Chapel Mormons

[Bsix]

For me, Dr. Shade's so-called Chapel/Internet Mormons concept failed in three significant areas:

1. He attempted to depict the LDS Church as being in the moment of schism...literally dividing into two distinct religions. He claimed that the differences between the groups were so significant and polar...and without middle ground. This clearly is not happening.

2. He focused on idiosyncratic controversies upon which to justify the theory of a schism. He completely and totally ignored established, core LDS doctrines upon which to base his theory.

3. His own flawed research completely debunked his theory. Almost all hard-core LDS online apologists scored as Chapel Mormons. Additionally, those who took the survey simply did not fall within monolythic poles...both online and offline Mormons answered all over the map in terms of what would be presumed orthodoxy with no consistent slant. And to repeat...even the online Mormons who engaged in apologetics scored pretty close to the offline Mormons as Chapel.

Regards,

Six

[Scott Lloyd]

For me, Dr. Shade's so-called Chapel/Internet Mormons concept failed in three significant areas:

1. He attempted to depict the LDS Church as being in the moment of schism...literally dividing into two distinct religions. He claimed that the differences between the groups were so significant and polar...and without middle ground. This clearly is not happening.

2. He focused on idiosyncratic controversies upon which to justify the theory of a schism. He completely and totally ignored established, core LDS doctrines upon which to base his theory.

3. His own flawed research completely debunked his theory. Almost all hard-core LDS online apologists scored as Chapel Mormons. Additionally, those who took the survey simply did not fall within monolythic poles...both online and offline Mormons answered all over the map in terms of what would be presumed orthodoxy with no consistent slant. And to repeat...even the online Mormons who engaged in apologetics scored pretty close to the offline Mormons as Chapel.

Regards,

Six

Like the Elvis song says:

Now I'm happy in the chapel

Where people are of one accord

Yes, we gather in the chapel

Just to sing and praise the Lord

[Jeff K.]

Non sequitir and it does not speak to the post.

Otherwise I am sure it was quite timely and thoughtful.

I have yet to sit in a chapel were all were of one accord, indeed I daresay there isn't such a unified ward upon this earth. At least from personal experience. Many people have distinct ideas as to how doctrines come about and how they should be implemented, indeed the only unifying factor is that the church is true and the prophet that leads the church does so with the authority of God, everything else is pretty much up in the air....

A false dichotomy is the best that you can come up when describinb chapel and internet Mormon questions.

[Scott Lloyd]

Non sequitir and it does not speak to the post.

It was also meant in jest.

[sigh] Mark Twain was right: A joke is like a frog; if you have to dissect it, it dies.

[Jeff K.]

It was also meant in jest.

[sigh] Mark Twain was right: A joke is like a frog; if you have to dissect it, it dies.

LOL, my apologies

[notHagoth7]

How about a large, scarlet "I" stitched to the clothing we wear to Church meetings? And we be banished from the chapel and required to sit in overflow classrooms with the proceedings piped in via PA system. Or better yet, required to remain at home and have the proceedings transmitted to us via -- what else? -- the Internet.

Just as long as the "I" camp doesn't intrude too much on the foyer, where the ultra-secret third column of "lobby mormons" stands patiently.

[Scott Lloyd]

Just as long as the "I" camp doesn't intrude too much on the foyer, where the ultra-secret third column of "lobby mormons" stands patiently.

The foyer: That's where the social relations class is held in our ward.

[jimg]

Well, using your example of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, it's not that it's not taught by the church. I mean, here's a massive article about it on none other than lds.org!!!

http://lds.org/ldsor...0004d82620aRCRD

It was in the Ensign a couple of years ago. Any mormon that reads the Ensign in depth, should know about the MMM tragedy. And it's probably not the only instance of it being mentioned in such an open place for mormons to read (it's just the only one that I remember from recently).

Some people claim that the church hides this information, but if so, they're not doing a very good job of hiding it if it's on their website!

However, you're very correct in that there is this divide in the church. I see it very much most Sundays. Chapel mormons and Internet mormons see their religion through different eyes. Internet mormons, knowing all the 'dark' facts about Joseph Smith won't be insisting that he's perfect. If you say "The prophet isn't always right" to a chapel mormon, they'll most likely gasp, in utter shock, and reply "You can't say that!", while an Internet mormon will probably nod along. Chapel mormons have no reason to believe Joseph Smith isn't perfect, because they're very rarely told anything bad about him. If you go on the Internet, you have an endless stream of 'bad press' about Joseph Smith put infront of you, so you can't possibly believe he was perfect.

