LDS general conference - Fall 2013

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Absolutely. Why are Jazz fans happy when their team wins games? It means they are being successful. Same thing.

If you really do feel this way the same logic would also dictate that people who left the church are going to be motivated to convince more people to leave the church because it justifies their decisions.

BTW, I'd be interested to see some charting on the growth rate of the group identified as "Former Mormons." Based on my experiences that is one population that really does seem to be multiplying exponentially.

 

[colton]

By the way, I just finished inputting the membership and congregation data for the past 30 years into a spreadsheet, and that's what it looks like to me. Around 1999 there was a substantial change in the real growth rate (as measured by # of stakes and # of congregations). Prior to that the growth rate was about 3-4%. After that, the rate has been about 1-1.5%. The growth is still exponential, though.

The reported growth rate of membership is consistently larger than that, though, so that's pretty good evidence that the activity rate has been consistently decreasing, as sirkicky said (and perhaps you as well).

I've got to run now, but I should be able to post the actual numbers and charts tomorrow for those who are interested.

I've decided to continue this in a new thread, please see here if you are interested:
https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?19964-LDS-church-membership-statistics

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

So all of the revelations were pointing to Christ and his church and the nature of God? Where's the part where Joseph Smith tells people to worship him?

Is John the Beloved worshiped because he wrote so much of the Bible?

I never, ever said that Mormons worship JS. I'm a bit baffled as to how you've come to that conclusion. As a nearly life-long member of the LDS Church, I can say unequivocally that Mormons DO NOT worship JS and that Mormons ARE Christians.

I do, think, however that relegating JS to merely a historical figure, albeit an important one, as Bronco70 has done is a grossly inaccurate portrayal of how Mormons view JS. He is literally 'second to Jesus Christ' in Mormon doctrine/belief, and no one is even close AND he is the source of many, if not most, core doctrines held by the LDS Church. AND I do think honestly that Mormon veneration for JS long ago crossed the line from veneration to 'personality cult' (not implying that the LDS Church is a cult).

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

It was not a Christmas display. It was a display put up around Christmastime, because that's when Joseph Smith was born.



I am very confident in the opposite. There's no way a reasonable outsider would interpret this as anything close to worship of Joseph Smith. In fact, when I googled it earlier today I saw no evidence that any reasonable outsiders HAD made that mistake. All I saw were anti-Mormon sites making fun of it.

Do YOU have any evidence that even as many as a single reasonable outsider incorrectly interpreted the display??

We'll agree to disagree on this. It was not just a coincidence that BYU chose to put up this type of display to honor JS's birth. The parallels to a nativity scene are just to obvious to ignore.

I have as much evidence as you do that any reasonable outsider didn't incorrectly interpret this display. Similar to you, I imagine, I've better things to do than to conduct surveys on how non-LDS might view this display. I am making an inference based on my experiences, understanding of how people at large tend to view Mormonism, and undoubtedly filtered somewhat through my biases. Same as you.

That said, I'd be willing to bet sizable money that a non-trivial number of reasonable outsiders would find this display inappropriate given the context.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I'm not confusing that, but it seems like you were.

So, do you admit that the church is still growing, possibly even with an exponential growth rate--just that the exponent itself has decreased a bit? I have no problem with that claim, it seems very reasonable. Or am I misunderstanding you again?

I'm not confusing anything (unless I'm confused about what I'm confused about ). Yesp I admit that the Church is still growing, I don't believe I've ever said anything to the contrary. My larger point is that the Church's claims about its actual growth rate are overstated--it is not growing nearly as fast as members are led to believe. Certainly not at the rate that would fulfill any prophecy about a stone cut without hand filling the earth, unless we agree than .002 of the world's population constitutes 'filling the earth.' Of course, since the Church is not transparent about its membership attrition rate, we are left to do a lot of guess work and inferences based on other data.

Then there's the matter of absolute vs. relative growth. I don't have the numbers, but it would be of interest to know to what extent its net growth rate is keeping up with the overall population growth rate. It might actually be growing in absolute terms but falling behind in relative terms. Or it might not.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

By the way, I just finished inputting the membership and congregation data for the past 30 years into a spreadsheet, and that's what it looks like to me. Around 1999 there was a substantial change in the real growth rate (as measured by # of stakes and # of congregations). Prior to that the growth rate was about 3-4%. After that, the rate has been about 1-1.5%. The growth is still exponential, though.

The reported growth rate of membership is consistently larger than that, though, so that's pretty good evidence that the activity rate has been consistently decreasing, as sirkicky said (and perhaps you as well).

I've got to run now, but I should be able to post the actual numbers and charts tomorrow for those who are interested.

Thanks. That certainly seems consistent with what I've read/observed.

