I have a couple of questions...

[sr1030]

This always gives me a chuckle.  LDS read their Bible more than most. 

What total nonsense.

sr

[MorningStar]

What total nonsense.

IT'S TRUE, SR!!!!!! It makes her chuckle!!!!

Geez.

MorningStar

[smac97]

This always gives me a chuckle.  LDS read their Bible more than most. 

What total nonsense.

sr

I am curious as to how LDS teens fair in scripture study as compared to their Protestant counterparts:

Fewer than one-third of all U.S. Protestant teenagers (32 percent) report that they personally read the Bible alone once a week or more often, according to researchers with the National Study of Youth and Religion. The majority of U.S. Protestant teenagers say that they read the Bible either less frequently or not at all. Furthermore, of all U.S. teenagers, only about one in four reads the sacred scripture of their religious tradition weekly or more often (26 percent). Large numbers of U.S. teenagers do claim religious affiliations and report attending religious services. But the findings here suggest that far fewer U.S. teens regularly engage in more personal religious practices of faith

[juliann]

Is this a statement of fact or just something you have always been told?

I have been told. By a reputable and probably best known survey group....Barna. I believe they are evangelical since they are a little clueless of the LDS view of the Bible:

http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=Ba...arnaUpdateID=93

The study also revealed that barely half of all Protestant adults (54%) read the Bible during a typical week. Barna pointed out that Mormons are more likely to read the Bible during a week than are Protestants - even though most Mormons do not believe that the Bible is the authoritative Word of God.

It always gives me a chuckle when people attempt to raise "emotional statements" to the level of sound "factual statements" in order to make their point!

Where are your "factual statements"? Your reaction sure sounded emotional. Are you giggling yet?

[juliann]

This always gives me a chuckle.

[YH8]

Either what they said was true, or it was not true. Which is it? Another question to ask is whether or not those writers believed what they were saying was true.

Does context and/or perspective ever come in to play for you? Is it possible for the same statement to be true in some contexts and false in others?

If I say Kansas is flat will you call me deluded? If you look at certain areas it sure is. If you look at others it isn't. However, most people wouldn't have a problem with calling it flat. But then again, if you take the actual Earth as a whole Kansas is not and can never be considered flat?

Cognitive flexibility is usually a good thing.

[tubaloth]

Hi Tubaloth,

Your argueing against yourself, I never said I didn't care I said, I said I didn't believe either view, I do care, I care deeply, thats why I'm here.

You care so much to make sure we teach our own doctrine. That is so nice of you.

If what i have said is wrong instead of making things up I didn't say just give some reference from a authoritive LDS member that what I said was wrong, then we can look at it and discuss it. I didn't make up that God was a man before he became a god, Joseph smith did, your argument should be with him, not me.

Actually, I have no problem with the doctrine. To me You do. If anybody should be talking to Joseph Smith, (or Lorenzo Snow) it is probably you.

My only point was, is I don

[sr1030]

This always gives me a chuckle.

[sr1030]

YH8: Does context and/or perspective ever come in to play for you? Is it possible for the same statement to be true in some contexts and false in others?

I understand context and provided references so anyone that questions the quote can read it in context.

YH8: If I say Kansas is flat will you call me deluded? If you look at certain areas it sure is. If you look at others it isn't. However, most people wouldn't have a problem with calling it flat. But then again, if you take the actual Earth as a whole Kansas is not and can never be considered flat?

.......yawn

YH8: Cognitive flexibility is usually a good thing.

So, exactly which quote are you suggesting was taken out of context? Apparently this is nothing more than a Red Herring.

sr

[JLH]

From the Barna site that Juliann cited:

The study also revealed that barely half of all Protestant adults (54%) read the Bible during a typical week. Barna pointed out that Mormons are more likely to read the Bible during a week than are Protestants - even though most Mormons do not believe that the Bible is the authoritative Word of God.

So it appears that it was only comparing readership to "protestants adults only", as compared to what Juliann described as "most", and, it is a site that concludes that momrons do not believe that the Bible is the authoritative Word of God.

Question for Juliann: Do you find credibility in Barna's comment that: "mormon's do not beleive the Bible to be the authoritative Word of God" ? Does this give you comfort in the credibility of the rest of Barna's conclusions?

Barna's conclusions were based on taliking to an entire population of 86 mormons over a year and a half period. Do you find that a quality sample size?

Also, again from this Barna site: 86% of evangelical christians have read the bible in the past week as compared to 67% of mormons. So I'm not sure how you can say that "mormons read the bible more than most".

