Why I Haven't Become a Member

[bluebell]

11 hours ago, Calm said:

That may be because they want to avoid awkwardness (someone who doesn’t know them might misunderstand or it just feels too intimate outside of the context of church) rather than they don’t think of them as “brothers” or “sisters” for the same reason they call others that.   It isn’t something I have discussed with other LDS, but just assumed though because of our constant referencing of everyone being a child of God.  I act differently, more relaxed with my sister who I text with constantly, who stays with us whenever visiting Utah (we think of the spare room as pretty much her bedroom) than I do with a sibling who has pretty much disowned the family except for their own sweet children (none of us understand why), but both are still my family, so it’s understandable to me why there would be different comfort levels even as we see everyone as family.

I suppose you could describe it as we most often use “brothers” and “sisters” for those of our greater family with which we are on friendly terms, but I speculate it’s mostly influenced by the church context.  If someone comes to church, we get into the habit of calling them “brother” or “sister” and continue to think of them in that way outside of church…unless we use first names.   
 

added:  somehow I missed several posts, including webbles’ which gives another POV than mine, I am now reading them.

One thing I have learned over the years is while we members often assume we are doing and thinking the same things, there are often significant unseen differences.  A lot of people in and out of the Church assume we are pretty much cookie cut when that is more a like a top layer of similarity, imo, because we are encouraged not to be contentious, to be loving and accepting and that gets interpreted into no questioning or debating (and given how debates occur in much of the public sector, it’s reasonable imo to want avoid them).  I think based on my personal experiences of talking to other Saints here and elsewhere that a lot of us do the same things for different reasons and when it comes to nuances in our belief, quite varied even if the basic stuff sounds the same.

I use in those instances where there is a relevant connection but no closeness or personal relationship.

it’s not something that I would say to somebody outside of church or a church function, because the relevant connection to the term doesn’t exist in my mind under that context.

I think this topic of discussion is interesting though because it shows how we take our perceptions and so easily apply them to other people. Sometimes to the other person‘s detriment.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Rain said:

brother and sister are used to enforce fake closeness because of membership in the church.

Interesting.  Never occurred to me to think of it that way***, but now you say that, I can imagine a lot feel as you do on this. 

***I am guessing because for me “sibling” has never equated to “closeness” as outside outside of one sister in the last 35 years, my relationships with my siblings aren’t ones I see as “close” which I see as confidants, best friends.  I have had very few close relationships in my life.  I have always loved my siblings, but for the most part even as kids once we were going to school, we lived our own lives.  Our interests have always been very different.  

Edited May 21 by Calm

[Tony uk]

I, for my own part, have used the terms, brother and sister. Occasionally in passing to very close friends. Only to express a deep friendship.

[Peacefully]

I grew up in the Church of Christ where we used brother and sister a lot so it came naturally to me when I converted. However, I use it for those in the congregation I don’t know well. If I know the person I use their first name. 

[Navidad]

2 hours ago, Peacefully said:

I grew up in the Church of Christ where we used brother and sister a lot so it came naturally to me when I converted. However, I use it for those in the congregation I don’t know well. If I know the person I use their first name. 

Years ago, when I first met Elder Steven Snow, the historian of the church, I didn't know who he was. Rick Turley, Jr. introduced me to him. I didn't know the protocol, and he was about my age, so I said "Hi Steven, good to meet you!" The church members in the little group, looked at me with a look I interpreted as horror. I didn't realize he was a General Authority and Historian of the Church. Way back then, I probably still would not have known how to address him. I learned real quickly that he was "Elder Snow." After years of association, I am still not sure who gets the title "Elder" and why. Elder is sometimes used in the Mennonite church. There it is an honorific title, a sign of highest respect, not something ever used for a 19 year old youth. I find it interesting how we use the same words and often mean something different by them. So then the person listening interprets what the other says through their own meaning. The whole conversation may go south! Ha!

Edited May 22 by Navidad

[Rain]

43 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Years ago, when I first met Elder Steven Snow, the historian of the church, I didn't know who he was. Rick Turley, Jr. introduced me to him. I didn't know the protocol, and he was about my age, so I said "Hi Steven, good to meet you!" The church members in the little group, looked at me with a look I interpreted as horror. I didn't realize he was a General Authority and Historian of the Church. Way back then, I probably still would not have known how to address him. I learned real quickly that he was "Elder Snow." After years of association, I am still not sure who gets the title"Elder" and why. Elder is sometimes used in the Mennonite church. There it is an honorific title, a sign of highest respect, not something ever used for a 19 year old youth and a General Authority of the Church.

