DiscussMormonism.com

suniluni2 wrote:What is your source for this?

I always heard 5 for a bishop and 7 for a SP, although I'll admit it seems to have gone to 7 and 9. I've seen earlier; I've seen later.

Ours was replaced near the end of last year, so I decided to look up how long the old one served. Answer: nine years and three days. Our bishop was just released after 5 years.

suniluni2 wrote:What is your source for this?

I always heard 5 for a bishop and 7 for a SP, although I'll admit it seems to have gone to 7 and 9. I've seen earlier; I've seen later.

Two Stake Presidents and someone a little higher up the food chain.

Kishkumen wrote:If one apostle can cause so much damage--one who is not even in the FP, then the governance of the LDS Church is deeply, deeply flawed. I don't regret not waiting around for more awful surprises.

D Michael Quinn in his book "Mormon Hierarchy Extensions of Power" also discuss this issue of how the senior members of the Quorum of The Twelve would just bulldog policies through and the younger members were expected to conform. Boyd K Packer was called a grizzly bear because he was so adamant and unyielding. I was raised and taught that these gentlemen all agreed with each other all the time, that Jesus would meet with him and give them revelation. Learning the reality of how the quorums really run it's honestly no surprise. It has nothing to do with revelation from heaven, it has everything to do with what these guys want and they bully each other into submission. The Harold B Lee years were especially prominent for that, as was the Bruce R Mcconkie and Boyd K Packer years. Quinn's book was such an enlightening read to me the first time but I am really seeing things the second time that I didn't see the first time.

Philo Sofee wrote:

Kishkumen wrote:If one apostle can cause so much damage--one who is not even in the FP, then the governance of the LDS Church is deeply, deeply flawed. I don't regret not waiting around for more awful surprises.

D Michael Quinn in his book "Mormon Hierarchy Extensions of Power" also discuss this issue of how the senior members of the Quorum of The Twelve would just bulldog policies through and the younger members were expected to conform. Boyd K Packer was called a grizzly bear because he was so adamant and unyielding. I was raised and taught that these gentlemen all agreed with each other all the time, that Jesus would meet with him and give them revelation. Learning the reality of how the quorums really run it's honestly no surprise. It has nothing to do with revelation from heaven, it has everything to do with what these guys want and they bully each other into submission. The Harold B Lee years were especially prominent for that, as was the Bruce R Mcconkie and Boyd K Packer years. Quinn's book was such an enlightening read to me the first time but I am really seeing things the second time that I didn't see the first time.

At least in a real corporation, the shareholders can vote off of the board of directors those that start using their petards to advance their own, personal agendas.

Maureen said:

Nine years to the day they are set apart, a flag pops up on a computer in Salt Lake City telling an Apostle they need releasing. The process of replacement can vary in length because it depends on candidate availability etc. But the release date of nine years is automated.

Philo notes:
Well the nice thing is now that Jesus can use the technology scientist discovered on earth, it saves him a lot of time running around back and forth between heaven and earth to counsel and guide these guys.

Philo Sofee wrote:...
Boyd K Packer was called a grizzly bear
...

- [#img] http://img1.indafoto.hu/10/1/57091_6715 ... 7b2a_m.jpg[/img] -

Dehlin will be the biggest embarrassment of my adult life. I doubt I could beat the Dehlin mistake if I tried.

Anyway, when I look at his writing now (I only rarely watch or listen to him because, to be frank, hearing his voice makes me feel fairly sick after the magnitude of his aggressions against me), I also feel embarrassed that there was ever a time when I didn't roll my eyes at the confidence with which he asserts his positions about his victimizations and heroism. It's cliché and waaaay over the top.

What I hated most about his lies was that the fact that I knew he was lying. That made me complicit yet I didn't have any power to prevent the lies. He spoke them so confidently and publicly and seemed to feel good about his knowledge that new, uninformed people would always be around to believe him. I felt guilty about his lies and he didn't. He intentionally took advantage of that fact by using my own feelings against me to manipulate, control and use me. I didn't see it then because I didn't yet know how cruel he could be or to what extent he would stoop in order to reach his personal public objectives. I still believed, until much later when I began to piece together the expertise with which he manipulated me, that he was a flawed person trying to do his best rather than someone effectively pretending to be a flawed person trying to do his best so people would have compassion for him and follow along with his lies. He is very good at what he does.

Looking back now I can see his expertise. He knew how to spot a woman in a bad position and then manipulate and use her and then how to work aggressively to keep her silent while he built an intentional narrative. His techniques are effective and are very dangerous for the people who have the misfortune of crossing his path in any significant way. I have felt great compassion for his stake presidents. He used and manipulated them then published his victorious victimhood.

Mostly, I'm embarrassed that I was so vulnerable to such a stupid shmuck. I mean.....look at him. I should have been smarter than that. He intentionally caught me at the perfect time and took advantage of his catch and knew he was taking advantage. What a fool I was. I mean, how can he not be embarrassed that he advertises these things about himself? The whole situation screams "shmuck."

Anyway, these are my musings for the day. Thanks for reading. I'm so glad I'm in a better, safer place now and that I am more capable of protecting myself. Mormon women are raised to be victims. Oh well..... live and learn.

Just as it is impossible to have a Makelan thread without Servant showing up, it is impossible to have a Dehlin thread without Rosebud showing up.

Just an observation.

But unlike bettlejuice, Tobin has been absent for weeks.

Philo Sofee wrote:Maureen said:

Nine years to the day they are set apart, a flag pops up on a computer in Salt Lake City telling an Apostle they need releasing. The process of replacement can vary in length because it depends on candidate availability etc. But the release date of nine years is automated.

I didn't say this, IHAQ said this.

M.

Maureen wrote:

Philo Sofee wrote:Maureen said:

Nine years to the day they are set apart, a flag pops up on a computer in Salt Lake City telling an Apostle they need releasing. The process of replacement can vary in length because it depends on candidate availability etc. But the release date of nine years is automated.

I didn't say this, IHAQ said this.

M.

Indeed he did.