cinepro wrote:Darth J wrote:Cinepro, you've been commenting on this a lot, so just to clarify:
Is it your belief that a 100-page unilateral temple recommend interview can legitimately be characterized as a scholarly research paper?
I don't recall calling Smith's paper a "scholarly research paper".
I do recall it being touted as such by its author, up to and including the present moment.
And you gave lip service to the big picture, then abandoned it. It doesn't matter whether Greg Smith is "right" from a militant TBM perspective. It doesn't matter if you can make the case that John Dehlin says things contrary to LDS dogma. It's the fact that an attempt to make the case is being undertaken at all. This is not what grown adults with brains and lives of their own do. Period. The only step left is threatening to sue anyone who says your religion is a lie, and then you are full Scientologist.
If I really was an anti-Mormon, I would take this essay to everyone I could find who has started the missionary discussions and say, "Here you go. This is how ostensibly adult Mormons act. Join right in!"
As for it being a "unilateral temple recommend interview", since the TR questions are public knowledge, and John Dehlin has addressed many of the issues contained in the TR interview publicly and clearly, it wouldn't be too hard to figure out how the public Dehlin would (have) answered the questions.
Yeah, Mormonism isn't paternalistic enough as is. So let's have some idiot nerd who used to rock out to New Order at Young Single Adult dances appoint himself as bishop for the world at large.
Dehlin has explained his beliefs and doubts about the nature and reality of God, Jesus, Joseph Smith's calling, the atonement, church attendance, tithing, and the Law of Chastity. I'm mystified why it is out of bounds to quote Dehlin's own stated beliefs on these subjects? If I were publicly expressing myself in a way that contradicted LDS beliefs on these subjects while at the same time advertising I had a TR, I wouldn't take offense to someone noting the contradiction.
Perhaps that's because somewhere during the last 183 years, Mormons lost any concept of "mind your own goddamn business."
For example, if I publicly said "I don't believe in tithing, and I don't pay it. But I have a temple recommend", I might not like it if someone pointed out the contradiction, but it would be a valid question.
Valid
how? Valid as in something any rational adult who lives in the real world would do?