BYU comm speech "disconnect from those who have lost their faith"

[mfbukowski]

16 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

I would rather be "blindly obedient" to the Spirit of God that is in me than be "blindly obedient" to the Spirit of God that LDS Church leaders tell me is in them.

OK - to me it's words and interpretations and no basis for discussion.  It's "agree to disagree" time.

[Tacenda]

9 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

You've been a great friend Tacenda...I will miss you in my life.  But mfb is right.  You are a sincere questioner.

I'm not going anywhere, and you better not either.

[Mars]

39 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Okay, so I get that certain people of the most virulent personality can be exhausting and can even plant doubt in the minds of others; especially when that's their goal.  I agree that such people should be avoided, if for no other reason than they aren't healthy to be around at all, let alone from a spiritual standpoint.  But, I can't say I recall ever entertaining the idea that some individual would be able to destroy faith simply by virtue of their words. 

I, too, have dealt with some pretty nasty anti-LDS folks in the past having served my mission in the Southern U.S., and having grown up just down the street from the (so-called) Concerned Christians.  Most of the time, I've walked away from those people because it's mostly a waste of time, not because I was afraid of some harm they might do to my testimony.  I just found their proselytizing to be pointless.

But, I've never thought of having some blanket notion that all people should be evaluated for their potential to harm me spiritually.  That thought is just completely foreign to me.  I just don't believe others have that power over me.

That being said, do I believe someone's faith be damaged by outside events which cast doubt on certain foundational theological elements.  Absolutely.  In fact, I would say that many of the discussion playing out on this very board regarding the age-old problem of evil are actually in that arena.  But, I see the internal struggle with reconciling doctrinal and theological elements to the world around us to be very different than interacting with someone who disagrees with the Church's doctrines/policies/etc.; even when they vocal and passionate about it.  Maybe I'm jaded and just don't trust anyone else to tell me how to think.  Maybe I'm naive and being mind-controlled right now.  Or, maybe, I'm just plain wrong.  I don't know; but it just struck me that there is an underlying assumption in this entire conversation (not just you) that others can harm us (as if firing a gun when we have no defense) without us having an ability to process their words critically.

this is a very well thought out post and i find that i agree, on the whole.  i find that i understand your position very clearly - thank you.

this may be our personality differences, showing.  i do make it a point to evaluate people for how their potential to build me up toward my goals or tear away at them.  that goes for all goals - spiritual ones most definitely included.

i do believe in the power of long term persuasion.  humans spend all kinds of money on marketing to make sure you pick up their brand of soft drink when you're thirsty, even absent-mindedly.  to say nothing of the vast audiences of charismatic political pundits who get themselves wrapped up in ideology and feel convinced of something without having fully thought it through.  shucks, sometimes i get so worried about this i wonder if it's happening when i watch general conference and "am i only mormon because i'm wrapped up in it?  have i really thought this through?"

anyway.  i think there's enough of a range of observed human behavior to demonstrate that protracted exposure to ideas changes people's minds.  being wary of those people who would undermine our faith with silver tongues is sound advice, imo.

[ttribe]

2 minutes ago, Mars said:

this is a very well thought out post and i find that i agree, on the whole.  i find that i understand your position very clearly - thank you.

this may be our personality differences, showing.  i do make it a point to evaluate people for how their potential to build me up toward my goals or tear away at them.  that goes for all goals - spiritual ones most definitely included.

i do believe in the power of long term persuasion.  humans spend all kinds of money on marketing to make sure you pick up their brand of soft drink when you're thirsty, even absent-mindedly.  to say nothing of the vast audiences of charismatic political pundits who get themselves wrapped up in ideology and feel convinced of something without having fully thought it through.  shucks, sometimes i get so worried about this i wonder if it's happening when i watch general conference and "am i only mormon because i'm wrapped up in it?  have i really thought this through?"

anyway.  i think there's enough of a range of observed human behavior to demonstrate that protracted exposure to ideas changes people's minds.  being wary of those people who would undermine our faith with silver tongues is sound advice, imo.

This reminds me, I need a Dr. Pepper...now.

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

That's not what I said, Bluebell.  Are you saying people who leave the faith are comparable to Satan?  That seems extreme. 

