Craig Paxton Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 Is there something you see that the LDS Church could do differently that would bring back the apostates?The ONLY way that the church could achieve this goal would be to become a "Bigger Tent Church"... allowing respective members to hold views and beliefs that do not sync with the insitutional church, allow open free discussion in church on these differing views and finding a way for those who hold apostate beliefs to be on equal footing with those who choose to hold traditional beliefs....actually putting the 11th article of faith into practice by respecting others views and beliefs and encouraging mutual respect. In other words...Its never gonna happen...
Palerider Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 I'm just saying what I think, and I'm sorry if that offends you. But if critics like yourself are going to come on here and tear down the faith and tell the LDS why their church is wrong, then I'm not going to just sit quietly and let it go unchallenged... I think your self diagnosis was correct. Otherwise you wouldn't have said it in the way you did. Freudian slip I suppose?
Craig Paxton Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 That is why I would suggest things like shoveling snow . . . who's going to say, No, don't shovel my driveway?Mark...you are welcome to come shovel my three car wide driveway any time you'd like...I'd even let you use my snow blower as a token of kindness for your kindness...
Pahoran Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 #2I believe whole heartedly in the prophets of the Old and New Testaments.Furthermore, I certainly wouldn't say that Heavenly Father wouldn't or couldn't call a prophet in our own time.Joseph Smith and his successors just weren't them (prophets).The Spirit bears witness to me of that.The Spirit bears witness to me that they were (and are.)I think I'll rely upon the spiritual witness I've received, thanks.Given that Moses was a murderer on the run from the law when he had his first vision, and that he received a number of revelations that "conveniently" shored up his leadership position, and that Abraham practiced polygamy, and that Paul published different versions of his first vision, and that Peter claimed to have received a revelation that contradicted what was revealed to previous prophets, I don't actually see any obvious difference between them and Joseph Smith except that Joseph had a surname.Regards,Pahoran 2
Sky Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 I think your self diagnosis was correct. Otherwise you wouldn't have said it in the way you did. Freudian slip I suppose?Laman and Lemuel thought that Nephi was being self-righteous when he called them to repentance, too. And Nephi said that the wicked take the truth to be hard. But you don’t believe in the Book of Mormon anyway. But anyhow, nobody likes to be told that they need to repent. If the attacks towards the LDS faith from certain posters on this thread weren’t so overt and bitter and frequent, then I wouldn’t have responded in the way that I did.
Palerider Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) Laman and Lemuel thought that Nephi was being self-righteous when he called them to repentance, too. And Nephi said that the wicked take the truth to be hard. But you don’t believe in the Book of Mormon anyway. But anyhow, nobody likes to be told that they need to repent. If the attacks towards the LDS faith from certain posters on this thread weren’t so overt and bitter and frequent, then I wouldn’t have responded in the way that I did.I see. You had no choice but to respond as you did. It was somone elses fault that you behave the way you do. You are being victimized. Hmmmm.......But couldn't the first part of your statement be applied to yourself as well? The OP wanted our opinion of what the church could do to encourage "apostates" to return. I gave him an honest assessment of what it would take for me to return. The response of you and others here was that we needed to repent.I guess some do take the truth to be hard and their self-righteousness (as you self-diagnosed) comes shining through.If the "ark" were truly what it says it is I would be afraid to "steady" it and would give it the respect it so richly deserves. As it is I feel it would be cowardly not to call it what it is. Edited February 2, 2012 by Palerider 1
sethpayne Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 Like you I'm only going from memory, but I believe the fax did reference the EoM and quote a short passage therefrom.Makes sense. I think the claim is that Bill took the EoM and created the fax out of thin air. I haven't been convinced of this argument, however. Seems pretty risky to create a fax from the First Presidency's office. The other option is that there was some type of coordination between Bill and the FP office to use the EoM and then produce the fax -- this clami seems a little too 9/11-trutherish to me and just seems a bit. Makes more sense that the FP secretary took the EoM ,by direction or on his own (who knows/cares) and used it as the basis of his response to a question on Camorah.(We agreed on something! It's a miracle!)With God, all things are possible my son. 1
Duncan Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 The ONLY way that the church could achieve this goal would be to become a "Bigger Tent Church"... allowing respective members to hold views and beliefs that do not sync with the insitutional church, allow open free discussion in church on these differing views and finding a way for those who hold apostate beliefs to be on equal footing with those who choose to hold traditional beliefs....actually putting the 11th article of faith into practice by respecting others views and beliefs and encouraging mutual respect. In other words...Its never gonna happen...I agree with you but I don't think it works in practice-but if someone doesn't believe that Jesus was resurrected then you wonder why they would bother coming to Church
Scott Lloyd Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 Another thread got me thinking about this idea. Is there anything the LDS Church could do to attract members back. Persuade them to repent and be baptized.
