Mass Exodus from Church?

[lostindc]

16 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

That strikes me as a compliment. Thank  you.

And it works much better as a descriptor for faith in Christ and His gospel than for hostile and cynical conjecture, don't you think?

Most definitely works great for religious faith or various other beliefs, very much agree.  Hope that helps.

 Do you believe the Church is experiencing a drop in growth?  If so, what's da reason?

[HappyJackWagon]

38 minutes ago, CV75 said:

The full context of that quote is in a D. Michael Quinn book, "J. Reuben Clark: The Church Years” (notably pages 24-26). While he began his faith inquiry with the sentiment of your siggy (taken from a personal memo he wrote when he was 46 years old… a mid-life crisis?), and had to do with his quest for a fact-based rational theology than with correcting Mormonism, he ultimately confessed to a friend in a letter:

 

"I came early to appreciate that I could not rationalize a religion for myself, and that to attempt to do so would destroy my faith in God… I have always rather worshipped facts, and while I thought and read for a while, many of the incidents of life, experiences and circumstances led, unaided by the spirit of faith, to the position of the atheist, yet the faith of my fathers led me to abandon all that and to refrain from following it.... For me there seemed to be no alternative. I could only build up a doubt. --If I were to attempt to rationalize about my life here, and the life too come, I would be drowned in a sea of doubt." According to the author, “All the confidence of J. Reuben Clark's commitment to rational inquiry in religious matters evaporated.”

Over the intervening years, he either he became less childish, he got over it, or both!

 

I find this post perplexing because it is insightful but it also makes some rash assumptions. I agree that context is great. Thanks for sharing that.

I don't understand why the question about "mid-life crisis" arises. I see nothing about the quote in my Sig line as being childish or evidence of a mid-life crisis. It seems quite reasonable to me, in fact. Could you explain your interpretation of the weakness of the quote? I'm not quite following your thinking.

I have never considered the quote "If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed" to be focused solely on rational inquiry in religious matters or verifiable data, though I think it applies there as well. But I think investigation is important in every facet of our lives, as we build relationships, exercise faith, gain education, etc. Investigation and an openness to accept the results of the investigation indicate maturity, not childishness.

Critical thinking requires introspection and analysis about why we do, think, believe the things we do. Part of this is recognizing differences between our System 1 (heuristic/unconscious) thinking and our System 2 (logical/conscious) thinking. While we focus major decisions in System 2 thinking we must also recognize the limitations of our unconscious thinking that will include personal bias & beliefs.

 

[pogi]

16 minutes ago, lostindc said:

Do you believe the Church is experiencing a drop in growth?  If so, what's da reason?

All of you Satan's little helpers are the reason  

[lostindc]

2 minutes ago, pogi said:

All of you Satan's little helpers are the reason  

I gave you one of those reputation points.  Do you think Satan's helpers are providing information that is less faith promoting to the LDS?

[bcuzbcuz]

12 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I find this post perplexing because it is insightful but it also makes some rash assumptions. I agree that context is great. Thanks for sharing that.

I don't understand why the question about "mid-life crisis" arises. I see nothing about the quote in my Sig line as being childish or evidence of a mid-life crisis. It seems quite reasonable to me, in fact. Could you explain your interpretation of the weakness of the quote? I'm not quite following your thinking.

I have never considered the quote "If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed" to be focused solely on rational inquiry in religious matters or verifiable data, though I think it applies there as well. But I think investigation is important in every facet of our lives, as we build relationships, exercise faith, gain education, etc. Investigation and an openness to accept the results of the investigation indicate maturity, not childishness.

Critical thinking requires introspection and analysis about why we do, think, believe the things we do. Part of this is recognizing differences between our System 1 (heuristic/unconscious) thinking and our System 2 (logical/conscious) thinking. While we focus major decisions in System 2 thinking we must also recognize the limitations of our unconscious thinking that will include personal bias & beliefs.

