The Deniable Dehlin

[_Hades]

Ezra T. Benson said,
Now the question arises, will we stick with the kingdom and can we avoid being deceived?

No we can't stick with the kingdom and avoid being deceived. The two go hand in hand.

[_Tarski]

still without doubt, a criticism of the Church who's primary purpose is to criticize and delegitimate central aspects of Church doctrine and teaching.

You say that like it is a bad thing.

(the church isn't true)

[_Jason Bourne]

In the ongoing interest in John Dehlin and a salient thread about him at the MDD board, Bernard Gui posted what I think is probably the most insightful perspective regarding his overall style and approach one could wish for.

Although I have not perused Dehlin's stuff extensively, my initial acquaintance with his Mormonstories website would tend to confirm Bob Crockett's general analysis.

Dehlin comes off as a nice guy on some occasions, but as pointed and agenda driven on others. The general passive-aggressive style of his approach is, while avoiding the hot-headed or intellectually paternalistic approach of many other apostate critics (I'm thinking Hutchinson or Metcalf), still without doubt, a criticism of the Church who's primary purpose is to criticize and delegitimate central aspects of Church doctrine and teaching.

Despite his overall low key and well mannered approach, such as it is, he is, indeed, a "vegetarian wolf" in sheep's clothing, and while clothing himself in niceness is laudable for its restraint, on an emotional level, the project itself - subverting and weakening the testimony and faith of other members and poisoning the well for potential converts, is still the same.

So you judge a man whose podcasts you "have not perused Dehlin's stuff extensively."

I see. Simply amazing. It seems the Church and those who defend it really cannot withstand any criticism even in a tame and open way. Dehlin is mild and interviews people from all sides of the issues. I think what you say and your conclusions are telling. Dehlin does not encourage people to stay or go but he will help you in whatever you decide.

Well I will tell you as I did on the first thread about Dehlin that you may have missed.

When I started realizing there really are major issues in LDS history that can cause many doubts and questions, and this even after years of knowing and studying such things and acting the role of hobby apologist I was facing a great dilemma. I did not know what to do.

I posted started posting about some of the issues I had major concerns with in a more critical way than I ever had both here and at what is know MDD. Only two people really offered help. All the other apologists here and on MDD were no help at all, you included. The pounced, were critical and even openly hostile.

The two people who offered to help were John Dehlin and Dan Peterson. Dr Peterson was kind to me and had offered numerous times to correspond and to even meet with me personally.

John Dehlin responded to my emails, provided a caring atmosphere of support and help me find a way to navigate through the issues and still remain active in the Church albeit in a more NOM or "cafeteria" way (which I know Droopy really bothers you still for some reason). He never encouraged me to leave, was happy, in fact thrilled I have found a way to stay active and make the Church work for me. I met John Dehlin and a Mormon Stories conference last summer. He asked where I was at and I told him I am still active, hold a calling and all this in spite of my concerns and more NOMish view of things. He was elated and ever introduced me to a number of people by telling them that I had found a way to stay active and make the Church work for me in spite of things.

All I can say Droopy is he has done more to help me and others than you have. I am not going to elaborate on the way you approach me and others here that are more liberal and NOMish in our religious views. But I can tell you that the approach you take can serve to move people in the opposite direction of full fellowship in the Church. So Dehlin, someone who you say he is, indeed, a "vegetarian wolf" in sheep's clothing" as well as his "primary purpose is to criticize and delegitimate central aspects of Church doctrine and teaching" seems to care more for people struggling and does more to keep them in than you and others who have a similar style as yours do.

[_Jason Bourne]

Misinformation, confusion, intellectual shallowness, and even a kind of ignorance (where one wouldn't expect it - in degreed intellectuals with a history of Church activity) of LDS doctrine and, in more than a few cases, maliciousness in efforts to evangelize others to the critical/apostate perspective, has never been lacking among this subset of LDS.


No matter how much time, effort, and talent was dedicated to the Church in the past, it is endurance to the end, that really matters, and apostasy is ultimately a choice to reject greater light and knowledge and remain at a certain level while that light and knowledge is available and further progress possible.
[/i]

And this is another problem with you and many other apologists. You think that those who look at the problem areas of the Church and conclude that they really are problematic are somehow intellectually shallow and ignorant. How utterly arrogant and condescending you are. Really.

Based on what I see from you about the problematic historical issues for the Church I can confidently state that most of those here who have come to a different conclusions that you have as much, if not more intellectual depth about these issues than you. Sometimes light and knowledge demands honesty that leads one to a different path rather than tenaciously hanging on and burying ones head in the sand. I hate to burst your bubble but you have no more light and knowledge than anyone else here does. Perhaps less so in many cases.

[_Polygamy-Porter]

Meanwhile Droopy stops by the local convenience store for something for the road...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM4eIBs8WBw

[_Drifting]

Droopy, how come the Church refused to allow the hit piece to be published if what it was doing was showing John in the 'true light' of apostasy and nefariousness that you claim, and thus would help fortify shaken faith?

The fact is, John has tacit approval for what he is doing from the senior Church leaders. DCP et al, not so much....

[_Tator]

The two people who offered to help were John Dehlin and Dan Peterson. Dr Peterson was kind to me and had offered numerous times to correspond and to even meet with me personally.

Jason I am elated that this happened for you. I can totally visualize this scenario from John but from Dan I can not visualize it, at least for me. I feel that if I were to approach each of them in person I would find both of them every bit the gentleman. Both very helpful, caring and long suffering for me if I was struggling. I feel that if I were to approach John online I would get the same Christlike love from him as I would in person. But online, no matter what, Dan would try to have me for lunch, dinner and tomorrow's breakfast.

I am glad it was a different experience for you than I think it would be for me.

[_Jason Bourne]

I have met Dan in person. In that setting he was very kind and a gentleman.

[_Yoda]

The two people who offered to help were John Dehlin and Dan Peterson. Dr Peterson was kind to me and had offered numerous times to correspond and to even meet with me personally.

John Dehlin responded to my emails, provided a caring atmosphere of support and help me find a way to navigate through the issues and still remain active in the Church albeit in a more NOM or "cafeteria" way (which I know Droopy really bothers you still for some reason). He never encouraged me to leave, was happy, in fact thrilled I have found a way to stay active and make the Church work for me. I met John Dehlin and a Mormon Stories conference last summer. He asked where I was at and I told him I am still active, hold a calling and all this in spite of my concerns and more NOMish view of things. He was elated and ever introduced me to a number of people by telling them that I had found a way to stay active and make the Church work for me in spite of things.

My experience with both John and Dan has been very similar to yours, Jason.

Although I have not had the privilege of meeting either of these men face to face, my online experiences with both of them have been extremely similar to what you describe. And, as you know, my views, like yours, tend to lean more on the NOMish side as well.

This is why I was saddened that two men who have both helped me through what I consider a trial of my faith, and assisted in leading me to a place of peace, are at such odds.

I certainly hope that they can resolve things, because I have a great amount of respect for both of them.

[_Jason Bourne]

i hope so too Liz. I like and admire both of them.







i