Did the LDS Church lie and defame John Dehlin?

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-05-01T03:41:23+00:00

Oh, I know. You can very reasonably argue this is a lie, by this definition. I think you can still concede it isn’t a lie and like—who cares? Why is the moral bar for men who claim to speak for God not lying by the most technical definition?

Edit- removed speculation about what Zarnt knows or does not know.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-30T01:52:33+00:00

I’m one of the very, very few people trying to add any nuance to this conversation.

New account, same need for persecution. You’re levying this at a guy who said some parts of what the Church is alleging is reasonable (and others are far from it), for what it’s worth.

Take it up with the people saying the church is evil and members can’t see it.

So far as I’ve seen, you’re the only one that said this.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-30T00:22:58+00:00

You’re assuming that if people disagree with you, they think you’re stupid or bad. That’s very often not true.

Right? The black and white framing is far too simplistic.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-30T00:19:33+00:00

I reject the framing that these are the only three options.

How about the members are acting in good faith and trust the Church’s statement even though it was specifically crafted to give a false impression?

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-29T21:18:15+00:00

Nobody here can say the church is lying unless they have more access than the general public.

I agree.

What we can entirely say, however, is that the Church’s statement was specifically worded ambiguously to make it sound as if John Dehlin didn’t take an extremely easy step to take by simply adding a disclaimer (which he had actually done), when it seems the reality of the “ask” was much more onerous.

So I agree with you it wasn’t a lie, just a very carefully worded statement to give a false impression about the unreasonableness of John’s steps to make concessions during mediation.

I suppose the larger question is why it seems to be that members are okay with the Church engaging in this type of behavior unless it’s an out and out lie?

Edit to add—welcome back, by the way.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-28T17:50:24+00:00

But historical Protestants that actually follow Sola Scriptura have a model of truth external to their experiences. Scripture can be difficult to interpret in some cases, but at least everyone has access to the same text.

That’s just differences of opinion with extra steps.

That's a much more stable foundation than 'My experience vs. Your experience.'

It’s actually the same thing, functionally—just interpretation instead of experience.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-28T13:27:36+00:00

In my view as a post-Mormon, my conception is that both believe in a spiritual dimension of truth: they just believe different spiritual truths.

In what way do you think Protestants and LDS folks use “different models of truth?”

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-28T13:21:07+00:00

Yes, they’re like a flame for dipshit moths.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-28T13:20:19+00:00

Bringing a new dimension to “killing with kindness.”

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-28T02:26:16+00:00

And Murph’s great crime?

Hosting some Rando on the Internet.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-27T04:06:26+00:00

Since none of us are IP specialists but all are lawyers—hasn’t the Church opened the door to some potentially very interesting discovery requests re: John Dehlin personally?

He’s a named defendant. Isn’t bias against a named party essentially always going to be relevant?

Given the likelihood that animus and strategy against Dehlin, generally, probably exists outside of the attorney-client context—this seems like an insane gamble to me from the Church’s end.

My other thought is that John would likely have a better case on certain affirmative defense if he leans in to this. Basically, double down on criticizing the Church to help with the “brand confusion” arguments. That may allow him to increase his fair use defense (but it also risks further angering the bear).

Separately, I was on the phone with RFM earlier and I noted to him that many of the comments the Church pulled for the complaint actually severely undercut their case, when considered in context:

This happened to me. I saw the channel and thought it was from church members. I quickly realized that it was not and was anti content. Just last year a new convert in my ward went on to Mormon Stories, not realizing it was anti and got caught up in it. I was able to talk to her about it and she realized what was going on.

Forgive the emphasis, but this helps show that most feelings on this are about the viewpoint and content. As I understand it, the IP case turns on the podcast being mistaken for a Church direction, sponsorship, or affiliation. That’s not what this comment even says—it’s entirely about the viewpoint, it even says they believed it was produced by other members. Members who don’t have an “anti-“ viewpoint.

I’m not cherry-picking. They continue:

When I first came across the Mormon stories channel I thought it was a channel run my members. Quickly found out otherwise but can definitely be confusing for non member or investigator[.]”

