Adventists and Jehovah Witnesses Are Converting More Than The LDS

[Navidad]

19 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

Compare apples to apples.  Do these other groups have the same conversion requirements as the LDS church does?  Few churches expect as much from their members as ours does.  In many churches, all is expected is one shows up.  No callings and other things are expected. 

HUH?

[Navidad]

19 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

They are dedicated.   Our church requires much more of its members than quite a few other churches.   From church callings to tithing to worthiness issues and word of wisdom stuff.   We tend to emphasis church activity more than others.  Joining the LDS Church requires more sacrifice than others typically expect.  

HUH?

[Navidad]

I need one small bit of clarification. When we were studying the Old Testament in Sunday School, both my wife and I were taken about how often the OT was interpreted as having specific reference specifically to the LDS Church somewhere way out there in a prophetic sense in the future. The Old Testament was interpreted through LDS hermeneutics to refer specifically to the LDS church. . . . empty cisterns refer to other churches . . . living water refers to living prophets, etc.

Now in this thread, I think I am reading that Nebuchadnezzar's dream interpreted by Daniel implies that the LDS Church will one day fill the earth, perhaps in the millenium? Not the Christian church (world-wide), but specifically and only the LDS Church? Is this another indication of the exclusive identity and doctrinal nature of the LDS Church?

We found an interpretation of the Old Testament through a singular LDS lens to be very idiosyncratic. I never heard teachers read specific and exclusive Mennonite, Baptist, Pentecostal, or Lutheran identity into Old Testament interpretation and hermeneutics.  Thanks for your clarifications. Best to all.

[BlueDreams]

13 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I had the same thought, but it is likely very difficult to tease out meaningful data out of the Covid mess. 

Very true. Though from the graph, the JW numbers were stumbling well before 2020. Which is curious. 

 

With luv,

BD 

[BlueDreams]

15 hours ago, Stargazer said:

While I tend to agree about the requirement to show some dedication before baptism, it is not how the Primitive Church operated. When Philip taught the eunuch, he baptized him after the first lesson. The righteous centurion was welcomed into the church likewise quite quickly. 

The Lord's parable of the sower, where seeds fell on different ground and the results depended upon the ground, says to me that it doesn't matter whether we think the seed is on good or bad ground. There are members who have fallen away after many decades, and some who have fallen away after a few months. I've seen new members disappear immediately after their baptism. We must fellowship all who come, but whether they stay or not is up to them. 

Small irk as an obsessive gardener. You can interpret it this way, but I definitely don't. I'm well acquainted with the importance of my soil quality being directly tied to how successful my garden will be. Each year I am taking inventory of the problems facing my land and carefully planning how to best address those to increase the success of plantings. There will always be failures. But there is a lot that I can do to reduce that rate of failure and so much of that is just making sure I have good earth prepared to receive my plants/seeds. 

Now that preparation can be personal (as in work one must do to address their spiritual weak spots). But it can also be communal (as in what we can do to prepare the way to reduce unnecessary stumbling blocks for others). Neither are contradictory from the parable IMHO. 

 

With luv, 

BD

[BlueDreams]

21 hours ago, Peppermint Patty said:

David G. Stewart, Jr., of UNLV who operates the cumorah website published an article last week showing the Jehovah Witnesses and Adventist missionary programs are having more success in finding converts than the LDS. He gives some reasons and possible solutions. Has anyone read this article? Thoughts?

“Trends point to continued underperformance of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints compared to its competitors. While a range of possibilities exist, the default path is for further decline of growth rates. The LDS Church is unlikely to regain its former growth trajectory. Prospects of becoming a major world faith have faded and are likely beyond reach.”

http://jmssa.org/stewart/

The reasons why his prediction was wrong make a lot of since. It was oversimplified and ignored confound internal/external trends.

I don't know about the part the article comparing JW's/7DA's to our numbers though. This may have been a delayed stagnation for them as well. THe JW numbers have been mentioned, but the 7DA numbers have also struggled in recent years and their growth soon stagnated after the 1.25-1.4 mill conversion rate...it stay around that high until 2020, where it (understandably) crashed, and hasn't gotten back on its feet again. Plus apparent in 2019, they were experiencing the exact same problems described in the article, namely struggles with retention. see here.