Just to be clear on what I'm saying:

1. Growth rates reported by LDS Church are overstated
2. Net growth rates are slowing at the margin (slope of curve flattening out)--I am assuming this is a result of poor membership retention after baptism and accelerating departure rates among rank and file members due, in large part, to greater availability of information and possibly also due to Church's lagging position on social issues, among others. (My oldest daughter, for example, has ceased her activity over Church's stance on women's issues and gay rights--not that I would generalize from sample set of 1.)
3. Growth rates and share of LDS in world population fall far, far short of any prophecy or belief that the LDS Church is destined to 'fill the earth' in any sense.

 

[colton]

Then there's the matter of absolute vs. relative growth. I don't have the numbers, but it would be of interest to know to what extent its net growth rate is keeping up with the overall population growth rate. It might actually be growing in absolute terms but falling behind in relative terms. Or it might not.

This Wikipedia page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth, says that "In 2009, the estimated annual growth rate was 1.1%". Interestingly enough, 1.1% is exactly what I deduced for the church's growth rate since 1999, see this thread: https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?19964-LDS-church-membership-statistics. So I guess the church is not falling behind, but not getting ahead either.

 

[infection]

My larger point is that the Church's claims about its actual growth rate are overstated--it is not growing nearly as fast as members are led to believe.

How fast are they being led to believe it's growing? I get that some members occasionally comment about things like "fastest growing religion" (and to be honest, how often do we hear this.. I know it's been quite some time that I can't even recall the last time I heard it), but what from the top down is conveying these ideas that are being purported?

 

[colton]

Just to be clear on what I'm saying:

1. Growth rates reported by LDS Church are overstated
2. Net growth rates are slowing at the margin (slope of curve flattening out)--I am assuming this is a result of poor membership retention after baptism and accelerating departure rates among rank and file members due, in large part, to greater availability of information and possibly also due to Church's lagging position on social issues, among others. (My oldest daughter, for example, has ceased her activity over Church's stance on women's issues and gay rights--not that I would generalize from sample set of 1.)
3. Growth rates and share of LDS in world population fall far, far short of any prophecy or belief that the LDS Church is destined to 'fill the earth' in any sense.

I can agree with #1 and #2. On the other hand, #3 is purely subjective, and also depends on how one interprets scripture--so I won't comment on it since I'm trying to stick to verifiable facts for this discussion.

 

[colton]

How fast are they being led to believe it's growing? I get that some members occasionally comment about things like "fastest growing religion" (and to be honest, how often do we hear this.. I know it's been quite some time that I can't even recall the last time I heard it), but what from the top down is conveying these ideas that are being purported?

I get where he's coming from. He's undoubtedly talking about how the church reports total membership (as opposed to active membership, or even "people who claim LDS as their religion). If you look at the numbers I posted here, https://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/colton/personal/lds/membership statistics.html, you'd infer from the total membership numbers the church reports that the church's growth rate has been 2.2 - 2.4% over the past decade. In actuality, the growth in number of active members has very likely been much less than that.

 

[colton]

P.S. Let's take the membership stats discussion to the other thread that I created, https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?19964-LDS-church-membership-statistics

 

[Stoked]

Thanks. That certainly seems consistent with what I've read/observed.

Just to be clear on what I'm saying:

1. Growth rates reported by LDS Church are overstated
2. Net growth rates are slowing at the margin (slope of curve flattening out)--I am assuming this is a result of poor membership retention after baptism and accelerating departure rates among rank and file members due, in large part, to greater availability of information and possibly also due to Church's lagging position on social issues, among others. (My oldest daughter, for example, has ceased her activity over Church's stance on women's issues and gay rights--not that I would generalize from sample set of 1.)
3. Growth rates and share of LDS in world population fall far, far short of any prophecy or belief that the LDS Church is destined to 'fill the earth' in any sense.

That depends on how you wish to define "fill the world". If it is by pure numbers than I say that even if all 15 million were active it would fall short. But are we talking mere presence? If so I can see an arguement being made for that beginning to happen. The church is in, officially, 167 countries. Only 29 countries have no official LDS presence. Also there are 80,00ish missionaries at any one time in over 405 missions. Not to mention the world class humitarian program run by the church. In 2008 alone the church provided assistance to 3.3 million poeple in 122 countries. This help ranges from direct emergency aid (Haiti, Katrina, Sandy...) to skill teaching such as gardening and woodworking to vacinnating children against disease in the third world.

How fast are they being led to believe it's growing? I get that some members occasionally comment about things like "fastest growing religion" (and to be honest, how often do we hear this.. I know it's been quite some time that I can't even recall the last time I heard it), but what from the top down is conveying these ideas that are being purported?

It is more often a number, 15 million is the latest, and not a % but that is readily available. If you want to debate that number this thread is the place. Some good info on all sides so far.