 

I see you´ve been reading "Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman

[pogi]

3 minutes ago, lostindc said:

I gave you one of those reputation points.  Do you think Satan's helpers are providing information that is less faith promoting to the LDS?

I was just inserting a little humor, I obviously don't know you or what you are about, so you tell me...what is your purpose here? 

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

The full context of that quote is in a D. Michael Quinn book, "J. Reuben Clark: The Church Years” (notably pages 24-26). While he began his faith inquiry with the sentiment of your siggy (taken from a personal memo he wrote when he was 46 years old… a mid-life crisis?), and had to do with his quest for a fact-based rational theology than with correcting Mormonism, he ultimately confessed to a friend in a letter:

 

"I came early to appreciate that I could not rationalize a religion for myself, and that to attempt to do so would destroy my faith in God… I have always rather worshipped facts, and while I thought and read for a while, many of the incidents of life, experiences and circumstances led, unaided by the spirit of faith, to the position of the atheist, yet the faith of my fathers led me to abandon all that and to refrain from following it.... For me there seemed to be no alternative. I could only build up a doubt. --If I were to attempt to rationalize about my life here, and the life too come, I would be drowned in a sea of doubt." According to the author, “All the confidence of J. Reuben Clark's commitment to rational inquiry in religious matters evaporated.”

Over the intervening years, he either he became less childish, he got over it, or both!

 

"I came early to appreciate that I could not rationalize a religion for myself, and that to attempt to do so would destroy my faith in God."  This.  While so many ex-mormons who leave lose God, it was the one reason that I left.  I don't know..do women have mid-life crises?  When in thoughtful and intent prayer within the struggle of retaining a returned testimony..I knelt and listened to a voice that said to leave.  I believe I would have lost God had I remained.  He must have known that my great disappointment and plans would be a parcel of losing Him.  It is not like I had time to have a "shelf"...everything seemed to tumble all at once and the one thing that I knew...and know now..is that God loved me more than the church did.  For all the wonderful people in my life in the church...it wasn't them.  It was the religion and trying to believe in man and revelation..became to me contrary to the Lord.

[lostindc]

35 minutes ago, pogi said:

I was just inserting a little humor, I obviously don't know you or what you are about, so you tell me...what is your purpose here? 

Lifelong Mormon, lots of questions, heavy shelf

[CV75]

58 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I find this post perplexing because it is insightful but it also makes some rash assumptions. I agree that context is great. Thanks for sharing that.

I don't understand why the question about "mid-life crisis" arises. I see nothing about the quote in my Sig line as being childish or evidence of a mid-life crisis. It seems quite reasonable to me, in fact. Could you explain your interpretation of the weakness of the quote? I'm not quite following your thinking.

I have never considered the quote "If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed" to be focused solely on rational inquiry in religious matters or verifiable data, though I think it applies there as well. But I think investigation is important in every facet of our lives, as we build relationships, exercise faith, gain education, etc. Investigation and an openness to accept the results of the investigation indicate maturity, not childishness.

Critical thinking requires introspection and analysis about why we do, think, believe the things we do. Part of this is recognizing differences between our System 1 (heuristic/unconscious) thinking and our System 2 (logical/conscious) thinking. While we focus major decisions in System 2 thinking we must also recognize the limitations of our unconscious thinking that will include personal bias & beliefs.

The book from which your siggy is taken provides a good deal of context bout the quote, informing its best use.

J. Reuben Clark began his faith inquiry positing that, “If we have the truth, [it] cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed” (quoting from the book) and which you borrow for your siggy. I was joking that at the time he wrote it (in the year 1917, at the age of 46), he might have been having a mid-life crisis.

The quote is only the hypothesis at beginning of his inquiry, and he abandons it after he concludes that religious matters (in his words, “truth”) don’t work that way.

In his case, he was indeed “focused solely on rational inquiry in religious matters.” So I think that there might be some weakness in quoting a premise that he concluded to be faulty and that he wasn’t using to justify correcting Mormonism in the first place.

