for what it's worth, my review of Greg Smith's "review" of Mormon Stories

[Guest]

Dehlin has lots of issues, one of them is he craves for charisma, needs to build up his business, which I'm not faulting him for. As far as damaging Church, John was great.

I completely disagree. I don't see Dehlin as "craving" anything, other than to help people the best he can. And I don't think he has "damaged" the Church. If anything, I believe the Brethren are taking and using the data John has compiled to address the obvious problems with members leaving. That can only be a positive for the Church, in my opinion. Frankly, we need more people like John in the Church, and I'm convinced the Brethren know and accept this. Baby steps, baby steps ....

Well, Rollo I am surprise at your level of naïvété.
John is a masterful chameleon When he talks to anti's; he agrees with them, when he talks with pro's he agrees with them. Sorry, but not many of us conduct our business affairs like that.
Bottom line is; (perhaps you missed it); John flooded the Podcast waves with incalculable damaging information. How can you say he is not damaged the cause of Church? Any publicity like Johns is a huge negative, especially Church's Missionary program....

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Well, Rollo I am surprise at your level of naïveté.

Me, too. I thought I was pretty worldly.

John is a masterful chameleon When he talks to anti's; he agrees with them, when he talks with pro's he agrees with them. Sorry, I but not may of us conduct my business affairs like that.

We all talk differently depending on the audience. For example, what I say from the pulpit is generally a bit different than what I post here. Different audiences, different places. But I feel I'm being just as honest with both.

Bottom line is; (perhaps you missed it); John flooded the Podcast waves with incalculable damaging information. How can you say he is not damaged the cause of Church? Any publicity like Johns is a huge negative, especially Church's Missionary program....

This is where I disagree with you. I've listened to many podcasts, and I don't recall hearing anything factual or historical that I hadn't already heard somewhere else. Why the podcasts are so invaluable is because the topics are discussed by real current or former members (most the time -- some non-Mormons were interviewed) in a natural way that does not include judgments, unlike what I often find on pro-Mormon and anti-Mormon sites. Podcasts on Mormon Stories seem "safe" for anyone to hear, active or ex-Mormon alike, without fear of being judged. And I think the Brethren are very interested in John's work -- they have already reviewed the data from his survey of why members are leaving. John addresses issues that the Brethren care about, so I don't think that's damaging at all.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

If anything, John Dehlin gave people a place to work things out that was much less hostile. If anyone supposes that getting bullied by apologists over on MDDB or a FAIR blog was going to save more testimonies, that person is delusional.

Rollo is totally right: in the long run John Dehlin's impact will be much better for the LDS Church. The Church has learned a great deal through this experience. It has learned that fanatical polemicists do not serve the interests of the organization very well. Doubters need different resources from those that classic-FARMS and FAIR have offered. It helps not one bit to treat the person who is still half way in the Church as though she or he were a bitter enemy. Yet that is what Mopologists have done many, many times.

Reverend,

I couldn't agree with you more. John Dehlin has done a great service for the Church and thousands of LDS with honest doubts. He created a welcoming refuge for those who found classic-FARMS and FAIR a hostile, bizzare and non-compassionate place.

God bless John Dehlin, his family and his future endeavors.

[Guest]

I've listened to many podcasts, and I don't recall hearing anything factual or historical that I hadn't already heard somewhere else. Why the podcasts are so invaluable is because the topics are discussed by real current or former members (most the time -- some non-Mormons were interviewed) in a natural way that does not include judgments, unlike what I often find on pro-Mormon and anti-Mormon sites. Podcasts on Mormon Stories seem "safe" for anyone to hear, active or ex-Mormon alike, without fear of being judged. And I think the Brethren are very interested in John's work -- they have already reviewed the data from his survey of why members are leaving. John addresses issues that the Brethren care about, so I don't think that's damaging at all.

