DiscussMormonism.com

This is a pretty interesting article:

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695236498,00.html

~dancer~

Interesting. Today in Elder's Quorum, the EQ pres mentioned this very thing. The bishop also mentioned that the church believes that the internet will fuel growth. I'm not so convinced. I think it will help clear up some misconceptions, but I think it will eventually backfire as people eventually realize that there is more to the story than they realized. Soon people will have to ask themselves why it is that the correlation committee omits references to BY having "wives, and why part of the Wentworth Letter was edited.

truth dancer wrote:This is a pretty interesting article:

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695236498,00.html

~dancer~

It's the comments that make it interesting.

I would imagine young Mormons would begin this challenge by issuing some strong exhortations on My Space and perhaps Zwinky. Who knows, maybe they will eventually find MAD and Mormon Discussions.

moksha wrote:I would imagine young Mormons would begin this challenge by issuing some strong exhortations on My Space and perhaps Zwinky. Who knows, maybe they will eventually find MAD and Mormon Discussions.

What is Zwinky?

JMS

asbestosman wrote:Interesting. Today in Elder's Quorum, the EQ pres mentioned this very thing. The bishop also mentioned that the church believes that the internet will fuel growth. I'm not so convinced. I think it will help clear up some misconceptions, but I think it will eventually backfire as people eventually realize that there is more to the story than they realized. Soon people will have to ask themselves why it is that the correlation committee omits references to BY having "wives, and why part of the Wentworth Letter was edited.

I don't think therer's any doubt that the internet hurts Mormonism. For decades, the Church kept members under control in part by controlling information. It can no longer do that (though it will try here and there to discourage members from seeking out critical voices). Information is power . . . and freedom.

Hi Guy...

I also think in the past, the response to anything negative was just to ignore it assuming it would just go away. Prior to the internet it pretty much worked.

But today there is just too much information available to everyone.

Folks are discovering that many things they formerly thought were anti-mormon lies, are actually true.

Not only is the truth coming out but the church doesn't look good for not being honest.

I sense a lot of confusion.

I think at some point the church is going to have to address the issues... do you think? Can they keep going, just telling people to bear their testimonies?

I know the church is moving toward the whole "inocculation" thing, still... is this enough?

~dancer~

guy sajer wrote:

asbestosman wrote:Interesting. Today in Elder's Quorum, the EQ pres mentioned this very thing. The bishop also mentioned that the church believes that the internet will fuel growth. I'm not so convinced. I think it will help clear up some misconceptions, but I think it will eventually backfire as people eventually realize that there is more to the story than they realized. Soon people will have to ask themselves why it is that the correlation committee omits references to BY having "wives, and why part of the Wentworth Letter was edited.

I don't think therer's any doubt that the internet hurts Mormonism. For decades, the Church kept members under control in part by controlling information. It can no longer do that (though it will try here and there to discourage members from seeking out critical voices). Information is power . . . and freedom.

I agree. It's really hitting Mormonism where it counts. Ultimately, for the leaders, that's the pocket book. But unfortunately, I think it will be short term. I think it's very unlikely the Church will keep up its growth so that it is ever greatly significant. But, I don't think it will shrivel away and die either, as it deserves to. I think it will stick around for the next couple centuries as a mid-sized church. At a certain point, during the next 20 years, the truth will take a big toll. There will be not a few members who feel betrayed by the lies and downright stupidity. But there will be enough members simply who either aren't interested or just completely immune to doubt to keep it going. Not to mention, converts or more recent members who just don't really "get it" enough to feel the impact. This is an important point. I had a convert girlfriend a few years ago who just knew nothing about doctrine, and didn't really care. I shared some "doozies" with her about church history that just met with shoulder shrugs, she really didn't see how it factored in. I do believe that slowly but surely the church will pretty much distance itself from its history and crazier doctrines and offer a more generic message that isn't as dependent on its origins (as it's already doing). I could even see the possibility of Joseph Smith being discarded for all intents and purposes.

Think about it this way, you have an organization led by a lot of smart and dedicated people, it has money. It has a decent sized following. No series of facts, no matter how impressive they are, are just going to unravel the whole thing. I can see it changing a lot of things over the next 50 years to survive. But I think it will survive.

Gadianton wrote: I could even see the possibility of Joseph Smith being discarded for all intents and purposes.

I await the day. I will have a party. A feast. A celebration. With fireworks.

I can see it changing a lot of things over the next 50 years to survive. But I think it will survive.

Thank you, God, for continuing revelation!

I have no idea whether Church growth will be impacted and in what way.

I suspect that currently the net effect is very little in either direction. In the future I expect the Church to move on to new levels in using technology to implement new strategies and to draw a worldwide Church closer together. How critics will expand I don't know.