People leave the church because of a "trust gap"

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, William Jones said:

Listen to the conference review pt. 2 at http://www.mormondiscussionpodcast.org/.  They make a good case for the exaggerated miracle stories. They give proof as well.

Then you should be able to provide quotes and these references just as would be expected for an article.

[SteveO]

21 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It's odd, my wife and I notice the most engaged members in our ward have been those who are most prone to feel justified in condemning others for whatever reason they've figured it seems.  They seem most happy when they get together to condemn others either in the ward, or who have left Church who have children who they feel are problems.  Its tough.  We find ourselves really just wanting to be on the outside of that circle because of that, but then being on the outside we not only feel unwelcome in many circumstances but also find ourselves as the focus of much of the chatter that gives social fulfillment.  In a sense I'm happy to take one for the team, if that's how it continues to play out, though.  But the problem of course is that this social aspect you mention, seems to be the cancer that is the problem.  it'd be bad in my mind to get people into the Church or get people back to Church only to have them feel all the more justified in looking down upon others.  We're certainly not the only ones skirting around on the outside, though.  So there's that. 

You know...the problem it sounds like--rests with you...

It's a certain kind of person who thinks the topic of conversation behind their backs is always about them.  

And it takes a remarkable lack of self awareness to not realize that pointing out other member's "justified condemnation" on the faults of others is a form of self righteous judgment.

 

[bsjkki]

13 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

The more interesting question (perhaps unanswerable) is why some leave when encountering the same information that others shrug off and stay

I'm not sure the ones who stay shrug it off. I'm staying but I think this is where life experiences, specifically, spiritually experiences come into play. I had the privileged of growing up attending many churches and choosing this faith over others. My past spiritual experiences helped me struggle through the faith crisis. I have also witnessed the safety found in the commandments. Watching some of my children leave the faith and follow the "ways of the world" has strengthened my faith in the commandments. Watching one return to the fold and seeing the change and peace come back is also a sight to behold. What an amazing change to watch first hand. For me it came down to shelving a lot of questions and understanding that I still feel joy and peace in the gospel and my membership in the church. (For me to say that is a miracle in itself...I didn't know if I would ever feel peace or joy at church again but I do.)

24 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It's odd, my wife and I notice the most engaged members in our ward have been those who are most prone to feel justified in condemning others for whatever reason they've figured it seems.  They seem most happy when they get together to condemn others either in the ward, or who have left Church who have children who they feel are problems.  Its tough.  We find ourselves really just wanting to be on the outside of that circle because of that, but then being on the outside we not only feel unwelcome in many circumstances but also find ourselves as the focus of much of the chatter that gives social fulfillment.  In a sense I'm happy to take one for the team, if that's how it continues to play out, though.  But the problem of course is that this social aspect you mention, seems to be the cancer that is the problem.  it'd be bad in my mind to get people into the Church or get people back to Church only to have them feel all the more justified in looking down upon others.  We're certainly not the only ones skirting around on the outside, though.  So there's that. 

They are missing the whole point of the gospel and do not have the love of Christ in their hearts.  Anonymously send them all a copy of Renlund's talk from conference and highlight the self righteous quote. It is so easy to lose sight of the fact the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not a competition. True joy comes through helping others succeed and serving each other. Your comment made me think of high school and people who have to tear others down in order to puff up their self esteem. You could throw in President Benson's Pride talk too but maybe that would be a bit prideful.  

[Johnnie Cake]

22 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

In the absence of solid documentation, I must chalk up this report of "some chatter" to common, garden-variety rumor-mongering.

 

Aren't you an investigative reporter Scott?  Consider this a tip....check out the stories and see if they stand up to reality.  Here's a start...the mission president featured in the Japan story made a post to his Mission web site a day or two after the tsunami...the facts posted within days of the earthquake and tsunami conflict in important details with the story given in general conference.  The truth while it could still be seen as faith promoting was less faith confirming than the story given in conference....thus the charge of Dunn-like liberties having been taken to make the story more faith confirming that it actually was in reality.

Edited April 20, 2017 by Johnnie Cake

[JLHPROF]

19 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Whatever the case, God is supposed to be about saving mankind, even if they are all but whiners in your view.  If the Church is so necessary for salvation as some seem to indicate, then one wonders why God is unable to make it adapt for more people.  Perhaps He knows the church is less necessary and leaves us with the cultural tradition of Church because, well, some people do well with it, but other than that, He's not so into making Church work for people because He knows the Church isn't really going to help anyone to salvation.  He will.

Salvation requires faith in Jesus Christ and repentance.  That's it.  That gift has been given to all.
The Church isn't necessary for that.
And if people are more comfortable stopping there they will be amply blessed.

But that is all it will get you.  A resurrection.  If you want to live with God and Christ THEN the Church becomes necessary.

[cinepro]

16 hours ago, SamIam said:

Poppycock...People leave the church because they do not have a properly foundated faith based testimony of Jesus Christ. 

Well, I think you're wrong.  But who cares what I think?  I'm just some anonymous gadfly on the internet.

