LDS Church plans to decrease missions; utilize tech savviness to locate religious-minded people

[Atheist Mormon]

44 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 Condescend much?  

what part, please quote?

[Atheist Mormon]

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

This has been in prophecy for centuries -- the end of the Fullness of Times for the Gentiles.   When he missionaries have finished warning the world, the Lord will then preach His own sermons.  We are seeing the beginning of His sermons.

That's another way to look at it....

[Kenngo1969]

3 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Sadly it was inevitable & long overdue. The growth in 60's, 70's. 80's virtually stopped...I was in the Mission Field (not as missionary) in Europe, even then things weren't great but still there was a steady stream of new members, now with the age of technology there's no chance of capturing those glory days back.....This is not the case only for LDS obviously. The civilized part of the Planet is waking up to the reality, if they want to be saved it will be only by their own doing. [Emphasis Added by Kenngo1969]

 

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 Condescend much?  

 

39 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

what part, please quote?

I have bolded the portion I find objectionable, and that I think other reasonable people would find objectionable (this makes twice now, for the record).  

[Atheist Mormon]

7 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 

 

I have bolded the portion I find objectionable, and that I think other reasonable people would find objectionable (this makes twice now, for the record).  

Got you, but I'm still wondering where the condescending is, is it untrue that peoples interest in religion waning and skeptics/non-Believers numbers are increasing? 

[Avatar4321]

2 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

That's another way to look at it....

considering this was prophecied at the beginning of our dispensation and we certainly seem to have the technology set up for that, is it any surprise anyone might realize that?

the world is not waking up. It's going down the rabbit hole. Even my nonmember wife is constantly noticing that.

after all these natural disasters one after another and a dramatic shift in missionary effort it certainly seems like the prophecies will be fulfilled and soon.

[Kenngo1969]

13 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Got you, but I'm still wondering where the condescending is, is it untrue that peoples interest in religion waning and skeptics/non-Believers numbers are increasing? 

Hey, if you want to continue to condescend to the devout, knock yourself out, but don't consider me to be a part of a captive audience.

[california boy]

8 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Hey, if you want to continue to condescend to the devout, knock yourself out, but don't consider me to be a part of a captive audience.

Boy you really had to work at it to be offended by that statement.  I think that a lot of people have come to the conclusion that organized religion is not going to save them.  And there are plenty of reasons to come to that conclusion.  It doesn't come in a vacuum.

[RevTestament]

14 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Got you, but I'm still wondering where the condescending is, is it untrue that peoples interest in religion waning and skeptics/non-Believers numbers are increasing? 

The condescending part is a lack of recognition of the faith of Christians. I assume you realize they believe they cannot save themselves? You are basically saying they are not civilized therefore. That is disrespectful and condescending. It is like Christians saying you are not civilized because you believe you can only be saved by your own doing. I'm sure that would offend you, and you would think of Christians as a bunch of condescending jerks who think themselves better than other contributors to society.

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Boy you really had to work at it to be offended by that statement.  I think that a lot of people have come to the conclusion that organized religion is not going to save them.  And there are plenty of reasons to come to that conclusion.  It doesn't come in a vacuum.

Do you disagree with certain things simply based on who says them? Can you really not see far enough past your animus toward me based on the disagreements we've had to recognize (as, putatively, a fellow Christian, notwithstanding any disagreements you may have with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, with its doctrine, with its leaders, and with the positions of Church members expressed on this board) the merit in my position?  And do you really think that loss of faith and creeping secularism are things to be celebrated?  (Again, that's a rather strange position for someone who, putatively, is a person of faith.)  If so, I think that's rather sad, but I'll leave you to it.

P.S.: See Matthew 16:24-26.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[smac97]

On 10/20/2017 at 10:54 AM, Kenngo1969 said:

Smac97:

My entire post is off-topic, so sue me!   (I will waive formal service and will accept service via a PDF copy of your complaint attached to an e-mail.  If you will not be representing yourself, tell your attorney that, since I'm poor ... notwithstanding the old adage that an attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client ... I will be representing myself, and s/he's free to contact me directly.  Now, with the legal niceties out of the way ...  

Mega--major-kudos to your son, Sir.  Notwithstanding some limitations, I served a "regular" proselyting mission.  See here (last accessed today):  https://www.lds.org/new-era/1993/02/we-did-it?lang=eng&_r=1.  I would not do so under today's "Raised Bar" standards.  I was, perhaps, a liability to several of my companions, in more ways than one.  In retrospect, I would have benefitted from the "outside-the-box" thinking which has occurred since my mission that has expanded the conception of what it means to be a(n effective) missionary.  On the one hand, there were (are) my limitations; on the other, I have some unique strengths, talents, and abilities which could have been employed to great(er) benefit on my mission, had that sort of "outside-the-box" thinking occurred then.