 

I think some of the differences within both how these groups proselytize and their degree of distinction from mainline christianity may have helped delay what's an inevitable trend happening for every religious group. No one's fully escaping the trends in lower birth rate and increased secularization. Among other things. 

 

With luv,

BD 

[Kenngo1969]

Whether I ought to be concerned about the rapidity with which Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses are amassing converts compared to Latter-day Saints might depend on what those who join the former two groups are converting from. 

Never would I suggest that the irreligious are completely amoral.  Even if one adheres to no faith tradition at all, if, nevertheless, he or she is an honest, upright, decent, caring individual who believes in loving one's neighbor, in doing unto others as one would have done unto him or her, in turning the other cheek by refusing to return spite for spite and slight for slight, in making life as good as one can make it for oneself, for one's loved ones, and for those around him or her before (from his or her perspective) "succumbing to the void," and so on, more power to him or her.  

That said, if the doctrine of the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Seventh Day Adventists or of some other non-Latter-day Saint tradition is what enables someone to emerge from a state of comparative hopelessness or at least to better one's life in comparison to how one was living it previously, again, more power to him or her.  (I'll take a good Jehovah's Witness or Seventh Day Adventist over a "bad" Latter-day Saint every day of the week and twice on Saturday or on Sunday, as the case may be. ) As disappointed as a part of me might be if those two groups were "poaching" a significant number of Latter-day Saints, if one feels one can be a better Jehovah's Witness or Seventh Day Adventist than one was a Latter-day Saint, again, more power to him or her.  One must find the faith path that speaks to one's soul.  As much as I hope that uniting with the Latter-day Saints would be that path, if it is not, I hope that one is able to find it wherever it might be.

As for the prospects successfully of leading Latter-day Saints successfully through a seeming teeming sea of secularization, definitely, there is a limit to how much the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should be expected to change, fundamentally, in a likely-futile effort to appease those who have taken their leave.  One realizes that this is so especially once one considers that however many watershed fundamental issues there might be, when it comes right down to it, the reasons why many have taken leave, or have failed to convert despite initial interest, are so subtly different that there is little prospect that any given change would be able to appease even a small minority, let alone a plurality or a majority, of them.

Whatever changes in approach might need to occur to enable the Church of Jesus Christ to attract a greater number of converts and to retain them once they join, there's always the prospect that a leave-taker or an originally-skeptical convert will change one's mind and will opt to return or to join, respectively. Conversely, if Church of Jesus Christ were to change in an attempt to please all such people (or most of them, or many of them) in their infinitely-variable stripes, the more fundamental such change, I believe the likelihood is that, instead, the change would backfire, pleasing no one.

I would hope that the Holy Spirit would move upon one, upon some, and upon great numbers of people to unite themselves with the Latter-day Saints.  But, again, ultimately, one must find the path that speaks to his or her soul.  And right is right even if no one teaches it, believes it, or does it, and wrong is wrong even if everyone teaches it, believes it, or does it. Whatever changes might need to occur in order for Latter-day Saints to attract greater numbers, perhaps it behooves us to ask ourselves whether, indeed, we are the salt of the earth and whether, if, once, this was the case, we have lost our savor. 

"Ye are the salt of the earth," the Savior said, "but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men."  Matthew 5:13.  Also, He reminded us that great numbers are not a prerequisite for a particular gathering to be attended by the Spirit (hopefully, if COVID-19 has taught us anything, it has taught us this).  He said, "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."  Matthew 18:20.

In my estimation, the long and the short of it is this: Is change needed for the Church of Jesus Christ to attract converts and to retain those who, already, are within the fold?  Perhaps, but perhaps the greatest "institutional" change that President Russell M. Nelson is striving fervently to have Latter-day Saints adopt is being led by the Holy Spirit more often and to a greater degree (indeed, as constantly as possible).  And anyone agitating for any other kind of fundamental or institutional change had best exercise great care, lest one find himself or herself clamoring for "the baby to be thrown out with the bathwater."

