Women leaders ordered off the stand

[JAHS]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

Or he guessed.

But it follows a pattern for how he referred to the Church or any religion:
"We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied.
We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their members for disorderly conduct, according to the rules and regulations of such societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing; but we do not believe that any religious society has authority to try men on the right of property or life, to take from them this world’s goods, or to put them in jeopardy of either life or limb, or to inflict any physical punishment upon them. They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship." (D&C 134: 9-10)

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, JAHS said:

But it follows a pattern for how he referred to the Church or any religion:
"We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied.
We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their members for disorderly conduct, according to the rules and regulations of such societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing; but we do not believe that any religious society has authority to try men on the right of property or life, to take from them this world’s goods, or to put them in jeopardy of either life or limb, or to inflict any physical punishment upon them. They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship." (D&C 134: 9-10)

Which is why I think it is the most likely reading.

It is hard to demonstrate a negative, so I realize it isn’t an easy ask, nor am I cfring you on this.  I just would like to know this if possible (speaking out to the universe my desire, not to anyone here) Joseph might use “society” for an organization within another organization that he called a society as well.  Just because he has a pattern of calling churches societies doesn’t preclude him from calling a subset of that society a society as well.  If he did that as well, him referring to the Church as a church society doesn’t mean it is the only likely possibility of what he was talking about if calling the women’s organization a society also fits his pattern.
 

I hope that makes sense.  

Edited November 29, 2023 by Calm

[JLHPROF]

Are our chapel designs supposed to reference this concept that dates to the first decade of the Church?  When did we begin using actual chapels as a Church?

 

[CV75]

Whenever the topic of activism comes up in relation to societal (and Church) change, I think about how activism is more a part of the landscaper of change than the cause for change, or even a contributor to change. It seems to be more of a reaction or response to more widespread and subtle or grassroots changes in the ethos, and some of it is productive, some not, some quite detrimental, but in all cases a contributing component of the slow pace at which change occurs. I think changes can occur without activism (but not without action obviously), and generally at the same pace as when overt activism is in the mix.

I think about how councils operate in the Church (often slowly unless there's an emergency) and how more "activist" members of a council impact the process. Along with how the more conforming or conservative members impact it. Whatever their attitude in this regard, those who move change along do so as part of a group, not necessarily formally organized, consisting of the humble and the charitable (I'm thinking of the beatitudes). I think society ultimately functions as a giant council, for better or worse, depending on the nature of the people. And of course, in the world we are trying to create a Zion society (the kingdom of heaven).

Some might hold up the (from our standpoint, prophesied) American Revolutionary and Civil Wars as examples of activism (on either side), but I rather think of them as consequences of far more complex interactions and choices between God and His children, and among His children, concerning the desire for liberty. 

 

[Teancum]

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

Well, there's plenty of tedium to be borne by my side of things as well. 

Likely.  But I typically don't start threads.  Just respond to threads and comments and ideas that seem to be important to me.  

 

As noted above, if there is an issue I see come up worth opining about I do so. Is that rehashing the issues?  Perhaps.  But I don't accuse others dishonestly of positions and opinions they do not have.  And I don't put words into their mouths.  But you do and you don't back down.  And I don't proliferate my words with loaded hyperbole repeated over and over again, and in a tendentious way.  You do this to anyone whose views and opinions you disagree with.  Believer and  non balivaer alike.  It's seems you think if you just bludgeon them with your word salads that they will capitulate.

15 hours ago, smac97 said:

More broadly, I think anti-Mormonism has been stagnating for many years now.  You guys just don't have much substance to offer these days.  

Thanks,

-Smac

I guess it is a matter of perspective.  I find little substance in the attempts to refute criticisms and even desperation. And I think the leaders of the church feel are worried.  You have leader saying this like this on a regular basis as compared to what leader used to say.  I think the top leaders are worried.  What you call stagnating anti-Mormonism has and is taking a toll both in prior strong and active members leaving and in winning new converts. 

 

[MustardSeed]

Off-topic. I wonder if BRMC is at all curious at the fact that no one here uses the downvote even nearly as much as do they, even though it’s is obvious that the culture of this board is to disagree. 

[Peacefully]

1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

Off-topic. I wonder if BRMC is at all curious at the fact that no one here uses the downvote even nearly as much as do they, even though it’s is obvious that the culture of this board is to disagree. 