And to make it more confusing for you, women missionaries are titled Sister, but every female member of the church is also titled Sister, but somehow the missionary one is more of a title and the ever female one is more of a connector.

43 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I find it interesting how we use the same words and often mean something different by them. So then the person listening interprets what the other says through their own meaning. The whole conversation may go south! Ha!

 

[Peacefully]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Years ago, when I first met Elder Steven Snow, the historian of the church, I didn't know who he was. Rick Turley, Jr. introduced me to him. I didn't know the protocol, and he was about my age, so I said "Hi Steven, good to meet you!" The church members in the little group, looked at me with a look I interpreted as horror. I didn't realize he was a General Authority and Historian of the Church. Way back then, I probably still would not have known how to address him. I learned real quickly that he was "Elder Snow." After years of association, I am still not sure who gets the title"Elder" and why. Elder is sometimes used in the Mennonite church. There it is an honorific title, a sign of highest respect, not something ever used for a 19 year old youth and a General Authority of the Church. I find it interesting how we use the same words and often mean something different by them. So then the person listening interprets what the other says through their own meaning. The whole conversation may go south! Ha!

Another example of culture vs. doctrine. 

[longview]

22 hours ago, Calm said:

On 5/21/2026 at 8:18 AM, Rain said:

brother and sister are used to enforce fake closeness because of membership in the church.

Interesting.  Never occurred to me to think of it that way***, but now you say that, I can imagine a lot feel as you do on this. 

According to the teachings and counsels and commandments of the master teacher Jesus, we very much NEED to be "proactive", go the extra mile, show energetic goodwill, no slacking back with timidity.

Matt 5:44. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

This is eyeball-to-eyeball discipleship! Stop using "fake" qualifiers. This is NOT "enforcement" but a willingness to walk with Jesus no matter big or small.

[Rain]

31 minutes ago, longview said:

According to the teachings and counsels and commandments of the master teacher Jesus, we very much NEED to be "proactive", go the extra mile, show energetic goodwill, no slacking back with timidity.

Matt 5:44. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

This is eyeball-to-eyeball discipleship! Stop using "fake" qualifiers. This is NOT "enforcement" but a willingness to walk with Jesus no matter big or small.

I don't have any problem with loving one another.  I just disagree that using the brother and sister titles is part of that in most cases where church members use it, at least in the areas I have lived. Using the titles does not necessarily signify loving, blessing, doing good will.

[Tony uk]

51 minutes ago, Rain said:

I don't have any problem with loving one another.  I just disagree that using the brother and sister titles is part of that in most cases where church members use it, at least in the areas I have lived. Using the titles does not necessarily signify loving, blessing, doing good will.

I imagine the terms brother and sister could be used in a number of ways. Near family members, literally brothers and sisters. Or members of a Church or some other kind of institution, signifying fraternity. Alternatively, in a secular sense of equality.

 My own preference, as a literal person. A brother and sister, is exactly that, a close family relative.

[longview]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

I don't have any problem with loving one another.  I just disagree that using the brother and sister titles is part of that in most cases where church members use it, at least in the areas I have lived. Using the titles does not necessarily signify loving, blessing, doing good will.

Exactly! By addressing each other as brothers and sisters is a proactive show of good will AND testifying that we firmly believe we came from the presence Heavenly Parents in the pre-existence.

[manol]

There is a local family-owned business that is a shipping location for Fed Ex, UPS, DHL, and the USPS.  The area is well outside of the Mormon Corridor. 

The husband called me "brother" the first time I came in to ship something.  This was unexpected, and it felt very inclusive to me.  I have no idea what his belief system is  - does it really matter? - he and I are now "brothers". 

Edited May 22 by manol

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, manol said:

There is a local family-owned business that is a shipping location for Fed Ex, UPS, DHL, and the USPS.  The area is well outside of the Mormon Corridor. 

The husband called me "brother" the first time I came in to ship something.  This was unexpected, and it felt very inclusive to me.  I have no idea what his belief system is  - does it really matter? - he and I are now "brothers".  

We own a Powersports dealership in Wyoming and a lot of the men call each other, brother. Especially the men who have been in the military, but it’s not only them.  Some people seem to like it and other people find it annoying. Just like with everything else. 😂

[Amulek]

On 5/20/2026 at 10:57 AM, Rain said:

The problem is that everything in your church also hinges on private experience. 

Sorry, I've been off on vacation (and will be leaving again tomorrow), but I wanted to swing back by and address this, because I think there may be a conflation here between two different categories of claims.

