Mass Exodus from Church?

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

If there is a prophesy to cover every possible outcome, is it really prophesy?

This is why those of us who have resigned or been exed don't even matter.  I quit arguing mass resignation or any mass of leaving.  We are considered among the wheat and tares and it is often just "good riddance" to all of us.  My thinking is that those who are remaining with a different view of things will be the ones to make a change in the church.  At least I hope so.

[stemelbow]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

I also reject the notion that God doesn't want people in the Church.  God wants EVERYONE in the Church, but unlike Lucifer he leaves it entirely up to us.
Perhaps there is an error in the delivery of our message.  But the notion I reject is that because conversions are decreasing and resignations are increasing that there is a flaw in the gospel.
The idea that if we gave women the priesthood, accepted SSM, got rid of the garments, and preached nothing but Christ,  would absolutely gain us more converts.
History proves that given the increase in converts proportional to previous changes we've made.
But God doesn't want us to change his gospel to increase our numbers.  He wants people to accept his gospel.

Women and the priesthood, SSM and garments aren't the gospel.  They are mere states positions the Church has and represent practices the Church does.  I see clearly where we differ, and no doubt your view aligns with the majority, but I'd say treating every little piece like it's the gospel is the problem and is likely the biggest factor in why we remain so small and our growth rate has been in steep decline for years. 

[bluebell]

23 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

This is why those of us who have resigned or been exed don't even matter.  I quit arguing mass resignation or any mass of leaving.  We are considered among the wheat and tares and it is often just "good riddance" to all of us.  My thinking is that those who are remaining with a different view of things will be the ones to make a change in the church.  At least I hope so.

One of the things that i liked about the article was that it quoted the church spokesperson as saying that every person matters to the leadership of the church and that even the few that are leaving are too many and that we need to be loving and kind to those who choose to go.

[Nofear]

Oh, there's no doubt that there are things that need improvement among the Saints. There is more to be revealed (AoF 9). What sometimes gets some members in trouble is that they either 1) advocate a change that is not, nor ever will be in the program of the Lord or 2) advocate a change that will be but is not within their stewardship to push on others.

Another misconception is that membership numbers = fulfilling the mission of the Lord. It is true that we wish as many people as possible to hear the Gospel and change their lives through it. But, not everybody is ready for the fullness of the revealed Gospel (just as not every member, indeed, not most members are ready for the yet-to-be-revealed aspects of the Gospel). Our charge is to spread the message to every kindred, nation, and tongue. Not everybody will or is ready to convert. Whatever good they do accept from the good news is something to be celebrated. Still, not everybody, not most, will accept the message at this time. In short, the number of converts only has tertiary relevance to the prophecy and prophetic charge.

Edited November 3, 2016 by Nofear

[JLHPROF]

8 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Women and the priesthood, SSM and garments aren't the gospel.  They are mere states positions the Church has and represent practices the Church does.  I see clearly where we differ, and no doubt your view aligns with the majority, but I'd say treating every little piece like it's the gospel is the problem and is likely the biggest factor in why we remain so small and our growth rate has been in steep decline for years. 

I was addressing the argument of our inclusiveness - the idea that we make changes in doctrine and practice to increase/retain memberships.
That is something I am completely opposed to.  No doctrine of the gospel is up for change to increase our numbers, and when God corrects any steps astray there will likely be those who choose to leave.
It all comes down to who believe a religion should work for them vs those who just want whatever God says even if it makes them unhappy/uncomfortable.

Edited November 3, 2016 by JLHPROF

[Jeanne]

20 minutes ago, bluebell said:

One of the things that i liked about the article was that it quoted the church spokesperson as saying that every person matters to the leadership of the church and that even the few that are leaving are too many and that we need to be loving and kind to those who choose to go.

I saw that too; but in numerous online talk on this board and others..it has not been kind.  Thank you though for accepting this ol' lady as she is. 

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, Gray said:

We'd better bring the missionaries home. Our numbers are many!

I thought the point of this discussion is that we aren't many but we should be. Maybe I misunderstood.

[Gray]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I thought the point of this discussion is that we aren't many but we should be. Maybe I misunderstood.

Well, it's all very subjective. Compared to what we were 50 years ago, we are many. Compared to the Catholics, we are few. Compared to the first century Christian communities, or the Community of Christ, or the local non-denominational congregation down the road, we are many. 

Edited November 3, 2016 by Gray

[cdowis]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

 we need to be loving and kind to those who choose to go.

As long as they leave quietly and not with fireworks and a marching band of followers.

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, cdowis said:

As long as they leave quietly and not with fireworks and a marching band of followers.

If you can show me where our leaders teach that we can drop love and kindness based on the behaviour of those leaving, it would help me not dismiss your comment as personal opinion I very much disagree with.

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, cdowis said:

As long as they leave quietly and not with fireworks and a marching band of followers.