A downvote from BRMC is a badge of honor for me, the Peaceful Pot Stirrer:) 

[tagriffy]

On 11/27/2023 at 7:41 AM, teddyaware said:

The fact that nearly 64 million American women have condemned their own unborn children to death since 1973, and about 73 million women worldwide elect to abort their own offspring every year, and a majority of the world’s women believe the legalized mass slaughter of the innocent unborn is a boon to society, all strongly point to the fact that women are, in general, just as fallen and spiritually blind as men. 

Nonsense! Women have just a right to their bodies as men.

[california boy]

19 hours ago, smac97 said:

More broadly, I think anti-Mormonism has been stagnating for many years now.  You guys just don't have much substance to offer these days.  

Thanks,

-Smac

I think it might surprise you how little most of the world cares about Mormonism outside of the Mormon corridor.   The only time it gets on anyone's radar is when the Church does something very controversial like refusing to baptize underage children of LGBT parents or are exposed for some controversy like hiding wealth from its members, hoarding 100 billion dollars, and submitting false statements to the SEC.  

You belong to a tiny Church that doesn't affect very many people outside your bubble.  To put this in perspective, how many on this board are aware of Vaishnavism?  How often do you read about this religion for good or for bad?  Yet they are FIVE times larger than the Church.  You first have to care about the Church to oppose what it does.

 

[Teancum]

19 minutes ago, california boy said:

You belong to a tiny Church that doesn't affect very many people outside your bubble.  To put this in perspective, how many on this board are aware of Vaishnavism?  How often do you read about this religion for good or for bad?  Yet they are FIVE times larger than the Church.  You first have to care about the Church to oppose what it does.

Great point. I have not heard of Vaishmavism.  Looks like it is a Hindu sect.  Per your link: 

According to a 2010 estimate by Johnson and Grim, Vaishnavism is the largest Hindu sect, constituting about 641 million or 67.6% of Hindus.^[6][7]

[smac97]

55 minutes ago, california boy said:

Quote

More broadly, I think anti-Mormonism has been stagnating for many years now.  You guys just don't have much substance to offer these days.  

I think it might surprise you how little most of the world cares about Mormonism outside of the Mormon corridor.

I think you might be surprised at how unsurprised I am.  

What you seem to be trying to characterize as a disappointing and discouraging bug is, to us, a fully-anticipated and understood feature of the Restoration.  See, e.g., here (from Elder Maxwell in 1988) :

Quote

In the last days, happily, the Church will grow extensively, with its membership being “scattered upon all the face of the earth” (1 Ne. 14:14). Nevertheless, its dominions will still be comparatively “small” because of “wickedness,” which will close the ears of many to the gospel message (see 1 Ne. 14:12).

There will also be “a great division among the people” (2 Ne. 30:10; see also D&C 63:54). This stressful polarization will, ironically, help in the final shaking of that strange confederacy, the “kingdom of the devil,” in order that the honest in heart, even therein, may receive the truth (2 Ne. 28:19).

This “great division” is what President Brigham Young also saw, saying: “It was revealed to me in the commencement of this Church, that the Church would spread, prosper, grow and extend, and that in proportion to the spread of the Gospel among the nations of the earth, so would the power of Satan rise” (in Journal of Discourses, 13:280).

Happily, even though the world worsens around us, there will be many, many fine and wonderful men and women of all races and creeds—and of no religious creeds at all—who will continue to lead decent and useful lives. Besides, as Mormon said, scriptural commentary on declining conditions is not communicated “to weigh thee down,” but, instead, to help us live so that Christ may “lift thee up” (Moro. 9:25).

Thus, what I have said is not said in alarm at all, but, rather, so that we might be noticing and preparing. Prophecies are given, in part, that we “might know and remember” that these things “had been made known … beforehand, to the intent that [we] might believe” (Hel. 16:5). Today’s inattentive people will be like an earlier, desensitized people who “began to forget those signs and wonders which they had heard, and began to be less and less astonished, … and began to disbelieve all which they had heard and seen” (3 Ne. 2:1; see also 1 Pet. 3:17). If faithful, brothers and sisters, we lose nothing, even if, happily, like the ancient Ninevites, today’s mortals were to repent.

See also scriptural references to salt and leaven.

The Church is not supposed to be big.  That's never been a part of the plan.

