Blasphemy or Biblical?

[_gdemetz]

Yes, and he was released also from his service, which is very unusual for a man of his position. Health reasons were cited, but to those who know the case more intimately, it is obvious that the real reason was actions contrary to the standards that were expected for a man in his position. His is not the only case of release or disfellowship, or even excommunication.

[_just me]

Yes, and he was released also from his service, which is very unusual for a man of his position. Health reasons were cited, but to those who know the case more intimately, it is obvious that the real reason was actions contrary to the standards that were expected for a man in his position. His is not the only case of release or disfellowship, or even excommunication.

So now you know who is being discussed in the previous posts.

[_Themis]

Yes, and he was released also from his service, which is very unusual for a man of his position. Health reasons were cited, but to those who know the case more intimately, it is obvious that the real reason was actions contrary to the standards that were expected for a man in his position. His is not the only case of release or disfellowship, or even excommunication.

That's not the issue. We know the details, you didn't. Now you seem to know some. The issue though is he used lies that generated deep spiritual experiences for thousands who listened to his stories.

[_Drifting]

Yes, and he was released also from his service, which is very unusual for a man of his position. Health reasons were cited, but to those who know the case more intimately, it is obvious that the real reason was actions contrary to the standards that were expected for a man in his position. His is not the only case of release or disfellowship, or even excommunication.

No, he wasn't released from his service in an unusual way.
He was made emeritus, same as Elder Jensen has just been and the same as numerous other General Authorities.

He wasn't released.
He wasn't disfellowshipped.
He wasn't excommunicated.

Now back the point that people experienced deep spiritual, moving, feelings brought on by the spirit as a result of what we now know we're flat out lies.

[_Drifting]

Yes, and he was released also from his service, which is very unusual for a man of his position. Health reasons were cited, but to those who know the case more intimately, it is obvious that the real reason was actions contrary to the standards that were expected for a man in his position. His is not the only case of release or disfellowship, or even excommunication.

So now you know who is being discussed in the previous posts.

Gdemetz was identified as a troll some weeks ago.
I have seen nothing since that has made me think otherwise.

However, he seems to ask questions (deliberately perhaps?) to which the answers are embarrassing to the Church.

[_gdemetz]

Regardless of the circumstances, the church gives you a release if you no longer can or want to do the job for the position! Paul Dunn wanted a release, and health reasons were sited, but I think everyone knows the real reason he wanted the release, and he got the release! Even an anti Mormon site mentions the release of Dunn! Check out "Dunn, in the Name of God." Who are the trolls now?!?:

[_Drifting]

Regardless of the circumstances, the church gives you a release if you no longer can or want to do the job for the position! Paul Dunn wanted a release, and health reasons were sited, but I think everyone knows the real reason he wanted the release, and he got the release! Even an anti Mormon site mentions the release of Dunn! Check out "Dunn, in the Name of God." Who are the trolls now?!?:

No. Once again you are incorrect.

Emeritus General Authority
September 30, 1989 – January 9, 1998
Called by Ezra Taft Benson

I think the key phrase is 'Called by...'

e·mer·i·tus/iˈmeritəs/
Adjective:
(of the former holder of an office, esp. a professor) Having retired but retaining his title as an honor

And, at the time of his move into emeritus status (for age and health reasons not as a form of punishment), Paul H. Dunn was even given a unanimous sustaining vote and a vote of thanks for his faithful and effective service.

Now if you are suggesting that he was released for reasons other than age or health then you are accusing the then First Counsellor in the FP (GBH) of lying to the membership of the Church. You sure you want to throw Hinckley under the bus to defend Dunn?

Today, in consideration of factors of age and health, it is proposed that we sustain the following as Emeritus members of the First Quorum of the Seventy with a vote of thanks for their faithful and effective service: Elders Theodore M. Burton, Robert L. Simpson, Victor L. Brown, Paul H. Dunn, J. Thomas Fyans, Walmart. Grant Bangerter, Royden G. Derrick, and Rex C. Reeve.

Those in favor, please manifest it...

...President Benson, it appears that the voting has been unanimous in the affirmative.
(GBH Conference 1989)

Your fingers seem to be typing posts that your brain hasn't authorised for publication...

[_gdemetz]

No, you are wrong! Even the anti article states that he was released! Everyone is released when they are excused from their office in the church, regardless of the circumstances! When one in requested to take a position in the church, then they are said to be "called." to that position!

[_Drifting]

No, you are wrong! Even the anti article states that he was released! Everyone is released when they are excused from their office in the church, regardless of the circumstances! When one in requested to take a position in the church, then they are said to be "called." to that position!

I repeat...
Now if you are suggesting that he was released for reasons other than age or health then you are accusing the then First Counsellor in the FP (GBH) of lying to the membership of the Church. You sure you want to throw Hinckley under the bus to defend Dunn?

[_gdemetz]

Yea, I think he was let off easy. I won't, however, object to him just being allowed to go like that because I won't object to mercy being shown. However, you guys are right. What he did was especially bad for a man in his high office. It definitely had a negative effect on the image that latter day saints are supposed to uphold! Having said that, I would just refer you to my article here entitled, "Prophets and apostles not Perfect."