Mormon message boards

[readstoomuch]

I don't actually participate that much, but I do check in regularly.  My search for an intelligent, faithful place keeps bringing me back here.  Imperfect as it is, I still appreciate how well it does.  I won't even discuss some websites because of the shark tank they were or became.  

A Thoughtful Faith and Rationalfaiths didn't work.  Wheatandtares didn't work.  Neither did bycommonconsent, though I am still working through the board and discussions.  There is nothing like this little journey to make you feel like a faithful LDS person with rather minor concerns.  

There was quite a bit of temple talk or at least people discussing their problems with it on wheatandtares.  I know that is an issue on this board, so I am treading lightly.  In fact I am treading lightly about lots of things, especially social issues.  Social issues.Aaaaarggghhhh!!!!!!!  I know they exist, but it is just a dead horse beating contest.  The noise in my head just gets painful so I just don't go any where.  Then I miss a faith promoting, intellectual, and yes, candid discussion.  I guess it comes down to how candid and how much people are a victim or whine about the same things over and over again.  

So, I really like this board, even if it comes up short sometimes.  Ultra faithful boards can be a little too much for me.  Especially, when they are not always accurate or sugar coated.  Our board doesn't always hold my interest, but neither does a soup of doubters and those in a crisis of faith.  I don't even try to help very much with the faith crises or even understand it.  I never seem to help that much.  There is so much that is well written and honest in print that is still faith promoting.   Why doesn't that help?

Am I the whiner, or is it hard to get a good, faithful, honest, intellectual conversation about LDS beliefs?  Where do you go?  Do you just stay to yourself and have the discussions in your head?  Is this (mdmb) the place like Brother Brigham said?  Thanks for the rant and good discussions you do have.

[rpn]

This site acts almost like a ward:   http://nauvoo.site/forum/index.php

I've noticed that it doesn't matter what site, the boards with people who consider themselves less actives, former members, not as committed, or even just different from others in their church communities  are far more active.    I presume that is a good thing: that being anxiously engaged in good causes limits the time available to trashtalk, and the inclination to do so.   But it also gives space to the critics, and  makes it harder to find places where people can really discuss questions that arise.  This site is good for that.

[Doctrine 612]

Welcome to the group, I love this place; I like to ask any question I like and then I get a variety of responses, and I take what I like and leave what I don't.

i do have other groups that help my interests and needs, example: 

a trivia group 

a Sunday lesson group 

a disscusion with non members group

hope you find the answers to your questions.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, readstoomuch said:

 

So, I really like this board, even if it comes up short sometimes.  Ultra faithful boards can be a little too much for me.  Especially, when they are not always accurate or sugar coated.  Our board doesn't always hold my interest, but neither does a soup of doubters and those in a crisis of faith.  I don't even try to help very much with the faith crises or even understand it.  

Can you define, "Ultra faithful boards" for me, because there are boards with stricter rules, but even they have persons with a crisis of faith issue. In fact I don't know any adults who have never had a crisis of faith, or serious questions they have had to work through. In fact, faith cannot grow strong without being tested, and re-tested. Even "seeds of doubt", just as "seeds of faith" can grow into mighty oaks. I cherish my doubts over the years, those that have driven me to my knees, and cased me to cry out, Abba (Father), "help thou my unbelief"! For it is then when I find the answers to questions that have caused my faith to grow, my soul to all but outgrow my body. I have had the opputunity to bless people and have them healed, but had given up hope that I could be healed. The scriptures teach that "healing and being healed" are two different gifts. It also teaches that when we are healed, "our sins are forgiven". This December 7th will mark a year, where I was taken to the hospital in such a state that my wife was told to call in my children, because he did not think I would make it. While in that state two of my Bishopric showed and gave me a blessing...two hours later I was awake a watching TV with my wife. My children where happily on their way home to get ready for work and to get their children off to school. So maybe the "ultra faithful" you speak off, have reasons to feel that way. So take part more here, as all are welcome. 

[readstoomuch]

I am looking at the Nauvoo site.  So far so good.

instead of ultrafaithful, ultrauninformed might be a better way of saying it.  For example, no working knowledge of Church essay topics or willingness to learn about the issues.  I come across sites like that and meet people at Church like that.  I want to respect where they are and don't want to plant doubt within their minds. 

As far as faith crisis, I used to want to help, but don't have a very good record in making any difference.  Social differences seem almost insurmountable.  I don't want to even start into them on this thread or it will be the same drawn out discussion that goes nowhere.  Young people don't seem to read or reason very well.  They don't know history.  They don't know what a balanced view is.  At least that is what it seems like.  