55 minutes ago, california boy said:

The only time it gets on anyone's radar is when the Church does something very controversial like refusing to baptize underage children of LGBT parents or are exposed for some controversy like hiding wealth from its members, hoarding 100 billion dollars, and submitting false statements to the SEC.  

That's your radar.  There are quite frequent news items about the good things the Church is doing.

Meanwhile, the Church is not really about courting publicity or notoriety.

55 minutes ago, california boy said:

You belong to a tiny Church that doesn't affect very many people outside your bubble.  

I think you may be measuring influence/effect differently than some other people do.

55 minutes ago, california boy said:

To put this in perspective, how many on this board are aware of Vaishnavism?  How often do you read about this religion for good or for bad?  Yet they are FIVE times larger than the Church.  

By the end of the first 200 years of Christianity, the worldwide total population of Christans was, it seems, "only just over 200,000{}, barely 0.35 per cent of the total population {of the Roman Empire}."  The worldwide population at the time was around 190 million.  So at the Primitive Church's 200 year mark, Christians comprised about 0.105263158% of the world.

The current membership of the Church is around 17 million, out of a worldwide population of 8 billion.  So at the Restored Church's 193 year mark, Latter-day Saints comprise about 0.2125% of the world.

That ain't bad, particularly considering the scriptural description of the Lord's Church as being relatively small in number.  See above.

55 minutes ago, california boy said:

You first have to care about the Church to oppose what it does.

And yet, there sure seem to be a lot of anti-Mormons out there.  

Anyhoo, my original point (to which your comments above don't seem particularly relevant or responsive) remains: I think anti-Mormonism has been stagnating for many years now.  You guys just don't have much substance to offer these days.  You seem to be conceding the point, and then arguing that anti-Mormonism is stagnating because there aren't enough people out there to generate it.  Is that your position?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited November 29, 2023 by smac97

[mfbukowski]

42 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I think you might be surprised at how unsurprised I am.  

What you seem to be trying to characterize as a disappointing and discouraging bug is, to us, a fully-anticipated and understood feature of the Restoration.  See, e.g., here (from Elder Maxwell in 1988) :

See also scriptural references to salt and leaven.

The Church is not supposed to be big.  That's never been a part of the plan.

That's your radar.  There are quite frequent news items about the good things the Church is doing.

Meanwhile, the Church is not really about courting publicity or notoriety.

I think you may be measuring influence/effect differently than some other people do.

By the end of the first 200 years of Christianity, the worldwide total population of Christans was, it seems, "only just over 200,000{}, barely 0.35 per cent of the total population {of the Roman Empire}."  The worldwide population at the time was around 190 million.  So at the Primitive Church's 200 year mark, Christians comprised about 0.105263158% of the world.

The current membership of the Church is around 17 million, out of a worldwide population of 8 billion.  So at the Restored Church's 193 year mark, Latter-day Saints comprise about 0.2125% of the world.

That ain't bad, particularly considering the scriptural description of the Lord's Church as being relatively small in number.  See above.

And yet, there sure seem to be a lot of anti-Mormons out there.  

Anyhoo, my original point (to which your comments above don't seem particularly relevant or responsive) remains: I think anti-Mormonism has been stagnating for many years now.  You guys just don't have much substance to offer these days.  You seem to be conceding the point, and then arguing that anti-Mormonism is stagnating because there aren't enough people out there to generate it.  Is that your position?

Thanks,

-Smac

What he doesn't know is that both science and philosophy understand the phenomenon of " spiritual experience " as "real" and empirically justified.

The world still thinks in 16th century logic, but they will learn that it is all due to biased beliefs in self- contradictory logic.

Ignorance is bliss

More later 

Edited November 29, 2023 by mfbukowski

[MiserereNobis]

25 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

What he doesn't know is that both science and philosophy understand the phenomenon of " spiritual experience " as "real" and empirically justified.

Science doesn't know this.

The philosophy of science claims it. Who knows where philosophy will be once it moves past post-modernism? You know, in like 100 years.

There is a difference between science and the philosophy of science.

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Science doesn't know this.

The philosophy of science claims it. Who knows where philosophy will be once it moves past post-modernism? You know, in like 100 years.

There is a difference between science and the philosophy of science

We'll have to get into this sometime. Got hit by a huge project

 

 

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by mfbukowski

[manol]

8 hours ago, smac97 said:

The Church is not supposed to be big.  That's never been a part of the plan.

