From the overall impression I gather the guy was questioning parts of the Mormon faith and trying to persuade others that the Church is wrong which by default attacks their message of divinely inspired. The guy has every right to do so. But the Church has a right to revoke his membership as a result.
I fail to see the problem.
There are fundamental issues organized religions generally cannot resolve. An organized religion generally has to define core beliefs and world views. Then,generally, has to change them or shift emphasis.
The LDS Church has an elaborate formal protocol for making changes. There are inherent questions in all with respect tithe nature of " truth""
The LDS Church is at its core incoherent with "nature, nature's God, scriptural assertions of a sovereign unchanging Diety, of an unchanging God who adheres to law either coherent with the universe or established by said Diety. . . .
I expect that the LDS Church will have some new policies soon, with claims as to the prayerful concerns of the Leaders in regard for the sufferings of faithful women and LGBT members.
Like Dehlin, I will wonder if that decision is Right". Dehlin thinks they are just wrong now, and expects progress which will vindicate his stand. I will know that decision is without "truth" or "virtue" and is incoherent with universal and eternal principles.
Moses laid out a law that was supposed to be "Forever" as a covenantal relationship with God. Jesus condemned the leaders of his day who had substituted their own rules in the place of the old. Joseph Smith claimed to be restoring the faith of old.
These three are alike in the fundamental assertion of truth and virtue of an unchanging and eternal God, which the modern LDS Church has rejected in favor of their privilege to supplant that God with their internal policies and power.
A lot of people want their organized religion to shapeshift the doctrines to keep up with their changing views. I myself want the privilege to improve my notions of things.
Colton and other bright lights inside the LDS current faith will cast a favorable light on changes the Church undertakes, much like Catholics repose faith in the Pope and Cardinals.
I am going to expect God to be what He is.
Abraham pleaded for God to spare the cities of the plain, reputed to be doing wrong, but ultimately recognized the sovereignty of God. There is an example of compassion, love, and tolerance for others that does not supplant truth.
You guys can all debate what truth is pretty good. I just don't think I can win the case with my ideas.
I think genetics or behaviors have a known trend towards ending those characteristics which are dysfunctional or noncompetitive with respect to propagation .within a few generations, human history has many examples of displacements or demises of less functional groups.
I like women and kids, there is plenty I can do for them. Functional stuff with long-term results. I'd encourage any man to give it a shot. Abraham hoped as much for the people in those cities. I think God just knew it wouldn't turn out, and weighed the consequences somehow.
I don't think a Church can belong to God that fundamentally displaces "God" from the sovereign place in the faith. So the choice we all face is who we will allow to determine our beliefs. I just think it's got to be a personal choice.
My personal choice idealizes the hope and purpose I think God set out as the first commandment. Doesn't mean kids with self-image issues haft a be pressure-cooked in their formative years. We need someone who can pop the lid on those pressures.
