12 Reasons Millenials are Over Church

[carbon dioxide]

9 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It seems to me that without significant adaptation, churches in general, and the LDS church in particular, will lose the majority of a generation which will be difficult to regain. I'm curious what kind of adaptation you feel would be useful.

None.  If the LDS Church case, if the majority are not interested in Celestial glory for eternity and choose their smartphones instead, so be it.  More fun for the rest of us.

Edited February 24, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[Ouagadougou]

2 hours ago, rongo said:

1) I don't think the Church has "fully disavowed" that. Instead, it has simply stopped referencing it. That is much more of a passive than an active disavowal, isn't it?

         1a) CFR that they are, in fact, not (not a real CFR; I know that you can't prove a negative). I don't think it has been firmly established, beyond any argument, 

that, say, American Indians or native peoples in Central and South America, are not Lamanite descendants. 

 

 

How? Can you give some concrete examples of how teaching and believing that one is a Lamanite descendant "robs one of his true heritage" --- even if, for the sake of argument, they aren't? Can't one partake in that case of one's "true heritage," even if they have a mistaken belief about descent 1600 years ago?

The church has stopped referencing it because there is no DNA evidence to support a migration from Israel in ~ 600 B.C.  For over 150 years the church told Native Americans and others this narrative...but DNA evidence forced the church to change its story.  Telling people that their ancestors are ancient Israelites (and that they were cursed), is dishonest and doesn't allow them to understand their true heritage.  

Alma 3:6

"And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men."

It's dishonest and misleading to tell various groups of people this narrative, when, in fact, their ancestors were not cursed and did not come from Israel.  

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

I had high hopes for the Come Follow Me program but now I've heard teachers and youth complain about teaching the same 12 topics each year. The kids get 8 lessons on the same topic each month. It's boring.

Yes and the same lesson given to 12 year old is given to 17 year olds.  We are not developing the youth and raising the bar in terms of quality of knowledge and understanding of many different issues.

[Ouagadougou]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I don't think any of this can be called " an unnecessary cultural expectation".
You're reaching.

 

I have lots of friends and family members who have served in South/Central America (within the last 10-20 years) -- and most stated that they told members their ancestors were the people in the BoM.  It probably still happens a lot in some areas, IMO.  

[Ouagadougou]

2 hours ago, ksfisher said:

...as children of God?

(because that seems to be the only heritage that has any permanent value)

Because a person's true ancestory doesn't matter?  There are many customs, along with cultural/linguistic attributes associated with your heritage.    

[notHagoth7]

10 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

None.  If the LDS Church case, if the majority are not interested in Celestial glory for eternity and choose their smartphones instead, so be it.  More fun for the rest of us.

?!!

Um...what?!!

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, ksfisher said:

I'm pretty sure Canadians aren't devil spawn.  My son has some sort of machine in one of his Minecraft worlds that creates them.

My friends won't let me on their Minecraft server anymore. When I fill giant cauldrons in the skies overhead filled with lava I see art. They see a death trap waiting to happen. Philistines!

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Duncan said:

oh yeah, i'll get you at recess

Bring it on!

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Ouagadougou said:

I have lots of friends and family members who have served in South/Central America (within the last 10-20 years) -- and most stated that they told members their ancestors were the people in the BoM.  It probably still happens a lot in some areas, IMO.  

I still would tell them that.

[Duncan]

Just now, The Nehor said:

Bring it on!

Pretend you're Dwight

 

[Ouagadougou]

35 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I still would tell them that.

Classy.  

[The Nehor]

9 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said:

Classy.  

I expect the Book of Mormon to be proved correct to a degree at some point. I am just not that eager for it.

[Calm]

"I'm even aware of active temple recommend holding millennials who Gasp...drink coffee and frequently enter Starbuck's... oh sin of sin."

So they lie in temple recommends or what? (Serious question, not making accusations...just don't understand how else they could do both)

[sunstoned]

12 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

So history is repeating itself...

 1 Now it came to pass that there were many of the rising generation that could not understand the words of king Benjamin, being little children at the time he spake unto his people; and they did not believe the tradition of their fathers.

 2 They did not believe what had been said concerning the resurrection of the dead, neither did they believe concerning the coming of Christ.

 3 And now because of their unbelief they could not understand the word of God; and their hearts were hardened.

 4 And they would not be baptized; neither would they join the church. And they were a separate people as to their faith, and remained so ever after, even in their carnal and sinful state; for they would not call upon the Lord their God.

 5 And now in the reign of Mosiah they were not half so numerous as the people of God; but because of the dissensions among the brethren they became more numerous. (Alma 26)

And yet the Nephite branch of the kingdom of God on earth moved forward for about another 450 years, including the glorious Nephite "golden age" recorded in 4th Nephi. 

 

This seems like a situation where the older generation is upset and judging the younger generation. I am not sure labeling people carnal and sinful is the best approach if reactivation is the goal.