Just want to be sure "all the facts" are told in support of your claim!!! Perhaps you may want to rethink your conclusions now?

[smac97]

> Smac, just ask Juliann. She wants to give the impression she knows all about this stuff.

==I'll let Juliann tell me what impressions she has in mind, thanks.

==Meanwhile, she has provided some evidence to substantiate her assertion. You have not substantiated your countervailing assertion of "What total nonsense." How 'bout it?

> It seems to me, at times, you want LDS to be included in "Christianity",

==Yes, along with any other religious group that professes to believe in Jesus Christ. It's a nominal concession. Keep in mind that I wasn't asking about how LDS teens fair in scripture study as compared to their Christian counterparts, but "as compared to their Protestant counterparts." It should go without saying, but I'll say it anyway: "Protestant" and "Christian" are not necessarily synonymous. The former is a subset of the latter.

==I have my suspicions as to why some factions of Christendom are so touchy about the "Christian" label, but I'll save that for another thread.

> and at other times, such as this, you want to group all denominations outside LDS together, and then compare LDS to them.

==I said, "I am curious as to how LDS teens fair in scripture study as compared to their Protestant counterparts." I could also have said "their Roman Catholic counterparts" or "their Eastern Orthodox counterparts" or "their Egyptian Coptic counterparts." I chose a comparison of LDS to Protestantism because Protestants, I think, constitute a significant majority of theistic anti-Mormons. When I hear someone spouting tripe about how Latter-day Saints don't value the Bible, I'd wager money every time that the speaker is a Protestant. It would therefore be fairly ironic to see a study that shows that Latter-day Saints - who, according to some anti-Mormons, don't value the Bible - read the Bible more than Protestants do.

==Juliann has just such a study. Let's discuss it.

> It would seem to me that if you were to compare the LDS Church to a particular denomination, you would have a more representative comparison. Don't you consider LDS as "Protestant"?

==Of course I don't consider the LDS Church to be Protestant. Again, I was asking about how LDS teens fare "as compared to their Protestant counterparts," not their Christian counterparts.

==So, any thoughts on Juliann's post? Do you disagree with the study she cited?

-Smac

[Calm]

Of course I don't consider the LDS Church to not be Protestant.

Double negative, right? I think you mean either I don't consider the LDS Church to be Protestant or I consider the LDS Church to not be Protestant.

If LDS are classed in a group of Christian sects, it should probably be Restorationist, not Protestant. I've never heard LDS classified as Protestant except when it came to government forms when they only had the choice of Jewish, Catholic and Protestant.

[smac97]

Of course I don't consider the LDS Church to not be Protestant.

Double negative, right? I think you mean either I don't consider the LDS Church to be Protestant or I consider the LDS Church to not be Protestant.

If LDS are classed in a group of Christian sects, it should probably be Restorationist, not Protestant.

Yep. Accidental double negative. I've edited it.

Thanks,

-Smac

[sr1030]

Smac: ==So, any thoughts on Juliann's post? Do you disagree with the study she cited?

The problem I had with Julianns post was that she did not support her statement, nor did she clarify who the "most" was. It was nonsensical. She linked to the study after my post.

I question any study done in which LDS are asked about reading the bible. LDS often equate "reading the bible" with "reading scripture" and may include any of the standard works in their answer. I believe that LDS would rank among the highest, if not the highest for reading scripture. I highly question that they would rank among the highest for bible reading.

In addition, there are many factions of the LDS church. If studies are going to group all baptists together, they should group all LDS together. Assemblies of God are a Pentecostal group, why are they separated from Pentecostal, but all Baptist, Presbytarian, Methodist, and Lutheran are grouped together.

sr

[MorningStar]

LDS read the Bible a lot. We refer to the Bible a lot. We quote it when we give talks, lessons, etc. In Seminary, the students spend a year studying the Old Testament and another year studying the New Testament. Also, in Sunday School, we spend an entire year focusing on one thing - sometimes it's the Bible. We are encouraged to read the lesson at home.

It's irritating when people assume that LDS aren't familiar with the Bible and quote it to us as if we've never heard it before.

MorningStar

[Guest johnny_cat]

I question any study done in which LDS are asked about reading the bible. LDS often equate "reading the bible" with "reading scripture" and may include any of the standard works in their answer. I believe that LDS would rank among the highest, if not the highest for reading scripture. I highly question that they would rank among the highest for bible reading.

