ksfisher Posted August 21, 2019 Posted August 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: I've tried but find myself lapsing more and more. Since the Church really didn't offer a workable alternative that's short, I'm not surprised. When I'm going for short I just say the Church or say that he or she or they are members of the Church. I don't think I really ever used LDS or Mormon that much to start with so I haven't found it very difficult. 1
phaedrus ut Posted August 21, 2019 Posted August 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: He said the Lord had “impressed upon [his] mind” the need for a correction in how the Church of Jesus Christ is identified. He was very clear about it. To me that’s as good as saying it is revelation. If you have to make an argument to say it's subjectively "as good as" revelation you are saying it's not quite revelation. But even if it was there is recent precedent showing even a new policy received by revelation isn't permanent if it's unpopular. 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: And no one ever said God is offended by the name Mormon. I don’t know why you critics keep repeating that straw man. Rather, what has been said is that He is offended by the removal of His name from His Church. Nelson literally said in his conference address "if we allow nicknames to be used or adopt or even sponsor those nicknames ourselves, He is offended." Nobody is suggesting he hates the name Mormon like he hates character in the BOM. It's clear what the context is. There is one nickname used in reference to the church in 99.99% of the time. And again to repeat my point they aren't removing his name from the church because it isn't his name. Phaedrus
JulieM Posted August 21, 2019 Posted August 21, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, phaedrus ut said: If you have to make an argument to say it's subjectively "as good as" revelation you are saying it's not quite revelation. But even if it was there is recent precedent showing even a new policy received by revelation isn't permanent if it's unpopular. Nelson literally said in his conference address "if we allow nicknames to be used or adopt or even sponsor those nicknames ourselves, He is offended." Nobody is suggesting he hates the name Mormon like he hates character in the BOM. It's clear what the context is. There is one nickname used in reference to the church in 99.99% of the time. And again to repeat my point they aren't removing his name from the church because it isn't his name. Phaedrus Either way it is still the name of the church. Whether we use Mormon sometimes or we don’t, that doesn’t change the actual official name, right? And wasn’t there something about pleasing Satan or something in the statement if we use the term Mormon (going from memory)? I do honestly try, but I guess I’m weak 😉 Edited August 21, 2019 by JulieM
ALarson Posted August 21, 2019 Posted August 21, 2019 9 minutes ago, JulieM said: Either way it is still the name of the church. Whether we use Mormon sometimes or we don’t, that doesn’t change the actual official name, right? And wasn’t there something about pleasing Satan or something in the statement if we use the term Mormon (going from memory)? You're thinking of this: Quote After noting last August that the instruction to emphasize the full name of the church had come from the Lord, Nelson employed even stronger language at the faith’s General Conference in October 2018, saying that use of the long-standing term “Mormon” in reference to the church constituted a “major victory for Satan.” https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2019/08/20/jana-riess-year-later-how/ 1
clarkgoble Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 3 hours ago, ksfisher said: When I'm going for short I just say the Church or say that he or she or they are members of the Church. I don't think I really ever used LDS or Mormon that much to start with so I haven't found it very difficult. I actually do that a lot too. But I've noticed I've been saying Mormon for somethings because the alternatives are ridiculously awkward. I've not really done LDS though.