One category is epistemic: how a person comes to believe something is true. In that sense, yes, religious belief often involves personal spiritual conviction. Evangelicals appeal to the Spirit for assurance, Catholics do too, and Latter-day Saints do as well. I don't think I ever said differently.

But that is different from a historical or institutional claim about authority.

For example, Joseph Smith’s claim was not merely, “I feel spiritually authorized.” His claim was that heavenly messengers conferred priesthood authority and keys for the restoration of Christ’s covenant Church. Likewise, the existence of the golden plates are not just an inward feeling thing. They are presented as historical claims tied to witnesses, testimony, documents, and events that can be discussed historically, even if they involve the supernatural.

That is categorically different from someone independently saying, “The Spirit told me I now have authority to administer ordinances on God’s behalf.”

The New Testament consistently treats covenant authority as something conferred, recognized, and transmitted through Christ’s established order, not merely self-authenticated through personal experience.

That is why the NT repeatedly ties ministry and ordinances to sending, ordination, laying on of hands, and stewardship (e.g., “how shall they preach, except they be sent?” (Romans 10:15), “No man taketh this honour unto himself” (Hebrews 5:4), etc.).

So the issue is not whether spiritual experiences are real. The issue is whether private spiritual experience, by itself, creates covenant authority, and I just haven't seen any compelling evidence that New Testament ever treats it that way.

 

[Orthodox Christian]

On 5/16/2026 at 9:21 PM, Navidad said:

Why I haven’t become a Member:

1. I would have to agree to be rebaptized because of a doctrine that only the LDS baptism is pleasing to Christ in terms of mode, manner, and authority. My own father baptized me. I have baptized many people. I do not believe in the onlyness of LDS baptism and/or authority. It wouldn’t bother me if it wasn’t a requirement for joining.

2. I am in agreement that churches (both individually and as affiliates of a group of churches), broadly speaking, break down into two types: fence groups and well (the kind that provides water) groups. The distinction is that fence churches build policies, doctrine, and guidelines to keep members in and to keep outsiders out. Well churches have a well (metaphorically speaking) built in the center that keeps the flock close by because it is a source of refreshment in the form of teaching, loving, and nourishing. It doesn’t worry about keeping others out or on the edge of fellowship. After six years of full-time faithful non-member worship, fellowship, and ministry, I believe the LDS church is more fence-oriented than well-oriented. That doesn’t work for me.

3. I don’t believe churches should keep secrets, especially about means of growth, participation, and spiritual renewal. I could never take an oath or agree to an expectation that I would keep silent about temple ordinances. I would want to spread the word; not hide it, especially if it is indeed sacred. The more sacred, the more meaningful; the more meaningful, the more it needs to be shared.

4. As probably most of you know, I am very uncomfortable with the onlying, othering, and persecution identity (all three are connected) that have become endemic to the LDS Church's individual and group identity. I think all three are unhealthy and inaccurate. To deny that the godly people I know as non-LDS Christians can have thee gift of the Holy Spirit outside the LDS Church is a non-starter for me. There can be no question of the Holy Spirit's power and Gift in many godly non-LDS Christians. Non-LDS Christians who become LDS Christians are migrants, not converts.

5. Regarding LAD – life after death—I cannot see eternity in a place where Christ and the Father do not dwell as anything but Hell (in the non-brimstone sense). I also do not believe Christian denominational and group identity will survive into eternity. We will all be in the same boat on that ocean. Boats aren’t marked by denomination or earthly affiliation.

Those are my five reasons. Having said all that, I must say this as well. . . . . None of that relates, for me, to either salvation or exaltation (which I deem sanctification). So, yes, I believe that LDS Christians are capable of being fully and completely Christians, just as are folks from any other group, Christian or perhaps, according to the wideness in God’s mercy, non-Christian as well. I believe that wideness extends to the Judgment Seat of Christ. Perfect judgment based on love, mercy, and perfect wisdom. No Mennonites, Catholics, or Mormons (sorry) in eternity. There will simply be humans - waiting for Christ to make His decisions one by one. 

I also must say that as an Evangelical, I hold my beliefs with faith, not with certainty. Humongous difference. I am also 120% convinced of the kindness of a majority of my LDS friends. That kind of kindness can only come from the Holy Spirit.

I am open to your thoughts. For those of you who have been around for a while, there is most likely nothing new in what I have said. Best wishes to all. 

There is much truth in what you have said. Thankyou.