I merely shared your use of the word childish in the post to which I replied. You were saying that you find it troubling that the church seems to be so focused on fear and avoidance of criticism in relation to her transparency on fiscal matters.

To reply to the conversation about transparency from the standpoint of religious fiscal matters, and with respect to Brother Clark’s attitude toward rationale and faith with regards to religious matters, I think transparency and common consent in the Church have the same relationship as knowledge and faith. While it is difficult to tease out how much knowledge the Lord imparts before He requires the application of faith in gaining more (and vice-versa), the desire to believe is incipient to both knowledge and faith. In the same way, transparency (a quality and mechanism for expressing knowledge) and common consent (a quality and mechanism for expressing faith) stimulate each other so that both are sufficient. And since transparency is not the absence of color there are many multiple kinds or “colors” of transparency, often driven by the eye of the beholder in faith.

[CV75]

26 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

"I came early to appreciate that I could not rationalize a religion for myself, and that to attempt to do so would destroy my faith in God."  This.  While so many ex-mormons who leave lose God, it was the one reason that I left.  I don't know..do women have mid-life crises?  When in thoughtful and intent prayer within the struggle of retaining a returned testimony..I knelt and listened to a voice that said to leave.  I believe I would have lost God had I remained.  He must have known that my great disappointment and plans would be a parcel of losing Him.  It is not like I had time to have a "shelf"...everything seemed to tumble all at once and the one thing that I knew...and know now..is that God loved me more than the church did.  For all the wonderful people in my life in the church...it wasn't them.  It was the religion and trying to believe in man and revelation..became to me contrary to the Lord.

I would agree that if you cannot rationalize belonging to a religion on one hand, and haven’t faith in that religion on the other hand, then wherever you find God, by rationalization or by faith, in any degree, is better than not at all. This is what I think Alma might have referred to as "desire to believe."

[pogi]

53 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

"I came early to appreciate that I could not rationalize a religion for myself, and that to attempt to do so would destroy my faith in God."  This.  While so many ex-mormons who leave lose God, it was the one reason that I left.  I don't know..do women have mid-life crises?  When in thoughtful and intent prayer within the struggle of retaining a returned testimony..I knelt and listened to a voice that said to leave.  I believe I would have lost God had I remained.  He must have known that my great disappointment and plans would be a parcel of losing Him.  It is not like I had time to have a "shelf"...everything seemed to tumble all at once and the one thing that I knew...and know now..is that God loved me more than the church did.  For all the wonderful people in my life in the church...it wasn't them.  It was the religion and trying to believe in man and revelation..became to me contrary to the Lord.

While you may have experienced much disappointment with the church, religion, and man/revelation, I think it important to acknowledge and be grateful to the church, religion, and man/revelation for their part in nurturing, fostering, and cultivating your relationship and understanding of God.  Your very knowledge of God is attributable to the church, religion, and man/revelation.  Without those things, God would not exist in your life the way He does now.  You can thank God, and the church, for that at least.

[pogi]

59 minutes ago, lostindc said:

Lifelong Mormon, lots of questions, heavy shelf

Great, then you have come to the right place.  Are you here looking for reasons to believe/stay or for reasons to doubt/leave?  Either way, you will find what you are looking for.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, lostindc said:

Most definitely works great for religious faith or various other beliefs, very much agree.  Hope that helps.

 Do you believe the Church is experiencing a drop in growth?  If so, what's da reason?

I understand there has been a recent slowing in the rate of growth.  

My personal opinion is that the reason is the pervasive global influence of Satan as foretold in the vision that Nephi beheld, the one where he was shown that in the last days the church of the Lamb of God would have a global presence but that its numbers would be (relatively) few by reason of Satan and his "church," or those who subject themselves to his influence  

If you say that the growth rate has slowed because the Church won't change its doctrines, that's as much as to confirm my opinion, because the Church won't abandon principles of truth. If it were to do so, Jesus Christ would reject us as a people. 