Scott Lloyd Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 7 hours ago, phaedrus ut said: If you have to make an argument to say it's subjectively "as good as" revelation you are saying it's not quite revelation. But even if it was there is recent precedent showing even a new policy received by revelation isn't permanent if it's unpopular. Nelson literally said in his conference address "if we allow nicknames to be used or adopt or even sponsor those nicknames ourselves, He is offended." Nobody is suggesting he hates the name Mormon like he hates character in the BOM. It's clear what the context is. There is one nickname used in reference to the church in 99.99% of the time. And again to repeat my point they aren't removing his name from the church because it isn't his name. Phaedrus Obviously, the reason He is offended is that the nickname is being used to supplant the name of Christ in the name of the Church, not because there is anything inherently wrong with the name Mormon. It’s comparable to the analogy the resurrected Lord used when He spoke to the Nephites: If it be called after the name of Moses, it would be Moses’s church. But it is not Moses’s church, it is Christ’s church. Likewise, it is not Mormon’s church (or “the Mormon Church”), it is Christ’s church. By the way, don’t put words in my mouth. When I say “impressed upon [his] mind” is as good as saying there was revelation, I mean it is the functional equivalent thereof. I am the world’s foremost expert on what I mean by the phrasing that I use. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 8 hours ago, ksfisher said: When I'm going for short I just say the Church or say that he or she or they are members of the Church. I don't think I really ever used LDS or Mormon that much to start with so I haven't found it very difficult. 5 hours ago, clarkgoble said: I actually do that a lot too. But I've noticed I've been saying Mormon for somethings because the alternatives are ridiculously awkward. I've not really done LDS though. I used this convention for the 33 years I wrote for a Church publication, and it served me just fine. Once it’s clear from context what church you’re referring to, you need only say “the Church” or “the Church of Jesus Christ.” A lot of this habitual behavior has to do with ear training. I am at the point now where “the Mormon church” sounds dissonant to me. It’s an irritant — like fingernails on a chalkboard. Really, it takes some degree of forbearance for me not to correct the speaker or writer when I encounter it. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 8 hours ago, ALarson said: Well...who knows? That may come back That would actually be a good term for any person (male or female) ministering to a family or single .....a ward teacher. No. “Ministering” works much better than “ward teacher” which lacked precision in its connotation. Even “home teacher” is inadequate to convey the required meaning. There will come a time when the nicknames and abbreviations will seem just as archaic as “ward teacher.” 1
ALarson Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: No. “Ministering” works much better than “ward teacher” which lacked precision in its connotation. Even “home teacher” is inadequate to convey the required meaning. LOL....ok (I was just teasing you a bit....but you're so serious about everything ) 6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: There will come a time when the nicknames and abbreviations will seem just as archaic as “ward teacher.” I guess time will tell. I believe that will depend on how the next Prophet emphasizes it. If he feels as strongly as Pres. Nelson does, we may possibly see what you describe. But I honestly still doubt that and I do believe we will always still hear "Mormon" and "LDS" commonly used to identify us (and for members to identify themselves and fellow members). That's my opinion....I certainly understand if you disagree. Edited August 22, 2019 by ALarson
phaedrus ut Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 7 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: By the way, don’t put words in my mouth. When I say “impressed upon [his] mind” is as good as saying there was revelation, I mean it is the functional equivalent thereof. I am the world’s foremost expert on what I mean by the phrasing that I use. I didn't put words in your mouth. I literally used the quote feature just like I did here.
MustardSeed Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 If one lives in a predominantly lds area then “the church” works just fine. The rest of us have to identify which church. Imo it’s one of those issues that is much more significant outside of Zion.
MiserereNobis Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 20 hours ago, phaedrus ut said: the recent round of cease and desist letters Intellectual Reserve have been sending out to websites using the name "Mormon" in their title. Ooo, did this site get one?
MiserereNobis Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 19 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Question to ponder: How does one boil down “the beliefs, culture, practices, history, traditions, worldview, etc. of the Seventh Day Adventists” into an accurate, one-word noun? Sincere question, because I really can’t think of a way to do it offhand. Good point. Maybe the difference is that Mormonism has a history of usage where, as far as I know, there isn't a history of an equivalent term for the Seventh Day Adventists.
RevTestament Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 23 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: I think the hardest one is Mormonism, referring not just to the organization, but also to the beliefs, the culture, the practices, the history, the traditions, the worldview, on and on. Think of what "Catholicism" encompasses. What is a simple replacement for Mormonism? Good point. Restorationist. 1
mrmarklin Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 On 8/20/2019 at 12:50 AM, Calm said: https://www.deseret.com/2019/8/16/20807538/the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints-mormon-lds-russell-m-nelson-full-name some highlights for me... And more stuff to read for those interested in the subject.... Maybe I’m too old, but I vaguely remember this name deal has come up before. They rebranded the placards on all the new church buildings. The old ones stayed the same AFAIK. This, in conjunction with using The Church of Jesus Christ as the name of the church The problem is that the full name of our church doesn’t exactly trip easily off the tongue. It’s a classic PR problem for any brand. First thing they need to do is to get the AP et al to change their style book, if they haven’t done it already.
