Palerider Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 I don't know about anyone else but I don't go to a Ford dealership and expect that salesman to trash talk Fords and talk up Chevy's. The Church is in the business of getting and keeping new members. We do a good job of it. No we're not perfect, not by a long shot. But we hopefully are getting better.http://www.allaboutm...ENG_Video29.phpExcellent point. That's why it's critical to go out back and talk to a Ford mechanic and ask what the inherent design weaknesses are. What are the true problems underneath the hood that can't be seen by a cursory look and are hidden by a pretty paint job. The problem is that the church has been telling us for years not to talk to the mechanics. They don't have your best interests at heart. They don't tell you the truth. Just stay away from them........ take the salesman's word for it. It's a great truck! Spend your money here.
Analytics Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) See Pahoran's excellent analysis about the Church having the right to define its own mission.From the preface of my first comment on this thread, I've stated over and over that it's the church's prerogative to kick out apostates. What part of that do you disagree with? There is a vast difference between withdrawing membership or association from someone and killing him.Of course there is, and you entirely missed the point. You’re the one that said that “Religious tolerance is about allowing people to make choices.” Like BYU, Nebuchadnezzar gave Daniel a choice. Can you now see why I think religious tolerance is about more than allowing people to make choices? Religious tolerance is about tolerating it when people follow the dictates of their own consciences.BY the way, I believe it’s the church’s prerogative to kick apostates out of BYU. Edited February 2, 2012 by Analytics
Analytics Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 The Catholic Church's policies with regard to Notre Dame are their own business. That doesn't make the Church of Jesus Christ and BYU wrong in what they do.But it does illustrate why BYU's level of religious tolerance is somewhat less than "excellent."
Sky Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 Thanks for the link and the quote.Based on what I see here, I really don't see a contradiction in the quoted statements from Elder Jensen. To say that there has not been such a period of apostasy since Kirtland, is not to say that conditions today are "Kirtland-like." Nor does it say that -- how did he put it in the other quote? -- there is "some Titanic-like wave of apostasy" going on today.I think Elder Jensen acknowledged the fact that members leaving due to troubling history or something they read on the internet is a growing concern for the Church, and that the Church would like to do something about it. But as to be expected, the anti-Mormons practically jumped out their seats for joy when they heard this, because they felt a GA vindicated their assertions that members are leaving the Church in droves. Now Jensen appears to be saying that while this is a concern, it is not as big of an issue as the critics like to think it is. So the critics were singing Jensen’s praises a week or two ago, and now they are ruthlessly accusing him of lying and contradicting himself, and that he was whipped into shape by the Brethren higher up, particularly Boyd K. Packer. Some have even implied that Jensen being made an emeritus general authority is actually a nice way of firing him.
toon Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 The latest one i heard is that the church owns pepsi. Another common one is that tithing money is being used for the downtown redo of salt lake city.That Pepsi rumor is potentially dangerous. The Church needs to clarify that it's Coca Cola, not Pepsi.
Duncan Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 That Pepsi rumor is potentially dangerous. The Church needs to clarify that it's Coca Cola, not Pepsi.pepsi is horrible, Diet Pepsi is where it's at-I write this as I am drinking a coke
Analytics Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Since BYU does not encourage LDS converts to spend their internet time bagging their former faiths on websites devoted to discussing those faiths, their religious tolerance clearly excels yours.Be that as it may, I take solace in knowing that as an invited guest, the way to show respect to the host of this community is by obeying its rules and not attacking other guests.
Pahoran Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Be that as it may, I take solace in knowing that as an invited guest, the way to show respect to the host of this community is by obeying its rules and not attacking other guests.If you feel attacked, feel free to click the "Report" button.But since you raised the subject, don't leave us in suspense; please elaborate. What part of what I wrote is an "attack," actually?My remarks can be easily paraphrased as "Someone else does something better than you do." How is this an "attack?" Is it an essential part of your self-image to suppose that nobody could possibly excel you in the area of religious tolerance?You have subjected us to post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post after post sneering at the idea that BYU's record on religious tolerance is a good one. Your sole support for that sneer is to complain that it is religiously intolerant for BYU to expel students who were admitted on the strength of their LDS church membership when they choose to leave the Church. It has been pointed out to you that this is not an issue of "religious tolerance" at all, but you keep relentlessly pounding the same drum. Why, since you are so insistent on the question of "religious tolerance," is it suddenly dirty pool for me to point out your own performance in this matter?Regards,Pahoran 1
Analytics Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 If you feel attacked, feel free to click the "Report" button.But since you raised the subject, don't leave us in suspense; please elaborate. What part of what I wrote is an "attack," actually?A principle rule of this forum is that we be respectful of each other. That includes not judging others, not engaging in personal attacks, not attempting to provoke people, not altering members quotes on the board, and not telling others how to behave.Personal squabbles are also not allowed. I feel that I am an invited guest here, and as such will continue to do my best to be respectful of the hosts by abiding by their rules.