I wouldn't say the church is neccessarily 'divided' because of this, however.

I have often heard it discussed that if one could be either a non-member convert or a born-in-the-church member, which would they choose? I don't know. Having the advantage of having an active set of parents and all the training one gets from being raised in the church has much to be said for it. I find that I sometimes envy those who were.

At the same time, as a convert when in my thirties back in the 1960's I had to dig for information that was other than what the Church provided. I found a few anti-mormon books in the local library. (Placed there, I discovered, by the Baptist church that I was attending at the time). I think that's where I first saw mention of the MMM, the Adam-God thingy, and all of Joseph's and Brigham's involvement with plural wives. Again, this was the early 1960's. There was no internet.

Then I began to read things like the Discourses of Brigham Young, the History of the Church, the works of Joseph Fielding Smith, Harold B. Lee, LeGrand Richards, Hugh B. Brown, and Hugh Nibley. What an abundance and depth of knowledge. (Naturally the standard works is included in this.)

It took me two full years of reading, study, and prayer before making my decision. The Spirit had become so strong that I was unable to resist any longer. In spite of all that, Satan still "picks" at me and I have fleeting doubts sometimes. I think most members do. It's brought on by hearing something "new" that is unfavorable to the Restored Gospel or a leader.

For instance, in our Gospel Doctrine class a couple of weeks ago, it was mentioned by someone that Joseph Smith had a pistol with him in jail before he was killed. I quickly turned around and scanned the faces of those in the class. As I expected, there was a look of surprise on some of them. They had never heard it before. Why? I don't know. I ran across this years ago. It was a small "pepperbox" pistol. One can be seen at: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Pepper-box

Jim in Texas

[Daniel Peterson]

For instance, in our Gospel Doctrine class a couple of weeks ago, it was mentioned by someone that Joseph Smith had a pistol with him in jail before he was killed. I quickly turned around and scanned the faces of those in the class. As I expected, there was a look of surprise on some of them. They had never heard it before. Why? I don't know. I ran across this years ago. It was a small "pepperbox" pistol. One can be seen at: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Pepper-box

The actual pistol itself can be seen at the Museum of Church History and Art, where the ever-deceptive Church, in its relentless and immoral quest to hide its history from the sheeple, has cunningly hidden it in a display case:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Martyrdom/Hiding_Joseph%27s_gun

[notHagoth7]

The actual pistol itself can be seen at the Museum of Church History and Art, where the ever-deceptive Church, in its relentless and immoral quest to hide its history from the sheeple, has cunningly hidden it in a display case:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Martyrdom/Hiding_Joseph%27s_gun

For the edification of Internet Mormons (the ones described earlier in the thread who are merely impersonating mormons but who never step foot in a chapel), does anyone know if there has been any discussion of creating a virtual interactive online version of the museum?

Seriously for a moment, it might be of some interest/value to millions who don't have the opportunity to visit the Wasatch Front.

If anyone knows contacts at the museum who might be interested in exploring the idea, feel free to forward contact info, and I might be willing to donate the time/technology blend.

[LifeOnaPlate]

LOL and forgive my poor quality cell phone pic. I didn't anticipate it ending up on the wiki. I need to get a cleaner shot. Pun intended.

[Tchild2]

For me, Dr. Shade's so-called Chapel/Internet Mormons concept failed in three significant areas:

1. He attempted to depict the LDS Church as being in the moment of schism...literally dividing into two distinct religions. He claimed that the differences between the groups were so significant and polar...and without middle ground. This clearly is not happening.

2. He focused on idiosyncratic controversies upon which to justify the theory of a schism. He completely and totally ignored established, core LDS doctrines upon which to base his theory.

3. His own flawed research completely debunked his theory. Almost all hard-core LDS online apologists scored as Chapel Mormons. Additionally, those who took the survey simply did not fall within monolythic poles...both online and offline Mormons answered all over the map in terms of what would be presumed orthodoxy with no consistent slant. And to repeat...even the online Mormons who engaged in apologetics scored pretty close to the offline Mormons as Chapel.

Regards,

Six

Proof of the divide?

Pose a question, here on these boards of those who believe in a literal world wide flood, first man, garden of Eden without death in the world, and those who do not, and you will have your division via indisputable proof.

Chapel Mormons = literal interpretations of Mormon belief, and internet Mormons = mental gymnasts as relating to reality contrasted against certain literal interpretations of scripture.

