Anti LDS sites that make a lot of money off their youtubes/podcasts that are against the church.

[Duncan]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Yea? So what?

just sayin, for context on his money achieving activities

[Frank11]

3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

As you will see, your false notion that if the restored church is true everything must needs be spiritually strong, sound and healthy in the church grows out of your ignorance of the scriptures.

For those reading along who believe in Joseph Smith as a prophet, this is certainly an interesting post.

However, for me Joseph Smith has all the typical characteristics of a false prophet, so although I read his writings and his teachings with interest, I do not regard them as trustworthy or even holy.

[LoudmouthMormon]

8 hours ago, Frank11 said:

Now that the anti-Mormon lies have been refuted by convincing facts, the numbers should return to what they were in the 80s and 90s, when the Internet was not yet in the world.

3 hours ago, Analytics said:

About the time the Internet mushroomed, the Mormon missionaries had a lot less success converting people from other Christian churches. However, people started leaving both those other Christian churches and Mormonism in favor of secularism.

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Well you keep telling yourself this as the church continues to bleed strong active members as well as having a dismal growth rates and very low active participant rates. The LDS church is pretty insignificant on the world stage.

If I was Gen Z, this would be my response: I love the taste of bitter critic tears!   Cry more!   But since I'm a crotchety old GenX/Boomer, I'll stick with this: Tell you what, let's compare LDS membership trends against other Christian denominations first, then let's talk.

But to directly address the valid rebuttals, yes, secularism has made massive gains in the 1st world white/European/English speaking nations in the last 2 decades.  Religious folks in those nations have been worried about eroding religious liberties, and in the US it's been a cause for action.  Yes, this sort of forced Christian leaders to re-think who their enemies were.   I think this started dawning on everyone around 2013 when Southern Baptist leader Al Mohler gave that talk at BYU and said stuff like "I do not believe that we are going to heaven together, but I do believe we may go to jail together" and "When it comes to religious freedom, we all hang together or we all hang separately. We are common targets in this." 

Al Mohler?  Southern Baptist leader?  I'm not the only person who remembers they were some of our most vociferously loud critics, right?  Baptist congregations were some of the more organized in terms of bussing to General Conference and protesting.  No politics please, but surely I'm not the only one who remembers the Mitt Romney vs. Mike Huckabee battles in 2011...

But yeah, the dying off on antimormon energy was well underway at the close of the prior decade.

And yeah, with so many former anti zealots who got tired of never having any points and dropped out of the zealous critic business, some of which I've personally met, I'm comfortable saying yeah, we won.  But if you don't think so, please, resurrect your old criticisms about Nephite coinage or Jewish DNA or anachronisms or missionaries-are-because-of-Utah-inbreeding or Jesus-and-satan-are-brothers, and we'll see if you've got anything new.   

Edited August 23, 2024 by LoudmouthMormon

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, Analytics said:

If somebody’s business would need to grow by a factor of x30 to get their gross revenue up to the poverty line, I wouldn’t call that thriving. Maybe it is thriving as a hobby if it is something they enjoy doing anyway, but as an actual business?

 

That's fine if you wouldn't, but with such a subjective word, I don't think you can accuse anyone of nefarious intent if they did consider it thriving.

[Analytics]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

That's fine if you wouldn't, but with such a subjective word, I don't think you can accuse anyone of nefarious intent if they did consider it thriving.

I wouldn’t say anything about this video is nefarious intent, but some of it is quite dishonest (e.g. the claim that the Church uses any of its reserves for humanitarian causes, the insinuation that John Dehlin is the one who sells those offensive t-shirts). Beyond that, his whole theory about the relationship between faith crises, youtube videos, and the motivation of the people who make the videos misses the mark.

As another example, the former poster of this forum who went by the name consiglieri now calls himself Radio Free Mormon. (And by way of disclosure, I’ve considered him to be a personal friend since long before he changed sides.) When he was an apologist, he had papers published in BYU Studies and Journal of Book of Mormon Stories. While he was doing this, his day job was a lawyer.

Over the years, the tension between what he wanted to say and what the Church would allow him to say grew to the point where they wouldn’t let him teach Sunday School anymore and he got banned from this forum. He started freely saying what he really wanted to say in other venues, and soon Bill Reel offered to support him with his own Radio Free Mormon podcast as part of the Mormon Discussions family.

I would guess that if you listed the podcasters who make the most money, Radio Free Mormon would be in third place, not far behind Bill Reel. However, the reason his podcasts are so successful is because they are very well-researched and interesting, and the reason they are so well researched is because Radio Free Mormon has a deep, genuine passion to research and talk about his religion. The reason Radio Free Mormon shifted his focus away from practicing law and towards podcasting wasn’t to make more money, but rather was to spend his time doing what he is passionate about.

 

[Analytics]

3 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

If I was Gen Z, this would be my response: I love the taste of bitter critic tears!   Cry more!   But since I'm a crotchety old GenX/Boomer, I'll stick with this: Tell you what, let's compare LDS membership trends against other Christian denominations first, then let's talk.

From the beginning of 2022 to the end of 2023, the total number of Mormon congregations in North America went down by about 60. But many other churches are doing worse, so if you grade on a curve you a winning! Congratulations, the missionary effort is paying off!