[Hamba Tuhan]

9 hours ago, Navidad said:

Now in this thread, I think I am reading that Nebuchadnezzar's dream interpreted by Daniel implies that the LDS Church will one day fill the earth, perhaps in the millenium? Not the Christian church (world-wide), but specifically and only the LDS Church? Is this another indication of the exclusive identity and doctrinal nature of the LDS Church?

Yes, 100 per cent. At this point, are you genuinely surprised or just feigning surprise?

[Navidad]

5 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Yes, 100 per cent. At this point, are you genuinely surprised or just feigning surprise?

I don't feign! And I am not surprised . . . just disappointed.

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I don't feign! And I am not surprised . . . just disappointed.

Being repeatedly disappointed by the consistency of our beliefs sounds potentially exhausting ... 

[rodheadlee]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

I don't feign! And I am not surprised . . . just disappointed.

Don't be disappointed. It won't be exclusive it will be inclusive.

You won't understand until Christ explains it to you. 

Edited December 6, 2022 by rodheadlee
Clarification

[gav]

15 hours ago, Navidad said:

Now in this thread, I think I am reading that Nebuchadnezzar's dream interpreted by Daniel implies that the LDS Church will one day fill the earth, perhaps in the millenium? Not the Christian church (world-wide), but specifically and only the LDS Church? Is this another indication of the exclusive identity and doctrinal nature of the LDS Church?

We found an interpretation of the Old Testament through a singular LDS lens to be very idiosyncratic. I never heard teachers read specific and exclusive Mennonite, Baptist, Pentecostal, or Lutheran identity into Old Testament interpretation and hermeneutics.  Thanks for your clarifications. Best to all.

Daniel is multi faceted. And many have read much into it.

For example the Seventh Day Adventists using the 2300 days (years) from wikipedia...

Quote

• The Great Disappointment in the Millerite movement was the reaction that followed Baptist preacher William Miller's proclamations that Jesus Christ would return to the Earth by 1844, which he called the Second Advent. His study of the Daniel 8 prophecy during the Second Great Awakening led him to conclude that Daniel's "cleansing of the sanctuary" was cleansing the world from sin when Christ would come, and he and many others prepared. When Jesus did not appear by October 22, 1844, Miller and his followers were disappointed.^[1][2][3][4]

  These events paved the way for the Adventists who formed the Seventh-day Adventist Church. They contended that what had happened on October 22 was not Jesus' return, as Miller had thought, but the start of Jesus' final work of atonement, the cleansing in the heavenly sanctuary, leading up to the Second Coming.

 

 

 

The Jehovah's Witnesses had a similar eschatology this time from the new testament and once again from the wikipedia page:

Quote

Its computations of the length of the "times of the Gentiles" mentioned at Luke 21:24 (calculated as 2,520 years from 606 BC)^[4] used an interpretation that is still adhered to by Jehovah's Witnesses.^[2] It used the year-day system of interpreting prophecies, presented the idea of a 360-day "prophetic year" and a historicist interpretation of the book of Revelation. It drew on the millenarian studies of 19th-century writers in formulating a system that demonstrated remarkable biblical-mathematical "correspondencies" and modified Bishop James Ussher's chronological calculation to declare that 6,000 years of human history had ended in the autumn of 1873 and that a "morning of joy" was about to begin for humankind.^[2]

 It proposed that Christ's second coming began in 1874, and would be followed by a forty-year harvest period including the rapture of the Saints in 1878, leading up to God's judgment of the nations and day of wrath in 1914.^[5][6]

:

 

[Scott Lloyd]

16 hours ago, Navidad said:

Now in this thread, I think I am reading that Nebuchadnezzar's dream interpreted by Daniel implies that the LDS Church will one day fill the earth, perhaps in the millenium? Not the Christian church (world-wide), but specifically and only the LDS Church? Is this another indication of the exclusive identity and doctrinal nature of the LDS Church?

 

7 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Yes, 100 per cent. At this point, are you genuinely surprised or just feigning surprise?

 

4 hours ago, Navidad said:

I don't feign! And I am not surprised . . . just disappointed.

 

4 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Being repeatedly disappointed by the consistency of our beliefs sounds potentially exhausting ... 