Give it a test Bsix, ask who believes in a literal world wide flood and who does not (they both cannot be true) and you will prove the division.

[Bsix]

Proof of the divide?

Pose a question, here on these boards of those who believe in a literal world wide flood, first man, garden of Eden without death in the world, and those who do not, and you will have your division via indisputable proof.

Chapel Mormons = literal interpretations of Mormon belief, and internet Mormons = mental gymnasts as relating to reality contrasted against certain literal interpretations of scripture.

Give it a test Bsix, ask who believes in a literal world wide flood and who does not (they both cannot be true) and you will prove the division.

There could be no better proof point to proving how silly Shade's Chapel/internet Mormon theory than the 'great flood' and Eden questions.

For example:

1. Many so called Internet Mormons believe in a great flood that covered the earth. I believe in the Garden of Eden as absolutely literal. For example...I am one of them. I'd venture that there are a lot of so called chapel Mormons that may not believe in a literal or total flood...but are completely unaware of any controversies about this topic. There is no monolthic polarization on issues like these.

2. The flood...the Garden of Eden...ect...are completely non-central doctrinal matters.

3. Is the Church really going to split into two religions over trivial matters like Big/little flood and death in the Garden of Eden? If you are going to have a schismatic divide of the Church...it should be about issues tht matter...not sideshow ginned-up controversies.

Shades conducted research to prove his theory. He did everything he could to pack it with the most controversial, non-central issues. He changed the criteria in a manner that skewed the results. He took a small self-serving sample size. And, for all his efforts to produce a result that supported his theory...even his own biased study repudiated his theory.

Six

[Scott Lloyd]

The actual pistol itself can be seen at the Museum of Church History and Art, where the ever-deceptive Church, in its relentless and immoral quest to hide its history from the sheeple, has cunningly hidden it in a display case:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Martyrdom/Hiding_Joseph%27s_gun

I've been there many times, and I haven't noticed it. I think I've been lied to, because nobody pointed it out to me. I guess I'll apostatize. Somebody send me one of those nasty exit-letter templates.

[jimg]

The actual pistol itself can be seen at the Museum of Church History and Art, where the ever-deceptive Church, in its relentless and immoral quest to hide its history from the sheeple, has cunningly hidden it in a display case:

http://en.fairmormon..._Joseph%27s_gun

Thank you for this information Daniel. I have emailed the link you gave above to my Gospel Doctrine teacher. I think she will appreciate getting it.

This talk about "chapel Mormons" and "internet Mormons", I don't understand the reasoning behind the distinctions. This seems to me to be something instigated by critics of the Church instead of by LDS members. The same with the designation "Temple Mormons" which I have seen used by critics of the Church in a manner meant to be unflattering.

I, and most members I know, would fall into all three categories. We all grow in our understanding at differate rates. I really see no reason for the distinctions.

Jim in Texas

[Daniel Peterson]

Precisely.

Proof of the divide?

Pose a question, here on these boards of those who believe in a literal world wide flood, first man, garden of Eden without death in the world, and those who do not, and you will have your division via indisputable proof.

Chapel Mormons = literal interpretations of Mormon belief, and internet Mormons = mental gymnasts as relating to reality contrasted against certain literal interpretations of scripture.

Give it a test Bsix, ask who believes in a literal world wide flood and who does not (they both cannot be true) and you will prove the division.

I'm rather curious as to why these particular issues were set up as the defining criteria for determining to which of the two utterly distinct churches, the two wholly separate faiths, a given individual belongs.

Assuming for purposes of discussion that the two mythical religions actually exist, the overwhelming majority of both "Internet Mormons" and "Chapel Mormons," I would guess, believe that

* God the Father and his Son and the Holy Ghost exist.

* The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost form a Godhead totally unified in love and shared purpose.

* The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost manifest themselves to prophets, today as in ancient times.

* They also communicate with ordinary people, today as anciently.

* The Father and Son have physical bodies, while the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit.

* Jesus Christ's is the only name under heaven whereby humankind may be saved.

* A real Lehite colony left Jerusalem and settled in the New World.

* Jesus was physically resurrected after his crucifixion.

* Jesus visited the descendants of Lehi in the Americas following his resurrection.

* The Father and the Son appeared to Joseph Smith in the Sacred Grove.

* Moroni directed Joseph Smith to the location of the plates of the Book of Mormon.

* The Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God.

