John Dehlin: Ignorant? Liar? Both?
The central claim of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is that it’s true. In other words that it is the Church Jesus Christ wants all his followers to be a part of. However, let’s set that aside for a moment and imagine (still in a christian context)that there is no such thing as a true church. That should naturally lead us to question, what does Jesus think of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? Do you see how this is a different question?
There likely is a large percentage of people even inside the church who are not sure if it’s true but are truly convinced the church is Good and something that brings them closer to Christ. However, John Dehlin (the founder of the very popular Mormon Stories Podcast) recently released a video with his emphatic belief that not only is the church not true, its NOT good either. It sums up well the typical arguments you hear on this subject. In the following, we will set aside for a moment the question of if the Church is true and instead focus on if it is good.
Who are we following?
Before we get into John’s distortions, I think one of the first things that John misses is that as members of the Church of Christ our primary concern is with following Jesus Christ. We should keep in mind that John is not a Christian, and that’s his fundamental problem. He thinks he is railing against “Mormonism” when he is usually arguing against ideas rooted in the bible and Christianity more generally. This just goes to show his small myopic “Utah Mormon” perspective. A perspective where all religious thought gets wrapped up as “Mormonism”.
For example, the notion of a “true church” (which John loves to attack Mormons for) is not really a “Mormon” idea. It comes from the notions of special authority structures being set up explicitly in the Bible. It’s the Bible that shows Jesus saying to his apostle:
“Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church….And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven”.
Ironically, it is also the oldest traditions in Christendom (namely the Catholic and Orthodox) that are solidly built on the notion of a true church with saving ordinances. So if Joseph was restoring the original Church it would be expected to be considered “The True Church”. John seems to forget that we are Christians and unlike him we are committed, not to the Jesus of our imaginations, but to the Jesus witnessed and testified by special witnesses including those in the Bible.
Just the fact that he says we need to “prove” the church is true demonstrates his lack of sophistication in matters of epistemology and the Christian thought. And why does he insist we use his standards of proof? Because he claims that our following Jesus Christ is harmful. He seems to think that Jesus requires too much sacrifice of those who wish to follow him. Really? He makes it sound like the church forces unwilling people down some terrible dark path. Is he totally unaware of the immense good the church does?
The outcomes of active membership.
Is he totally unaware that according to Gallup Polling religious people are happier than the non religious and the happiest of all religious groups in the US are Latter Day Saints?
Is he totally unaware that Penn State recently found Latter Day Saints are exceptionally high in pro social behavior and are model citizens and contributors in the communities where they reside?
Is he totally unaware that, unlike many religions, it is Latter Day Saints who are highest educated that tend to be the most active in our faith?
Is he aware that Provo Utah was found to be the happiest city in America?
There are a lot of dark and dangerous places in the world, but communities with high numbers of active Latter Day Saints like Laie Hawaii, Gilbert Arizona, Idaho Falls Idaho, St George and Orem Utah are not those places. In fact when there are social pathologies in Utah look at the county breakdowns. You will nearly aways see the problems are worse in the quickly secularizing Salt Lake Area rather than Utah County which retains the highest numbers of active members. No, the saints are not a perfect people all is not well in Zion. But when you look at the data and compare us to other groups of people Johns claims about church activity being so bad for people quickly falls apart.
But what about those youth he claims are being “scarred for life” by the churches opposition to “normative” sexuality? I am wondering whose norms he thinks we should follow? Does he really think modern sexual norms are better than Christ’s sexual norms? Also, does he realize that Mormons did not invent the law of Chastity? Again, Does he not realize our church is about following Jesus Christ, not the sexual whims popular to society at the moment?
The ills of Mormon family life?
He also mentions the great evil of women choosing to put family before career? YES. And Dads are also to put family first. Is he implying that there is something more important in life than our families? He then exaggerates claiming that women are told to simply marry fast and have as many babies as possible when in reality the church manual explicitly states:
“The decision about how many children to have and when to have them is extremely personal and private. It should be left between the couple and the Lord. Church members should not judge one another in this matter.”