Elder Clayton wasn't taking about all people who leave the faith. He was talking about a specific few. 

I've been talking about that same group as well. This discussion has never been about everyone who leaves. 

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

That's not what I said, Bluebell.  Are you saying people who leave the faith are comparable to Satan?  That seems extreme. 

Elder Clayton wasn't taking about all people who leave the faith. He was talking about a specific few. 

I've been talking about that same group as well. This discussion has never been about everyone who leaves. 

Edited April 25, 2016 by bluebell
Sorry for the double post but it won't let me delete it.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said:

How is that I am doing this? I repeat the same things he said " We should disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith,  

 

 

You really didn't. 

[stemelbow]

7 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Elder Clayton wasn't taking about all people who leave the faith. He was talking about a specific few. 

I've been talking about that same group as well. This discussion has never been about everyone who leaves. 

So which person on this planet are you comparing to satan?  it sounds like you are saying some people are, but I don't know who that would be. 

[Mars]

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

This reminds me, I need a Dr. Pepper...now.

little sweet is happy

[rodheadlee]

6 hours ago, consiglieri said:

I would rather be "blindly obedient" to the Spirit of God that is in me than be "blindly obedient" to the Spirit of God that LDS Church leaders tell me is in them.

So have you turned in your TR and resigned from the Church? Are you living what you preach?

[Kenngo1969]

I'm not sure what good comes of imputing bad faith, suspect motives, ineptitude, and other such things to (one of) the Brethren, even if the person doing so is absolutely correct. If I'm inclined to give the average Joe Latter-day-Saint (or even average Joe, whatever his religious or irreligious leanings) the benefit of the doubt, as I believe the Christian ethic would have me do, then I don't see how I can or should do differently with one of the Lord's servants, no matter what position he occupies, how high profile he is, and so forth.

I've done and said more than my share of horrendous things, certainly more serious and more numerous than most any of the Brethren have done. If I am to have any hope at all, it is only because I will be judged mercifully: “With what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be meted to you again.”  For that reason alone, if for no other (and numerous others certainly exist), I would be inclined to give Elder Clayton or any of the other Brethren the benefit of an enormous doubt. 

Food for thought.

Your mileage may vary. 

Edited April 26, 2016 by Kenngo1969

[Rico]

"A few of you may have run into some who cease to hold fast to the iron rod wandered off the straight and narrow path, and have become lost. They started sometimes with online tours of the territory of the faithless. This indiscretion is often accompanied by failing to earnestly study The Book of Mormon everyday, and by the companion problem of gradually becoming lax in keeping other commandments. This sometimes leads to listening and then harkening to those who mock the church, its leaders, or its history. The faithless often promote themselves as the wise who can rescue the rest of us from our naievity. One does not need to listen to assertive apostates for long to see the parallels between them and the Corihors and Nehors and Sharoms of The Book of Mormon. We should disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith, and instead reconnect promptly with the holy spirit. The adversary sees spiritual apathy and half-hearted obedience as opportunities to encircle us with his chains and bind us, and he hopes to destroy us. We escape his chains as we voluntarily chose to bind ourselves instead to God. In what at first may seem ironic, our choosing to bind or connect with Heaven frees and empowers us to become all that we possibly can in this life and the next through the atonement of Jesus Christ."

On the other hand....

"And he spake this parable unto them, saying, What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it? And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost. I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance." (Luke 15:3-7)

[flameburns623]

How do you persistently gloss over the qualifiers "proselytizing efforts" and "assertive apostates"?

That the ones described are said to be not merely "faithless" but seeking to "rescue the rest of us from our naivete"? 

These are not mere doubters, Less-Active or Inactive LDS, nor wounded seekers seeking reasons for faith.

These are scoffers and obstinate ones, uninterested in answers but only in doing harm to the Church.

Evangelical Atheists seeking to damage or destroy faith wherever it can be injured.