mrmarklin Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 22 hours ago, ksfisher said: When I'm going for short I just say the Church or say that he or she or they are members of the Church. I don't think I really ever used LDS or Mormon that much to start with so I haven't found it very difficult. If one lives in Utah, this may work. Don’t expect anyone in Italy to understand what you mean 😀 1
Scott Lloyd Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 7 hours ago, ALarson said: LOL....ok (I was just teasing you a bit....but you're so serious about everything ) I guess time will tell. I believe that will depend on how the next Prophet emphasizes it. If he feels as strongly as Pres. Nelson does, we may possibly see what you describe. But I honestly still doubt that and I do believe we will always still hear "Mormon" and "LDS" commonly used to identify us (and for members to identify themselves and fellow members). That's my opinion....I certainly understand if you disagree. Oh, we may hear it from non-members and the less active. But they get things wrong all the time. The faithful will come to hearken to the prophet, even if some are slow to do it at the moment.
Scott Lloyd Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 (edited) 16 minutes ago, mrmarklin said: If one lives in Utah, this may work. Don’t expect anyone in Italy to understand what you mean 😀 Are you Italian? I ask, because Swedish is my second language, and I can’t imagine typical Swedes being confused by the above. And I don’t know what living in Utah has to do with it, unless you believe those who live outside of the state are less bright than Utahns. I don’t believe that. Edited August 22, 2019 by Scott Lloyd
MustardSeed Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: Are you Italian? I ask, because Swedish is my second language, and I can’t imagine typical Swedes being confused by the above. ? i live in the US. Not in Utah. If I’m at work and talking to someone about “the church” they are gonna say straight up, “what church”. There are more than one predominant church in most places. So I don’t follow you here.
Scott Lloyd Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 Just now, MustardSeed said: ? i live in the US. Not in Utah. If I’m at work and talking to someone about “the church” they are gonna say straight up, “what church”. There are more than one predominant church in most places. So I don’t follow you here. I thought it went without saying that it would be clear in the context of the conversation what Church was meant. Of course you would explicitly give the full title of the Church early on in the conversation, but thereafter you can get by with saying just “the Church” or “the Church of Jesus Christ” in subsequent references. I’m sorry this wasn’t clear to you.
Scott Lloyd Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 4 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: Good point. Maybe the difference is that Mormonism has a history of usage where, as far as I know, there isn't a history of an equivalent term for the Seventh Day Adventists. I’m sure you’re right about that. And yet we have somehow gotten by without a shorthand way of expressing ourselves when we refer to the set of all things pertaining to the Seventh Day Adventists.
MustardSeed Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 11 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I thought it went without saying that it would be clear in the context of the conversation what Church was meant. Of course you would explicitly give the full title of the Church early on in the conversation, but thereafter you can get by with saying just “the Church” or “the Church of Jesus Christ” in subsequent references. I’m sorry this wasn’t clear to you. Nope. Wasn’t clear. Most of my conversations that include talk of church requires I identify the name of my church, as most of my associates are not members of the C if Jesus Christ of LDS.
JulieM Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 24 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Are you Italian? I ask, because Swedish is my second language, and I can’t imagine typical Swedes being confused by the above. And I don’t know what living in Utah has to do with it, unless you believe those who live outside of the state are less bright than Utahns. I don’t believe that. I think it’s because if you give no context (full name), but ask in conversation, “Are you a member of the church?”, and you’re in Utah, most would know what you meant (the Mormon church). But if someone asked that in conversation in Italy, they wouldn’t make the same assumption or know which church. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 (edited) 38 minutes ago, MustardSeed said: Nope. Wasn’t clear. Most of my conversations that include talk of church requires I identify the name of my church, as most of my associates are not members of the C if Jesus Christ of LDS. I would never expect anyone not to explicitly give the full name of the Church at least once in such a circumstance. But I’m sure you agree it would probably not be necessary to do it with each subsequent reference in the conversation. That’s what I meant. Edited August 22, 2019 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted August 22, 2019 Posted August 22, 2019 31 minutes ago, JulieM said: I think it’s because if you give no context (full name), but ask in conversation, “Are you a member of the church?”, and you’re in Utah, most would know what you meant (the Mormon church). But if someone asked that in conversation in Italy, they wouldn’t make the same assumption or know which church. Even in Utah, I would not do that if the conversation were with a stranger. By the way, I never say “Mormon church.”
Recommended Posts