I don't know about that. I've never confused "reading the Bible" with "reading the scriptures." We read the Bible and other scriptures together as part of our family scripture study. I don't think we've had an evening scripture study in a long time that didn't involve the Bible. Obviously, that's just me, but I don't imagine that I'm particularly atypical. I think the real issue is when the assumption that Mormons trash the Bible collides with the reality that we do study it, and not just a little.

In addition, there are many factions of the LDS church. If studies are going to group all baptists together, they should group all LDS together. Assemblies of God are a Pentecostal group, why are they separated from Pentecostal, but all Baptist, Presbytarian, Methodist, and Lutheran are grouped together.

Obviously, the poll takers did not see it your way. The claim was that LDS read the Bible more than Protestants, and evidence was provided. Unless you have evidence more concrete than an assertion that we confuse "Bible" and "scriptures," you don't have much of a leg to stand on, sr.

[Calm]

LDS often equate "reading the bible" with "reading scripture" and may include any of the standard works in their answer

I'd like to see some support for that. Got a study?

I've personally never experienced that confusion or seen that confusion in those I've taught from the age of Sunbeam to adult. They know when they are supposed to be reading from the Bible for the weekly assignment, reading the Book of Mormon doesn't count. Or in the case that just occurred last week, they stated they hadn't earned their cookie because they hadn't read the D&C even though they'd read the Book of Mormon.

If we are going to group LDS all together, the Bible reading is likely to go up as the RLDS (Community of Christ) in my experience focus more on the Bible than the Book of Mormon. The rest of the LDS groups...well, I'm not sure if they are significant in numbers. A lot focus on Revelation though.

[Calm]

LDS often equate "reading the bible" with "reading scripture" and may include any of the standard works in their answer.

This seems to be counterintuitive to the idea that LDS don't respect the Bible as they do the rest of their scripture. We can't throw the Bible in with the rest of the standard works and throw it out as not so trusted on the other.

[smac97]

> The problem I had with Julianns post was that she did not support her statement, nor did she clarify who the "most" was.

==You didn't support your statement, either.

> It was nonsensical. She linked to the study after my post.

==So she did. But now that she has provided evidence substantiating her comments, do you have any countervailing evidence to support yours?

> I question any study done in which LDS are asked about reading the bible. LDS often equate "reading the bible" with "reading scripture" and may include any of the standard works in their answer.

==How do you know that? If someone asked me "How frequently do you read the Bible," I would not equate that question with "How frequently do you read the Book of Mormon" or the D&C or PoGP.

> I believe that LDS would rank among the highest, if not the highest for reading scripture.

==You've now made two unsubstantiated assertions: 1) that Juliann's comment was "nonsense," and 2) that "LDS often equate 'reading the bible' with 'reading scripture' and may include any of the standard works in their answer." Besides your say-so, what evidence do you have to support either of these claims?

> I highly question that they would rank among the highest for bible reading.

==You "highly question" something you apparently haven't even read. Juliann's link showed Pentecostal/Foursquare as having the highest percentage of weekly Bible reading (75%), followed by Latter-day Saints (67%) and Assemblies of God and "Christian non-dominational (both at 66%).

> In addition,

=="In addition" to what? You haven't provided any evidence. Just conjecture.

> there are many factions of the LDS church. If studies are going to group all baptists together, they should group all LDS together.

==Perhaps so, but I wonder if this would make a big difference. Most schismatic LDS groups are quite small. Even the largest, the Community of Christ (n

[sr1030]

johnny_cat: I don't know about that. I've never confused "reading the Bible" with "reading the scriptures."

I didn't say "confuse", I said "equate". Why did you need to make this adjustment?

johnny_cat: We read the Bible and other scriptures together as part of our family scripture study. I don't think we've had an evening scripture study in a long time that didn't involve the Bible. Obviously, that's just me, but I don't imagine that I'm particularly atypical.

That is great. Why did you need to tell me this?

johnny_cat: I think the real issue is when the assumption that Mormons trash the Bible collides with the reality that we do study it, and not just a little.

LDS scripture trashes the bible. It doesn't matter if you see it this way or disagree. 1 Nephi 13 indicates that the bible was revised to the point where it could mislead people. This is considered trashing by many people. I certainly consider it trashing the bible.

In addition, there are many factions of the LDS church. If studies are going to group all baptists together, they should group all LDS together. Assemblies of God are a Pentecostal group, why are they separated from Pentecostal, but all Baptist, Presbytarian, Methodist, and Lutheran are grouped together.

johnny_cat: Obviously, the poll takers did not see it your way.