Well said, Rollo. The truth of the matter is that it is those who have an agenda who read what they want to into John's podcasts. Mormon Stories was designed as a forum for people on all sides of Mormon issues to tell their own stories. Anti-Mormons and apologists tend to take way from Mormon Stories whatever they can use to serve their own agenda. An honest listen to a healthy percentage of the whole, when done with an informed viewpoint regarding the purpose of the podcasts, does not reveal an intention to harm the LDS Church. It is, rather, to let people tell their stories. It is healthy for all Mormons to know what those different stories are. You may not agree with the speaker, but the person and the issue have now been humanized and personalized in a way that they were not before.

I found this to be the case when I heard the Daniel Peterson interview. I found him a very sympathetic fellow in that podcast. What an ironic situation.

[_Darth J]

I'm so glad we have faithful, active members of the Church like Why Me who are here to set the infidels straight. Instead of wolves in sheep's clothing like Dehlin, we need righteous Latter-day Saints like Why Me, who can give faith-promoting, spiritual advice to the struggling member.

If Mormons are subscribing to porn this would be one site that would appeal to them because of its natural quality and tasteful porn.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25175&p=621465#p621465

Say, Why Me, not to change the subject, but tell the board again how non-married people dry humping in their underwear is not only a great idea, it's also totally acceptable under the law of chastity.

[_Darth J]

The critics showed their true colors on this one: censors.

Did Why Me ever decide he was going to provide any evidence at all for this ongoing assertion?

Also, I want to remind everyone that Why Me is a stalwart defender of the faith.

Much better to quench the addiction by paying for non-exploitive porn. One site seems very nice with the owner even quoting philosophers, writers etc when she posts her messages to the members which everyone can read. She makes the subscribers feel like they are a big family and important to her and her husband.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25175&p=621692#p621692

[_Joe Geisner]

Thank you Rollo for the excellent write-up. I love that your comments are being circulated far and wide.

[_solomarineris]

Well, Rollo I am surprise at your level of naïveté.

Me, too. I thought I was pretty worldly.

John is a masterful chameleon When he talks to anti's; he agrees with them, when he talks with pro's he agrees with them. Sorry, I but not may of us conduct my business affairs like that.

We all talk differently depending on the audience. For example, what I say from the pulpit is generally a bit different than what I post here. Different audiences, different places. But I feel I'm being just as honest with both.

Bottom line is; (perhaps you missed it); John flooded the Podcast waves with incalculable damaging information. How can you say he is not damaged the cause of Church? Any publicity like Johns is a huge negative, especially Church's Missionary program....

This is where I disagree with you. I've listened to many podcasts, and I don't recall hearing anything factual or historical that I hadn't already heard somewhere else. Why the podcasts are so invaluable is because the topics are discussed by real current or former members (most the time -- some non-Mormons were interviewed) in a natural way that does not include judgments, unlike what I often find on pro-Mormon and anti-Mormon sites. Podcasts on Mormon Stories seem "safe" for anyone to hear, active or ex-Mormon alike, without fear of being judged. And I think the Brethren are very interested in John's work -- they have already reviewed the data from his survey of why members are leaving. John addresses issues that the Brethren care about, so I don't think that's damaging at all.

Whether I agree or disagree with you Rollo,
I like your posts, I'm just pessimistic & skeptical on my outlooks at issues John presents, what kinda agenda he has.

[_consiglieri]

Now having completed reading the review, I liked the last part even better than the first, by which I mean I found the last parts more damning to Smith's scholastic approach; especially the part where he sets himself up as Dehlin's ecclesiastical leader.

What on earth were they thinking having something like this in a purportedly scholarly review?

And given the fact that Dehlin had quite publicly reaffiliated himself with the LDS Church before the publication of the hit piece, it comes across even more as attacking the faith and credentials of a fellow Mormon.

I am more clearly seeing the wisdom in the GA's putting the kibosh on this piece, and am starting to think the publication of this piece in the MI in spite of the GA's admonitions may have been the determing factor in Bill Hamblin's sudden "resignation" as editor in chief.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_Uther]

I wonder how long it will take with the level of attention this thread is pulling, before the madpologist club desides to send an emmisary to derail it. Surely one of the lords henchemen has a sockpuppet that can be revived for this special occation.