[mfbukowski]

24 minutes ago, Rico said:

"A few of you may have run into some who cease to hold fast to the iron rod wandered off the straight and narrow path, and have become lost. They started sometimes with online tours of the territory of the faithless. This indiscretion is often accompanied by failing to earnestly study The Book of Mormon everyday, and by the companion problem of gradually becoming lax in keeping other commandments. This sometimes leads to listening and then harkening to those who mock the church, its leaders, or its history. The faithless often promote themselves as the wise who can rescue the rest of us from our naievity. One does not need to listen to assertive apostates for long to see the parallels between them and the Corihors and Nehors and Sharoms of The Book of Mormon. We should disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith, and instead reconnect promptly with the holy spirit. The adversary sees spiritual apathy and half-hearted obedience as opportunities to encircle us with his chains and bind us, and he hopes to destroy us. We escape his chains as we voluntarily chose to bind ourselves instead to God. In what at first may seem ironic, our choosing to bind or connect with Heaven frees and empowers us to become all that we possibly can in this life and the next through the atonement of Jesus Christ."

On the other hand....

"And he spake this parable unto them, saying, What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it? And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost. I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance." (Luke 15:3-7)

In seventh grade I learned what a direct object of a sentence was, and an indirect object.

Perhaps you missed that day.

All you have to do is look at the sentence and ask- "What is happening here?  Who is doing what to whom?"

Quote

"We should disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith"

What is the subject of the sentence? 

"WE".

What is the predicate?

"Should disconnect"

What should we disconnect from??

"Proselyting efforts"

See how it works?  Glad to have taught you a little about how the English language works.  Of course others have said the same thing.

[Abulafia]

Define proselytising in this context?

[Hamba Tuhan]

15 minutes ago, Abulafia said:

Define proselytising in this context?

From the OED: 'the process of making, or seeking to make, proselytes or converts'.

Also from the OED: proselyte = 'a person who has changed from one opinion, religion, party, etc., to another; a convert'.

[Bobbieaware]

1 hour ago, Rico said:

"A few of you may have run into some who cease to hold fast to the iron rod wandered off the straight and narrow path, and have become lost. They started sometimes with online tours of the territory of the faithless. This indiscretion is often accompanied by failing to earnestly study The Book of Mormon everyday, and by the companion problem of gradually becoming lax in keeping other commandments. This sometimes leads to listening and then harkening to those who mock the church, its leaders, or its history. The faithless often promote themselves as the wise who can rescue the rest of us from our naievity. One does not need to listen to assertive apostates for long to see the parallels between them and the Corihors and Nehors and Sharoms of The Book of Mormon. We should disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith, and instead reconnect promptly with the holy spirit. The adversary sees spiritual apathy and half-hearted obedience as opportunities to encircle us with his chains and bind us, and he hopes to destroy us. We escape his chains as we voluntarily chose to bind ourselves instead to God. In what at first may seem ironic, our choosing to bind or connect with Heaven frees and empowers us to become all that we possibly can in this life and the next through the atonement of Jesus Christ."

On the other hand....

"And he spake this parable unto them, saying, What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it? And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost. I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance." (Luke 15:3-7)

I get a kick out of observing non-LDS people who come on this board who think they've found a real zinger in the Bible that's "going to really put those ignorant Latter-day Saints in their place," only to demonstrate just how unfair and scripturally ignorant they really are. In trying too hard to find fault with the Latter-day Saints these folks become hasty, suspend critical thinking, and forget to thoroughly check with available sources so as to be sure they aren't going to end up putting their foot in their mouth. But of course, that's precisely what you just did. If you had bothered to research Elder Clayton's background, such as his General Conference addresses, you would have come to realize that lovingly and compassionately going after the lost sheep who have lost their faith is a recurrent theme of his. And if you had more thoroughly checked with the Bible you would have come to understand there is Biblical support for the saints of God to refuse to give aid and comfort to the "proselytizing efforts" of apostate enemies of the Church of Christ.

 14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing;and I will receive you,

 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. (2 Corinthians 6)

Edited April 26, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[canard78]

17 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

I read a post by an atheist on Patheos that was criticizing this talk and the quote that Bobbie presented specifically.  They were appalled that this Mormon yokel would counsel the saints to exclude people from their lives.  

