100 replies to this topic

[why me]

I see an internet connection with this survey. The first three reasons for leaving for both survey blocks show how members read the internet about such topics and are influenced by what the critics write. I don't think that this is surprising considering the time critics spend to giving their interpretations about these issues.

http://whymormonslea...n-faith-crises/

The question is, however, what can be done about it?

[rpn]

But the survey was an online one (which self-selects in a way that could get that result), and it is not of all people, but people who chose to respond (both of which suggest some skepticism about the ten least likely reasons being valid for the general inactive group).   What I found the most interesting is that only 37% said it was because they didn't receive the spiritual confirmation, which I think means that the "facts" they read were sufficient to completely disregard that spiritual witness.  How does that happen?

[cinepro]

There's a couple of different ways to look at this, but I'll raise one possibility.

It's possible that there are certain members of the Church who have a testimony of the "Church" as it has been presented to them (i.e. the image of the Church they have in their mind based on a combination of study and experience), but that this image of the Church isn't entirely accurate.

Obvioiusly, we all have our own perceptions and experiences.  But it's possible that there is a subset of Church members that would not want to be a member of any Church with characteristic X, and that the LDS Church has characteristic X in its history, and that subset of members have only continued membership in ignorance.

If there are in fact such people in the Church, and no amount of explanation, context or prayer can make them feel comfortable belonging to a Church with X, then the Church would risk losing these members by being honest about X.  The Church would then have to decide if it is worth it to be open and honest about X, or to not publicize it and live with the risk of losing those members as they discover X from non-Church approved sources.  Since the Church would have lost them anyway, there's no downside to keeping it a secret when it comes to these members.


There may be other Church members who could accept belonging to a Church with X in its history if they hear about X from sympathetic sources that include explanation and context supportive of the Church, but would leave the Church if they hear about X from sources that don't provide explanation or context supportive of the Church.  These are the people the Church needs to worry about.

The critical question is which group is larger...

Edited by cinepro, 31 January 2012 - 02:15 PM.

[Mariner]

What might be done about this problem has been the topic of many a discussion on the Ex-Mormon, Post-Mormon, and Recovery from Mormonism, and other message boards set up to discuss Mormonism related topics.

Reading of some of these threads reveals that there are two main lines of thinking on this, with any number of intermediate or hybrid scenarios.

This first main line of thought is that there is not really much that the Church can do and continue to be the LDS Church as presently organized. The LDS Church cannot practically jettison its history, which is seen as highly problematic. Nor can it jettison its revealed scriptures, which are seen by many (if not most) who consider them as fraudulent. In this scenario, the Church continues along as a reasonably successful business with a core of die-hard adherents, mostly in Utah and the west. The Church essentially experiences no net growth through conversions in the US and eventually (very soon)  becomes stagnant in terms of membership numbers, thereafter shrinking as the younger members continue to leave numbers that make any kind of status quo unsustainable.

The second main line of thought is that the Church, begins a program of systematically separating itself from its past, acknowledging that the BoM is not a historical document and that the Book of Abraham is not a translation of Egyptian papyri written by Abraham. The Church instead claims that these are simply inspired documents that teach valuable religious lessons. The uber-authoritarian theocratic gerontocracy is also loosened up a bit and members are given more say in who their leaders are. In this scenario, there would almost certainly be more fundamentalist break away groups, but most would probably stay with the Corporation of the COJCOLDS and things would begin to improve in 20 years or so.

There are a number of intermediate scenarios, wherein the apologists take the lead in presenting new belief systems to the members who care and the fault line between chapel Mormons and internet Mormons become more distinct.  

The consensus from those who have been there and left is that the Church is headed for some very trying times and that, were it not for the money represented by the business side of the operation, would eventually become a vestigial organization much like the Community of Christ.

Edited by Mariner, 31 January 2012 - 08:35 PM.

[why me]

Mariner, on 31 January 2012 - 02:34 PM, said:

What might be done about this problem has been the topic of many a discussion on the Ex-Mormon, Post-Mormon, and Recovery from Mormonism message boards.

Reading of some of these threads reveals that there are two main lines of thinking on this, with any number of intermediate or hybrid scenarios.

To be honest, I don't think that the people on those forums could ever be brought back to church because the desire is not there. Also, once one leaves and begins to post on such boards, there is more at stake about going back to the lds church. One has to eat a lot of crow. So, it is not surprising that they would have such a take on it. Their exer testimony depends on them staying an exmember.

[why me]

rpn, on 31 January 2012 - 02:10 PM, said:

  What I found the most interesting is that only 37% said it was because they didn't receive the spiritual confirmation, which I think means that the "facts" they read were sufficient to completely disregard that spiritual witness.  How does that happen?

I think that there spiritual witness is what gives them the problem. If one never had a spiritual witness nor strong belief, leaving would not be hard. But when one had a strong spiritual witness or witnesses, and then leaves, it is hard to leave the church alone. Plus, they begin to rationalize their former testimony and spiritual witness. It all becomes a 'warm fuzzy'.

[The Nehor]

So we have a self-selected group of apostates advertising a survey where apostates like them hang out showing that most apostates are like them. Wow.

