listens to the podcast, so, again: Who is he talking about here?

In any event, it will be very interesting to see if these "farm team" Mopologists will be able to restrain their anger and hatred, or if they will step up their attacks on Dehlin.


That may be, Scratch in his pants. But its not an attack to question the study itself. Its questioning. Its thinking about it and pondering whether the conclusions should be accepted.

This appears to be more of a hit piece then anything demonstrated to this point. Granted I don't know anything about a hit piece, but this surely doesn't demonstrate anything as Scratch would paint it, it seems to me.

_________________
Love ya tons,
Stem


I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.


Last edited by stemelbow on Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:47 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 2:45 pm
Posts: 1176
It seems to me that most active members I know are not interested in John Dehlin, Joanna Brooks or any one else that they see as on the 'fringe' of Mormonism. They are ignored. They are particularly ignored by those for whom testimony, lifestyle and belief are more important than anything that history or interpretations of history might throw up.

I linked to John's 'Why Mormons Leave' on my fb page and one member pm'd me to say that I should take it off because she didn't know the stuff he brought up and felt it wasn't faith promoting and might disturb other faithful members of the church. She wasn't interested in whether it was true or valid or not, just whether it was faith promoting. She took me off as a friend and that was that.

Bringing proceedings against John, for whom it is hard to categorise as an 'apostate' in my opinion, would be pointless and be more trouble than it is worth.

I watched the UVU Q and A session all the way through twice, and when I linked to it I found it easy to categorise Scott as a Mormon Apologist and Rosemary as a Non-member Academic. John I would put right there in the middle.

John, on his fb page has just put up a disclaimer of sorts about his position with regard to the church. He is no wolf in sheep's clothing. He has always, as far as I'm concerned, been honest about where he stands. I have never seen or heard of him attack the church in any way.

What on earth would he be excommunicated for?

_________________
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:59 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 9:06 am
Posts: 9388
Location: Kershaw, SC
Quote:
What on earth would he be excommunicated for?



Open, public rebellion against and active criticism of the Church, its core teachings, and its leaders, with the intent of influencing further dissent, rebellion, and apostasy among other members.

That's more than enough grounds for the separation of anyone from his membership in the Church.

_________________
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 12:35 pm 
Kishkumen wrote:
Still, it is easy for you to sit back and sound off on having Greg Smith publish his attack piece on Dehlin, but what does it feel like to have 100 pages of paper publication attacking you out there? It has to be an awful experience. This is the most immediate impact it has, and it is the very kind of bullying effect that these apologetic publications thrive on.


I've had far, far, far more than 100 measly pages of personal criticism against me, examining every aspect of even my personal life (before stronger rules were in place), on this very board, going right back to the beginning. I don't think you were even here for the first year of it, Kish.

Time for some shut eye. Probably not a good idea to post after 14 hours on the road.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 12:46 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 2:45 pm
Posts: 1176
Droopy wrote:
Quote:
What on earth would he be excommunicated for?



Open, public rebellion against and active criticism of the Church, its core teachings, and its leaders, with the intent of influencing further dissent, rebellion, and apostasy among other members.

That's more than enough grounds for the separation of anyone from his membership in the Church.


You have to be kidding Droopy. I would NEVER categorise John in this way, in fact if anything, it is John's kind of approach that would encourage me to return, not to leave.

I also watched the last of Dan Wotherspoon's interviews with Daniel Peterson and Daniel (in the 4th podcast in particular) showed the same kind of reasonableness and understanding that John shows with regards to troubling aspects of church history and the 'one true church' claims.

Does that make Daniel Peterson an apostate too, because he understands how some might have trouble coming to terms with Joseph's polyandry for instance?

He doesn't have a problem with the troubling aspects of church history. He still believes, but he understands, or at least appeared to, why some people can't come to terms with the information.

John is no more an apostate than is Daniel Peterson.

_________________
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 1:19 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 9:06 am
Posts: 9388
Location: Kershaw, SC
A wolf among the sheep, even if less of the "ravening wolf" variety and more of the Larry Talbot kind, is still of canine predilection, no?

_________________
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehli
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2012 1:21 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 9:06 am
Posts: 9388
Location: Kershaw, SC
Quote:
I also watched the last of Dan Wotherspoon's interviews with Daniel Peterson and Daniel (in the 4th podcast in particular) showed the same kind of reasonableness and understanding that John shows with regards to troubling aspects of church history and the 'one true church' claims.



So you are here, for the record, claiming that Daniel Peterson does not accept the Church's claim that it is the "only true and living church" on earth?

Do you think he has a problem with that claim?

CFR.

_________________
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 447 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 22  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Abaddon, Analytics, badseed, cognitiveharmony, Craig Paxton, DrW, Fence Sitter, Google [Bot], Juggler Vain, Majestic-12 [Bot], Molok, MSNbot Media, Quasimodo, robuchan and 36 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group