What amazed me is that the language used so clearly states, "One does not need to listen to assertive apostates for long to see the parallels between them and the Corihors and Nehors and Sharoms of The Book of Mormon. We should disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith,"  How does stop listening to the proselytizing efforts become rejecting people?  

Simple, if you are the type of person that yammers on constantly about how stupid or silly or wrong the Church is then some LDS are going to say, "Look, I love you, but I don't want to hear this anymore.  If we are going to hang out together leave your negative comments at the door for your other friends.  Deal?"

Why would any individual want to be around a negative person all the time?  

I'd agree that this is something of a storm(rider) in a (herbal) tea cup. 

When I wrote to my family informing them of my changed perspectives my sister replied: "I'll tell you what, I promise to not try to convince you to believe again if you promise to not throw anything antimormon at me."

She and I continue to be good friends and rarely talk about Mormonism.

Yes, it's a deal, I agree with you, but it has to go both ways. 

We have a family thread between my parents and the 8 siblings. 4 are no longer active or are in some way "post/transitioning" out of Mormonism. 

Is it ok that the active siblings still occasionally post links to lds.org? They would probably be upset if I posted links to the CES letter or a Sam Harris/Dawkins video. 

Is that reasonable. 

[Abulafia]

"From the OED: 'the process of making, or seeking to make, proselytes or converts'.Also from the OED: proselyte = 'a person who has changed from one opinion, religion, party, etc., to another; a convert'."

But there is no church of ex or post or doubting mormons to convert people to.  There are support networks but those are very loosely knit groups with many different people with many different beliefs.  Is that what Elder Clayyon means?  

 

 

 

[canard78]

2 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

From the OED: 'the process of making, or seeking to make, proselytes or converts'.

Also from the OED: proselyte = 'a person who has changed from one opinion, religion, party, etc., to another; a convert'.

Should non-Mormons or post-Mormons also disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have kept their LDS faith?

I suppose that if they don't want to be influenced by those perspectives, then the answer would reasonably be "yes."

What he doesn't say, and what is unreasonably getting people into a "tizz", is that they should disconnect with the people. It's a very technical and specific statement. He advises people to disconnect from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith.

He doesn't say: disconnect from those who have lost their faith

He doesn't even say: disconnect from those who have lost their faith and make proselytizing efforts

He does tell people to stop listening to the critical content about the church that comes from people who had lost their faith.

Personally, I think he could have articulated it better. I think it's easy for both the believer and non-believer to be left with the impression that the person should be disconnected from. I don't think that's what he intends to say, but it's easy to take that message when the people he talks about are compared to Book of Mormon anti-Christs. Not very conducive to dialogue is it.

Out of interest, what are you all doing on this forum? There are plenty of people here who have lost their faith and could be characterised as proselytizing. I'm not... I'm discussing. I wonder if he'd support the distinction.

[flameburns623]

10 hours ago, canard78 said:

Should non-Mormons or post-Mormons also disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have kept their LDS faith?

I suppose that if they don't want to be influenced by those perspectives, then the answer would reasonably be "yes."

What he doesn't say, and what is unreasonably getting people into a "tizz", is that they should disconnect with the people. It's a very technical and specific statement. He advises people to disconnect from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith.

He doesn't say: disconnect from those who have lost their faith

He doesn't even say: disconnect from those who have lost their faith and make proselytizing efforts

He does tell people to stop listening to the critical content about the church that comes from people who had lost their faith.

Personally, I think he could have articulated it better. I think it's easy for both the believer and non-believer to be left with the impression that the person should be disconnected from. I don't think that's what he intends to say, but it's easy to take that message when the people he talks about are compared to Book of Mormon anti-Christs. Not very conducive to dialogue is it.

Out of interest, what are you all doing on this forum? There are plenty of people here who have lost their faith and could be characterised as proselytizing. I'm not... I'm discussing. I wonder if he'd support the distinction.

In college I was a proud progressive.

By the time I was 30, I most definitely was not.  But I still had a lot of progressive friends.

Until the last few years.

Somewhere around 2009 or 2010, Yahoo! made a feeble attempt at social networking. Among other things, when you logged in to Yahoo, a popup window would welcome you and ask, "What are you doing right now?"