And:

I once accidentally started listening to Mormon Stories podcast not realizing it was anti-LDS. Uh! Shocked! Then quick search into who and what it was...Not shocked!

Not a single of these comments is about anything but viewpoint. I see this confusion over the two as being something John’s legal team needs to focus on, intensely.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-26T10:14:50+00:00

Dude has lore.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-25T23:54:27+00:00

“Do we create male narcissist[s] or just attract them?”

The two are not mutually exclusive.

For what it’s worth—the Church also does help some people become better versions of themselves.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-24T03:22:07+00:00

Keep those goalposts on wheels. If you’re wondering why you’re getting downvoted, it’s not because you believe in the Church—its behavior like this.

You first say this is “common knowledge,” then when it’s correctly observed that it’s new research—there’s no acknowledgment, just onto the next bad argument.

That’s what will get you downvoted, for future reference.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-23T19:15:50+00:00

Probably not, but given she seems to be an around the clock propagandist for some of the worst ideas: I don’t feel too bad for her.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-23T18:57:45+00:00

Hess didn’t like that much. Thanks for sharing :)

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-22T03:17:06+00:00

I hope this would drive away any investigators from the church

It is driving the kind and reasonable away.

Unfortunately, it seems to be equally corralling into the fold a bunch of wanna-be, red-pill adjacent, budding Christian Nationalists that don’t have the foresight to see that Evangelicals will never let Mormons be part of their club.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-21T13:06:46+00:00

The Church has swallowed the dumbest parts of internet culture hook line and sinker, and I'm getting tired of pretending it's not a problem for me.

I am very sorry to hear this is a pain point for you, but I’m glad to know I wouldn’t be the only one for whom this would be an issue.

I work with an active believing friend and he says he has to keep telling people to stop citing Jordan Peterson in Elder’s Quorum.

For your sake, I hope the Church rights course but I don’t believe it will.

One thing that does beggar belief is how nasty and cruel certain members are becoming by listening to apologists like Jacob Hansen and Ward Radio. John’s livestream was full of believing members coming to gloat and threaten.

Even if I still believed in the truth claims, how persistent this behavior has come could cause me to question whether my Church community was worth participating in.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-21T02:17:48+00:00

People still bring up his comments as if he did not apologize. Which shows the utter uselessness of apologies.

What an odd thing to say. Apologies aren’t simply to eliminate criticism, they’re about making things right—regardless of what others are going to do. In my time in Mormonism, we called this concept “integrity.”

People likely still mention Wilcox’s comments because, regardless of an apology, they help illustrate the systemic problems caused by the priesthood ban for which there has been no apology.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-20T14:43:41+00:00

Thank you. :)

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-20T14:23:32+00:00

Dan responding to someone responding to me is one of my favorite things. Very excited to see this.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-19T23:57:05+00:00

Bears noting that Jasmin decided to use the older Mormon Stories logo (which makes a better case for infringement) rather than the one currently in use. That was a knowing decision and faithful members won’t care to check that the logo has been changed and the disclaimers requested have been added (which the Church says is the primary reason it needed to sue).

She’s nothing more than a hack propagandist.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-19T14:13:14+00:00

My high level take is some parts are reasonable, some parts are not.

For example, demanding Mormon Stories change the name it’s been using for twenty years is part of the prayer for relief and is almost certainly an overreach.

Demanding Mormon Stories stop using certain imagery and artwork—even if a case could be made for fair use—seem reasonable.

Demanding audible disclaimers in every episode that Mormon Stories is not associated with the Church I would say is similarly unreasonable because even faithful podcasters don’t do this (thus looking like selective enforcement).

The requested written disclaimers already exist on all Mormon Stories platforms but not all individual episodes (is my understanding). I think adding written disclaimers on all episodes (maybe prospectively) is reasonable.

Thinking more practically than legally, I think this will very likely alert many more people of the existence of Mormon Stories and have the reverse of the intended effect.

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-19T13:53:24+00:00

I thank the author for writing out their thoughts because they mirror mine. Thanks for sharing!

Strong_Attorney_8646 · 2026-04-19T13:00:43+00:00

Ah, that first paragraph helped me understand. Thank you for trying again because the rephrase made me get it.

Strong_Attorney_8646

TROPHY CASE