But whatever the growth rate, the Church will continue  to prepare for the Second Coming, at which time the earth will be cleansed of wickedness in advance of Christ's thousand-year reign on the earth, during which Satan will be bound. 

Thereafter, he will be loosed for a little season, and wickedness will grow on the earth again until ultimately the wicked will be destroyed, attendant to the end of time. Then will come the final judgment. 

Edited December 8, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[lostindc]

14 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I understand there has been a recent slowing in the rate of growth.  

My personal opinion is that the reason is the pervasive global influence of Satan as foretold in the vision that Nephi beheld, the one where he was shown that in the last days the church of the Lamb of God would have a global presence but that its numbers would be (relatively) few by reason of Satan and his "church," or those who subject themselves to his influence  

If you say that the growth rate has slowed because the Church won't change its doctrines, that's as much as to confirm my opinion, because the Church won't abandon principles of truth. If it were to do so, Jesus Christ would reject us as a people. 

But whatever the growth rate, the Church will continue  to prepare for the Second Coming, at which time the earth will be cleansed of wickedness in advance of Christ's thousand-year reign on the earth, during which Satan will be bound. 

Thereafter, he will be loosed for a little season, and wickedness will grow on the earth again until ultimately the wicked will be destroyed, attendant to the end of time. Then will come the final judgment. 

I can respect those beliefs.  I won't mock them the way you mocked my beliefs for the why my Church may be going through a sizable exodus.  

 

Is it possible that the Church is slowing to grow because people now have easy access to Church history and the history of the Church may hinder one from baptism or from staying LDS?  

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, lostindc said:

I can respect those beliefs.  I won't mock them the way you mocked my beliefs for the why my Church may be going through a sizable exodus.  

 

I don't recall discussing your church, whatever that might be,, let alone mocking your beliefs about why said church is experiencing an exodus. I try not to mock the religious beliefs of others.

Quote

Is it possible that the Church is slowing to grow because people now have easy access to Church history and the history of the Church may hinder one from baptism or from staying LDS?

I think Satan will use any means at his disposal to prevent or hinder people from embracing the gospel. This might include confusing their minds relative to less-understood elements of Church history and distracting them from seeking and receiving a witness through the Holy Ghost, which the only real way conversion occurs. 

We have people in the Church with brilliant minds who have long been very well acquainted with material that people "have easy access to" today, and yet they have not abandoned their faith or been hindered in their embracing of the restored gospel of Christ.

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

While you may have experienced much disappointment with the church, religion, and man/revelation, I think it important to acknowledge and be grateful to the church, religion, and man/revelation for their part in nurturing, fostering, and cultivating your relationship and understanding of God.  Your very knowledge of God is attributable to the church, religion, and man/revelation.  Without those things, God would not exist in your life the way He does now.  You can thank God, and the church, for that at least.

Oh..I am ever so grateful ..always..some very treasured childhood and family memories and not to mention core beliefs that will never change!  Though many may disagree, I will never be anti-mormon.  These are my people...the religion is not.

[rongo]

51 minutes ago, lostindc said:

Is it possible that the Church is slowing to grow because people now have easy access to Church history and the history of the Church may hinder one from baptism or from staying LDS?  

It's possible in some cases, but to be honest, the vast majority of people who are not interested in joining the Church have no idea whatsoever about any of the "hot internet Church history topics." Nor do they care much if and when they learn about them. The vast majority of people who aren't interested in joining the Church are simply . . . not interested. Because they're not interested. 

It does sometimes happen that people read things online that disturb them, and this inhibits them from wanting to go further with investigating/joining the Church, but the reality is that the bigger problem is the majority of people's disinterest in commitment religion and increasing secularism. This includes members of the Church, many of whom increasingly don't believe in the supernatural, really, in the here and now. They sometimes do when it is safely in the remote past, as a vague concept, but they increasingly are skeptical of such things being possible today in 2016. I think adhering to things like miracles, ministry of angels, etc. are a bigger drag on people enthusiastically wanting to join the Church and staying active in it than "easy access to Church history."