Please thank your son for his service, and remind him that, very possibly, he's reaching more people in more ways than you and I ever could have dreamed of doing as full-time missionaries, and that it's not where one serves, but how.  Whatever arrangements have been made to maximize his chances for success and to ensure that his unique challenges are met, his sacrifice is acceptable to the Lord, just as anyone else's sincere sacrifice of time, talents, and other resources is.  (In fact, given his challenges, it's very possible that the Lord has an even greater appreciation for those sacrifices than he does for the sacrifices of someone without such challenges.)  

Thanks,

-Ken

Ken,

Thank you for your kind words.  I pick my son up from the MTC several times a week, so we regularly talk about his daily experiences.

I also have a daughter who is presently an exchange student in Bosa, Italy (it's a small town on the west coast of Sardinia).  She too is having some very interesting missionary experiences.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Kenngo1969]

15 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Ken,

Thank you for your kind words.  I pick my son up from the MTC several times a week, so we regularly talk about his daily experiences.

I also have a daughter who is presently an exchange student in Bosa, Italy (it's a small town on the west coast of Sardinia).  She too is having some very interesting missionary experiences.

Thanks,

-Smac

I'm currently taking advantage of the fact that I bought Homer, Toronto, and Dursteler's Mormons in the Piazza: History of Latter-day Saints in Italy for my brother, who served in Italy-Catania, for his birthday, by reading the book before I give it to him.   Truly fascinating stuff, that!  If I'm not working or watching a Jazz game, I'm thoroughly engrossed!

Edited October 22, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[Kenngo1969]

A few months ago, I posted the following in another forum.  I think it is applicable to this discussion, and I think the point I make here applies to religious devotion generally and is not limited to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to its teachings, or to its members.  Yes, we might be seeing an inexorable decline in faith and in faithfulness which it may take the advent of the Millennium to remedy, and, in light of a decline in faithfulness and of a creeping secularism, there may be unusual challenges ahead for anyone who strives to remain faithful.  That said:

Quote

By no means am I suggesting that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will accept into its ranks those who do not have at least fledgling testimonies of its foundational claims and core doctrines. However, as time goes on, I believe more people who now are apatheistic or who are only vaguely religious will come to the realization that life, for all of its possible richness which may come from so many quarters, actually is rather hollow without some sort of a Supreme Being or Higher Power, along with the attendant coherent moral framework that the existence of such a being implies, at its center.

Perhaps more than a few such people, who might have been inclined to reject the tenets of the Church of Jesus Christ for their supposed "strangeness," will, instead, be drawn to the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ as promulgated in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for its ability to provide that which they had been lacking, which I allude to in the foregoing paragraph.

In any case, reports of the imminent demise of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints [or of religion generally] are greatly exaggerated.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[Atheist Mormon]

6 hours ago, RevTestament said:

The condescending part is a lack of recognition of the faith of Christians. I assume you realize they believe they cannot save themselves? You are basically saying they are not civilized therefore. That is disrespectful and condescending. It is like Christians saying you are not civilized because you believe you can only be saved by your own doing. I'm sure that would offend you, and you would think of Christians as a bunch of condescending jerks who think themselves better than other contributors to society.

you concocted the whole reply..I never said christians are not civilized, on the contrary; they live mostly in civilized world. How can they not save themselves? If they want to swim they will learn swimming and not drown, rather than relying somebody else to save them. How my doing is going to save me, if a runaway train comes across and I don't have time. What I am saying is Christians (sizable sum of them) are getting tired of waiting for second coming. And the number of conversions support this hypthesis.

[mrmarklin]

Glad to see the Church is rethinking the program. I’ve thought for decades now that the program has been off track, and I suppose the age change was an attempt to get it back again. 

But doing the same thing over and over with more people obviously didn’t work. 

[Kenngo1969]

1 minute ago, mrmarklin said:

Glad to see the Church is rethinking the program. I’ve thought for decades now that the program has been off track, and I suppose the age change was an attempt to get it back again. 

But doing the same thing over and over with more people obviously didn’t work. 

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree, but I don't think the changes in the missionary program of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints constitute simply "doing the same thing over and over with more people" ...  

[Scott Lloyd]

On 10/21/2017 at 7:26 PM, Atheist Mormon said:

Got you, but I'm still wondering where the condescending is, is it untrue that peoples interest in religion waning and skeptics/non-Believers numbers are increasing? 

The condescension is in your categorizing yourself as within “the civilized part of the planet” while placing those who disagree with you outside of it. 

Even I can see that immediately, as uncivilized as I am (by your definition). 

[Atheist Mormon]

8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The condescension is in your categorizing yourself as within “the civilized part of the planet” while placing those who disagree with you outside of it. 

Even I can see that immediately, as uncivilized as I am (by your definition). 

That is amazing. since you are also part of the "civilized" your vote shouldn't count. I grew up in an uncivilized country, I definitely stand by my observation of deep division where rule of the law is dictatorship & oppression. If you find this condescending, you don't have to accept the reality of it and continue. We all have our own opinions/standards. For example; If you were a Russian and if we were discussing the politics, i'd tell you your government has very little resemblance to parliamentary democracy where the rule of the law exists. It is an opinion supported by the reality of the facts not arrogance.