Duncan Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 Persuade them to repent and be baptized.our ward, as in myself and the elders, are visiting everyone on our ward lists and suffice it to say that SLC is getting about 40-50 people that we have no clue who they are or where they are BUT we reactivated so far about 10 people and the missionaries are working with some of them to teach so I am very satisfied with the efforts. I got the elders working for me now
Craig Paxton Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I agree with you but I don't think it works in practice-but if someone doesn't believe that Jesus was resurrected then you wonder why they would bother coming to ChurchWell I should also have added that if they included an all you can eat Grand America style Sunday Brunch...I'd return...
Duncan Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Well I should also have added that if they included an all you can eat Grand America style Sunday Brunch...I'd return...well, in God's other home, aka Canada! haha! we have The Keg-i'd go for that-let me get back to you about after church eats!
Pahoran Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Well I should also have added that if they included an all you can eat Grand America style Sunday Brunch...I'd return...In my ward, we used to have a shared lunch of soup and bread every 5th Sunday. That meant that approximately four times a year there'd be people we never saw on any other day showing up to the "Snack and yack."Last year, our bishop put a stop to it.Regards,Pahoran
Duncan Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 In my ward, we used to have a shared lunch of soup and bread every 5th Sunday. That meant that approximately four times a year there'd be people we never saw on any other day showing up to the "Snack and yack."Last year, our bishop put a stop to it.Regards,Pahoranthat's a hoot!
Kemara Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 In my ward, we used to have a shared lunch of soup and bread every 5th Sunday. That meant that approximately four times a year there'd be people we never saw on any other day showing up to the "Snack and yack."Last year, our bishop put a stop to it.Regards,PahoranWhat!? Bishop A.......put a stop to an activity that gave him an opportunity to eat food? The Universe must be in complete chaos. (please dont tell him I said that)
Avatar4321 Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 This is sad because it entirely fails to address why a large number of people, like myself, are no longer active. I've explained my position in other threads, but here's a brief summary. I don't believe the epistemologica method taught by the Church is good justification for the relevant sorts of beliefs to which Church authorities want members to assent. The best available historical evidence is not sufficient evidence for belief that the relevant foundational Church claims are true. Telling me to repent doesn't even speak to me. What am I suppose to repent for? How do I repent for the fact that I don't find the epistemological method or best available evidence compelling? Do I repent by finding them compelling? How do I do that?Perhaps instead of looking to history alone, you should be looking for revelation as well.Repenting involves changing behavior. Are you praying daily to find God? Are you practicing the commandments? Because Christ promised that we can know the doctrine is true by doing it. Not by looking at historical records. And believe me, I am not against looking at historical records, I very much encourage it. But that's not the way Christ and the Father are inviting us to find out the truth.Of course, it requires exercising faith to do this. It requires sincerity. I didn't know whether there was a God or where to find Him before I did my own experiment on the Word. Neither does anyone else. And I know nothing that has been given to me will be withheld from anyone else who humbly seeks it.I think persuading people to keep the commandments and seek the Lord out will bring more people back then merely talking about history. We have a religion that requires faith to be demonstrated by actions.You don't have to believe everything to try this out. Just test it out line upon line and precept upon precept.
Avatar4321 Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Question: why would you want to bring apostates back into the fold?If the question is, how do you get an unbeliever to affiliate and attend church actively, I'm not sure that's desirable. A lot of apostates/unbelievers want to be affiliated and have demands that they want to be heard, but this isn't going to help the church any.Is the question, what can we do to make apostates believe again? That's probably not going to happen in large numbers.The better question is, what can we do to stop more members from going apostate.I believe it is the second question. Obviously, we don't want the apostates to merely be rebaptized into the Church, if they even need it (Some dont bother leaving officially). We want to invite people to come and experience the change of heart. We want them to be born again and recieve the Joy the Gospel brings to us. Statistics are useless unless there is a change of heart.