[lostindc]

56 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

We have people in the Church with brilliant minds who have long been very well acquainted with material that people "have easy access to" today, and yet they have not abandoned their faith or been hindered in their embracing of the restored gospel of Christ.

But they have Scott.  Many of our bright minds have left or hold a more universalist type of approach.  Look at what FARMs has become.  Look at the institute teachers and many scholars that have left.  If you want to speak to some they're all over the Facebook groups, Sunstone, etc.  

[Scott Lloyd]

7 minutes ago, lostindc said:

But they have Scott.  Many of our bright minds have left or hold a more universalist type of approach.  Look at what FARMs has become.  Look at the institute teachers and many scholars that have left.  If you want to speak to some they're all over the Facebook groups, Sunstone, etc.  

The real descendant of FARMS is the Interpreter Foundation --as good or better, in my opinion, than FARMS, ever was.

And there are and always have been apostates. But many brilliant scholars in the field of Church history have testimonies as vibrant as they ever were.

[HappyJackWagon]

3 minutes ago, rongo said:

It's possible in some cases, but to be honest, the vast majority of people who are not interested in joining the Church have no idea whatsoever about any of the "hot internet Church history topics." Nor do they care much if and when they learn about them. The vast majority of people who aren't interested in joining the Church are simply . . . not interested. Because they're not interested. 

It does sometimes happen that people read things online that disturb them, and this inhibits them from wanting to go further with investigating/joining the Church, but the reality is that the bigger problem is the majority of people's disinterest in commitment religion and increasing secularism. This includes members of the Church, many of whom increasingly don't believe in the supernatural, really, in the here and now. They sometimes do when it is safely in the remote past, as a vague concept, but they increasingly are skeptical of such things being possible today in 2016. I think adhering to things like miracles, ministry of angels, etc. are a bigger drag on people enthusiastically wanting to join the Church and staying active in it than "easy access to Church history."

But why aren't they interested? Do they not care about God? Or do they mistrust organized religion? What is it about secularism that is more compelling than God's one true religion?

I agree that miraculous truth claims are a hindrance to people, but why? Is it because they see so many miracles that a church that claims miracles seems dull and uninspired? Or is it because they don't see the same kind of miracles in their own lives as they are taught to believe in church? Is it because religion (generally speaking) loses credibility when it supports mythical claims like a global flood or a tower being built to heaven which is the origin of all languages, or a prophet being swallowed by a fish, or the sea being separated magically etc. as literal events? Is it because religion is often perceived to be in opposition to science? Or maybe because religion is the basis for discrimination against others based on what they claim to be "the will of God"?

I think the "nones" are the fastest growing segment of society because they simply don't trust religious organizations and they don't trust miraculous claims that can't be verified, and don't match their own lived experiences. I think at least in part they are uninterested in religion because religion isn't speaking to their own experience and in many ways seems to be in direct opposition to their lived experience.

[rongo]

23 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

But why aren't they interested? Do they not care about God? Or do they mistrust organized religion? What is it about secularism that is more compelling than God's one true religion?

I don't see it as one being more "compelling" than the other --- except maybe by default. I feel that we largely have a certain mix of people on the earth right now --- generally apathetic, lethargic, soft, and non-resilient. This predominating type falls prey to the myriad addictions of our day (including, especially, electronics).  Those who are energetic, passionate, and resilient (in or out of the Church) stand out.

Who is actually energetic and passionate about secularism? For the vast majority who lean that way, it's a lazy default setting, not a thoughtful and deeply-felt position --- and one that keeps them from having to commit any time and resources to outside endeavors. 

This is the dilemma the Church (and other traditional institutions) finds itself in. Most who agree to be baptized are not committed to the doctrine and cause of the Church. Many inactive Mormons on the rolls have no particular doctrinal quarrel with the Church, they just don't want to "church" at all. So, we continue to baptize a couple hundred thousand each year, most of whom drop out not due to the Church's or anyone's fault --- it's just part and parcel the times we live in and the mix of people.

