Future of the church

[poptart]

I wanted to ask what people think about the future of the church.  If anyone remembers i posted here a little bit last year and the church did.help me.  I also had a chance to look at other  churches like the catholic church  and well, i can see why the lds church is winning, you guys are not only waay more practical,  you care.  They went out of their way to help me, let me work at di and even offered the bishops storehouse if need be.  Sad to say, Catholic parishioner i knew did not care at all.   I remeber giving confession a try,  all the while thinking who is this guy to call me out on my sin. Hes not god.  Even worse, when he asked if i was gay.  I lied, if i was honest the congregation would have been even colder.  Never mind some of them being married multiple times and having kids they cant afford, lets go pick on the gays and people different from us.  Sooo sorry who i am interferes with the sanctity of your third marriage. 

That being said i look at how the lds church does hold their members accountable, i find that a very attractive trait.  

Probably the best of all, you guys are so healthy! You can tell where the church spends its money and focus, on the people.  

Anywau, where do you think the church will go from here?

[poptart]

I wanted to ask what people think about the future of the church.  If anyone remembers i posted here a little bit last year and the church did.help me.  I also had a chance to look at other  churches like the catholic church  and well, i can see why the lds church is winning, you guys are not only waay more practical,  you care.  They went out of their way to help me, let me work at di and even offered the bishops storehouse if need be.  Sad to say, Catholic parishioner i knew did not care at all.   I remeber giving confession a try,  all the while thinking who is this guy to call me out on my sin. Hes not god.  Even worse, when he asked if i was gay.  I lied, if i was honest the congregation would have been even colder.  Never mind some of them being married multiple times and having kids they cant afford, lets go pick on the gays and people different from us.  Sooo sorry who i am interferes with the sanctity of your third marriage. 

That being said i look at how the lds church does hold their members accountable, i find that a very attractive trait.  

Probably the best of all, you guys are so healthy! You can tell where the church spends its money and focus, on the people.  

Anywau, where do you think the church will go from here?

[poptart]

Also anyone know how to delete duplicate threads?  I accidentally made two threads instead of the intended one.

Threads have been merged.

[VideoGameJunkie]

I have no idea what the future holds. I doubt members in the 1950s saw the priesthood ban being lifted in 1978 and I didn't see gay marriage being legalized nationwide when Massachusetts became the first state to legalize it in 2003. Especially not this fast. Who knows what the world will be like.

[JLHPROF]

D&C 112:24 Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord.
25 And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord;
26 First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord.

 

[poptart]

1 hour ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

I have no idea what the future holds. I doubt members in the 1950s saw the priesthood ban being lifted in 1978 and I didn't see gay marriage being legalized nationwide when Massachusetts became the first state to legalize it in 2003. Especially not this fast. Who knows what the world will be like.

I don't see what the big deal over gay marraige is, its not like anyone i know wants to marry in a church.   A gay couple wanting to marry in a church is like a black guy wanting to go to a kkk rally.

Thats been the Catholic churches answer to gay marriage,  we don't care but we wont allow you to marry in the church.   Thats totally fair think,  their church their rules.

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

D&C 112:24 Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord.
25 And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord;
26 First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord.

 

I've always liked reading about things like the 30 years war to get an idea of things like that, they had the advent of firearms, mass produced weapons that were top quality and very good armor the common man could afford with 4 months salary.  Add in religious and political strife and the end result was 8 million dead.  The whole apocalypse thing never did much for me, we've seen much and done much worse as a species and it looks like we're going back to that.  Oh well...

[Believing]

One of the beautiful characteristic of our church is we are predictable and consitent, look to the past and you see our future.

[BCSpace]

Some hope for changes in doctrines on issues like the priesthood ban, plural marriage, and homosexuality/ssm.  I think what the recent 'essays' demonstrated is that there will be no such changes and that is my prediction.  Otherwise, the Church may grow or shrink with the times but it will never become irrelevant.

[Tacenda]

3 minutes ago, BCSpace said:

Some hope for changes in doctrines on issues like the priesthood ban, plural marriage, and homosexuality/ssm.  I think what the recent 'essays' demonstrated is that there will be no such changes and that is my prediction.  Otherwise, the Church may grow or shrink with the times but it will never become irrelevant.

