John Dehlin is thinking about bringing Mormon Stories back

[CardiacCoug]

i mean, if they are ignoring him, simply disobeying him or not including him in their decisions, i think it would be fair to conclude the church isn't being directed or led by him. rather its being led by them.

(edit) i now see you were likely being facetious. i can be pretty dumb at times.

Not being facetious. Church leaders are fallible and the racist stuff didn’t come from God. That doesn’t seem edgy or controversial for even a very ortho mo, just similar to what happens in the scriptures all the time.

[Jeff Lebowski]

i mean, if they are ignoring him, simply disobeying him or not including him in their decisions, i think it would be fair to conclude the church isn't being directed or led by him. rather its being led by them.

(edit) i now see you were likely being facetious. i can be pretty dumb at times.

I don’t think that is a fair conclusion.

Always interesting to me how we are naturally drawn to black and white thinking.

[Maximus]

I don’t think that is a fair conclusion.

Always interesting to me how we are naturally drawn to black and white thinking.

I am curious what your conclusion is.

[myboynoah]

I am curious what your conclusion is.

Likely something like this:

Mormons and their leadership were fairly racist back in the mid-1800s, leading to the policy/doctrine. The policy/doctrine became imbedded in Mormon practice/lore over time as Mormons remained isolated in the Mormon Corridor and didn't regularly face racial issues (when in came to African Americans; oddly, Mormons were very racially progressive in establishing local leadership in the Pacific). Nobody gave it much thought. Then The Church started expanding into Latin America (particularly Brazil) and groups in Africa started forming around Mormon belief, which forced The Church to rethink the policy/doctrine. SWK ponders and discusses with the brethren, decides on a course of action, then takes it to The Lord. Voila!

[Northwestcoug]

I don’t think that is a fair conclusion.

Always interesting to me how we are naturally drawn to black and white thinking.

Sometimes, there are only a couple of options to consider. The 'black and white' accusation can also be a fallacy. In the context of the belief of a church that is divinely guided (even the 'on again, off again' model that Creekster proposes), are there other viable opinions? The position that good men are susceptible to societal influences but are still able to be inspired by God, in his own due time, is pretty nuanced. The other option is that church leaders have a direct continuous revelatory line with God does lead to the position that god had racist views until recently. That can be nuanced a number of different ways which have been hashed out before; the church or even the leaders weren't ready for the change, the political climate wasn't ready, etc. etc.

Again, there may be other options out there to promote. But in the context that the church places on revelation and doctrine, there are only a couple that are allowed to remain. Those positions can still be expanded to include non-traditional beliefs. I don't see that as black and white.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I am curious what your conclusion is.

Sure. This is what you said:

I hadnt heard of that letter before. how does one read that and conclude anything other than the church was racist, and either god is racist or the church isnt directed by god?

I dont get it.

You are promoting two extreme positions there. Either God is racist, or God would not allow church leaders ever to do anything racist. Why stop there? Why not conclude that if God allowed slavery to happen (thus impacting far more people than the priesthood ban ever impacted), then God must be racist. Right? Anyone who pursues a life of faith has to come to terms with human suffering and imperfection. You have to accept that God allows bad things to happen for reasons we may not understand.

I think there are very few people in the church, even staunch ortho-mos, who would disagree with the statement: "church leaders are not perfect". Many people have even come to terms with the idea that BY had racist tendencies. But when we read letters like the ones listed above and see the gruesome details of what that statement really means in practice, we recoil.

I believe in the following:

1) God directs the church
2) God allows leaders to be human and make mistakes. Sometimes big mistakes.

Those two statements are compatible. Clearly "God directs the church" does NOT mean that leaders are robots or avatars for God and everything they do and every policy/doctrine they promote will be objectively viewed as correct by all future generations. It means that God inspires and motivates the church leaders and they do wonderful things and provide wonderful service and generally do the best they can but revelation is a messy and imperfect process and for reasons that are sometimes hard to understand, they sometimes screw up. And we should love them and forgive them just like we are commanded to love and forgive anyone else.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Sometimes, there are only a couple of options to consider. The 'black and white' accusation can also be a fallacy. In the context of the belief of a church that is divinely guided (even the 'on again, off again' model that Creekster proposes), are there other viable opinions? The position that good men are susceptible to societal influences but are still able to be inspired by God, in his own due time, is pretty nuanced. The other option is that church leaders have a direct continuous revelatory line with God does lead to the position that god had racist views until recently. That can be nuanced a number of different ways which have been hashed out before; the church or even the leaders weren't ready for the change, the political climate wasn't ready, etc. etc.

Again, there may be other options out there to promote. But in the context that the church places on revelation and doctrine, there are only a couple that are allowed to remain. Those positions can still be expanded to include non-traditional beliefs. I don't see that as black and white.

Appeal to ortho-mo fallacy.

And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrine.

I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us—His imperfect children—and imperfect people make mistakes.

In the title page of the Book of Mormon we read, “And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.”6

This is the way it has always been and will be until the perfect day when Christ Himself reigns personally upon the earth.

--- Deiter F. Uchtdorf

[Northwestcoug]

Appeal to ortho-mo fallacy.

Gotta stay to my online rep!

But if the ortho-mo fallacy is generally accepted in the church, is it a fallacy???

[Jeff Lebowski]

Gotta stay to my online rep!

But if the ortho-mo fallacy is generally accepted in the church, is it a fallacy???

Whoa. You just layered an ortho-mo fallacy on top of an ortho-mo fallacy. I am impressed!

[Donuthole]

Gotta stay to my online rep!

But if the ortho-mo fallacy is generally accepted in the church, is it a fallacy???

[Northwestcoug]

Whoa. You just layered an ortho-mo fallacy on top of an ortho-mo fallacy. I am impressed!

LOL. I'll take the arrows for this one (I'm altruistic like that ). But this recent discussion has revealed others who are susceptible to the ortho-mo fallacy, such as it is.

Green Monstah isn't going to be happy sharing his moniker

[Bo Diddley]

I want one!

When I go to restaurants, I typically order by pictures. If I see something that looks good, I can't get it out of my head. It goes along with my lack of impulse control.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I want one!

When I go to restaurants, I typically order by pictures. If I see something that looks good, I can't get it out of my head. It goes along with my lack of impulse control.

Yeah, I am embarrassed to admit that I want one.

[Bo Diddley]

Yeah, I am embarrassed to admit that I want one.

Some character flaws you just have to embrace. Pick your battles, and embrace your surrenders.

[myboynoah]

Is it an all-beef kosher dog?