The Savior himself has authored many hit pieces. All one has to do is read the Bible to know this.CFR
I'm not aware that The Savior authored any of the Bible.
The Bible reports that he he did.
The Savior himself has authored many hit pieces. All one has to do is read the Bible to know this.CFR
I'm not aware that The Savior authored any of the Bible.
bcspace wrote:The Savior himself has authored many hit pieces. All one has to do is read the Bible to know this.
CFRI'm not aware that The Savior authored any of the Bible
The Bible reports that he he did.
wayfarer wrote:The only thing Jesus wrote were the words on the ground at the event if the woman taken adultery.
ludwigm wrote:wayfarer wrote:The only thing Jesus wrote were the words on the ground at the event if the woman taken adultery.
He wrote the list of that woman's customers - in fact the woman was a prostitute, which is the most archaic profession.
It s not a wonder, the men around scattered the stones and oozed away...
BUFBFEO wrote:MichelleD wrote:I don't understand why members on here are not more upset and shocked at the contents of the quotes in the paper on John Dehlin. Isn't the author a Bishop? Would he treat a member of his ward in this manner whether he was inactive or was trying to repent and come back? This man represents Christ's church and what he's written is anything but Christlike. Who cares about fighting over what to technically call it (a hit piece or not a hit piece)? I cannot believe there are members here who are defending the writing of such a shameful article.
"Woe unto you scribes and pharisees, hypocrites!" --Jesus Christ
Sometimes it is necessary to call a spade a spade, even within the church, even by loving and Christlike observers. If Greg Smith sincerely believed that Dehlin was harming others (and I know that he did/does so believe) then I think we can better analyze his motives and the paper's worth. Reading the entire paper will make this more clear.
Daniel Peterson wrote:Good grief.
DrW wrote:ludwigm wrote: the woman was a prostitute
Never heard this before.
Where did you get this idea?
It is certainly believable and makes the stroy much more interesting.
wayfarer wrote:So, when we look at the enemy here: the John Dehlins of the world, the so-called "wolf in sheeps clothing", who does he parallel in Jesus' account? Is there one that doubted? Is there one who didn't see a reason to believe in a literal resurrection? Thomas. Thomas the doubter. Yet how did Jesus treat Thomas? with love, understanding, and with the idea that some just aren't going to believe without the logical part. Did he condemn? NO. He said there is a more excellent Way: Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet believed.
And what does the leader of this merry band of "Interpreters of Mormon Scripture" have to say when someone simply points out the obvious?Daniel Peterson wrote:Good grief.
Dan, it's time to stand up and lead. If the quotes in Greg Smith's article as posted by your "Malevolent Stalker" are accurate, it's not a piece worthy of publication by the Church, by BYU, by MI, or even (cough) by MormonInterpreter.com. It's a "hit piece", even if you still deny the obvious. It's time to stop the vilification of those who are simply struggling with their faith. It's time to stop this sad, pathetic drama. As leader of the group, you could make a huge difference by repudiating these articles and adopting Elder Maxwell's mission with integrity and honor, rather than as a platform to smear those you consider unworthy. And before you scream "stop bearing false witness", I hold you responsible as leader of this group for the harmful words and actions of its members.
You could make a difference. do the right thing on this. Now.