Well for starters, two out of three ain't bad!

Edited May 22, 2016 by Tacenda

[BCSpace]

8 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Well for starters, two out of three ain't bad!

LOL!  Feel free to present evidence of even one so far.  You have some time.  I have to go do some home teaching right now.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, BCSpace said:

LOL!  Feel free to present evidence of even one so far.  You have some time.  I have to go do some home teaching right now.

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/67613-weakened-testimony-from-church-history/?do=findComment&comment=1209625988

I'll just link RPN's post in Weakened Testimony From Church History in Social, I hope he doesn't mind.  Read #1.  It may not present the evidence you need, but it somewhat explains a little of how I feel.  Pres. Hinckley said polygamy isn't doctrinal.  The new, or semi new church essays, have basically disavowed the ban on blacks receiving the PH.  

 

[BCSpace]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/67613-weakened-testimony-from-church-history/?do=findComment&comment=1209625988

I'll just link RPN's post in Weakened Testimony From Church History in Social, I hope he doesn't mind.  Read #1.  It may not present the evidence you need, but it somewhat explains a little of how I feel.  Pres. Hinckley said polygamy isn't doctrinal.  The new, or semi new church essays, have basically disavowed the ban on blacks receiving the PH.  

 

You're right, it doesn't give the evidence.  With the priesthood ban, it was understood that at a later time, they would be given the priesthood and that has happened.  The 'essay' does say there were some wrong attitudes, but the ban itself remains doctrinal and inspired.  All disavowal does is say "It wasn't me".

Hinckley said no such thing about plural marriage.  We've already been the rounds on this one.  The quote you'll be wanting to present will be taken out of context and/or misread if used to back up this claim.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, BCSpace said:

.......................................................................

....................the ban itself remains doctrinal and inspired.  All disavowal does is say "It wasn't me".

.........................................................................

Interesting that Pres McKay was able to find no doctrinal basis for the priesthood ban and wanted to end it without a revelation, until the Pres of the Twelve objected.  After 1978, even Elder McConkie did not defend the ban as doctrinal or inspired.  Just the opposite.

Quote

There are statements in our literature by the early Brethren that we have interpreted to mean that the Negroes would not receive the priesthood in mortality. I have said the same things, and people write me letters and say, "You said such and such, and how is it now that we do such and such?" All I can say is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or George Q. Cannon or whoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.
It doesn't make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June 1978. It is a new day and a new arrangement, and the Lord has now given the revelation that sheds light out into the world on this subject. As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them. We now do what meridian Israel did when the Lord said the gospel should go to the Gentiles. We forget all the statements that limited the gospel to the house of Israel, and we start going to the Gentiles.

 

[Thinking]

15 hours ago, Believing said:

One of the beautiful characteristic of our church is we are predictable and consitent, look to the past and you see our future.

Apparently you haven't looked too far into the past.

[Maedros]

On 5/22/2016 at 2:42 AM, poptart said:

That being said i look at how the lds church does hold their members accountable, i find that a very attractive trait.  

Probably the best of all, you guys are so healthy! You can tell where the church spends its money and focus, on the people.  

Anywau, where do you think the church will go from here?

From here, I think the Church will grow in tolerance (especially toward LGBT) but no changes to the fundamental doctrines will be made - the Church will grow especially in Africa (stakes and Temples will dot the continent); the Church will also have more success in preaching the gospel in the Middle East and Muslim Countries - this will happen gradually, probably over the next 20 years or sooner.

[Atheist Mormon]

On 5/22/2016 at 7:42 PM, poptart said:

I wanted to ask what people think about the future of the church.  If anyone remembers i posted here a little bit last year and the church did.help me.  I also had a chance to look at other  churches like the catholic church  and well, i can see why the lds church is winning, you guys are not only waay more practical,  you care.  They went out of their way to help me, let me work at di and even offered the bishops storehouse if need be.  Sad to say, Catholic parishioner i knew did not care at all.   I remeber giving confession a try,  all the while thinking who is this guy to call me out on my sin. Hes not god.  Even worse, when he asked if i was gay.  I lied, if i was honest the congregation would have been even colder.  Never mind some of them being married multiple times and having kids they cant afford, lets go pick on the gays and people different from us.  Sooo sorry who i am interferes with the sanctity of your third marriage. 