[sdc999]

How does the church look at these message boards?   I know, many moons ago, before I had left the church, I inquired about having several friends (couples) over weekly to discuss the gospel.  I was not only shot down, but "educated" as well by the bishop and EQ president.    I was young and impressionable back then.  Today, I have a more Robert Kirby approach to things.   I will tell you what I think regardless of what I think it may do to affect your precious feelings.   I don't go out of my way to intentionally hurt feelings but if someone else starts the conversation, I do respond. 

So, back to the first question.  Since the church doesn't want people having discussions (or has that changed), what is the feeling of message boards? 

[Calm]

There was a certain type of discussion group at the time when instruction not to hold study groups was handed out that was growing in popularity that had little to do with dealing with Church history and more into getting into inappropriate relationships and money schemes, if my memory serves me correctly.  Nowadays I know a number of wards who have scripture study groups through the RS or other function.

The Church encourages members to get both educated and active in spreading their faithful knowledge in social and other media.

Edited November 27, 2016 by Calm

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, readstoomuch said:

I am looking at the Nauvoo site.  So far so good.

instead of ultrafaithful, ultrauninformed might be a better way of saying it.  For example, no working knowledge of Church essay topics or willingness to learn about the issues.  I come across sites like that and meet people at Church like that.  I want to respect where they are and don't want to plant doubt within their minds. 

As far as faith crisis, I used to want to help, but don't have a very good record in making any difference.  Social differences seem almost insurmountable.  I don't want to even start into them on this thread or it will be the same drawn out discussion that goes nowhere.  Young people don't seem to read or reason very well.  They don't know history.  They don't know what a balanced view is.  At least that is what it seems like.  

You helped me! So many on this board did, the ex-LDS, the doubters, the TBM's ... all helped me stay in the church. I'd have been out without a doubt were it not for this board.

[readstoomuch]

We have always emphasized education, at least I was always encouraged to do so.  I also found that there were well written books available.  They started coming out in the mid 70`s.  

I am looking for a faith promoting, but intelligent discussion.  Unfortunately, most groups have numerous people going through faith journeys and embracing social issues.  I don`t mind the faith journeys, but I get tired of what is basically the same question a thousand times over.  Is the Church true, asked in various forms.  Maybe it just isn`t possible to get what I am asking for.  My two older children have become inactive/left the Church and about eight adults in my ward are questioning or exiting in different ways.  I try to be positive with the people I have discussed, but it grows tiresome hearing people being negative about the Church.  My kids have big hang ups with social issues and political correctness.  Any progress with those questioning is very slow.  Usually they are quite angry at first.  Even if you have great answers, it doesn`t seem to go very well.  I feel like I fail them.  I think I have the knowledge to make a difference and I try to bare my testimony.   I am not sure I can say that I have helped any one come to terms with their problems

So, I would really like a sort of rejuvenation and positive interaction about the gospel for me.  Maybe I haven`t articulated the issues very well, but I appreciate the responses.  I am sure that I am not coming across as positively as I could be.  Maybe even judgmental and impatient.  My faults are many, but I do believe in the restored gospel and Jesus Christ.

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, sdc999 said:

I will tell you what I think regardless of what I think it may do to affect your precious feelings.

This is one of the dumbest approaches to life I have ever heard and even borders on sociopathy. Hope I did not hurt your precious feelings by saying so.

Edited November 27, 2016 by The Nehor

[sdc999]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

This is one of the dumbest approaches to life I have ever heard and even borders on sociopathy. Hope I did not hurt your precious feelings by saying so.

Doesn't hurt my feelings at all.  I guess you subscribe to the everybody gets a trophy as well.  Participation ribbons for everyone.  Oh, and safe spaces too!

[Calm]

15 hours ago, sdc999 said:

Doesn't hurt my feelings at all.  I guess you subscribe to the everybody gets a trophy as well.  Participation ribbons for everyone.  Oh, and safe spaces too!

Does it have to be one extreme or the other?

[The Nehor]

18 hours ago, sdc999 said:

Doesn't hurt my feelings at all.  I guess you subscribe to the everybody gets a trophy as well.  Participation ribbons for everyone.  Oh, and safe spaces too!

The false idea that everyone getting a trophy is somehow ruining the last few generations is ridiculous. I played on a soccer team when I was 7. I was in the worst team in the league (and I wasn't being held back by them either). We got a participation trophy. We weren't stupid. We knew we were terrible and a trophy did not change that. We had a good time though. If we carry the participation trophy hysteria over to adult life should we just not pay the bottom half of performers in a work place lest we give them the idea that they are as good as the best performers and ruin competitive spirit?