Not that I'm up-to-date on interpretations of scriptures, but I grew up being taught that the LDS Church was the "stone cut without hands... that became a great mountain and filled the whole earth", as spoken of by the prophet Daniel (chapter 2, verses 34 and 35).

Is this idea still being taught?

(I have come to believe that the "stone cut without hands... that became a great mountain and filled the whole earth" is about a leaderless worldwide paradigm shift away from thought systems [religions, philosophies, social and political viewpoints] which are based on, and manifestations of, separation.  Obviously this worldwide paradigm shift has not happened yet, but I think many individuals have already started shifting.) 

Edited November 30, 2023 by manol

[california boy]

8 hours ago, smac97 said:

I think you might be surprised at how unsurprised I am.  

What you seem to be trying to characterize as a disappointing and discouraging bug is, to us, a fully-anticipated and understood feature of the Restoration.  See, e.g., here (from Elder Maxwell in 1988) :

See also scriptural references to salt and leaven.

The Church is not supposed to be big.  That's never been a part of the plan.

There is a scripture for every point of view you can come up with.  Yeah I remember all those talks about "stone cut without hands... that became a great mountain and filled the whole earth".  Until the Church stopped growing.  Now the goal is to be a small Church that is influencing exactly what???  

Can you name anything that you think the Church has done that has had an impact on the world outside of the 0.2125% members?  Tell me all about this salt and leaven thing the Church is doing so well to fulfill that scripture.  Where are you seeing this massive influence on the world?

8 hours ago, smac97 said:

That's your radar.  There are quite frequent news items about the good things the Church is doing.Meanwhile, the Church is not really about courting publicity or notoriety.

I think you may be measuring influence/effect differently than some other people do.

By the end of the first 200 years of Christianity, the worldwide total population of Christans was, it seems, "only just over 200,000{}, barely 0.35 per cent of the total population {of the Roman Empire}."  The worldwide population at the time was around 190 million.  So at the Primitive Church's 200 year mark, Christians comprised about 0.105263158% of the world.

The current membership of the Church is around 17 million, out of a worldwide population of 8 billion.  So at the Restored Church's 193 year mark, Latter-day Saints comprise about 0.2125% of the world.

That ain't bad, particularly considering the scriptural description of the Lord's Church as being relatively small in number.  See above.

You think 0.2125% of the population is impressive?  Ok. 

8 hours ago, smac97 said:

And yet, there sure seem to be a lot of anti-Mormons out there.  

Anyhoo, my original point (to which your comments above don't seem particularly relevant or responsive) remains: I think anti-Mormonism has been stagnating for many years now.  You guys just don't have much substance to offer these days.  You seem to be conceding the point, and then arguing that anti-Mormonism is stagnating because there aren't enough people out there to generate it.  Is that your position?

Thanks,

-Smac

Outside your bubble, the Church is not even on the radar of the vast majority of the world's population.  There are NOT massive anti-Mormons out there that care what happens to the Church.  And the Church has very very very little influence in the world.  

My point is, you are not the victim you think you are.

[california boy]

9 hours ago, Teancum said:

Great point. I have not heard of Vaishmavism.  Looks like it is a Hindu sect.  Per your link: 

According to a 2010 estimate by Johnson and Grim, Vaishnavism is the largest Hindu sect, constituting about 641 million or 67.6% of Hindus.^[6][7]

Exactly my point.  Now compare 641 million followers with less than 17 million.  How many people in the world know what Vaishnavism is?  How many people in the world know what a Mormon is. And even fewer know what The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is.  

It is like SMAC labels ANYONE who disagrees with his view of what the Church is, gets the label Anti-Mormon slapped on them.  Those handful of people who do bother to challenge some of the things the Church does within his little bubble, no one has ever heard about them either.  Those huge numbers of Anti-Mormons only live in his head.

Always the victim.  Poor guy.

[smac97]

11 hours ago, california boy said:

There is a scripture for every point of view you can come up with.  Yeah I remember all those talks about "stone cut without hands... that became a great mountain and filled the whole earth".  Until the Church stopped growing.  Now the goal is to be a small Church that is influencing exactly what???  

I do not ever recall being taught that the Church will be numerically significant.  I have ample recollections of the contrary prediction.

I suspect the Church's approach to the "stone cut without hands" is not what you think it is.  See, e.g., here (Pres. Kimball in 1976) :

Quote

The Church was organized. Small it was, with only six members, compared to the stone cut out of the mountain without hands which would break in pieces other nations and which would roll forth and fill the whole earth.

