Allen Wyatt, Mike Parker & FAIR: A Growing Fear of Dehlin?

[_static]

I'm waiting for "mormonstories" to apologize for perpetuating the myth of a "hit piece" which neither he nor anyone else has seen, and which, if it exists, is probably not a "hit piece" at all, but a "multi-page critique."

[_stemelbow]

Stem has a gay moment.

As a happy married hetero I admit I have tons of those. Ain't no surprise. What's up Spurven?

[_stemelbow]

Do you feel that God's commandment to not bear false witness is no longer in force? Is that why you feel comfortable lying about Dehlin?

Or do you only feel comfortable when you make up lies about people who aren't on your side?

Stop the goonish behavior. if you don't like the church using guilt for you to attempt to use it is completely idiotic, rude, mean, evil, contradictory, hypocritcal, pathetic, disingenuous, etc. You get it. Just stop. I'd say it makes you look foolish, but nol one here picks up on the foolishness from your group.

[_Spurven Ten Sing]

Come on in Buffalo. Open up and let it go.

[_Kishkumen]

I'm waiting for "mormonstories" to apologize for perpetuating the myth of a "hit piece" which neither he nor anyone else has seen, and which, if it exists, is probably not a "hit piece" at all, but a "multi-page critique."

Only a fool apologizes for something he did not do, and only a snake in the grass invites him to do so.

[_Buffalo]

Do you feel that God's commandment to not bear false witness is no longer in force? Is that why you feel comfortable lying about Dehlin?

Or do you only feel comfortable when you make up lies about people who aren't on your side?

Stop the goonish behavior. if you don't like the church using guilt for you to attempt to use it is completely idiotic, rude, mean, evil, contradictory, hypocritcal, pathetic, disingenuous, etc. You get it. Just stop. I'd say it makes you look foolish, but nol one here picks up on the foolishness from your group.

I'm sorry for guilting you about your intentional deceptions.

I'll take a different tack. Kindly please stop lying. No pressure!

[_Kishkumen]

Stop the goonish behavior. if you don't like the church using guilt for you to attempt to use it is completely idiotic, rude, mean, evil, contradictory, hypocritcal, pathetic, disingenuous, etc. You get it. Just stop. I'd say it makes you look foolish, but nol one here picks up on the foolishness from your group.

Yeah, asking that you live up to your professed ideals is really goonish. Imagining that anyone could be moral without a church is expecting too much from you, clearly.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I'm sorry, but I just can't buy into this story. When has a general authority ever had, let alone exercised editorial authority over what gets printed in the FARMS Review?

Seriously. Is there any precedent for this kind of thing?

My impression has been that very few general authorities (and even fewer members) pay any attention to the FARMS Review, or know anything about it. I just can't believe that a GA is now on the editorial board of that all-but-invisible journal.

There was something mentioned about this in a thread from a couple of years ago. As I recall, I got a PM from somebody who had found an old article in, If I recall correctly, either Dialogue or Sunstone where it said that one of the apologists was "ordered" by one of the GAs to author an apologetic article. And again, I'm just going off memory here, but as I recally, it was Elder Maxwell telling John Sorenson to write this article. On other occasions, apologists have been blessed and/or set apart by General Authorities.

As to them being told to "tone it down," I don't think this is a first. I was told by a very prominent LDS scholar that there have been phone calls from Church Headquarters, telling these guys to knock it off. The thing is: I believe the Brethren are divided on the apologists. Some of the 15 are more liberal and more tolerant of the "soft," more postmodern apologetics, whereas some (like BKP, allegedly) prefer the "hard stuff": the outright attacks and smears, but also the stuff that is more rigid in terms of supporting orthodox doctrine (e.g., Schryver's and Gee's Book of Abraham work).

[_Doctor Scratch]

Also, I just want to add that if John Dehlin feels that I have maliciously dragged him into some kind of conflict, hoping to use him as a "pawn," as Liz suggested, then he has my sincerest apologies. I was told by a couple of people that FARMS was planning to attack him in print, and felt that this was news that was worth presenting to the community. Simon Southerton confirmed this in a thread, and the rest is history. I think that, though our approaches are clearly quite different, and that we obviously have different opinions on things, Dehlin and I can probably at least agree that things should be done to prevent people from being hurt by their experiences with the LDS Church. And I just don't think that the Mopologists feel the same way. To cite just one example: can you imagine Richard Bushman or Terryl Givens going on RfM in order to harvest quotes to later use as a means of embarrassing people? Can you imagine either of these guys going off on a k-word-laced rant? There is just a fundamental difference in views and approaches here.

I suppose you could argue that criticizing the Mopologists does nothing to help those who've been wounded, though obviously I disagree with that. I believe that keeping the spotlight tuned on them has revealed a lot more of their flaws. Sure: we could ignore them and hope that they just wither on the vine, but I think that concentrated criticism has arguably helped to hasten their fall from grace. And that is a fundamentally good thing.

[_mormonstories]

Also, I just want to add that if John Dehlin feels that I have maliciously dragged him into some kind of conflict, hoping to use him as a "pawn," as Liz suggested, then he has my sincerest apologies. I was told by a couple of people that FARMS was planning to attack him in print, and felt that this was news that was worth presenting to the community. Simon Southerton confirmed this in a thread, and the rest is history. I think that, though our approaches are clearly quite different, and that we obviously have different opinions on things, Dehlin and I can probably at least agree that things should be done to prevent people from being hurt by their experiences with the LDS Church. And I just don't think that the Mopologists feel the same way. To cite just one example: can you imagine Richard Bushman or Terryl Givens going on RfM in order to harvest quotes to later use as a means of embarrassing people? Can you imagine either of these guys going off on a k-word-laced rant? There is just a fundamental difference in views and approaches here.

I suppose you could argue that criticizing the Mopologists does nothing to help those who've been wounded, though obviously I disagree with that. I believe that keeping the spotlight tuned on them has revealed a lot more of their flaws. Sure: we could ignore them and hope that they just wither on the vine, but I think that concentrated criticism has arguably helped to hasten their fall from grace. And that is a fundamentally good thing.

Scratch - I think that this is an important story to tell....I just wish that we all knew how to talk about it in a more constructive way. I wasn't going to bring it up publicly out of respect for the parties involved, but once you did so, I felt like I wanted to say what I could about the story to prevent misunderstanding. Not sure how much good came out of it all, but I appreciate what you were trying to do.