The LDS Church in a nutshell.

[_Gunnar]

An apologist tends to defend everything.
Maklelan doesn't attempt to defend the obviously indefensible, he only seems to tackle (honestly from what I've seen) the issues of factual accuracy.

That's how I see him too, and, apparently, how he sees himself.

[_maklelan]

I appreciate the support of those here who see me as striving for honesty and objectivity in my participation here. It means a lot to me to know we can disagree about a lot of things and still respect each others' integrity and motivations.

[_malkie]

I appreciate the support of those here who see me as striving for honesty and objectivity in my participation here. It means a lot to me to know we can disagree about a lot of things and still respect each others' integrity and motivations.

It would be nice to have participation from others of your 'style/type' (since you don't like to be labeled without your permission ).

by the way, my reference to Prof Hamblin a few posts ago was with regard to his attempt to state succinctly the 'requirements' for being able to self-identify as a Mormon - Hamblin's creed?.

Aside: in a totally nasty sideswipe at Prof H, I might note that the excruciatingly badly written first para in this article may rival the writings of mittens. As a result, I'm sorry to say that you may never win a debate with Bill Hamblin - not even if you dance.

[_Ceeboo]

I appreciate the support of those here

CFR!

who see me as striving for honesty and objectivity in my participation here.

CFR!

It means a lot to me to know we can disagree about a lot of things and still respect each others' integrity and motivations.

CFR!









I love seeing you participate and sharing your perspectives here, Mak!

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_aznative]

The LDS Church is nothing more than a religious scheme that backfired when the con man couldn't sell the rights of his book in Canada. The con man then grew a religious body of zealots around him through his charisma that culminated in his attempting to set up a Kingdom with him as King to further his pursuit of sexual conquests that involved other men's wives and a run at being a pedophile.

From just these two sentences, I think you demonstrate a greater understanding of JSJr than the typical LDS, which is fed the white-washed, Correlated history.

Thanks

[_Spektical]

Not long ago, Jeffrey Holland famously proclaimed to the world that he was not a dodo. I always get a kick out of this statement because, in fact, Holland and his Church have more in common with the dodo than just about any other person or organization I can think of.

The dodo bird evolved in isolation on the island of Mauritius, where it eventually became flightless because of abundant food available at ground level and the fact that there were no effective predators for the animal in its natural environment. However, when exposed to environmental influences from outside its little island, it was ill equipped to compete, was unable to adapt, and therefore survived less than a century after its protective isolation ended.

Mormonism is facing the same problems. Salt Lake City based Mormonism evolved in relative isolation and is now trying to adapt as fast as it can because it no longer has the benefit of its former ability to hide its sordid history and silly "sacred" doctrine from the rest of the world, or indeed, from many of its less informed and therefore most faithful members.

Despite his protestations to the contrary, Holland really is a dodo, folks - I can hardly count the ways. I would further claim that the Church he represents also has a natural history, and perhaps a future, that has much in common with that unfortunate flightless bird.

Great insight. Love the irony.

[_Spektical]

I doubt he's seen any data anywhere that actually directly supports his description of the population dynamics leading to what he believes to be an inevitable cultural diluting of LDS relevance. My position is based on a number of different academic publications in the fields of history, social memory, cognitive linguistics, and the psychology and sociology of religion.

I doubt such data is too terribly hard to find. Off the top of my head:

- Disparities between claimed church membership and religious self-identification in various countries' census data.
- Increasing millennial impatience and intolerance toward many conservative social views, such as those still advocated by the church.
- Widespread attitude change towards same sex marriage and its inevitable legalization nationwide.
- Large increase of missionaries resulting in a barely noticeable bump in converts?

Honestly, just how relevant is the LDS church outside of Utah and a few other western states, anyway? Also, doesn't the LDS church necessarily become less relevant with each passing year that Jesus hasn't returned? Isn't that what the "latter-day" part of its name is all about?