I had a laptop manufactured by the Frozen Molasses Computer Company. It was v-e-r-y s-l-o-w t-o l-o-a-d.

I got so bored waiting on the thing I actually entered the sentence "Waiting on my computer to load while watching Fox TV". 

That became my tagline for two or three years. Every time I would log on, Yahoo would announce that flameburns623 is "Waiting on my computer to load while watching Fox TV".

And I lost several friends because of it.

Because watching Fox makes one a pariah to liberals, apparently.

No joke.

Edited April 26, 2016 by flameburns623

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, canard78 said:

Should non-Mormons or post-Mormons also disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have kept their LDS faith?

If they don't want to risk being converted, they should ... a point I've pointed out to non-members on more than one occasion. ('If you keep coming to church and listening to the missionaries, you're probably going to end up becoming one of us'.)

Quote

I'm not... I'm discussing. I wonder if he'd support the distinction.

I'm certain he would.

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 hours ago, Abulafia said:

But there is no church of ex or post or doubting mormons to convert people to.

'... changed from one opinion, religion, party, etc., to another ...'

[Storm Rider]

4 hours ago, canard78 said:

I'd agree that this is something of a storm(rider) in a (herbal) tea cup. 

When I wrote to my family informing them of my changed perspectives my sister replied: "I'll tell you what, I promise to not try to convince you to believe again if you promise to not throw anything antimormon at me."

She and I continue to be good friends and rarely talk about Mormonism.

Yes, it's a deal, I agree with you, but it has to go both ways. 

We have a family thread between my parents and the 8 siblings. 4 are no longer active or are in some way "post/transitioning" out of Mormonism. 

Is it ok that the active siblings still occasionally post links to lds.org? They would probably be upset if I posted links to the CES letter or a Sam Harris/Dawkins video. 

Is that reasonable. 

I think this is a great question for a family to consider openly and without rancor. The success of which depends on each family's dynamic and interplay. 

My position that it is not helpful to post links that are designed to either attack Mormonism or to purposely convert those who have moved on. However, the objective in life is not to shut our minds to truth.  This applies to this situation when you find a wonderful statement by a recognized anti-Mormon or on a site that is anti-Mormon.  I think you should share it.  At the same time, if you sister is talking about her children and she links to a specific talk on the topic by a Mormon speaker then that should be acceptable.  

For most adults this would work. Yet, as I say that I acknowledge that some people are going to be hyper sensitive about some topics.  The mere mention of them throws them into a tail spin. Their abilities need to be respected for a reasonable time while they consciously work on growing more mature emotionally.  The time will vary depending on the depth of pain being dealt with for each individual.  Some people may never recover from whatever ails them.

Some families may deal with these things best by never mentioning them and others will talk about it openly and freely without problems. Each family member will share, without concern, what is going on with their lives; the good and the bad.  

I think the point is not to proselyte the other.  Share your lives with each other and learn to be happy.  

Your lack of faith - or your transitioning out of Mormonism is a phase as much as one's transitioning into Mormonism.  I honestly believe that man is happiest when they have an active faith rather than a dormant faith.  We each are growing at our own pace and in our own way.  Some of us are stunted in our faith - I am only going to grow this much and no farther because it is who I am.  We do the best we can and leave the rest to Jesus Christ and his atonement and mercy.  

[stemelbow]

9 hours ago, flameburns623 said:

How do you persistently gloss over the qualifiers "proselytizing efforts" and "assertive apostates"?

That the ones described are said to be not merely "faithless" but seeking to "rescue the rest of us from our naivete"? 

These are not mere doubters, Less-Active or Inactive LDS, nor wounded seekers seeking reasons for faith.

These are scoffers and obstinate ones, uninterested in answers but only in doing harm to the Church.

Evangelical Atheists seeking to damage or destroy faith wherever it can be injured.

In other words, the caricaturizing of some creates people who do not exist in this instance.  No one is so unreasonable he/she won't have an open enough conversation with someone.  As has been suggested even the worst of bad guys in the BoM were addressed and engaged.  But here we're taught those who aren't near to the level of bad as those culprits in the BoM were, are too scary to even engage with.  It's pretty silly.