Avatar4321 Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I'm surprised by the willful naivety reflected in many of the responses given here. I would love to see the church honestly address it's issues and cleanly acknowledge the 800lb gorilla that meets with the general authorities in their weekly temple get-together. They've been ignoring,avoiding,attempting to sweep it under the rug much too long.I could give full hearted service/membership back to the church if the following were implemented:1. Acknowledge that Joseph Smith and all of his successors although good men were not prophets of God in the Biblical sense of that word.2. Recognize that the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham are not historical and they and all following "new scripture" are the work of man.3. Relinquish all claims to restored priesthood.This would obviously be disruptive to the body of the church, but wouldn't it be better to have an honest, rock solid platform from which to rebuild rather than a house built on sand?We can't build an honest, rock solid platform that's based on falsehoods. It be better if we had only 100 people believing the truth that those three points deny than to deny these eternal truths.
Avatar4321 Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I don't know where you're going with that. The only way to get non-believing apostates to come back to church would likely be things that hurt the integrity of the church, overall. You can try getting non-believing apostates to believe again, I'm not discouraging that, it just seems like a fruitless effort.He can speak for himself as to where he is going there. I believe I know where he was going, but he can explain himself better than I can.I would point out, that it's far from being a fruitless effort to bring people back to the fold. Through Christ, all things are possible. In the Book of Mormon we find the account of countless Nephites falling away. They returned when Nephi and Lehi began to seek them out and preach to them with the power of God. Which is precisely why I said that all members of the Church, especially the Priesthood, need to learn the principles in D&C 121 and obtain not just the authority of God, but the power as well. Because with the power of God, we can do miracles. With the power of God, we can accomplish all things He commands us to do, including seeking out those who have left us, even among the most negative circumstances. 2
Hamba Tuhan Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Which is precisely why I said that all members of the Church, especially the Priesthood, need to learn the principles in D&C 121 and obtain not just the authority of God, but the power as well. Because with the power of God, we can do miracles. With the power of God, we can accomplish all things He commands us to do, including seeking out those who have left us, even among the most negative circumstances.Amen. I have been impressed the past several years reading online 'exit narratives' that the common theme in most of them seems to be an absence of any experience with the power of God. (I've read threads, for example, where the OP invites men to share how they faked the words in priesthood blessings in the absence of any actual inspiration.)
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 In my ward, we used to have a shared lunch of soup and bread every 5th Sunday. That meant that approximately four times a year there'd be people we never saw on any other day showing up to the "Snack and yack."Last year, our bishop put a stop to it.Regards,PahoranThat is a darn shame. The "Snack and Yack, "Linger Longer", and the "Chat and Chew" are some of the best things for a missionary tool I have seen in a while. I find them very effective in building relationships of trust. The snack and yack, that is a good one.
Storm Rider Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 That is a darn shame. The "Snack and Yack, "Linger Longer", and the "Chat and Chew" are some of the best things for a missionary tool I have seen in a while. I find them very effective in building relationships of trust. The snack and yack, that is a good one.Sometimes I think it is almost as if our bishops don't have a clue about what fellowship means to the members and to sharing the gospel. I would make it mandatory for every ward in the Church to have these activities at a minimum of four times a year, if not every month. It may be a problem in Utah, but it is the life blood of a ward outside of Utah. I wish the Lord did not have to work so hard to move his kingdom forward in spite of his Church's leadership organizations and membership.
mfbukowski Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Sometimes I think it is almost as if our bishops don't have a clue about what fellowship means to the members and to sharing the gospel. I would make it mandatory for every ward in the Church to have these activities at a minimum of four times a year, if not every month. It may be a problem in Utah, but it is the life blood of a ward outside of Utah.I wish the Lord did not have to work so hard to move his kingdom forward in spite of his Church's leadership organizations and membership.Bishops have more to worry about than you can even imagine
Palerider Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 We can't build an honest, rock solid platform that's based on falsehoods. It be better if we had only 100 people believing the truth that those three points deny than to deny these eternal truths.I agree completely with your first sentence.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 I agree completely with your first sentence.Yawn.
Recommended Posts