Navidad did not say so explicitly, but it was I to whom he disparagingly referred here with regard to Daniel’s prophecy. 
 

So, for the record, let me cheerfully and affirmatively declare that I stand by my views as I have here expressed them. 

[Scott Lloyd]

7 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Yes, 100 per cent. At this point, are you genuinely surprised or just feigning surprise?

 

4 hours ago, Navidad said:

I don't feign! And I am not surprised . . . just disappointed.

 

[pondering]

I was raised in a JW offshoot.  The offshoot group I was in definitely had the "Holy Spirit", "we are the one chosen people" thing down, are anti-trinity, scholars - know Hebrew etc., really really know their scriptures.  I grew up going to youth camps, singing songs around camp fires etc.  I never joined as I never felt "the spirit" as a kid as they all felt it - you had to be "called" by god, then make your "calling and election" sure.  I think I am on the autistic spectrum, so stay a bit detached from all groups.  Like I said, they have the "Spirit" thing down.  It's a strange thing, the spirit, now I have experienced elevation in several different groups.  I do not associate it with "the truth" as I have felt it in tandem with lies.  I also do not associate it with protection as I have felt it in association with those whom I now know as child molesters.  It is a strange herd bonding thing I guess, not from god.  JW's use the same thing everyone uses, target those going through a rough time, throw your arms around them, provide community, love bomb stuff - that is how you get people into a group.    

[Amulek]

23 hours ago, Navidad said:

We found an interpretation of the Old Testament through a singular LDS lens to be very idiosyncratic.

I suspect Jews feel somewhat the same way about those who interpret the Old Testament as having specific reference to Jesus of Nazareth.

 

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, pondering said:

I was raised in a JW offshoot.  The offshoot group I was in definitely had the "Holy Spirit", "we are the one chosen people" thing down, are anti-trinity, scholars - know Hebrew etc., really really know their scriptures.  I grew up going to youth camps, singing songs around camp fires etc.  I never joined as I never felt "the spirit" as a kid as they all felt it - you had to be "called" by god, then make your "calling and election" sure.  I think I am on the autistic spectrum, so stay a bit detached from all groups.  Like I said, they have the "Spirit" thing down.  It's a strange thing, the spirit, now I have experienced elevation in several different groups.  I do not associate it with "the truth" as I have felt it in tandem with lies.  I also do not associate it with protection as I have felt it in association with those whom I now know as child molesters.  It is a strange herd bonding thing I guess, not from god.  JW's use the same thing everyone uses, target those going through a rough time, throw your arms around them, provide community, love bomb stuff - that is how you get people into a group.    

Agree, thanks for your comments. 

[Navidad]

9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

 

I am not sure I am following the last few posts, but I certainly love this scene from The Princess Bride! One of my all-time favorite movies for the fun of the dialogue. Thanks for posting it.

The disappointment I expressed is not of a personal nature. It is in the eisegetic nature of the LDS Biblical hermeneutic, especially Old Testament interpretation. I've been in the ward long enough to have gone through two separate studies of the Old Testament. Hermeneutics and exegesis is what one reads from the OT text. Eisegesis is what one reads into the OT text from one's own preconceived or a-priori perspectives. It reminds me of the study of history. To some degree we all bring ourselves to the events and texts of history (whether OT or Mexican Revolution). I would rather study the history of history than history itself. My LDS friends are not unique in their tendency toward validating their beliefs by reading them into the texts. It is a fairly common Fundamentalist traditionalist/Adventist (do the LDS see themselves as adventists?) habit (no pun intended). It is the difference between the local village cronista and the trained historian. I don't get disappointed when the cronista conflates his grandpa's stories into his history. It is to be anticipated and to some degree appreciated. I do get disappointed when a trained historian (or Biblicist) does it. Peter Novick's "That Noble Dream" says it much better than I could. Today's cry for "honest history" is of great interest to me. It seems that whatever history agrees with my interpretation is "honest history." Sigh - how disappointing!