Safe spaces have value in general. For example if you came into my home and started insulting me I would consider it a 'safe space' issue and toss you outside. There is a danger in University life in particular of protecting safe spaces becoming a method of infantilizing people. There is also a distinct differences involved. A group coming together mutually for a 'safe space' which restricts people's right to free speech for the good of the group. Church meetings fall into this category as there are limits on what can be said. If you felt the need to discourse on the falsity of the LDS faith Fast and Testimony meetings are unlikely to accommodate your desire. Clubs and social groups have similar rules. When someone tries to make an area a 'safe space' in an area where not everyone is in agreement like a public street or University cafeteria you hit on Free Speech issues. Anyways that was a long response to an off-the-cuff insult so I will stop there.

It has been my experience that people who insist they are 'keeping it real' or 'telling it like it is' are generally just jerks who imagine that somehow this worldview is equally valid to all others and justifies their competitive conversational nature. Don't get me wrong. Sometimes you do have to hurt people in conversation to help but those people feel genuine pain and concern and are fighting a natural instinct not to hurt people. The ones who insist they 'have to tell you something as a friend' with a gleam in their eye are jerks. Usually the desired correction is self-serving on their part (possibly just by gratifying their ego). You see it with children all the time tattling for their own good or parroting their parents to win moral superiority. Adults think they are hiding it better then children but they are usually not.

[Gray]

This is by far the best Mormon-themed discussion board on the internet, IMO. 

[pogi]

On ‎11‎/‎26‎/‎2016 at 1:26 AM, readstoomuch said:

Am I the whiner, or is it hard to get a good, faithful, honest, intellectual conversation about LDS beliefs?  Where do you go?  Do you just stay to yourself and have the discussions in your head?  Is this (mdmb) the place like Brother Brigham said?  Thanks for the rant and good discussions you do have.

I think this site has everything you need.  We do tend to see more controversial issues that can be more contentious than faith promoting (if that is what you are looking for), but that doesn't mean they don't happen.  Plus, if you don't see a topic that interests you, don't be afraid to start your own, there will always be willing people to engage you...and derail your thread, so be sure and direct the conversation.

Edited November 30, 2016 by pogi

[pogi]

I think some good advise that we can all follow comes from 2 Timothy 2:23.  I like the New International Version translation:

Quote

Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.

I might be a little bit guilty of that one on occasion!

[Woody]

On 11/30/2016 at 4:28 PM, pogi said:

(quoting 2 Timothy 2:23 from the NIV:

Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.

I think there are occasions when a measured poke into a stupid argument is OK. I refer you to Matt. 22:15-46. There I find five short debates, 3 of which began as attempts to start a foolish argument, and two started by Jesus himself. In each case, Jesus gave an answer which went right to the heart of the matter and put them to silence.

v15+  Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
v23+  in the resurrection whose wife shall she be?
v32+  have ye not read...?
v36+  which is the great commandment in the law?
v42+  What think ye of Christ? whose son is he?

I believe this was because he knew the doctrines, having studied the scriptures deeply, and inquired, and been educated into the realities of the universe by revelation. He could see into their hearts, that they were trying to trap him; but the direct answer avoided their traps. Also, many of the people there were honest in wanting to know the truth, and the direct answer met that need.

The NT writers present them as a brilliant evasions/escapes... but I think they were just humble, direct answers. Since we are sposed to follow him, I guess it makes sense to engage in conversations and try to help others understand.

BTW, most people don't understand what he said about the 7 brothers. And the other questions mostly.

[rongo]

On 11/27/2016 at 0:25 AM, readstoomuch said:

My kids have big hang ups with social issues and political correctness.  Any progress with those questioning is very slow.  Usually they are quite angry at first.  Even if you have great answers, it doesn`t seem to go very well.

In my experience (including close family), 99%+ of people who have testimony problems with the Church are politically liberal, and struggle with the dominant politically conservative active Church culture. That is the source, I find, for almost all who struggle significantly with doctrine or policy: gay marriage, women ordination, literal vs. non-literal approach to scriptures, Church finance, patriarchy, literal vs. figurative approach to distant history, law of chastity, Word of Wisdom --- you name it.

At critical message boards, the overwhelming supermajority of participants are politically liberal and constantly mock the Church, its people, and its policies, practices, and doctrines. This is patently obvious when one spends any amount of time with them. 

While it is possible to be a faithful, believing, active Church member while still being politically liberal, it appears to be exceedingly difficult. And difficult to maintain the faithful, believing, active part over time. 

 

[readstoomuch]

This is relevant, interesting and insightful.  I know there are politically liberal Mormons that still are faithful.  Most memebers from the northeast or Europe are more liberal than your typical mountain west member.  What I find with my children is they have a million friends on Facebook,  but one basically no outside friends and the other some good friends who have the identical political ideology.  If it weren't for their family support they would  often be in a bad way.  I have to decide to let them suffer from their decisions sometimes.