Obviously.

johnny_cat: The claim was that LDS read the Bible more than Protestants, and evidence was provided.

This was not the claim I first responded to. It was the nonsensical statement that "LDS read the bible more than most." More than most what? Protestants? I certainly could not have made that assumption. More than Catholic Priests? More than SBC? You get the point. You understand why it was non-sensical.

johnny_cat: Unless you have evidence more concrete than an assertion that we confuse "Bible" and "scriptures," you don't have much of a leg to stand on, sr.

It is a legitimate concern. I have good reason to believe that "reading the bible" and "reading scripture" are equated among many LDS. I have been dealing with LDS for 10 years and see this often.

sr

[YH8]

1) YH8: Does context and/or perspective ever come in to play for you? Is it possible for the same statement to be true in some contexts and false in others?

I understand context and provided references so anyone that questions the quote can read it in context.

2) YH8: If I say Kansas is flat will you call me deluded? If you look at certain areas it sure is. If you look at others it isn't. However, most people wouldn't have a problem with calling it flat. But then again, if you take the actual Earth as a whole Kansas is not and can never be considered flat?

.......yawn

1) While I didn't read through all of the posts, it sounds like the kind context you are referring to is not the kind of context I was referring to. I was referring to the type of context that somebody else was getting at about living in an environment hostile to Mormonism, etc.

While on a certain level most LDS likely agree that there is one true Church and all others are of the devil, on another level there is much good to be found in most mainstream world religion. It depends on how you look at it and in what way you are thinking and the point you are trying to make.

2) Good night

[sr1030]

smac: ==You "highly question" something you apparently haven't even read. Juliann's link showed Pentecostal/Foursquare as having the highest percentage of weekly Bible reading (75%), followed by Latter-day Saints (67%) and Assemblies of God and "Christian non-dominational (both at 66%).

I read it. I also don't want to take the time to deal with your posts which have become simply a desperate attempt to be right about everything, even the seemingly insignificant things. Basically this subject doesn't concern me much. I was addressing a non-sensical statement by Juliann. My post was one driver for her to support her statement.

I have a legitimate concern with the study. No group in the study that I can see have scripture that is in addition to the bible with the exception of LDS. I have not made a claim that the study is flawed, which I would need to support. I simply have an opinion that it may be flawed. But then, if it were not. So what?

sr

[Guest johnny_cat]

I didn't say "confuse", I said "equate". Why did you need to make this adjustment?

It was a deliberate attempt to soften your assertion. If trying to make your statement less offensive offends you, I'm sorry.

That is great. Why did you need to tell me this?

I offered it as anecdotal evidence that we don't exclude the Bible in our studies.

LDS scripture trashes the bible. It doesn't matter if you see it this way or disagree. 1 Nephi 13 indicates that the bible was revised to the point where it could mislead people. This is considered trashing by many people. I certainly consider it trashing the bible.

Two comments here: First, obviously, whether LDS scripture "trashes" the Bible is a matter of disagreement between us. Second, this is a red herring, as your response was about our practices, not about our teachings or scriptures. You've been offered statistical evidence and anecdotal evidence, but apparently your view of our teachings trumps both, thus proving my point.

This was not the claim I first responded to. It was the nonsensical statement that "LDS read the bible more than most." More than most what? Protestants? I certainly could not have made that assumption. More than Catholic Priests? More than SBC? You get the point. You understand why it was non-sensical.

I was not responding to that post. You were correct in asking for some support and clarification for the assertion. That you reject the assertion solely because it conflicts with your belief was my problem with your post.

It is a legitimate concern. I have good reason to believe that "reading the bible" and "reading scripture" are equated among many LDS. I have been dealing with LDS for 10 years and see this often.

It could well be a legitimate concern, but a concern is not evidence against documentary evidence.

[LDS4EVER]

I question any study done in which LDS are asked about reading the bible. LDS often equate "reading the bible" with "reading scripture" and may include any of the standard works in their answer. I believe that LDS would rank among the highest, if not the highest for reading scripture. I highly question that they would rank among the highest for bible reading.

What total nonsense.

[sr1030]

I question any study done in which LDS are asked about reading the bible. LDS often equate "reading the bible" with "reading scripture" and may include any of the standard works in their answer. I believe that LDS would rank among the highest, if not the highest for reading scripture. I highly question that they would rank among the highest for bible reading.

What total nonsense.

Total nonsense to question a study?

This is funny, pointing out a legitimate concern or question really bothers some people. Apparently you agree that it is legitimate, and that is what bothers you the most.

sr