LDS general conference - Fall 2013

[Stoked]

I agree with you until your last sentence, which I find NOT to be true in even the remotest sense of the word.

p.s. Sorry for all the posts today. It's one of those days I've got writer's block and am looking to kill time.

And that is fine. But I do find it to be true.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

The problem is that exponential growth is not occurring. See for example https://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/culture/5611/mormon_numbers_not_adding_up/. While this is by no means definitive, it does corroborate many other data points about endemic inactivity rates and stagnating net growth (conversions - those leaving). I think it is all well and good not to get caught up in the numbers, but that's NOT what has happened generally in the past, as the LDS Church continually made claims for itself as one of the fastest growing churches and used growth numbers to indicate fulfillment of prophecy. I suspect that given recent trends, we'll be hearing less about this in the future among the leaders and rank and file as the implications of the numbers start gradually to settle in.

I'm really not stressed about numbers and don't read into them as much as other people, members and non members, apparently.

I read this and the rest of the thread, but I really don't care. It means nothing to me. Sorry, I'm trying to see how any arguments about "bad" numbers matters to me, but it just doesn't.

I don't hurry to get my home teaching done by the last day of the month and hurry to schedule it close to the last day if I haven't done it yet. I visit the families when it works out for them. I don't stress about getting them "the message" they need to have, I go there and talk to them, share a message if I can, and try to help them or make a difference in their lives. Despite this I visit my home teaching families (friends) pretty much every month and I think I make a positive impact in their lives. I visit neighbors and friends and talk with them and hang out even though they are not my "home teaching assignment". I might share a message... if you call it that... I just talk about life and if some sort of lesson comes out of it then it does.

Sorry, numbers for the most part mean nothing to me, and arguments about bad numbers means even less.

*shrug

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

That's too bad, and means someone's not doing things the way they are supposed to. The procedure is supposed to be: individual writes letter to bishop requesting name removal, bishop* contacts individual to make sure they are certain, then bishop removes name. At least, I assume the procedure hasn't changed since then. In my opinion bishops who don't follow that really give the church a black eye--and I've heard about other similar stories, so I'm sure that it happens. Why are they so intent on making it difficult for people to disassociate themselves from the church? It's not like Mormonism teaches your salvation will be any different based on whether you are still a church member in name only.


* If the individual is a Melchizedek priesthood holder, then I believe the stake president must also be involved.

Which begs the question, why does the Bishop have to contact the person to make certain? The fact that he/she took the time to write the letter or make the request should be accepted at face value and honored.

 

[Stoked]

Which begs the question, why does the Bishop have to contact the person to make certain? The fact that he/she took the time to write the letter or make the request should be accepted at face value and honored.

To be honest I am not sure. Perhaps for the same reason federal agencies verify. To make sure the request came from them.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Which begs the question, why does the Bishop have to contact the person to make certain? The fact that he/she took the time to write the letter or make the request should be accepted at face value and honored.

To be honest I am not sure. Perhaps for the same reason federal agencies verify. To make sure the request came from them.

99% sure that is the reason. Anyone can write a letter, just verification that the letter did indeed come from that person.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

"Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church"
https://biblehub.com/ephesians/5-23.htm

- Bible, pretty much any version you care to choose.


Not sure what you're trying to say, but surely it's not that anyone who believes in the Bible thinks that women cannot be the equal of men. Is it?

People who believe in the Bible can believe in anything they want . . . and justify much it with the Bible. I think it's time to acknowledge that the Bible doesn't say anything per se, other than what its adherents project onto it. Any notion that the Bible leads to some kind of objectively consistent interpretation is just plain foolish. Which begs the question why would anyone consider this iron age piece of superstitious, misogynistic, and murderous (OT mostly) fairytales cobbled together over time through a very human political process morally authoritative, or authoritative in any sense?

 

[Gameface]

Which begs the question, why does the Bishop have to contact the person to make certain? The fact that he/she took the time to write the letter or make the request should be accepted at face value and honored.

When my family requested to be removed from the rolls we got a letter telling us the consequences (not being with our eternal family, etc.) and asking if we were sure. We were sure. As far as I know our names were removed. We had not been LDS for quite some time before my sister and I pressured my parents into having us removed.

 

[colton]

Membership rates are stagnating...

Where's that info from? As I said earlier in the thread, as far as I know the number of stakes and wards/branches keeps increasing, as consequently does the number of church buildings. Since those have pretty much a set number of active members, the number of active members almost certainly has to be continually increasing. So even if the activity rate is decreasing, the number of active members is increasing, not stagnating. Or so it seems to me.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

How do you figure?

He's extremely important in the context of the history of the church, but the doctrine and the history are separate things.

Edit: He is also an important influence in policy, but there again, that's different than doctrine.

JS was one of the primary sources of LDS doctrine. One cannot separate many core LDS doctrines from JS--they are intimately intertwined. This is jus tone way.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

And that is fine. But I do find it to be true.

And I'm down with that.

 

[colton]

Although 'nativity scenes' of Joseph Smith's birth (such as was at BYU a few Christmas's ago), might understandably cause reasonable people to wonder whether the LDS do worship Joseph Smith. (Google Joseph Smith nativity scene at BYU if you want to see.)

A display commemorating the 200th anniversary of Smith's birth qualifies as a nativity scene? How is that in any way, shape, or form equivalent to how we celebrate the Savior's birth?

 

[colton]

Sorry, numbers for the most part mean nothing to me, and arguments about bad numbers means even less.

*shrug

As a scientist and mathematician, I like numbers. Even better, I like CORRECT numbers. So my interest is more about getting the proper figures rather than what those figures actually are.