That being said i look at how the lds church does hold their members accountable, i find that a very attractive trait.  

Probably the best of all, you guys are so healthy! You can tell where the church spends its money and focus, on the people.  

Anywau, where do you think the church will go from here?

The Church has no future....For everyone of you who got help from the Church there are ten of them waiting for answers......

[HappyJackWagon]

23 hours ago, Believing said:

One of the beautiful characteristic of our church is we are predictable and consitent, look to the past and you see our future.

You may want to do a little more research. The church today is VERY different than the church of the 19th century and I sure hope the church doesn't revert to some of those troubling beliefs and practices. The church, its practice, customs, and doctrine are consistently changing.

Our church is exactly the opposite of "predictable" as long as it maintains the radical beliefs/teachings of modern revelation. Anything could happen.

But to the OP- I expect the church will see fewer and fewer converts but will continue to grow based on birth rates. The church will grow the most (both birth and convert) in areas struggling with poverty and lack of education. The church will become more fundamentalist as progressives continue to abandon the church, leaving only the most stalwart/fundamentalist members which will perpetuate the cycle.

[jkwilliams]

Predicting the future of the church is a fool's errand. 

[flameburns623]

I'm wondering if this book speaks to the topic?

http://gregkofford.com/products/future-mormon?ref=yotpo_93

I don't know the author from Adam (lol), nor have I ever heard of Greg Lofford books, so feel free to inform/warn/disabuse me about either or both. 

[stemelbow]

56 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Predicting the future of the church is a fool's errand. 

Thanks for the shout out.

I predict at around 20 million members Jesus will come again and embrace the Church.  That'll be in the year 2950, but it's coming. 

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

Thanks for the shout out.

I predict at around 20 million members Jesus will come again and embrace the Church.  That'll be in the year 2950, but it's coming. 

I predict that some time in the next 20 years there will be a moderate number of new apostasies and that those that remain and desire to serve the Lord will be held to the higher standards and laws restored through the prophet Joseph Smith and the ordinances will (mostly) resume their original forms.

THEN Christ will have a people he can come to.

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I predict that some time in the next 20 years there will be a moderate number of new apostasies and that those that remain and desire to serve the Lord will be held to the higher standards and laws restored through the prophet Joseph Smith and the ordinances will (mostly) resume their original forms.

THEN Christ will have a people he can come to.

You're probably right. I doubt Jesus would want to come to His people if someone like me were around.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

You're probably right. I doubt Jesus would want to come to His people if someone like me were around.

Yeah, I guess he's sick of having to leave the 99 and go after the 1.  

[JLHPROF]

36 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Yeah, I guess he's sick of having to leave the 99 and go after the 1.

Not yet.  But D&C 86 says that day will come.

There is a time limit on this probationary period after all.

[BCSpace]

22 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Interesting that Pres McKay was able to find no doctrinal basis for the priesthood ban and wanted to end it without a revelation, until the Pres of the Twelve objected.  After 1978, even Elder McConkie did not defend the ban as doctrinal or inspired.  Just the opposite.

 

The essay itself implies the opposite.  For example:
 

Quote

 

Nevertheless, given the long history of withholding the priesthood from men of black African descent, Church leaders believed that a revelation from God was needed to alter the policy, and they made ongoing efforts to understand what should be done. After praying for guidance, President McKay did not feel impressed to lift the ban.

Church leaders pondered promises made by prophets such as Brigham Young that black members would one day receive priesthood and temple blessings. In June 1978, after “spending many hours in the Upper Room of the [Salt Lake] Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance,” Church President Spencer W. Kimball, his counselors in the First Presidency, and members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles received a revelation. “He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come,” the First Presidency announced on June 8. The First Presidency stated that they were “aware of the promises made by the prophets and presidents of the Church who have preceded us” that “all of our brethren who are worthy may receive the priesthood.”21 The revelation rescinded the restriction on priesthood ordination. It also extended the blessings of the temple to all worthy Latter-day Saints, men and women. The First Presidency statement regarding the revelation was canonized in the Doctrine and Covenants as Official Declaration 2.

 

It wouldn't matter if the president of the quorum objected, McKay went with it. Notice also that it is not the ban that is disavowed, but certain notions surrounding it:

Quote

Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.

 

 

sdfg