Even then we should be loving and kind.

"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;"

[Scott Lloyd]

On 11/3/2016 at 10:34 AM, HappyJackWagon said:

I understand your position, but if the Standard of Truth has truly been erected, no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing. I guess we could quibble about what "progress" means, but it would seem that if the church ever actually declines in growth, a reasonable argument could be made that the work is not progressing.

Unless God's purpose lacks ambition, it would seem that the church should swell dramatically as it "sounds in every ear" or appears on every computer screen. It seems that as information about the church increases, the growth rate of converts is decreasing.

I've made the following points before, but as usual, you are ignoring what I've said.

Nephi beheld in vision that the church of the Lamb of God would be over all the face of the earth in the last days, but that its numbers would be few by reason of the influence of Satan in the world.

Ergo, all that has to happen for prophecy to be fulfilled is for the global presence of the Church to continue to spread. The "standard of truth" will thus have been erected and will have "visited every clime." Thus, no unhallowed had will have stopped the work from progressing, though Satan will continue his nefarious work to continue.

At length, Christ will come to reign personally on the earth, beginning the thousand years of peace, prior to which the earth will have been cleansed from wickedness. During this grant millennial period is when dramatic growth in conversions will occur in perfect fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy about the stone cut out of the mountain without hands consuming all worldly kingdoms until it fills the whole earth.

What is going on today is merely prelude to all that will come in the Millennium.

Edited November 6, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, Gray said:

Well, it's all very subjective. Compared to what we were 50 years ago, we are many. Compared to the Catholics, we are few. Compared to the original Christian church, or the Community of Christ, or the local non-denominational congregation down the road, we are many. 

We might also consider the parable of the sower when we fret over numbers of people leaving the Church.

[Scott Lloyd]

8 hours ago, Gray said:

I wish journalists would stop repeating this mantra. I don't think it's true - and it may never have been true. 

Why do you not think it's true? Bear in mind that people in general are largely turning away from religion today. With the LDS Church not so much.

[Scott Lloyd]

11 hours ago, Nofear said:

http://www.sltrib.com/home/4535962-155/mass-exodus-from-mormonism-lds-stats

From the article,

Is there more to the story or is this statistic substantially correct? For my part, I go with substantially correct, but some may wish a chance to "clarify" the facts.

I think the implications of what is reported in this Tribune article are very, very significant. For too long now, the narrative has been circulating at large that people of late are leaving the Church "in droves," that it is hemorrhaging, and other such nonsense.

Now, at long last, we have clear indication that the number of resignations has been stable for at least the past two decades, including the past couple of years when "mass resignations" have been staged as media events to convey the supposed impression that the Church was imploding because of anger over the gay marriage policy and what not.

This late news would support a couple of recent public statements by General Authorities that the Church of Jesus Christ has never been stronger, despite outside pressures from a world increasingly subject to unrighteous influence.

It is as Nephi beheld in vision: the church of the Lamb spreading over all the face of the earth (stability and global presence) but its numbers being relatively few because of Satan and his followers holding sway over so many people.

I, for one, take pleasure in this news item of today, even as I acknowledge that the loss of even one soul is regrettable.

[carbon dioxide]

7 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

The idea that if we gave women the priesthood, accepted SSM, got rid of the garments, and preached nothing but Christ,  would absolutely gain us more converts.
 

I don't even think such changes would increase the number of converts at least over the long term.  All that would show is the the Church is like any other church out there so what would the appeal be.  We really can't say anything in the Church is true since it would all be subject to change at any moment. 

[carbon dioxide]

The Church today can expect the same struggles that the Church in the Book of Mormon experienced.  It was not all just years of growth and prosperity.  It was a church that struggled with many things.  People left and became problems for the Church.   The only thing we know is how it all ends but until it ends, we can expects periods of growth and perhaps periods of decline.  The fact that the Church grows in a world that is said to be more wicked than the times of Noah when nobody converted shows that even our small growth is a miracle. 

[carbon dioxide]

5 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I was addressing the argument of our inclusiveness - the idea that we make changes in doctrine and practice to increase/retain memberships.
That is something I am completely opposed to.  No doctrine of the gospel is up for change to increase our numbers, and when God corrects any steps astray there will likely be those who choose to leave.
It all comes down to who believe a religion should work for them vs those who just want whatever God says even if it makes them unhappy/uncomfortable.

If the Church wanted to increase membership, dumping the Word of Wisdom would be far more effective than appealing to gay issues (4% of the population as a whole), women in the priesthood, ect.)  Dumping tithing might be another one that might bring in more people.  I don't want any of that however.  One thing I like about the Church is that it is not a church that seeks the approval of the world and adopt its ways.  Better to have a church of 1 million members who want to follow the gospel than a church of 100 million who want to follow the ways of man.

[cdowis]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

 

 

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

 

For those who are not aware, I have a very dry sense of humor.  