Rough days were ahead for the little kingdom. Prophets were assassinated. Persecutions and drivings have taken place and have vexed the fast-growing little church. A great exodus to the mountains of the West was directed by revelation. The colonization of the West occurred. Great tribulations were suffered. Blood was spilled. Hunger has taken its lives, but today the stone rolls forth to fill the earth.

Twenty-three thousand young missionaries proclaim these truths to thousands of people in their home areas. The gospel spreads to the nations of the earth in its approach toward the promise made by God through Daniel to fill the whole earth, and numerous people of all nationalities and tongues are accepting the gospel in many nations, and the Church and kingdom grow and develop, and we say to you and testify to you that it shall, in Daniel’s words, “never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people … but it shall stand forever.” (Dan. 2:44.)

And here (Elder Andersen in 2016) :

Quote

In 1831 the Prophet Joseph Smith received this revelation: “The keys of the kingdom of God [and the gathering of Israel from the four parts of the earth] are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands shall roll forth, until it has filled the whole earth.”
...
But they began, one person, one puzzle piece at a time, finding the straight edges, working to rightly frame this divine work. Little by little, the stone cut without hands began to roll forth; from hundreds to thousands, to tens of thousands, and now millions of covenant Latter-day Saints across every nation are connecting the puzzle pieces of this marvelous work and a wonder.

And here (Elder Andersen in 2013) :

Quote

Today we have congregations in 189 of the 224 nations and territories of the world. We are few in number, just as Nephi foretold. But at the same time, you and I are eyewitnesses of Daniel’s prophetic words: the “stone … cut … without hands … [is filling] the whole earth.”

And here (Pres. Hinckley in 2007) :

Quote

The Church has become one large family scattered across the earth. There are now more than 13 million of us in 176 nations and territories. A marvelous and wonderful thing is coming to pass. The Lord is fulfilling His promise that His gospel shall be as the stone cut out of the mountain without hands which would roll forth and fill the whole earth, as Daniel saw in vision (see Daniel 2:31–45; D&C 65:2). A great miracle is taking place right before our eyes.

And here:

Quote

The defining image of a stone cut without hands rolling away the wicked governments of the World from Daniel 2:44-45 is interpreted as triumphant Church growth.

Although it is true that the Church will stay intact as prophesied in the Scriptures and by modern Prophets, individual Apostasy will still be rampant. There seems to be a warning such as 1 Nephi 14 that strength will be more spiritual that numerical:

11 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.

12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.

And here: 

Quote

The Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar dreamed of a great statue representing all the kingdoms of the world and then saw a “stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold” and then filled the whole earth. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints see this as a prophecy of the growth and progress of the Church in the last days. It is one of the commonly referenced scriptures that adds zeal to our missionary efforts.
...
Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists have much more effective member missionary programs than us. Their members are actively spreading the word and studying the scriptures in the homes of their “investigators.” LDS culture creates a mindset that a mission is something you go and do for 18 to 24 months; that spreading the word is primarily the responsibility of full-time missionaries. Despite repeated attempts by church leadership to change this cultural trend, very few members are actively evangelizing (heck, we have a hard enough time just doing our home and visiting teaching for each other).

I’m not trying to be negative, I’m just analyzing the trends and facts available. I admit, it’s kind of discouraging. And yet, I believe this is God’s work. I believe he has the power to work miracles. He has done it in the past and continues to do so today. The Church continues to roll on. We have over 140 operating temples, nearly 5,000 family history centers and just under 30,000 congregations worldwide. And while 15 million members sounds a lot more impressive than 5 million (which is probably the true number of active members), it shouldn’t be all about the numbers. It should be about helping people come to Christ; and helping them live better lives. That’s why the Church exists. That we are few in number (at least everywhere outside of Utah), shouldn’t be surprising. As Nephi described his vision of the last days:

“And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.”  — 1 Nephi 14:12-13

And here:

Quote

It is a common mistake to assume the church will eventually dominate the globe in terms of numbers. I don't think that's the case.

"12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw." (1 Nephi 14)

And here:

Quote

When seeing the future church of the Lamb of God in a vision, Nephi beheld that “its numbers were few . . . and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small.” (1 Ne. 14:12).