I prefer reading and interpreting the plain Biblical text. In this case a king's dream and the dream's interpretation by a prophet. Turning the text of that dream and interpretation into a prophetic study of a thousands of years in a future millennial event centered on an organization that didn't even exist at the time of the dream and may not exist at the time of the millennial event (however interpreted) is huge leap from a plain text interpretation, whether done by the JWs, the Adventists, the LDS, Orthodox Presbyterians, or the editors of The Sword of the Lord in the 1950s. Best wishes to all. 

Edited December 6, 2022 by Navidad

[Navidad]

3 hours ago, pondering said:

I was raised in a JW offshoot.  The offshoot group I was in definitely had the "Holy Spirit", "we are the one chosen people" thing down, are anti-trinity, scholars - know Hebrew etc., really really know their scriptures.  I grew up going to youth camps, singing songs around camp fires etc.  I never joined as I never felt "the spirit" as a kid as they all felt it - you had to be "called" by god, then make your "calling and election" sure.  I think I am on the autistic spectrum, so stay a bit detached from all groups.  Like I said, they have the "Spirit" thing down.  It's a strange thing, the spirit, now I have experienced elevation in several different groups.  I do not associate it with "the truth" as I have felt it in tandem with lies.  I also do not associate it with protection as I have felt it in association with those whom I now know as child molesters.  It is a strange herd bonding thing I guess, not from god.  JW's use the same thing everyone uses, target those going through a rough time, throw your arms around them, provide community, love bomb stuff - that is how you get people into a group.    

Thanks for your candor!

[Stargazer]

On 12/5/2022 at 3:04 PM, BlueDreams said:

Small irk as an obsessive gardener. You can interpret it this way, but I definitely don't. I'm well acquainted with the importance of my soil quality being directly tied to how successful my garden will be. Each year I am taking inventory of the problems facing my land and carefully planning how to best address those to increase the success of plantings. There will always be failures. But there is a lot that I can do to reduce that rate of failure and so much of that is just making sure I have good earth prepared to receive my plants/seeds. 

I definitely see your point, and the parable could be enriched on the supply side with the admonition for the missionary to be humble, teachable, and understanding. Because some people are hard to approach unless approached with actual care, love, and concern. A missionary who scatters seeds while exhibiting arrogance or lack of caring, could be casting seeds onto ground hardened by his own attitude.

On 12/5/2022 at 3:04 PM, BlueDreams said:

Now that preparation can be personal (as in work one must do to address their spiritual weak spots). But it can also be communal (as in what we can do to prepare the way to reduce unnecessary stumbling blocks for others). Neither are contradictory from the parable IMHO. 

And this applies to the congregation of course. A congregation that is cliquish can turn off even an interested investigator.

[gav]

33 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I am not sure I am following the last few posts, but I certainly love this scene from The Princess Bride! One of my all-time favorite movies for the fun of the dialogue. Thanks for posting it.

The disappointment I expressed is not of a personal nature. It is in the eisegetic nature of the LDS Biblical hermeneutic, especially Old Testament interpretation. I've been in the ward long enough to have gone through two separate studies of the Old Testament. Hermeneutics and exegesis is what one reads from the OT text. Eisegesis is what one reads into the OT text from one's own preconceived or a-priori perspectives. It reminds me of the study of history. To some degree we all bring ourselves to the events and texts of history (whether OT or Mexican Revolution). I would rather study the history of history than history itself. My LDS friends are not unique in their tendency toward validating their beliefs by reading them into the texts. It is a fairly common Fundamentalist traditionalist/Adventist (do the LDS see themselves as adventists?) habit (no pun intended). It is the difference between the local village cronista and the trained historian. I don't get disappointed when the cronista conflates his grandpa's stories into his history. It is to be anticipated and to some degree appreciated. I do get disappointed when a trained historian (or Biblicist) does it. Peter Novick's "That Noble Dream" says it much better than I could. Today's cry for "honest history" is of great interest to me. It seems that whatever history agrees with my interpretation is "honest history." Sigh - how disappointing!