For an encore they should go announce a survey on UFO forums and prove that over 90% of Americans believe we are being regularly visited by extraterrestrials.

Edited by The Nehor, 31 January 2012 - 02:54 PM.

[Sky]

Mariner, on 31 January 2012 - 02:34 PM, said:

In this scenario, the Church continues along as a reasonably successful business with a core of die-hard adherents, mostly in Utah and the west. The Church essentially experiences no net growth through conversions in the US and eventually (very soon)  becomes stagnant in terms of membership numbers, thereafter shrinking as the younger members continue to leave numbers that make any kind of status quo unsustainable.

If this happens, the Church will have a lot of under-utilized or empty temples on its hands all around the world.

Mariner, on 31 January 2012 - 02:34 PM, said:

The second main line of thought is that the Church, begins a program of systematically separating itself from its past, acknowledging that the BoM is not a historical document and that the Book of Abraham is not a translation of Egyptian papyri written by Abraham. The Church instead claims that these are simply inspired documents that teach valuable religious lessons. The uber-authoritarian theocratic gerontocracy is also loosened up a bit and members are given more say in who their leaders are. In this scenario, there would almost certainly be more fundamentalist break away groups, but most would probably stay with the Corporation of the COJCOLDS and things would begin to improve in 20 years or so.

Not gonna happen.  At least that's not the impression I get from listening to the general conference talks.

[Pahoran]

Mariner, on 31 January 2012 - 02:34 PM, said:

What might be done about this problem has been the topic of many a discussion on the Ex-Mormon, Post-Mormon, and Recovery from Mormonism message boards.

Reading of some of these threads reveals that there are two main lines of thinking on this, with any number of intermediate or hybrid scenarios.

This first main line of thought is that there is not really much that the Church can do and continue to be the LDS Church as presently organized. The LDS Church cannot practically jettison its history, which is seen as highly problematic. Nor can it jettison its revealed scriptures, which are seen by many (if not most) who consider them as fraudulent. In this scenario, the Church continues along as a reasonably successful business with a core of die-hard adherents, mostly in Utah and the west.

And this is the point where we realise that this "discussion" is being carried on amongst people with zero clues and negative good faith.

As such, this opinion is worthless and a waste of our bandwidth.

Regards,
Pahoran

[Mariner]

Pahoran, on 31 January 2012 - 07:13 PM, said:

And this is the point where we realise that this "discussion" is being carried on amongst people with zero clues and negative good faith.

As such, this opinion is worthless and a waste of our bandwidth.

Regards,
Pahoran

Since the OP asked what could be done about folks leaving the Church during what we have  just learned from Elder Marlin K Jensen is the greatest apostasy since Kirkland, I would have thought that the opinions of those who have gone through the apostasy experience would be a perfectly appropriate and valuable input.

Please note that I have edited my comment above to include a number of boards that have Mormon neutral moderation policies and where members, non-members, and apostates go to discuss all issues Mormon in a reasonably uncontrolled environment.

Also, I might add, that if my post above rated a response from you, then it was probably not a waste of bandwidth. Surely you would agree.

[BCSpace]

Quote

the LDS Church cannot practically jettison its history, which is seen as highly problematic.

I've never seen it a problematic. The problem is that people lose sight of the foundation.  Take plural marriage for example.  How does some hijinks or some experiementation or some mistakes (if there really were any) change the fact that the scriptural example is that God authorizes it from time to time?

[Mariner]

BCSpace, on 31 January 2012 - 09:22 PM, said:

I've never seen it a problematic. The problem is that people lose sight of the foundation.  Take plural marriage for example.  How does some hijinks or some experiementation or some mistakes (if there really were any) change the fact that the scriptural example is that God authorizes it from time to time?

You are making the assumption that those considering the Book of Mormon believe that God had something to do with it. This is generally not the case.   Therefore the fact that Joseph Smith was married to more than two dozen women at the same time is, in fact, problematic in the eyes of the general public, especially given the recent events involving Warren Jeffs and the FLDS.

Edited by Mariner, 31 January 2012 - 11:02 PM.

[zomg]

My wife and I participated in the survey

[why me]

Mariner, on 31 January 2012 - 10:59 PM, said:

You are making the assumption that those considering the Book of Mormon believe that God had something to do with it. This is generally not the case.   Therefore the fact that Joseph Smith was married to more than two dozen women at the same time is, in fact, problematic in the eyes of the general public, especially given the recent events involving Warren Jeffs and the FLDS.

It could be problematic. It may be less problematic for people with an arabic or african backgroud since polygamy is not looked upon as being 'strange'. Also, the polygamy of JS can be considered faith promoting when we consider the women involved and the spiritual witnesses that they received when praying about it before saying yes to the sealing. Also, when we consider the time frame for most of the sealings occured within a two year period, it becomes apparent that JS was a man in a hurry to do the principle. And then when we consider not one of these women ever claimed that JS was a lusty guy with a strong libido who expoloited them...etc.etc.

The critics do have their spin but the actual facts speak loudly.