* John the Baptist ordained Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to the Aaronic priesthood.

* Peter, James, and John ordained Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to the Melchizedek priesthood.

* Moses, Elijah, and others restored priesthood keys in the Kirtland Temple.

* All humankind existed as individuals prior to mortal birth.

* All humanity will continue to live after death.

* All humanity will be resurrected.

* All humanity will be brought before God for judgment.

* All humanity will be assigned to one of three postmortal kingdoms, unless they are 'sons of perdition."

* Temple ordinances are necessary for exaltation.

* Temple ordinances must ultimately be performed for all those who have ever lived upon the earth.

* Brigham Young was the true successor to Joseph Smith.

* The keys of the priesthood are held and exercised by the president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

* The keys of the priesthood are conferred upon each ordained apostle in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

* There was a flood in the days of Noah.

* Adam and Eve fell, and we live in a fallen world needing redemption.

* We cannot save ourselves by our own efforts.

* The role of Jesus Christ as Savior and Redeemer was planned from before the foundation of the world.

* That plan was announced and determined in a grand pre-mortal council involving all the spirits of humankind.

There. I've just given you thirty (30) propositions affirmed in common by members of both of the utterly distinct faiths, the completely separate churches, conjured into dubious existence by the hostile imagination of the inventor of the "Chapel Mormon"/"Internet Mormon" dichotomy. I could easily supply you with thirty (30) more. Each of them is arguably more important than the precise nature of the Noachic flood (about which I, for one, am undecided) and the precise details of the biography of Adam and Eve. Each of them is much more clearly taught, and more frequently taught, in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and this has always been so.

It would be just as easy (and just as intellectually frivolous) to claim that there exist two entirely distinct classes of believing Mormons on the basis of the fact that some of them drink caffeinated Coke while some don't, that some are conservative Republicans while some (and, now, maybe most) vote for left-leaning labor or socialist parties (or consider themselves Chavistas), and the like.

But the "Chapel Mormon"/"Internet Mormon" dichotomy isn't merely a ridiculous sign of intellectual frivolity. It's a tool designed to further an ideological agenda hostile to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

[Bsix]

* God the Father and his Son and the Holy Ghost exist.

* The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost form a Godhead totally unified in love and shared purpose.

* The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost manifest themselves to prophets, today as in ancient times.

* They also communicate with ordinary people, today as anciently.

* The Father and Son have physical bodies, while the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit.

* Jesus Christ's is the only name under heaven whereby humankind may be saved.

* A real Lehite colony left Jerusalem and settled in the New World.

* Jesus was physically resurrected after his crucifixion.

* Jesus visited the descendants of Lehi in the Americas following his resurrection.

* The Father and the Son appeared to Joseph Smith in the Sacred Grove.

* Moroni directed Joseph Smith to the location of the plates of the Book of Mormon.

* The Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God.

* John the Baptist ordained Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to the Aaronic priesthood.

* Peter, James, and John ordained Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to the Melchizedek priesthood.

* Moses, Elijah, and others restored priesthood keys in the Kirtland Temple.

* All humankind existed as individuals prior to mortal birth.

* All humanity will continue to live after death.

* All humanity will be resurrected.

* All humanity will be brought before God for judgment.

* All humanity will be assigned to one of three postmortal kingdoms, unless they are 'sons of perdition."

* Temple ordinances are necessary for exaltation.

* Temple ordinances must ultimately be performed for all those who have ever lived upon the earth.

* Brigham Young was the true successor to Joseph Smith.

* The keys of the priesthood are held and exercised by the president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

* The keys of the priesthood are conferred upon each ordained apostle in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

* There was a flood in the days of Noah.

* Adam and Eve fell, and we live in a fallen world needing redemption.

* We cannot save ourselves by our own efforts.

* The role of Jesus Christ as Savior and Redeemer was planned from before the foundation of the world.

* That plan was announced and determined in a grand pre-mortal council involving all the spirits of humankind.

The good Bishop is EXACTLY correct! In the course of the original ZLMB exchanges on this topic I and others suggested that Shades survey these sorts of questions to see if there were significant differences between so-called Chapel and Internet Mormons. The gist of the reply from Shades and his supporters was that such a survey was not needed...schisms occur over differences...not commonality. They acknowledged that Chapel and Internet Mormons pretty much hold to similar core LDS beliefs.

To me...that confirmed that the entire Chapel/Internet Mormon dicotomy was a put up job from the beginning.