I prefer reading and interpreting the plain Biblical text. In this case a king's dream and the dream's interpretation by a prophet. Turning the text of that dream and interpretation into a prophetic study of a thousands of years in a future millennial event centered on an organization that didn't even exist at the time of the dream and may not exist at the time of the millennial event (however interpreted) is huge leap from a plain text interpretation, whether done by the JWs, the Adventists, the LDS, Orthodox Presbyterians, or the editors of The Sword of the Lord in the 1950s. Best wishes to all. 

Thanks for this.

Do you think apocalyptic prophecy can only be evaluated in its historical setting and has nothing to say about the future? or is there something there for the future and for future generations?

What do you make of statements like the ones bolded below?

Quote

6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?

7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?

9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

13 But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.

 

[Danzo]

I remember during my mission in the 90s in Italy, many of the members of the church were Ex- Jehovah's Witnesses. I guess for some people membership in the Jehovah's Witnesses can be a stepping stone to finding truth. 

[carbon dioxide]

If we factor in baptism for the dead and assume even 1/3 of those we baptize for the dead accept, we are growing like a weed.

Edited December 6, 2022 by carbon dioxide

[pondering]

On 12/5/2022 at 8:25 AM, Navidad said:

I need one small bit of clarification. When we were studying the Old Testament in Sunday School, both my wife and I were taken about how often the OT was interpreted as having specific reference specifically to the LDS Church somewhere way out there in a prophetic sense in the future. The Old Testament was interpreted through LDS hermeneutics to refer specifically to the LDS church. . . . empty cisterns refer to other churches . . . living water refers to living prophets, etc.

Now in this thread, I think I am reading that Nebuchadnezzar's dream interpreted by Daniel implies that the LDS Church will one day fill the earth, perhaps in the millenium? Not the Christian church (world-wide), but specifically and only the LDS Church? Is this another indication of the exclusive identity and doctrinal nature of the LDS Church?

We found an interpretation of the Old Testament through a singular LDS lens to be very idiosyncratic. I never heard teachers read specific and exclusive Mennonite, Baptist, Pentecostal, or Lutheran identity into Old Testament interpretation and hermeneutics.  Thanks for your clarifications. Best to all.

 

The offshoor group I was in was very involved with the Jewish community, lots of trips to Israel, archeologists, linguists.  It's actually pretty remarkable how well the OT was preserved  - newly found scrolls match what has been handed down.  

 

I have always personally viewed everyone as just different tribes, none better than any other, each with their pros and cons.  

I don't belong to any tribes, a nomad I guess.  During holidays, I try to bridge gaps between family from all different belief systems while protecting my kiddos from preaching.  I lurk on sites like this from different groups to try and remember how to communicate with everyone.  

An older relative told me they were going to purgatory because they "did some stuff".  I told them don't worry, you won't be alone, I'll be last to heaven if it exists. If it doesn't work out for all of us, then it won't work for me either.  

I don't understand how any loving person could believe their group is better, or higher, or has more authority than any other..  small gods make small heavens.

[Islander]

On 12/4/2022 at 11:43 AM, Peppermint Patty said:

David G. Stewart, Jr., of UNLV who operates the cumorah website published an article last week showing the Jehovah Witnesses and Adventist missionary programs are having more success in finding converts than the LDS. He gives some reasons and possible solutions. Has anyone read this article? Thoughts?

“Trends point to continued underperformance of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints compared to its competitors. While a range of possibilities exist, the default path is for further decline of growth rates. The LDS Church is unlikely to regain its former growth trajectory. Prospects of becoming a major world faith have faded and are likely beyond reach.”

http://jmssa.org/stewart/

I am not so sure about the reliability of the numbers as reported by the Watch Tower Society, for example in "Crisis of Allegiance": A Study of Dissent Among Jehovah's Witnesses by James Beverley - 2021, he paints a very bleak picture of the organization worldwide. He is a researcher and has studied this religious group for three decades. Lawsuits and criminal investigations in Australia and the UK as well as in US have thrown the organization into turmoil and significant scrutiny.  Anecdotally, here in Northern CO they have sold some buildings and consolidated several congregations into one building. We have relatives that are "inactive"  members. Covid shut down all their meeting halls and after the meetings resumed, nearly half of the congregants never came back, according to my relative. They do also include the children of the congregants as new members at baptism.