[why me]

zomg, on 31 January 2012 - 11:11 PM, said:

My wife and I participated in the survey

And....what did you think about it?

[zomg]

why me, on 31 January 2012 - 11:22 PM, said:

And....what did you think about it?

It was nice to reflect on the issues as to why we decided to leave the church. The author is a friends out ours so we were happy to help out. I hope the information we provided can be used in a good way

[why me]

zomg, on 31 January 2012 - 11:28 PM, said:

It was nice to reflect on the issues as to why we decided to leave the church. The author is a friends out ours so we were happy to help out. I hope the information we provided can be used in a good way

I hope so too. And it is good that you are here discussing issues. I don't find the problem that others do in the first three issues in both blocks to be a problem. The main issue for me hangs on the book of mormon and the witnesses that were involved in the process and their testimonies that never left them regardless of their relationship with the lds church. They seem to be very strong in what happened and in what they experienced.

[Storm Rider]

To a large extent this type of information has about as much worth as three boys agreeing that their families hate them and then stating that all families hate little boys.  The information is worthless.

One of the things that is significant is how many apostates cannot leave the Church alone. They must rail at it, demean it, work to destroy it, and deride all it stands for.  They sit in the big house surrounded by darkness.  Why should I be concerned about what they say about me, my family, my community, or my church?  They reek of unhappiness because they kick against the Spirit that has born witness to them of a truth they cannot now accept.  They have abandonned their God and demand to have the same sense of peace they had.

The history of the Church has always been there for people to read if they chose to do so.  Some really just focus on what the Church does for them today and the history does not concern them.  Others learn a very twisted idea of history from the slanted propaganda we find on websites today that have no interest in revealing history but in destroying the Church, the cult, the heresy they see as Mormonism.

This kind of activity will always exist and it cannot be stopped.  Let them rail.  Our job is to preach the gospel, redeem the dead, and strengthen the saints.

[california boy]

Storm Rider, on 31 January 2012 - 11:57 PM, said:

To a large extent this type of information has about as much worth as three boys agreeing that their families hate them and then stating that all families hate little boys.  The information is worthless.

One of the things that is significant is how many apostates cannot leave the Church alone. They must rail at it, demean it, work to destroy it, and deride all it stands for.  They sit in the big house surrounded by darkness.  Why should I be concerned about what they say about me, my family, my community, or my church?  They reek of unhappiness because they kick against the Spirit that has born witness to them of a truth they cannot now accept.  They have abandonned their God and demand to have the same sense of peace they had.

The history of the Church has always been there for people to read if they chose to do so.  Some really just focus on what the Church does for them today and the history does not concern them.  Others learn a very twisted idea of history from the slanted propaganda we find on websites today that have no interest in revealing history but in destroying the Church, the cult, the heresy they see as Mormonism.

This kind of activity will always exist and it cannot be stopped.  Let them rail.  Our job is to preach the gospel, redeem the dead, and strengthen the saints.

I can certainly understand why you don't agree with the people that have left the church.  But do you think it is useful knowing why THEY left the church?  Would it be helpful in understanding why others leave the church in order to better address those who are struggling within the church today?  Or are you advocating that the church just let those struggling with various issues to just leave?  I have no idea if this survey is accurate.  But what is knows is that some people do leave the church.  Do you just continue to let people leave and baptize new ones to take their place or do you somehow try and stop the revolving door?

I personally have no horse in this race.  Whether someone leaves or stays in the church is of no interest to me.  But I am curious about the reaction members give to information like this.  Does dismissing it make the problem of inactivity just disappear?  Or maybe there has always been those that join and leave.  It is just a part of religious organizations.

[zomg]

Storm Rider, on 31 January 2012 - 11:57 PM, said:

To a large extent this type of information has about as much worth as three boys agreeing that their families hate them and then stating that all families hate little boys.  The information is worthless.

One of the things that is significant is how many apostates cannot leave the Church alone. They must rail at it, demean it, work to destroy it, and deride all it stands for.  They sit in the big house surrounded by darkness.  Why should I be concerned about what they say about me, my family, my community, or my church?  They reek of unhappiness because they kick against the Spirit that has born witness to them of a truth they cannot now accept.  They have abandonned their God and demand to have the same sense of peace they had.

The history of the Church has always been there for people to read if they chose to do so.  Some really just focus on what the Church does for them today and the history does not concern them.  Others learn a very twisted idea of history from the slanted propaganda we find on websites today that have no interest in revealing history but in destroying the Church, the cult, the heresy they see as Mormonism.

This kind of activity will always exist and it cannot be stopped.  Let them rail.  Our job is to preach the gospel, redeem the dead, and strengthen the saints.

The information is not worthless.
This survey wasn't done for former mormons to pass it around and compare answers. It was done to gather information to show the LDS church how it can make improvements to prevent further membership losses. While that may not seem like a big deal to you I find it interesting how many people are responding to this survey with such animosity.

You should also know that many former mormons try to leave the church alone yet the LDS church does not leave THEM alone. This is done by family members, ward members, etc love bombing when it is not needed.

Also, I should note, that I am very happy with the choices I have made. Why must you assume all those who have different beliefs than yourself are miserable?