Open question to John Dehlin ???

Post by **_kairos** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:01 am

John

Without divulging a game plan we here on the board would ask that you update us on your situation-Are you are or are you not in the process of being Excommunicated from the CJLDS?

Thanx

kairos

Sushi on me the next time in Logan :smile:

Post by **_Polygamy-Porter** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:09 am

kairos wrote:Sushi on me the next time in Logan

Use a fork next time. :lol:

Post by **_Zadok** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:36 pm

Quick thread-jack....

Question: Is the sushi in Logan made with Bonneville Cisco from Bear Lake?

Post by **_Craig Paxton** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:22 pm

kairos wrote:John

Without divulging a game plan we here on the board would ask that you update us on your situation-Are you are or are you not in the process of being Excommunicated from the CJLDS?

Thanx

kairos

Don't know if you want to count me as a reliable proof source but....I am a member of John Dehlin's private Facebook group (nothing special after all they accepted me in the group) Yesterday he posted that one of his friends with connections to his SP gave him an advance noticed that the SP intends to hold a church chourt after the holidays.

Post by **_Zadok** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:28 pm

Craig Paxton wrote: Yesterday he posted that one of his friends with connections to his SP gave him an advance noticed that the SP intends to hold a church court after the holidays.

Just a serious question here. In a 'court of love' the high council is divided into two groups. One to stand for the Church's interests, and one group supposedly to stand for the accused.

Has anyone here EVER heard of the six members standing for the accused, convincing the rest of the group that the matter should NOT go forward? Would it even be hypothetically possible that John Dehlin would be summoned, and sent away with a vote of "No Action"?

Post by **_NorthboundZax** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:57 pm

I don't think they really stand for the accused, but rather are to ensure that the accused is given due process.

Post by **_cwald** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:14 pm

NorthboundZax wrote:I don't think they really stand for the accused, but rather are to ensure that the accused is given due process.

It's just a sham either way.

Post by **_Zadok** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:17 pm

NorthboundZax wrote:I don't think they really stand for the accused, but rather are to ensure that the accused is given due process.

Not to nit-pic but the idea that any so-called 'court of love' has anything even remotely related to legal due-process is a figment of your imagination.

Post by **_cwald** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:20 pm

Zadok wrote:
NorthboundZax wrote:I don't think they really stand for the accused, but rather are to ensure that the accused is given due process.
Not to nit-pic but the idea that any so-called 'court of love' has anything even remotely related to legal due-process is a figment of your imagination.

correct. It is total sham.

Post by **_Polygamy-Porter** » Wed Dec 24, 2014 1:00 am

So he is like a lamb with an appointment with the slaughterhouse?

DiscussMormonism.com

Open question to John Dehlin ???

Open question to John Dehlin ???

Re: Open question to John Dehlin ???

Re: Open question to John Dehlin ???

Re: Open question to John Dehlin ???

Re: Open question to John Dehlin ???

Re: Open question to John Dehlin ???

Re: Open question to John Dehlin ???

Re: Open question to John Dehlin ???

Re: Open question to John Dehlin ???

Re: Open question to John Dehlin ???