cinepro Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Another common one is that tithing money is being used for the downtown redo of salt lake city.I've never understood people who felt like all the Church's money was "tithing money". It's not that hard to understand that the Church has some money that is "Tithing money" and thus should be used to further the Lord's work in building the kingdom, and "non-Tithing money" that is discretionary for investments and other uses not directly related to Church stuff. It's the same way I pay 100% tithing, but not all of my income is "Tithing income", so I only pay tithing on the portion that is income meant to be tithed by the Lord. The rest is discretionary and meant to be used for investments and stuff. 1
Nemesis Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Personal squabbles are also not allowed. This is correct. Everyone we need to get passed the personal squabbles and digs. There is alot of history between posters and we have tried unsuccesfully to get everyone to drop past prejudices and antagonism and move forward. You can't have a discussion if you are looking for ways to get an adverse emotional response from the person on the other side of the screen.Nemesis
Scott Lloyd Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I think Elder Jensen acknowledged the fact that members leaving due to troubling history or something they read on the internet is a growing concern for the Church, and that the Church would like to do something about it. But as to be expected, the anti-Mormons practically jumped out their seats for joy when they heard this, because they felt a GA vindicated their assertions that members are leaving the Church in droves. Now Jensen appears to be saying that while this is a concern, it is not as big of an issue as the critics like to think it is. So the critics were singing Jensen’s praises a week or two ago, and now they are ruthlessly accusing him of lying and contradicting himself, ... Evidence, perhaps, that anti-Mormonism hinders one's ability to understand English.... and that he was whipped into shape by the Brethren higher up, particularly Boyd K. Packer. Some have even implied that Jensen being made an emeritus general authority is actually a nice way of firing him.And in so implying, they are either ignorant of or fail to recognize the fact that the long-time practice of the Church is to grant emeritus status to members of the Seventy when they reach age 70. Elder Jensen's 70th birthday will be on May 18, and he will receive emeritus status in October.
Loran Blood Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Here.Read the article, then I have a few questions:The article states: Is "a staffer" sufficient resources for such a daunting task?From the article:Has anyone read this book? Any reviews online?From the article:Who, do you think, has a more realistic perspective on this point, Elder Jensen or Terryl Givens?Richard Bushman has, I think, the right idea:Thoughts?-SmacYes. The vast majority of people who drop out of the Church or legitimately apostatize are not doing so because they have read The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power or Isn't the Word of God Enough or a diatribe by the Toscanos. The reasons are, for the most part, matters of what we moderns have come to call lifestyle and matters of personal predilection and bias regarding the standards of the church and rigors of discipleship. It is matters of personal priorities between the World and the Kingdom, in which the World, in many cases, predominates in importance.While my branch is quite small in comparison to others (and to most Wards), there are people from all over the country there, and not one of them I've ever talked to has ever heard of Signature Books. There are pleanty of inactives, however, and they are on the sidelines because of the fundamental nature of our culture and the difficulties it presents to serious discipleship, of which the neo-orthodox and apostate critics of various church historical problems is only one. 1
Wiki Wonka Posted February 5, 2012 Posted February 5, 2012 Is "a staffer" sufficient resources for such a daunting task?Elder Jensen is very likely referring to the person that the Church hired to help with search engine optimization. I met and conversed with a Church-employed SEO expert at the FAIR conference back in August.-WW
KevinG Posted February 5, 2012 Posted February 5, 2012 It has been my observation that men and women either go on missions, marry or fall away during their early twenties. Sometimes all of the above.It is a rough age to be a Mormon, keep some strict covenants and take on the daunting tasks asked of our young Elders and Sisters. I also noticed they come back in large numbers in their late 20s-40s when they have their own children.
KevinG Posted February 5, 2012 Posted February 5, 2012 It has been my observation that men and women either go on missions, marry or fall away during their early twenties. Sometimes all of the above.It is a rough age to be a Mormon, keep some strict covenants and take on the daunting tasks asked of our young Elders and Sisters. I also noticed they come back in large numbers in their late 20s-40s when they have their own children.
Recommended Posts