But you know what?  I think the Church thinks you're wrong too.  And here's why:

Because in response to the flow of people leaving the Church in the age of the internet, the Church has reacted as if the problem was based on information and trust, not on "faith."   The biggest evidence of this is, of course, the Gospel Topics Essays.

The purpose of the essays is to inform the members (hopefully pre-emptively) about aspects of Church history and doctrine that they were otherwise discovering and feeling distrust.  They are the Church's foremost effort to help those who are doubting.  If the real problem were people "not having a properly foundated faith based testimony of Jesus Christ", then the Gospel Topics essays are nothing more than a time-wasting distraction, and the Church would have (should have) doubled down on testimony building exercises.  The advice to any member who was doubting based on new information they had encountered would be "pray, read the scriptures, and otherwise strengthen your testimony, and avoid faith-discouraging history, even it it's true."  Because if faith and testimony are the real problem, then the doubt and information are only symptoms of the problem, and it's a waste of time to try and treat the symptoms and not the root-cause (and if you treat the root-cause, they symptoms take care of themselves).

But while those testimony-promoting behaviors are still important, they are not the primary focus of dealing with doubting members (especially because it is insulting to assume such members don't have a testimony or haven't been doing those things in the first place).  Any Bishop who still treats such doubts as primarily a "testimony" issue is woefully unprepared and out-of-date, and I suspect will have almost a 0% chance of helping someone whose doubts have progressed to the point where they are willing to talk to the Bishop about them.  They may maintain a testimony and belief in the Church, but it will be a fundamentally different sort of testimony than what they had before, and the Bishop or other "helpers" need to help them transition to that new kind of testimony instead of dreaming that the person's testimony will ever be the same.

 

Edited April 20, 2017 by cinepro

[bsjkki]

2 minutes ago, SteveO said:

You know...the problem it sounds like--rests with you...

It's a certain kind of person who thinks the topic of conversation behind their backs is always about them.  

And it takes a remarkable lack of self awareness to not realize that pointing out other member's "justified condemnation" on the faults of others is a form of self righteous judgment.

 

Pet peeve...sometimes people really are talking about you and really are mean, vindictive or glorying in your misfortune. Sometimes, they are even out to get you.Sometimes they are spreading malicious gossip. I knew someone would say calling someone self righeous is self righteous. Why did you feel the need to attack a struggling brother?

[SteveO]

8 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

Pet peeve...sometimes people really are talking about you and really are mean, vindictive or glorying in your misfortune. Sometimes, they are even out to get you.Sometimes they are spreading malicious gossip. I knew someone would say calling someone self righeous is self righteous. Why did you feel the need to attack a struggling brother?

Maybe they are, and we have the Savior's words and counsel on how we should react to others being less charitable in their words and actions.

 

[Meadowchik]

2 hours ago, Danzo said:

Do you subscribe to a limited atonement?

 

Nope. 

[Meadowchik]

51 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

If we accept that the Spirit can depart from a prophet, we must by the same token allow that the Spirit can depart from the follower of a prophet with the result that the follower no longer accepts the prophet.

Sure.

And we can also acknowledge that there are false prophets.

[bsjkki]

17 minutes ago, SteveO said:

Maybe they are, and we have the Savior's words and counsel on how we should react to others being less charitable in their words and actions.

 

And that would have been a much more helpful comment instead you said...

40 minutes ago, SteveO said:

You know...the problem it sounds like--rests with you...

It's a certain kind of person who thinks the topic of conversation behind their backs is always about them.  

And it takes a remarkable lack of self awareness to not realize that pointing out other member's "justified condemnation" on the faults of others is a form of self righteous judgment.

 

I can't tell you how many times I heard variations of these saying when my daughter was getting visciously lied about and bullied at church. Some people are really good at making victims feel like the bad guy. 

Sorry...your comment unleashed the "mother bear" which I should suppress. ☹️️

Edited April 20, 2017 by bsjkki
Added apology

[SteveO]

1 minute ago, bsjkki said:

And that would have been a much more helpful comment instead you said...

I can't tell you how many times I heard variations of these saying when my daughter was getting visciously lied about and bullied at church. Some people are really good at making victims feel like the bad guy. 

I responded to the post and information he volunteered.  I'm not sure how his post was any less "attacking" than mine?  The people he described aren't here to defend themselves, so I'm not going to just admit he's the innocent victim and assume the members of his ward are terrible people.

[Meadowchik]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Sorry, but no, you didn't.
Joseph Smith is and was a prophet of God, the head of the final dispensation of Christ's gospel on the earth (and more that I won't bring up here).

Whatever you think you learned that makes you believe Joseph couldn't have been a prophet is in your interpretation of his life and events.  Nothing in his life actually precludes his calling to the office he held.

There is such a thing as internal logic contradictions. Predatorial patterns of behavior. Outright repetitive lying. The enabling of self-contradictory practices while supposedly acting with the mantel of the Lord.

All these apply to Joseph Smith.

I know he was not a prophet just as much as I know Warren Jeffs is not a prophet or Korihor was not a prophet or James Strang was not a prophet.

