Since this is a John Dehlin interview and over three and a half hours long, I don't know if most people will "endure to the end." The less said on JD the better. It probably needs a Cliff Notes style summary.

There has been a lot of speculation about what happened. This gives a good idea. I honestly can't judge this man. He's had certain life struggles that I'll never relate to while I'm alive. My exit from the church was very different from what this couple experienced. I recommend you read some of the comments below the video which are a real eye opener.

https://m.youtube.com/live/juI-FVmU4OU

Some highlights:
* He said that he's had 50-60 people (out of a few thousand who have reached out to him) tell him of the sexual abuse they've endured at the hands of church members, many of them leaders. He said that he has his own lawsuit against the BSA with regard to sexual abuse.
* This man has an issue with polygamy. but think he believes that 132 were complete doctrines taught by Joseph Smith. (There is some good evidence that D&C 132 was altered by Brigham Young and his confederates. Joseph Smith's polygamy was more discreet.)
* It appears as if he's tossed the BoM as well. I find it interesting that this man doesn't believe the BoM, yet he quotes the BoM about Christ later on in the interview.
* He's moved from a 3 personage Godhead to a trinitarian viewpoint. I guess he's changed his feelings about Christ as well, but he said he didn't want to get into that.
* I did find it funny that on the way out he "declared" every member in his ward as a full tithe payer last year. He mentions an elderly woman with barely a penny to her name who pays tithing regularly to this billion dollar corporation.

+ Fries wrote in part (and I'll insert my comments in between):

"Some highlights:
* He said that he's had 50-60 people (out of a few thousand who have reached out to him) tell him of the sexual abuse they've endured at the hands of church members, many of them leaders. He said that he has his own lawsuit against the BSA with regard to sexual abuse."

Given what is known about sexual abuse in my former faith (Roman Catholicism), I'm not surprised.

"* This man has an issue with polygamy. but think he believes that 132 were complete doctrines taught by Joseph Smith. (There is some good evidence that D&C 132 was altered by Brigham Young and his confederates. Joseph Smith's polygamy was more discreet.)"

While JS's polygamy was more discreet in practice than Brigham Young's, I haven't seen any evidence anywhere that the latter altered D&C32. Please provide some of that evidence.

"* It appears as if he's tossed the BoM as well. I find it interesting that this man doesn't believe the BoM, yet he quotes the BoM about Christ later on in the interview."

It's probably all that he knows about religious teachings. Also, though I left the Roman faith, I dobelieve in some things it teaches, most notably in the areas of wealth and poverty.

"* He's moved from a 3 personage Godhead to a trinitarian viewpoint. I guess he's changed his feelings about Christ as well, but he said he didn't want to get into that."

I'm guessing that he moved from Mormonism to another religion. (Southern Baptist?)

"* I did find it funny that on the way out he "declared" every member in his ward as a full tithe payer last year. He mentions an elderly woman with barely a penny to her name who pays tithing regularly to this billion dollar corporation."

Yes. The Biblical reference for that comes from the New Testament and the parable of "The Widow's Mite," which I believe is found in Luke's gospel. It is a silly story meant to reenforce the idea that support for the group is *always* more important than meeting one's individual needs. That viewpoint only works if the group being donated to returns the favir by aiding the individual in the other things he/she must pay for, something that most religions either are unable or unwilling to do.

I don't have the refs to hand, but I think Denver Snuffer claims 132 was changed and he's not the only one.

Here is another take on this controversy (forwarded with disclaimers since I don't agree with some of the video's contects):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UaaouTVRNjE

Among the issues are that 132 was not published for nine years after it was supposed to have been received. Various people have also claimed it doesn't sound like Smith and there are also manuscript issues.

So the 132 problem is still essentially a Mormon problem, but not necessarily produced by Joseph Smith.

I wouldn't take Denver Snuffer as an authority on anything. There are plenty of legitimate authors and academics.

summer's right. No matter how admirable he was to stand on principle, Snuffer was out of his mind regarding polygamy.

Let's see what you would have to believe in order to maintain the belief that JS did not practice polygamy. First, you must reject a range of credible secondary sources: you'd have to think that Michael Quinn, Leonard Arrington, the author of Nauvoo Polygamy, David John Buerger, and other serious researchers were all wrong.

Moving to the primary sources, you would have to believe that Thomas Marsh and William Law were lying about why they left the church and then were excommunicated. You would likewise have to explain why the Nauvoo Expositor was wrong and why Joseph had his own private army, the Danites, destroy it. You would furthermore need to tell us why JS was indicted for polygamy. All of those events occurred while Joseph was still alive.

But what strikes me most is the women you would need to consider liars. The record is replete with Joseph's wives acknowledging in detail their experiences, including the Temple Lot depositions, Helen Mar Kimball's statement that her relationship with Joseph being a marriage in every sense of the word, the wide range of sources reproduced in In Sacred Loneliness.

The notion that Joseph did not practice polygamy is absurd. What is also absurd is the facility with which a lot of men are willing to disregard the legal testimony of dozens of LDS women. At some point the Snuffer canard verges on outright misogyny.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let's see what you would have to believe in order
> to maintain the belief that JS did not practice
> polygamy.

+ Fries wrote
-------------------------------------------------------
>Joseph Smith's polygamy was more discreet.

Doesn't sound like you two are disagreeing.

Try to keep your eye on the ball.

The topic I addressed was "Let's see what you would have to believe in order to maintain the belief that JS did not practice polygamy."

That is what I argued against.

"The Biblical reference for that comes from the New Testament and the parable of "The Widow's Mite," which I believe is found in Luke's gospel."

Which has nothing to do with prosperity gospel tithing as taught by TSCC. Tithing can be a valid principle when practiced with a church that operates as a charity. TSCC is no such thing. It is a financial empire that uses religion as a tax dodge.

Bradley wrote in part:

"Which has nothing to do with prosperity gospel tithing as taught by TSCC. Tithing can be a valid principle when practiced with a church that operates as a charity. TSCC is no such thing. It is a financial empire that uses religion as a tax dodge."

If you read the story of the widow's mites, it concerns a widow who contributes the last three coins in her possession (the widow's mites) to the Jewish offering. Jesus' teaching on this is that this widow did the proper thing because it was the last possessions she had and that she was donating all of it to the church and that, according to "the Christ,", the widow's gift was more valid than others because she had donated all she had.

While maybe not prosperity gospel, it most certainly is *not* sound financial advice to donate all of what you have to one organization, including any church. Yes, some churches are more charitable than others (and many are certainly more charitable than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints), but even the most charitable of churches will be unable to fulfill all of your daily needs all of the time. This is a bad parable that really shouldn't be taken literally.

I wish him and his family the best. I have a feeling that he's jumping out of the frying pan and into fire. That's my view about his sudden departure.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2024 09:55AM by messygoop.

“He said that he's had 50-60 people (out of a few thousand who have reached out to him) tell him of the sexual abuse they've endured at the hands of church members, many of them leaders.”

Imagine all those 50-60 people would go to the police.

When will the lds church stop protecting their pedophiles?

Great video, thank you!