[_Nightlion]

by the way, my reference to Prof Hamblin a few posts ago was with regard to his attempt to state succinctly the 'requirements' for being able to self-identify as a Mormon - Hamblin's creed?.

WOW! From one of the nominated.....Most informed Mormons:

Minimal Beliefs to be Considered a Mormon?
August 9, 2012 By William Hamblin 0 Comments

Amid the swirling controversies associated with the Church, a fundamental question emerges: Who should be considered a Mormon, and why? I believe that there are at least a minimum of four ideas one must affirm to be considered a Mormon in anything more than name only (there may be more).

1- There is a God.

2- Jesus is the Christ, meaning not that he was a great teacher, but that he was the Messiah, the Son of God, who was resurrected from the dead.

3- Joseph Smith is a true prophet, meaning not that he thought he was a prophet, or that other thought he was a prophet, but that he actually saw God, received authentic revelation from God, and received divine authorization to restore the Church. (To me this implies, as a corollary, belief in the historicity of the Book of Mormon. Although some have argued that a fictional Book of Mormon could be scripture, the problem is that if Joseph himself wrote a fictional Book of Mormon, either in a delusional state or as a knowing fraud, or by plagiarizing some other book, it is logically impossible that he was an authentic prophet.)

4- Thomas S. Monson is a true prophet. (To distinguish from other Mormon-related churches and movements.)

This is my minimal list. There may well be other ideas and practices that should be included as well. But I believe that if one does not minimally accept these four ideas, it is simply irrational to claim to be a Mormon. And in my experience, most cultural Mormons cannot truthfully affirm these four ideas, and are therefore at least minimally equivocating when they call themselves Mormons.

Jesus would only have one thing on HIS list. Repent (of being a complete dickhead) and come unto me that ye might be born of me and become one of my sons or daughters.

Makes you wonder how far and wide you got to wander amidst the Mormon Industrial Complex before trampling yet again upon Christ's real gospel?

HEY! don't be quoting me here on any sig lines....eh! eh!

[_maklelan]

I doubt such data is too terribly hard to find.

Are you finding it, or just making it up?

Off the top of my head:

- Disparities between claimed church membership and religious self-identification in various countries' census data.

This doesn't really influence growth at all. Everyone knows they're counting inactives.

- Increasing millennial impatience and intolerance toward many conservative social views, such as those still advocated by the church.

Where is this data? Remember, you're supposed to be actually finding data, not just assuming stuff.

Let's say you can find this data. Can you show that this actually influences the relevance of the Church? There are plenty of millennials within the Church who don't espouse those conservative social views. Additionally, conservatism is just digging in its heels more, and that millennial attitude is not universal.

- Widespread attitude change towards same sex marriage and its inevitable legalization nationwide.

Which will obviously lead to changes in LDS ideology. Remember polygamy and 1978?

- Large increase of missionaries resulting in a barely noticeable bump in converts?

And missionaries are emphasizing reactivation and retention much more now. I don't think anyone thought the missionary increase was going to blow the doors off of the membership.

Honestly, just how relevant is the LDS church outside of Utah and a few other western states, anyway?

This isn't data at all. You are aware that the Church exists outside the United States, right? The work is growing quickly in places like India and Burma right now, and in places in the Pacific like Kiribati and Tonga the Church has a very large presence. Maybe for some people the western world is the only one that counts, but the Church certainly doesn't think so.

Also, doesn't the LDS church necessarily become less relevant with each passing year that Jesus hasn't returned?

Why would that be the case, and how is this data?

Isn't that what the "latter-day" part of its name is all about?

It's related to his return, but it doesn't express that kind of immediacy in the minds of the vast majority of Latter-day Saints.

[_Bazooka]

- Widespread attitude change towards same sex marriage and its inevitable legalization nationwide.

Which will obviously lead to changes in LDS ideology. Remember polygamy and 1978?

Sometimes I cannot distinguish when your sarcasm button is on or off....