 

 

 

 

[sunstoned]

11 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I think this is a great point. Millenials expect to be treated as equals...as adults who have value and are able to make important contributions. They want to be evaluated on ideas. They seem more likely to look to their inner authority instead of an extrinsic authority that they are told and expected to listen to.

Being able to use your phone to fact check data within a minute or so has also changed the dynamic significantly.  

[notHagoth7]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

This seems like a situation where the older generation is upset and judging the younger generation. I am not sure labeling people carnal and sinful is the best approach if reactivation is the goal.

That is part of the disconnect. According to Meyers and Briggs, the temperament for each of us is somewhere along the spectrum of Judging at one extreme, and Perceiving on the other end. Church leadership, according to the professor I spoke with, is heavily weighted towards those on the Judging end of the spectrum.

If so, that can explain the growing disconnect between that status quo, and a new generation whose independent mindset more frequently bristles in response to such. Oil and water.

Thoughts?

 

Edited February 24, 2017 by notHagoth7

[notHagoth7]

4 hours ago, sheilauk said:

.... I don't know how any church can adapt sufficiently nor why it should. Church isn't a place of entertainment. 

Yet...Jesus of Nazareth, when asking if he was loved, responded not only "feed my sheep", but also "feed my lambs."

If a church isn't adapting to meet the needs of such...I think it is a tragic misstep.

Please note:

I am *not* insisting that core principles/objectives change. Instead, the strategies and tactics used to support/accomplish such should be nimble/adaptable enough to keep pace with the needs of lambs.

[Robert F. Smith]

9 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Yes, I do know LDS history. Thanks for asking. But despite many examples of past adaptations the prospect of changing cultural traditions seems to be a scary idea.

As we mentioned earlier, it is an interesting conundrum for how to deal with millenials who do not like micromanagement and high demand religion despite research that shows high demand religions are more stable than the "namby pamby" ones  

But I don't think there is anything to celebrate regarding LDS church activation levels for Millenials. Pretending like the church isn't suffering from the same phenomena as the rest of the churches is putting ones head in the sand.

Some excellent points here, HappyJack, but is the cup half full or half empty?  I don't believe in linear projections of history, and I don't know of a static LDS Church.  Just because everybody is in for a rough ride does not mean that all will get the same results, nor that all will come to the same destination.  History is oscillatory and unpredictable, and problems just beg for solutions.  Right?  Who has an open Canon and continuing revelation?  Which church has the soundest theology?  For those built on a foundation of sand, yes, they will have dark days ahead.  This life is not meant to be a cake walk.

[notHagoth7]

41 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

...For those built on a foundation of sand, yes....

Yet...sand is a key ingredient in concrete....

...something the Nephites in Hagoth's day became quite expert in.

41 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

...they will have dark days ahead....

It is always darkest before the dawn.

Edited February 24, 2017 by notHagoth7

[Yirgacheffe]

11 hours ago, bluebell said:

 What makes previous generations more able to handle being left out than millennials seem to be?

Millennials are wrong to believe that church should be molded around their expectations and their needs alone.  They are wrong to think that church should work the same way (and respond the same way to them) that society tends to work and respond.  The church is not society and should not be confused with society. 

What makes previous generations more able to handle being left out?  Previously if you were left out of your local  community that was it you were out and there was no where to go for the "community" every human being needs.  Now you can find like minded people while sitting on your couch at home, at your leisure.  You can create your own community not only religiously but in any area of interest, you can search up a dozen different "communities" to suit your individual interests and beliefs.  It is the same sort of self selecting you see discussed in the aftermath of the election, about news sources and people selecting input that only bolsters a view already held.  People now have the ability to "talk" with people who are like them in belief, temperament, interests, they can form on-line communities and from there create real life versions of the same. 

 

This ability to control the information you take in has an impact on the argument that any given group is wrong to think a church (any church) should work the same way and respond the same way to them that society tends to work and respond.   Certainly a religious institution can control what qualifies as membership in the religion and define what can be expected from both it and the member, defining belief, practice and so forth.  The other side of that coin is any given group is just as likely to be unresponsive to the allures of a church that doesn't do and respond the way they like and simply decide that it is a bad fit and look to finding a better one.  Churches are just one of the groups that are going to have trouble gaining and retaining members in the new build your own tribe world we see coming up.  Personally I think the generation after the millennials will be even more interesting, the millennials are a cusp generation and the social media influence is not thoroughly embedded in it as it is for the next and future generations.

 

All institutions have lost the ability to control the information and the ability to put it in a positive light, and now every one has the ability to control the information and narrative of every institution or individual, they control what sources they chose as informative, they can pick from all the opposing points only the one that agree with them and thus frame it all in what ever light suits them.

 

[Meadowchik]

7 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

Your use of the word 'they' was ambiguous. Sorry, I missed your point. 