If you think I don't know what I know, maybe you should give those other fellas a chance.

In other words, proving the existence of something is often impossible, but proving a contradiction, and thus that a thing is not, can be quite possible.

 

[stemelbow]

50 minutes ago, SteveO said:

You know...the problem it sounds like--rests with you...

It's a certain kind of person who thinks the topic of conversation behind their backs is always about them.  

I didnt' say anything near that. 

Quote

And it takes a remarkable lack of self awareness to not realize that pointing out other member's "justified condemnation" on the faults of others is a form of self righteous judgment.

 

I didn't comment on my own self-righteousness.  I realize I fail in this area too. 

Why so defensive?

Edited April 20, 2017 by stemelbow

[stemelbow]

39 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Salvation requires faith in Jesus Christ and repentance.  That's it.  That gift has been given to all.
The Church isn't necessary for that.
And if people are more comfortable stopping there they will be amply blessed.

But that is all it will get you.  A resurrection.  If you want to live with God and Christ THEN the Church becomes necessary.

I don't agree with you.  Thanks though.

[SteveO]

8 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

 Sorry...your comment unleashed the "mother bear" which I should suppress. ☹️️

I understand that members can be downright terrible to each other sometimes--that's when the gospel is needed most, and when it actually counts.  I've never seen any good come from blaming fellow members--all it leads to is bitterness, resentment, and sometimes a loss of faith.

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, SteveO said:

I understand that members can be downright terrible to each other sometimes--that's when the gospel is needed most, and when it actually counts.  I've never seen any good come from blaming fellow members--all it leads to is bitterness, resentment, and sometimes a loss of faith.

hmmm...blaming fellow members?  That's a Mormon thing.  "The Church is never wrong.  It's always the members fault."   That's kind of the mantra. 

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

I believe I am always honest...sometimes I believe I am perceived to be honest to a fault

I believe you are honest all the time..I didn't mean to imply otherwise.    Funny thing.  I had a job interview years ago where they asked me if I was truly honest..so I was honest and told them I am honest to the point where and unless I hurt someone's feelings...didn't get the job and this is why..

[stemelbow]

18 minutes ago, SteveO said:

I responded to the post and information he volunteered.  I'm not sure how his post was any less "attacking" than mine?  The people he described aren't here to defend themselves, so I'm not going to just admit he's the innocent victim and assume the members of his ward are terrible people.

That's the blessing of posting anonymously for me.  You don't know who I'm talking about.  I'm just pointing out issues I see every day.  Take it or leave it.  No big deal here. 

Not sure why you got defensive.  You don't know me or any other anonymously referenced person from my post. 

 

[SteveO]

12 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

hmmm...blaming fellow members?  That's a Mormon thing.  "The Church is never wrong.  It's always the members fault."   That's kind of the mantra. 

We could prolly start a whole thread on that whole topic again...I am curious though, which came first:

The problems with fellow members, or problems with church history?

[JLHPROF]

22 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I don't agree with you.  Thanks though.

My belief is based in scripture.

How about yours?

[rongo]

17 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I believe you are honest all the time..I didn't mean to imply otherwise.    Funny thing.  I had a job interview years ago where they asked me if I was truly honest..so I was honest and told them I am honest to the point where and unless I hurt someone's feelings...didn't get the job and this is why..

Have you ever taken an honesty test for employment? They are l-o-n-g, and ask you the same questions over and over in different ways to try to get you to be inconsistent (i.e., you answer that you never take anything home from work, ever, but later, they ask about severity of taking home a paper clip or a pen). The key is to be a) consistent, and b) avoid extremes of never or always. My dad interviewed our bishop's son in Chicago, but he failed the mandated honesty test because he was . . . 100% honest. He was actually a very honest, trustworthy young man, but didn't have the savvy to know the test for what it was. 

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, rongo said:

Have you ever taken an honesty test for employment? They are l-o-n-g, and ask you the same questions over and over in different ways to try to get you to be inconsistent (i.e., you answer that you never take anything home from work, ever, but later, they ask about severity of taking home a paper clip or a pen). The key is to be a) consistent, and b) avoid extremes of never or always. My dad interviewed our bishop's son in Chicago, but he failed the mandated honesty test because he was . . . 100% honest. He was actually a very honest, trustworthy young man, but didn't have the savvy to know the test for what it was. 

I was told by my clinical psych prof iirc (it was sometime ago) that they had to alter the honesty measure for self reporting tests for Mormons to be more accurate due to the higher frequency of members actually going to church every week, praying every day, and reading scriptures among other things.  Unfortunately not everyone using these tests are aware of the issue.

There may be other groups who have similar testing problems, I am not suggesting this makes LDS obviously more honest than other groups or that we are unique in these ways.

Edited April 20, 2017 by Calm

[stemelbow]

20 minutes ago, SteveO said:

We could prolly start a whole thread on that whole topic again...I am curious though, which came first:

The problems with fellow members, or problems with church history?

I'm not sure what you are asking. 

[stemelbow]

15 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

My belief is based in scripture.

How about yours?

Scripture, interpreted with the assistance of the spirit.