How can this be if the kingdom of God is destined to fill the whole earth? As always, Jesus points the way. The metaphors he used to describe his disciples, both ancient and modern, were light, yeast, and salt.

Particles of light are so small they are invisible, but they overpower the darkness. Other ingredients are far more substantial, but it’s the tiny amount of yeast that causes a lump of dough to rise. And only a pinch of salt transforms a dish from bland to savory.

We are not called to trade our fortress church for a religious empire. Rather, we are called to be light, yeast, and salt—to overpower darkness, elevate the whole, and transform the world. To fill the world with our influence, not necessarily our size.

Our dominions will be small, but our reach will be lengthened because we will hold up the Light of the World and by extension become lesser lights shining forth in the darkness.

Mason, Patrick Q. Restoration: God's Call to the 21st Century World . Faith Matters Publishing. https://www.amazon.com/Restoration-Gods-Call-Century-World-ebook/dp/B08PKKCVJ3/

I believe the Church is what it claims to be.  I believe that God exists, that Jesus Christ is His Son, that Joseph Smith experienced his theophanies, that the priesthood was restored, and that the Church is the nascent, inchoate Kingdom of God on the earth.

I have never expected the Church to "fill the whole earth" in mere numeric terms.  The Millennium will, of course, be a different story.

11 hours ago, california boy said:

My point is, you are not the victim you think you are.

Okay.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

11 hours ago, california boy said:

Exactly my point.  Now compare 641 million followers with less than 17 million.  How many people in the world know what Vaishnavism is?  

Um, that rather undercuts your argument.  You are proposing that the Church's small numbers = small influence, yet at the same time you ask "{h}ow many people in the world know what Vaishnavism is."

If your point is that mere population percentage is not the key metric here, I agree with you.  If that is not your point, then I'm not sure why you keep bringing up Vaishnavism.

11 hours ago, california boy said:

It is like SMAC labels ANYONE who disagrees with his view of what the Church is, gets the label Anti-Mormon slapped on them.  

No, I don't.

11 hours ago, california boy said:

Those handful of people who do bother to challenge some of the things the Church does within his little bubble, no one has ever heard about them either.  Those huge numbers of Anti-Mormons only live in his head.

Always the victim.  Poor guy.

Okay.

Thanks,

-Smac

[JLHPROF]

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

I believe the Church is what it claims to be.  I believe that God exists, that Jesus Christ is His Son, that Joseph Smith experienced his theophanies, that the priesthood was restored, and that the Church is the nascent, inchoate Kingdom of God on the earth.

This is part of the problem - equating the Church with God's kingdom on earth.

The Church and the Kingdom have never been the same organization.  Even going back to the life of Joseph Smith they had different leadership councils, different restoration dates, and different missions and callings.  In the later 19th century not all gospel functions were viewed under Church organizational purview (post manifesto plural marriages for instance).

And when the Millennium finally begins the legal entity known as the Church today will likely be superceded by the government of Christ's kingdom millennial reign.

[ksfisher]

1 minute ago, JLHPROF said:

The Church and the Kingdom have never been the same organization.  Even going back to the life of Joseph Smith they had different leadership councils, different restoration dates, and different missions and callings.

Who then leads Gods Kingdom on earth today?

[Tacenda]

I'm leaning on that all will be accepted by Christ in the end of days. He did die on the cross for all. 

[Calm]

15 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I'm leaning on that all will be accepted by Christ in the end of days. He did die on the cross for all. 

I think the issue will be who chooses to accept Christ (his door is open to all who knock) as I don’t believe he will force people to love him.

Edited December 1, 2023 by Calm

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, ksfisher said:

Who then leads Gods Kingdom on earth today?

Good question.

In the Kingdom of God organization with its attendant leadership council who succeeded Joseph?

Brigham then John Taylor.  The last time the council even met was 1884.

President Nelson may hold the authority as head but the Church is still not the Kingdom.  Two separate organizations.

Edited December 1, 2023 by JLHPROF

[mfbukowski]

On 11/29/2023 at 8:42 AM, MustardSeed said:

Off-topic. I wonder if BRMC is at all curious at the fact that no one here uses the downvote even nearly as much as do they, even though it’s is obvious that the culture of this board is to disagree. 

Disagree?

 I went to a Catholic high school.  named Saint Augustine.  For short, in sports, we were called The Saints.

 One of our sports Cheers was:

"Beat em bust em! That's our custom!  Go Saints Go"!

Now that's disagreement !