Focusing on your point, I'm wondering how many of the millennials who leave the Church continue to live lives of genuine belief in God? And of the number of those who continue to believe after departing, I wonder how many of them express their abiding faith by becoming enthusiastic members of other Churches? My guess is what's happening in today's Church is much like what occurred when the unbelieving younger generation of Nephites (spoken of in Mosiah 26) left the Church as openly-professed unbelievers. Similarly, I think it's unlikely most of today's exiting millennials are much concerned with maintaining a dynamic and growing relationship with God. But I could be wrong. At very least I hope I'm wrong. At any rate, the test of faith is designed by an infinite wisdom to be an exceedingly difficult and intensely private struggle to overcome the many naturally-occurring barriers that stand as formidable obstacles to obtaining authentic revelatory communication with God. Some may come to the aid of those being so tested, but in the end each must obtain, and keep, his or her own unshakable testimony of divine truth.

The Lord gives the supreme gift of the fulness of celestial glory only to those who successfully open -- and steadfastly keep open --  the floodgates of clarifying and empowering revelatory communication with heaven. The Lord expects those who will be blessed with the fulness of his glory to first heroically triumph in the test of faith by voluntarily (while in the pre-mortal world) allowing themselves to be fully-immersed in a fallen, highly imperfect world. A world filled with enough spiritual deceptions to be able to thoroughly convince the mind of the natural man that there is no true Church; and, even worse, to be persuaded that there is no good reason to believe there is a just, merciful and loving God enthroned on high. 

So it's unlikely the Lord is going to make the test of faith any easier, as that would rob the test of its purpose to fully try those who will ultimately be judged worthy to become joint heirs with Christ in all he possesses. Christ victoriously passed through the greatest of all trials of faith, and we are not exempt from being required to successfully pass through similar trials of faith. There is no other way...

I think you've hit upon a challenge for those who leave the Church. Supposedly many become atheist, because it can be very hard to separate the idea of the gospel of Christ from the Mormon version, because it is often so thoroughly programmed as a social pattern and cultural expectation in Mormonism. But there are more and more post-Mormon Christians coming out of that finding guidance from others on how to know Christ and identify Christ without the Mormon lens.

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Some excellent points here, HappyJack, but is the cup half full or half empty?  I don't believe in linear projections of history, and I don't know of a static LDS Church.  Just because everybody is in for a rough ride does not mean that all will get the same results, nor that all will come to the same destination.  History is oscillatory and unpredictable, and problems just beg for solutions.  Right?  Who has an open Canon and continuing revelation?  Which church has the soundest theology?  For those built on a foundation of sand, yes, they will have dark days ahead.  This life is not meant to be a cake walk.

I think the LDS Church is experiencing a crisis over its truth claims because the evidence is overwhelmingly to the contrary. They are looking to be more and more sandy. I think and I hope that a foundation on Christ will bear me up now that I "know" the church's claims are sandy.

Edited February 24, 2017 by Meadowchik

[notHagoth7]

13 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

...Telling people that their ancestors are ancient Israelites (and that they were cursed), is dishonest...  

Alma 3:6

"And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men."

It's dishonest and misleading to tell various groups of people this narrative, when, in fact, their ancestors were not cursed and did not come from Israel.  

I'll say this much.

Based on a number of things I've been reflecting on for a while that are found in Daniel (contemporary with Laman...of Lamanite fame) I'm coming to interpret "skins" to be better understood as "countenance". Both reflecting (or *not* reflecting) a person's character.

http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/countenance

This growing impression (that 19th-century "skin" might be better understood in the 21st century as "countenance") solidified for me earlier today, when I visited someone I have loved for decades. And that person's appearance and highly-unusual behavior towards me today was the most profound sudden shift I have ever seen in a person. It troubled me enough that I called a close relative to please investigate and provide a double check.

To call what I observed a darkening of countenance (not skin) would be the most accurate way to describe it. 

While composing and reflecting on this post, I explored in the D&C the concept of Heaven putting a curse on someone. It troubles me...especially in the context of such things as the closing verse in the OT...and I hope to see such a thing lifted...soon. *Very* soon.

Edited February 24, 2017 by notHagoth7

[notHagoth7]

6 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

The church has stopped referencing it because there is no DNA evidence to support a migration from Israel in ~ 600 B.C.

? Just as there's no DNA evidence that you created that post 6 hours ago.

DNA isn't that chronologically specific. That new science ain't as refined as some might prefer to believe.

Quote

...in fact, their ancestors were not cursed and did not come from Israel.  

Yet their ancestors *were* cursed.

And they *did* come from Israel. We *are* of Israel.

Edited February 24, 2017 by notHagoth7

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, notHagoth7 said:

Yet...sand is a key ingredient in concrete....

...something the Nephites in Hagoth's day became quite expert in.

It is always darkest before the dawn.

You sure you're not Hagoth?