I find many millenials aren't into service or it may be more that it is someone else's job to do those things.  Do some millenials apparent lack of motivation for service (imo), social justice/liberalism and the sense of community make connection to the Church in a meaningful way basically impossible?

[california boy]

I like the mix we have on this board.  I like the super faithful members that stand up for the church's beliefs and never seem to waiver.  If everyone thought the same as me, I would have little interest in this board.  I already know what I believe.  I want to hear from those that don't have the same view as me.  Sometimes I hide who the poster is on my computer and just read the comments.  It is probably no surprise to anyone that  I can figure out just by the type of response who the poster is.  

People have different life experiences and different life views.  It is what makes this board more real.  We should have different points of view.  And we should be able to listen to someone else's view that is different from our own without feeling threatened or attacked personally.  Challenging someone else's point of view does not mean they are a bad person.

[JLHPROF]

11 minutes ago, california boy said:

I like the mix we have on this board.

I like this board because the conversations here are more civilized.
The "other" board complains regularly that we have too much moderation and that the Mod's act against anyone that disagrees with their TBM view.
That is so untrue.  I frequently post things that go against Church leaders or official teachings and I've hardly ever been censured.  So have many others.
Generally the only people getting "moderated" are those who refuse to participate in civilized discussion and stoop to insults, baiting, and unreasoned arguing.  (Not that the Mod's are perfect  but they seem reasonable to me)

But having read that other board I see no benefit in their lack of moderation.  It's like Thunderdome in there and there is no pretense at all that the conversations are spiritual in nature.
I love a good debate as much as the next person but at least in these parts we try most of the time to remember in our debates that:

• 3 Nephi 11: 29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.

[Scott Lloyd]

On November 26, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Calm said:

There was a certain type of discussion group at the time when instruction not to hold study groups was handed out that was growing in popularity that had little to do with dealing with Church history and more into getting into inappropriate relationships and money schemes, if my memory serves me correctly.  Nowadays I know a number of wards who have scripture study groups through the RS or other function.

The Church encourages members to get both educated and active in spreading their faithful knowledge in social and other media.

Not only that, but such discussion groups could be springboards for schismatic or apostate groups, as I recall. These days, the apostates just peddle their wares and gather their followings on the Internet, so the discussion groups aren't the issue they once were. 

[It's.Complicated]

I just arrived, via Google to this board recently. I used to be belong to New Order Mormon but that one is gone now. I wasn't really looking to get involved with another board, but this one is interesting. It seems people can speak their minds, as long as it follows the topic without too many folks getting bent out of shape.

As far as those who have trouble with the church with social issues being liberal minded, that feeling transcends politics. My ultra TBM brother wasn't a big fan of recent social issues either, but decided that if it came from Salt Lake City, there has to be a purpose behind it. I am not there myself, but in real life, I don't like to talk about it because it serves no faithful or praiseworthy purpose.  It is like debating politics at work, nothing good comes of it. 

Good job to the moderators and those who keep the lights on here. I am glad I found you.

[Bernard Gui]

I have really enjoy this board and the great people who participate. I wish there were more non-LDS participants like in the olden days when we could discuss Calvinism, Catholicism, Evangelicals, Bible scriptures, anti-Mormon books, etc. Remember Richard Abanes and Rob Bowman, and the Calvinist Polish guy? 

It seems we have drifted more to "The Church believes/doesn't believe/said/didn't say/did/didn't/should/shouldn't/could/couldn/t do this....... (fill in the blank) How awful! What can we do?" Interesting, but predictable. 

 

Edited January 8, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[3DOP]

20 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I have really enjoy this board and the great people who participate. I wish there were more non-LDS participants like in the olden days when we could discuss Calvinism, Catholicism, Evangelicals, Bible scriptures, anti-Mormon books, etc. Remember Richard Abanes and Rob Bowman, and the Calvinist Polish guy? 

It seems we have drifted more to "The Church believes/doesn't believe/said/didn't say/did/didn't/should/shouldn't/could/couldn/t do this....... (fill in the blank) How awful! What can we do?" Interesting, but predictable. 

 

I remember. I had forgotten Abanes. How about rhinomelon and mudcat? I liked those days too.

I was mostly on your side in those days. But I have more in common with Protestant Evangelicalism than what I consider to be the New Mormonism which is now predominant here at least. 

Fifteen years ago we talked and I thought there was at least a little mutual admiration. Now? It has been established to my satisfaction that Catholics at least, use a vocabulary which is now obsolete and ultimately without meaning for most modern LDS. 

The question here isn't about apostasy or not anymore. It is about New Mormons vs. Traditional Mormons. If the New Mormons win the day, as it appears they will, there is nothing to discuss. They don't care if there was an apostasy. To believe in apostasy, you have to believe in truth first.