Regards,

Six

[Markk]

The actual pistol itself can be seen at the Museum of Church History and Art, where the ever-deceptive Church, in its relentless and immoral quest to hide its history from the sheeple, has cunningly hidden it in a display case:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Martyrdom/Hiding_Joseph%27s_gun

Hi Dan,

I believe this nothing more than a dead man of an argument. The reality is that the true and full account of Smith's murder is a thorn in the side of the church in that it deflates the Joseph Smith enigma and persona. The LDS culture has put Joseph on such a pedestal that he has/had become out of reach for negative

[Deborah]

I guess I would be both a chapel and internet Mormon, and only recently the latter. Much of my learning was long before I was on the internet and most of what I find here is what I pretty much knew already. The new things I have learned is how hateful and intent the opposition really is.

Now, many of our critics like to bring up Scientology as an example of ridiculous belief. I'm bringing it up because I want to point out that I may not agree with them, but never would I spend hours looking for quotes I can take out of context so that I can prove to all those faithful followers how false their beliefs are. They are entitled to their beliefs and I know that their beliefs have brought them satisfaction and happiness or they would be looking for something else.

To all those LDS who have been unhappy in the church or have found something to turn them away, go find your satisfaction elsewhere. But why do you waste so much time and energy trying to tear down what you once believed, particularly when most of you have families and friends who still hold these things dear? Do you really think you are helping them? I assure you what you are doing is garnering pity for yourself.

[Daniel Peterson]

If you choose your criteria of distinction with a view to creating a dichotomy, it's child's play to generate stark either/or categories for essentially anything.

Jeep Cherokees! Some are red. Some are blue! Two totally different cars!

Cats! Some are short-haired. Some are long-haired. These are two entirely distinct types of feline!

Pies! Some are apple. Some are cherry. Two non-overlapping species of pie!

Catholics! Some are Jesuits. Some are Benedictines. Two completely separate churches!

English-speakers! Some have a Maine accent. Some have a Georgia accent. Two wholly different languages!

An ideologue in pursuit of an agenda who isn't handicapped by logical or intellectual scruples can generate all sorts of nonsense with such silliness.

Distinguishing things on the basis of secondary or tertiary characteristics rather than on the basis of fundamental ones is amusing game, I suppose. Those who like such things will like it.

[Daniel Peterson]

You can give reference to all the material that told the story of the pistol, but it has nothing to do with what was actually taught to us both directly in class and indirectly in our everyday life in the church.

You make a characteristically brilliant point, Markk: What is said and taught has nothing to do with what is said and taught.

I can't refute that.

Personally this story was the start of my exodus from believing that the LDS church was the true church,

Weird.

Dan, if it wasn

[Jeff K.]

The people bringing up Chapel Mormon and Internet Mormon dichotomies as a major shift in change must have watched too much Star Trek....

"To you we are a loathsome breed that will never be ready!"

- Lokai to Bele

"It is obvious to the most simpleminded that Lokai is of an inferior breed."

"The obvious visual evidence, Commissioner, is that he is of the same breed as yourself."

"Are you blind, Commander Spock? Well, look at me. Look at me!"

"You're black on one side and white on the other."

"I am black on the right side."

"I fail to see the significant difference."

"Lokai is white on the right side. All of his people are white on the right side."

- Bele, Spock, and Kirk

[Markk]

You make a characteristically brilliant point, Markk: What is said and taught has nothing to do with what is said and taught.

I can't refute that.

Weird.

Yup, I do.

Once again you prove my point...

Take Care

Mark

[wenglund]

The good Bishop is EXACTLY correct!

He is, indeed. And, I don't think it coincidental that the things he listed directly relate to the intents and purposes of the Church--i.e. bringing us to Christ and helping us to become more like Christ.

To me, if there is any schism to be found amongst members and former members, it is between those who actually get what the restored gospel is really about and who, for the most part, employ the gospel as intended, as contrasted with those who don't get it, but who instead fuss and fret counter-productively over seeming irrelevancies and things that have little or no chance of impoving one's life and th life of those around one.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[WalkerW]

I believe this nothing more than a dead man of an argument.

Really? Because I thought your response was rather ridiculous:

The reality is that the true and full account of Smith's murder is a thorn in the side of the church in that it deflates the Joseph Smith enigma and persona.

Oh, yes. And the church displays this "thorn in the side" in a museum...

The LDS culture has put Joseph on such a pedestal that he has/had become out of reach for negative