[Orthodox Christian]

On 5/19/2026 at 2:39 AM, Navidad said:

Jesus did tell me that, and I don't believe (I could be wrong) that I am in a pickle because of that. Nothing that any denomination or sect does or believes has any impact on my salvation. No church or denomination has any impact on my salvation. That is between me and the Savior. My salvation is completely dependent on my faith and life. Jesus is the way because He is the one who will make thee ultimate decision on whether you or I will be able to spend eternity with the Father at the judgment seat. That will be a one-on-one situation. The decision He makes about me has nothing to do with the decision He makes about you. Neither does which church I belonged to on earth. My salvation is not dependent on my church. Of that my faith is strong (notice - strong - not certain). I believe certainty destroys faith because they are oppositional. What the criteria Christ will use may differ person by person depending on many factors in their lives. I am content (not certain) to trust in the perfection of his mercy and judgment. So yes, He is the ONLY way. We cannot be in more agreement on that. True and false authority is a very different situation than different authorities. My wife and I have different authorities, but neither is more true or false than the other. Your binary dichotomy is your belief. It has no bearing whatsoever on my authority or relationship with Christ, my life, or my belief. Neither does it bear on how Christ will judge me. There are far more important things in my life for Him to measure me by than by my authority or lack thereof. How I truth my life will be of much greater interest to Him, in my thinking. Best wishes and thanks for the comment. 

Thankyou for this wise post. Someone once wrote that we will only be judged on how we loved. This makes sense to me. God is love, and I believe that the journey that we are on as Christians is one of sanctification through the the grace and love of God. I believe that we really do have to put on Christ in order to grow into the likeness of God, so that when He looks at us He sees Himself, His image restored from that which was tarnished by our self centredness. And you are right, it is between the individual and God, we have to work out our salvation in our lives, walking as closely as we can with the Holy Spirit, who we are promised will not leave us as orphans. He is our sanctifing grace, in Him we are blessed.

[Orthodox Christian]

On 5/19/2026 at 5:40 PM, Navidad said:

As I was reading a lot of your wonderful responses to me, I thought of this Spurgeon quote. While I have four favorite preachers, Spurgeon comes out most likely on top. This is a quote from a devotional book built on his teachings:

“It is ever the Holy Spirit’s work to turn our eyes away from self to Jesus; but Satan’s work is just the opposite of this, for he is constantly trying to make us regard ourselves instead of Christ. He insinuates, “Your sins are too great for pardon; you have no faith; you do not repent enough; you will never be able to continue to the end; you have not the joy of his children; you have such a wavering hold of Jesus.” All these are thoughts about self, and we shall never find comfort or assurance by looking within. But the Holy Spirit turns our eyes entirely away from self: he tells us that we are nothing, but that “Christ is all in all.” Remember, therefore, it is not thy hold of Christ that saves thee—it is Christ; it is not thy joy in Christ that saves thee—it is Christ; it is not even faith in Christ, though that be the instrument—it is Christ’s blood and merits; therefore, look not so much to thy hand with which thou art grasping Christ, as to Christ; look not to thy hope, but to Jesus, the source of thy hope; look not to thy faith, but to Jesus, the author and finisher of thy faith. We shall never find happiness by looking at our prayers, our doings, or our feelings; it is what Jesus is, not what we are, that gives rest to the soul. If we would at once overcome Satan and have peace with God, it must be by “looking unto Jesus.” Keep thine eye simply on him; let his death, his sufferings, his merits, his glories, his intercession, be fresh upon thy mind; when thou wakest in the morning, look to him; when thou liest down at night, look to him. Oh! let not thy hopes or fears come between thee and Jesus; follow hard after him, and he will never fail thee.”

When I read that, it reminds me that my redemption is not in my church, my faith, practices, or beliefs. It is in Christ. I believe we can be so bound to our institutions that those bindings can cause us to take our eyes off the simplicity that is in Christ. Any time any of our churches tries to persuade us that it is the means for our salvation, it takes our eyes off the Savior.

It dims our eyes from simply waking up in the morning and thanking Him for another day to journey a few steps farther in getting to know and appreciate Him. Sometimes I think our institutions come between us and Jesus. If any Christian finds him or herself talking or thinking about their church more than about the Savior, they have lost at least some of their joy in their salvation. Somehow I think this thought goes along with this thread. 

C S Lewis called it churchianity. The institution replaces it's Founder; pharasaical devotion to living the letter but missing the spirit. I've  been there. The bells and smells, the lengthy wordy prayers, all very beautiful,  but does that produce what God wants in us. The answer can be no for many people, it has been for me. But hopefully, with His help, my faith will become really transformative. It seems that we need ritual, but if it's effects only transforms us on a Sunday, then something is off. My hope is that finally, when God looks at me, He will see Himself accomplished by the work He has completed in me. All I can offer Him is my broken self.

Edited Sunday at 07:08 AM by Orthodox Christian