[clarkgoble]

18 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

Glad to see the Church is rethinking the program. I’ve thought for decades now that the program has been off track, and I suppose the age change was an attempt to get it back again. 

But doing the same thing over and over with more people obviously didn’t work. 

I think this is positive, although I think the age shift was a mistake. I think though there have been extensive social changes. I also think that regions now need much more customized approaches - particularly Asia where I think we are underperforming compared to what we could do.

[mnn727]

On 10/20/2017 at 4:04 PM, cdowis said:

I have a feeling this stricter interview process will dramatically change the ratio of the number of sister missionaries compared to elders.  If you don't know what I am talking about, I'm not going to explain it.

You are probably correct, however women/girls are not immune to that either.

[Gray]

"utilize tech savviness to locate religious-minded people"

I wonder if digital marketing could do all the "hunting" part of missionary work, leaving missionaries free for teaching and service work.

[rongo]

12 minutes ago, Gray said:

"utilize tech savviness to locate religious-minded people"

I wonder if digital marketing could do all the "hunting" part of missionary work, leaving missionaries free for teaching and service work.

No. Not in my experience, anyway.

The paradox is that most people who are "found" would not have been found via social media or digitally. They were "found" through friends, door-to-door, or talking to the missionaries (street contacting). That holds true even in 2017.

Our mission went through a phase where the missionaries were forbidden to proselyte in order to put the onus on members to provide all of their teaching appointments. In a year, the three baptisms were a family of four, an elderly man, and a woman between middle age and elderly. The mission also piloted the program where they spend every minute not doing service and not teaching at the church, "finding" people on their tablets (what a joke that is). All were found by "illegally" knocking on doors or talking to people in front of their house. The two single people have now been through the temple, and in the family of four, the older two children are now entering adulthood (army and school/working). 

"We don't need to work harder, we need to work smarter by using digital technology to find people" frustrates me to no end, even when it comes from the Brethren. A large part of the value of missionary WORK is experiencing the heritage of our forefathers in finding people by talking to them (interpersonal, face to face). Electronic communication is alienating and not as effective, even if on paper we can "reach more people than ever." 

I am convinced that a major reason for the anxiety and depression among millennials on missions is that we have gotten away from our "ineffective" traditional finding methods and embraced "digital" finding. It is unrewarding, and doesn't bear fruit (look at the baptisms trend), and leaves people feeling in the back of their mind like they should have been talking to people.

[Rain]

I think digital is an important part of missionary work since more and more I hear of people who won't open doors or talk with neighbors etc on the message boards I visit. Neighbors have become more and more closed to us without us ever saying anything about religion at all. Digital can reach those that won't open those doors. One of those is my friend who knew me through a message board and little by little was baptized and went through the temple.

However, I agree that you need the face to face just as much as we ever did, because while I "found" her on the internet, helped her be comfortable enough with me there that she stepped out of her comfort zone in person, had many gospel discussions in facebook chat etc it was very important that she had that face time with her missionaries and the members in her ward.

Edited October 25, 2017 by Rain

[Gray]

18 minutes ago, rongo said:

No. Not in my experience, anyway.

The paradox is that most people who are "found" would not have been found via social media or digitally. They were "found" through friends, door-to-door, or talking to the missionaries (street contacting). That holds true even in 2017.

Our mission went through a phase where the missionaries were forbidden to proselyte in order to put the onus on members to provide all of their teaching appointments. In a year, the three baptisms were a family of four, an elderly man, and a woman between middle age and elderly. The mission also piloted the program where they spend every minute not doing service and not teaching at the church, "finding" people on their tablets (what a joke that is). All were found by "illegally" knocking on doors or talking to people in front of their house. The two single people have now been through the temple, and in the family of four, the older two children are now entering adulthood (army and school/working). 

"We don't need to work harder, we need to work smarter by using digital technology to find people" frustrates me to no end, even when it comes from the Brethren. A large part of the value of missionary WORK is experiencing the heritage of our forefathers in finding people by talking to them (interpersonal, face to face). Electronic communication is alienating and not as effective, even if on paper we can "reach more people than ever." 

I am convinced that a major reason for the anxiety and depression among millennials on missions is that we have gotten away from our "ineffective" traditional finding methods and embraced "digital" finding. It is unrewarding, and doesn't bear fruit (look at the baptisms trend), and leaves people feeling in the back of their mind like they should have been talking to people.

Good thoughts. However, I wasn't really imagining a person trying to hunt up investigators on social media - that does sound like depressing work. I was thinking advertising and bots. But maybe that wouldn't work.

[ERMD]

On 10/20/2017 at 11:06 AM, Amulek said:

These all seem like the sort of things a bishop ought to know about a prospective missionary before recommending him/her for a mission. 

It's amazing what youth keep to themselves.  

[ERMD]

On 10/20/2017 at 4:41 PM, rongo said:

 Stake presidents are still under tremendous pressure if their perceived quota of missionaries goes down. 

 

CFR