Anyway, they have done nothing to me to forgive.  I can only stand as a  witness in behalf of the little ones who were offended.
Mark 9 [42] And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.

Edited November 4, 2016 by cdowis

[Five Solas]

7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Of course in the context of the global population LDS Church membership is small; however, LDS leaders should not be faulted for celebrating its phenomenal growth since its foundation. But the numerical size of the Church is not what is important. Just as the small bit of leaven has impact on the loaf, the Church has spread throughout the world exactly as predicted in Nephi's prophecy of the end times. It accurately describes what is happening today. 

 

But at some point all this "celebrating" jumped the proverbial shark, didn't it?  At some point, that always-growing LDS Church membership number began to ring hollow, didn't it?  72% attrition by age 20--sustainable?  You don't have to be a mathematician to answer that.  But the number's propped up by absurd assumption--all the people LDS authorities have lost track of--all those people live to be 110, and thus they remain in the membership tally.  The more we lose, the better our numbers look...

All the more reason to insist (as you do) that the numbers now aren't really important.  Because if they were still important--you'd have a cold hard fact staring you in the face, contradicting your worldview.  See the link to Gordon B. Hinckley's talk I made in previous post.  Most unpleasant and disruptive to his worldview this fact, had he lived to see it. 

--Erik 

[Nofear]

2 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

If the Church wanted to increase membership, dumping the Word of Wisdom would be far more effective than appealing to gay issues (4% of the population as a whole), women in the priesthood, ect.)  Dumping tithing might be another one that might bring in more people.  I don't want any of that however.  ...

I shan't cite it right now (phone = inconvenient) but one of the trends noticed is that churches which capitulated on standards or otherwise did not expect or ask much of their congregants have not prospered. Counterintuitive though it may be, the changes above I believe would result in the decline of our church. Thus it is that the ''advocates'' for a more progressive church would wittingly or unwittingly advance the cause of the Adversary for the destruction of the Church.

That's not, of course, to say changes aren't needed or not coming. Quite the contrary, we *want* to further approach Zion. And, I believe, significant changes are indeed coming. Yet far better to be the Saint who is prepared and ready to accept further light and truth because we adhere to the principles we currently have than to be the fair weather saint who leaps from the ship of Zion because they imagine we are off course or too slow.

It is an unfortunate irony that such deserters (at least some of them, not all certainly) might have been positive agents for accepting changes the Lord will yet ask of us had they held fast to the iron rod. Instead by now forsaking the servants of his church, the General Authorities, the progress is impaired. This is because some, some, among us are less ready for change. (We, of course, ought not judge them or even try to identify them. We ought rejoice in all who endeavor to follow Christ where e'er they be.) And if some steps in the future would be a bit too much, perhaps the examples of others may have eased the difficulty of that path changing ''too much'' to doable.

Without trying to think who might fit this bill (on this I judge not) I nonetheless suspect there are some here who would indeed be such ready and valiant souls on the vanguard when more is asked of us. But the Adversary has cunningly deceived these with impatience and falsehood thusly impairing our cause. Others, well, there *are* tares among us. But the Master commands us and his other servants to suffer such lest our zeal cause harm.

[Gray]

15 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

We might also consider the parable of the sower when we fret over numbers of people leaving the Church.

Yes, that's quite a good thing to keep in mind. 

[Gray]

15 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Why do you not think it's true? Bear in mind that people in general are largely turning away from religion today. With the LDS Church not so much.

From this pew survey, we're declining as a percentage of the US population. Jehovah's Witnesses are doing slightly better than we are (although all Christian religious groups seem to have sluggish growth or are in decline). I think if not for our agressive missionary program and higher than average birth rate, I think we'd be shrinking at the same rate as the protestants. 

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/ 

 

Edited November 4, 2016 by Gray

[JLHPROF]

56 minutes ago, Gray said:

From this pew survey, we're declining as a percentage of the US population. Jehovah's Witnesses are doing slightly better than we are (although all Christian religious groups seem to have sluggish growth or are in decline). I think if not for our agressive missionary program and higher than average birth rate, I think we'd be shrinking at the same rate as the protestants.

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

 

As this shows any perceived change for Mormons (and JW's) is statistically insignificant and within the margin of error.

Sounds kind of like our "mass" resignations - statistically insignificant and definitely an error.

[Gray]

41 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

As this shows any perceived change for Mormons (and JW's) is statistically insignificant and within the margin of error.

Sounds kind of like our "mass" resignations - statistically insignificant and definitely an error.

Given our massive recruitment campaign and high birth rate, we should be growing as a percentage of the population. Good point on the margin of error. But our growth is tepid enough not to be detectable within the margin of error on the survey, which says that we are seeing a significant number of members who no longer attend. I doubt most of it has to do with the exmormons and their movements. I think it's just the larger societal trend away from organized religion.