Also I will not apologize because my wife and myself (like most couples in human history) found that in our family she is more inclined to take the lead with the kids during the day while I take the lead on bringing in a family income. This demonization of women (like my wife and my mother) who choose this arraignment is disgusting. Since when is being home with your children (instead of putting them in day care) a “mormon thing”. It’s not.
While the church does encourage women to put the care of the children above career, we also have an official world proclamations stating that men and women are equal partners and that roles can be flexible based on familial circumstances. He also may want to refer to a a recent study about all these “suffering” LDS women that said:
“Latter-day Saint women are overall happier about their pregnancies, have roughly one more child per family, and breast-feed more often than their peers. Among LDS members, women are better educated, marriages are slightly less likely to end in divorce, and members are less likely to die from heart disease or cancer than their peers overall.”
While he rants about divorce, he seems to forget that divorce rates among Latter Day Saints are lower than the national average. Furthermore, by being an active temple married member you cut your chance of divorce in half. Has he ever considered that perhaps the temple standards act as a great way to test compatibility and commitment in critical matters of worldview and morality? It stands to reason that, beyond the religious significance, the temple standards actually help acts as a litmus test for compatible partners. Despite all his whining about saints who get married young, he forgets that studies show conclusively that divorce probability actually increases once as you get into your 30s. So for him to pretend that the church drives divorce when the data literally shows the opposite is embarrassing.
Hurtful teachings?
Now let’s talk about his claims that the Church teaches black people that they are cursed and ugly ect. Is he living in 1872? Has he read anything from the church on race in the past 40 years? Does he realize The Church completely disavowed any and all teachings like that? It’s nonsense.
“Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form… The teachings of the Church in relation to God’s children are epitomized by a verse in the second book of Nephi: “[The Lord] denieth none that cometh unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; … all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.”
Of course he also lies about gay people. He says when that the churches teaches that being gay is evil. We don’t teach that. We like nearly every major christian denomination teach that sex is only to exist within a male female marriage. Because that’s what Jesus taught. The Church’s website for its leaders is explicit on this:
“Feelings of same-sex attraction are not a sin. Elder M. Russell Ballard stated: Let us be clear: ‘The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes that ‘the experience of same-sex attraction is a complex reality for many people. The attraction itself is not a sin, but acting on it is. Even though individuals do not choose to have such attractions, they do choose how to respond to them. With love and understanding, the Church reaches out to all God’s children, including [those with same-sex attraction]’” (“The Lord Needs You Now!” Ensign, Sept. 2015, 29).
Also since when are the teachings on homosexual behavior a “Mormon” issue? He seems to not realize that Jesus and Christianity are bigger than Mormonism. His myopic Utah Mormon worldview is again on full display.
He goes on to imply there is no way Jesus could have expected celibacy. Yet we find in the bible Jesus saying:
“For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others — and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”
The Jesus of scripture (rather than the one of John’s imagination) expected those who were willing and able to accept a life of celibacy of the sake of his kingdom to take on this immense challenge. Again, his beef is with Jesus, not the Church.
He rails against those who choose mixed orientation marriage (something the church explicitly has not encouraged, that may not be the best choice for everyone, so the church wisely leaves that up to the individuals to decide…). But to tell my friend Tember that getting married and having his beautiful children was a mistake is disgusting. The irony of him tacitly shaming my friend Tember for his lifestyle as if he is not authentic because he chose to marry and have children is appalling.
Tembers choice may not be the right choice for most gay people but when Tember holds his babies in his arms maybe I should remind him how much he should regret his decision because, after all, it could end in divorce and that never happens to straight couples.
He then goes on to lie about suicides among gay members of the church. Or perhaps he is unaware that Utahs lead researcher on this subject (and a gay former member of the church) has stated that while people might think that the church’s teachings are driving suicide among gays “There’s no data to show that, period,” or that “the data show that the more religious you are on average the fewer mental health problems you have and the lower your chances of suicide.” This seems to be backed up by the fact that suicide rates are lower in Utah county (the area of Utah with the most active members) than they are in Salt Lake County which is far more secular.
A false picture.