Do they mistrust organized religion? This question assumes that they give that amount of thought to it. 

Quote

I agree that miraculous truth claims are a hindrance to people, but why? Is it because they see so many miracles that a church that claims miracles seems dull and uninspired? Or is it because they don't see the same kind of miracles in their own lives as they are taught to believe in church? Is it because religion (generally speaking) loses credibility when it supports mythical claims like a global flood or a tower being built to heaven which is the origin of all languages, or a prophet being swallowed by a fish, or the sea being separated magically etc. as literal events? Is it because religion is often perceived to be in opposition to science? Or maybe because religion is the basis for discrimination against others based on what they claim to be "the will of God"?

I think the "nones" are the fastest growing segment of society because they simply don't trust religious organizations and they don't trust miraculous claims that can't be verified, and don't match their own lived experiences. I think at least in part they are uninterested in religion because religion isn't speaking to their own experience and in many ways seems to be in direct opposition to their lived experience

------

[rongo, here] The problem is that I don't see the David Bokovoy types as inspiring a stampede of people fired up with religious faith. Sure, it might make some people feel good to believe that they don't have to believe any of the silly miracle stuff and the Church can still be "true," but then what? What "get you out of bed in the morning" impulse does that engender?

 

Edited December 8, 2016 by rongo

[pogi]

30 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I agree that miraculous truth claims are a hindrance to people, but why? Is it because they see so many miracles that a church that claims miracles seems dull and uninspired? Or is it because they don't see the same kind of miracles in their own lives as they are taught to believe in church? Is it because religion (generally speaking) loses credibility when it supports mythical claims like a global flood or a tower being built to heaven which is the origin of all languages, or a prophet being swallowed by a fish, or the sea being separated magically etc. as literal events? Is it because religion is often perceived to be in opposition to science? Or maybe because religion is the basis for discrimination against others based on what they claim to be "the will of God"?

I think all of those things mentioned are real perceptions and reasons for people to be hindered.  It all boils down to this - you will find whatever it is you are looking for, because there are reasons to believe, and there are reasons not to believe.  I think we tend to believe whatever we choose to focus on more.  I try to keep my eye single to God for that reason.  Life works better, and good seems to be more predominant in my life that way.  

30 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

What is it about secularism that is more compelling than God's one true religion?

Beer...oh and sex.  

Instant gratification void of instant shame or guilt.  The illusion of total freedom.

And sometimes science.

 

Edited December 8, 2016 by pogi

[Five Solas]

3 hours ago, pogi said:

Beer...

I'll just pick on the first from your list.  You're wrong:  https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/431701.Drinking_With_Calvin_and_Luther_

:0)

--Erik

[Okrahomer]

1 hour ago, Five Solas said:

I'll just pick on the first from your list.  You're wrong:  https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/431701.Drinking_With_Calvin_and_Luther_

:0)

--Erik

Don't look now, Erik, but this hero of yours seems reluctant to belly up.  Maybe it's just me, but your verse-by-verse exemplar isn't too hip either.

[James Tunney]

7 hours ago, pogi said:

I think all of those things mentioned are real perceptions and reasons for people to be hindered.  It all boils down to this - you will find whatever it is you are looking for, because there are reasons to believe, and there are reasons not to believe.  I think we tend to believe whatever we choose to focus on more.  I try to keep my eye single to God for that reason.  Life works better, and good seems to be more predominant in my life that way.  

Beer...oh and sex.  

Instant gratification void of instant shame or guilt.  The illusion of total freedom.

And sometimes science.

 

Are you serious? Do you know any non- mormons? Have you ever ventured outside of your religious cocoon? Maybe if you did, you'd realize that the "they just want to sin" simplistic reasoning doesn't function very well outside mormonism?