John says its Fundamentally immoral to lead people into the church under false pretenses — YES, we agree. Thats just a fancy way of saying you should not lie to people. However, the reality is that many people in the church may not be sure if the church is true, but they are sure its good. There is nothing wrong with those people inviting others to come and see for themselves and make up their own minds.
John talks about a contract as if the paradigm of the church is that Latter Day Saints agree to do all these terrible self deprecating things now so that one day we get a payoff in heaven after we die. Thus, if the church is not true then all this sacrifice was for nothing.
This conception is so childish. Any mature understanding of the doctrine or data shows that what we preach and experience is progression. The idea is that by living gospel principles we can find greater meaning and joy in our lives starting right now though sacrifice. And the data all seems to indicate that members who live the gospel most faithfully end up with better outcomes like lower divorce rates, higher levels of well being, and a greater sense of meaning in their lives.
The blessings of sacrifice?
Is this a high stakes game? Does it require sacrifice? YES! Would we expect anything less from Jesus Christ who said we must take up our cross (and instrument of torture) and follow him but that by doing so our burden would be light and we would find a new kind of peace. World renown psychologist Jordan Peterson echos this notion in his world famous lectures on finding meaning in your life:
The sacrifices are exactly why our faith becomes meaningful and transformative. The meaningful life is not found in the pursuit of pleasures. It is found in the narratives we tell ourselves about our journey towards a worthwhile goal and the effort we put into that quest. Thats where we find meaning and we are in the midst of a meaning crisis in the western world that is driving people to depression and suicide.
But what if the narrative is not true? Well then at least you will die having lived a life of deep meaning and purpose. Thats what the Christian life of faith is. It’s not about proving something. It’s about placing our bet and our life on something that we believe is true based on both what we understand in our minds and what we feel in our hearts and then watching that process transform us as we act on that faith.
A builder or a wrecker?
John will spend a lot of time telling us what he does not believe in, but our actions in life are ultimately based on our faith in some narrative that give us purpose. What is the deep meaning and purpose of life according to John? Thats what I would love to know. But that is not what he does. John is not a builder, he is a critic. He does nothing but add fuel to the crisis of meaning that grips our world. On the other hand Joseph Smith was a builder, and he built something amazing by any reasonable standard. The saints are continuing that work with faith and love and it has blessed countless people with rich meaningful lives and objectively better social outcomes.
Am I a builder who works with care,
Measuring life by the rule and square?
Am I shaping my deeds by a well-made plan,
Patiently doing the best I can?
Or am I a wrecker who walks the town,
Content with the labor of tearing down?
There is a place for critique. But I am more interested in builders than wreckers. After all, what we are all looking for is something to BUILD a life on. It’s easy to stand on the sidelines critiquing an imperfect institution while ignoring all the joy and good it does in the world. It’s much harder to offer something for people to place their faith in that goes deeper than the silly platitudes of John Lennons “Imagine”. However, that is precisely what the church does and the positive results are measurable. A movement that results in the happiest religious group in the United States should at the very least be given serious consideration in a world increasing starved for deep meaning and purpose.
The reality is that John Dehlin is not a serious critic. He is a popular one. This is because he is charismatic and knows exactly what to say to your disaffected member of the church. He hides his deep seated resentment behind opening primary songs and prayers before his speeches. But don’t let the facade blind you. His passion is fueled by resentment, not an objective analysis of facts and data. He is a propagandist. Most people in the world (unlike John) see the Church as something good but not believable. Thats perfectly reasonable. What is not reasonable is to see the church has some force so bad in the world that it must consume your life’s work. Really?
With all the problems and injustice in the world you are focusing your life’s work on attacking the religion that seems to make people the happiest and whose biggest affront on the world is a relief society president dropping by unannounced with a casserole and an invite to the next activity? That sort of strange obsession can only be driven by something pathological (and perhaps financial incentives). It does not take much imagination to conclude that a deep sense of hurt from the loss of his own faith is what drives John and so many like him to this irrational resentment. If John were willing to embrace the Christian value of forgiveness (which is to let go of resentment) he not only could find greater peace in his life, he could become a believable critic or perhaps find better outlets for his need to fight injustice.