3 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

But to directly address the valid rebuttals, yes, secularism has made massive gains in the 1st world white/European/English speaking nations in the last 2 decades.  Religious folks in those nations have been worried about eroding religious liberties, and in the US it's been a cause for action.  Yes, this sort of forced Christian leaders to re-think who their enemies were.   I think this started dawning on everyone around 2013 when Southern Baptist leader Al Mohler gave that talk at BYU and said stuff like "I do not believe that we are going to heaven together, but I do believe we may go to jail together" and "When it comes to religious freedom, we all hang together or we all hang separately. We are common targets in this." 

You have to be wearing a tinfoil hat to think this. Only 30% of Americans don’t identify as religious, and of the 535 members of congress, exactly two are atheists. 

Beyond the fact that atheists don’t have any political power is the fact that in America, almost all atheists have humanist values and have no interest in taking away religious freedom, much less in hanging people because of their religion. 

3 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

And yeah, with so many former anti zealots who got tired of never having any points and dropped out of the zealous critic business, some of which I've personally met, I'm comfortable saying yeah, we won.  But if you don't think so, please, resurrect your old criticisms about Nephite coinage or Jewish DNA or anachronisms or missionaries-are-because-of-Utah-inbreeding or Jesus-and-satan-are-brothers, and we'll see if you've got anything new.   

If we rolled back the clock and resurrect old issues, people like consiglieri, Kerry Shirts, Bill Reel, David P. Wright, David Bokovoy, and countless others would still be in the Church. There is a reason apologists are so prone to eventually leave the faith. 

[LoudmouthMormon]

38 minutes ago, Analytics said:

4 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Tell you what, let's compare LDS membership trends against other Christian denominations first, then let's talk.

From the beginning of 2022 to the end of 2023, the total number of Mormon congregations in North America went down by about 60. But many other churches are doing worse, so if you grade on a curve you a winning! Congratulations, the missionary effort is paying off!

Guess I should have clarified: Global membership trends.  No need to be so Americocentric with a global church.

 

38 minutes ago, Analytics said:

There is a reason apologists are so prone to eventually leave the faith. 

You know the difference between anecdotes and data as much as I do.  Or maybe not?   Anyway, I see your 5 named individuals, and raise you 4 different organizations: 

This century: 
2005: https://www.moregoodfoundation.org/about-us/
2020: https://bhroberts.org/about and it's https://ldsbot.com/

Quirky young energetic GenZ rising up and taking their place in LDS apologetics:
https://mormonr.org/
https://saintsunscripted.com

In other words: For every one apologist who may be well known in one circle who leaves the church, umpteen fresh new ones appear, appealing to fresh audiences.  Prove me wrong.

Edited August 23, 2024 by LoudmouthMormon

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Analytics said:

and he got banned from this forum.

This forum has plenty of critics. My guess is that it wasn’t what he wanted to say, but how he chose to say it that got him banned  (significant ridicule is the usual banning offense outside insisting on discussing politics that I remember seeing over time).

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Analytics said:

I wouldn’t say anything about this video is nefarious intent, but some of it is quite dishonest...

 

You said that "Either this guy doesn’t know what the term “thriving industry” means, or he is hoping his listener does not."  That sounds like you are saying that either he's stupid or he's lying and hoping his audience is stupid.  Am I misunderstanding your meaning?

I shouldn't have used nefarious.  It's a stronger condemnation than I meant to imply.  I should said you were accusing him of bad intent.  

Quote

 

As another example, the former poster of this forum who went by the name consiglieri now calls himself Radio Free Mormon. (And by way of disclosure, I’ve considered him to be a personal friend since long before he changed sides.) When he was an apologist, he had papers published in BYU Studies and Journal of Book of Mormon Stories. While he was doing this, his day job was a lawyer.

Over the years, the tension between what he wanted to say and what the Church would allow him to say grew to the point where they wouldn’t let him teach Sunday School anymore and he got banned from this forum. He started freely saying what he really wanted to say in other venues, and soon Bill Reel offered to support him with his own Radio Free Mormon podcast as part of the Mormon Discussions family.

I would guess that if you listed the podcasters who make the most money, Radio Free Mormon would be in third place, not far behind Bill Reel. However, the reason his podcasts are so successful is because they are very well-researched and interesting, and the reason they are so well researched is because Radio Free Mormon has a deep, genuine passion to research and talk about his religion. The reason Radio Free Mormon shifted his focus away from practicing law and towards podcasting wasn’t to make more money, but rather was to spend his time doing what he is passionate about.

 

I don't have an opinion on his podcast (but I thought he was losing sponsors and put out a plea for more money?  Have I gotten him confused with someone else?) but I remember him fondly as a poster here.  I didn't think he got banned but that he just quit posting, but I wouldn't be surprised if I'm wrong on that.  It's been a long time.

I don't have any reason to doubt your explanation of his podcast and why he does it. Did that other guy imply or state that ex-members are only critical of the church for the money?  Sincere question as I didn't listen to his stuff.

[Rain]

21 minutes ago, Calm said:

This forum has plenty of critics. My guess is that it wasn’t what he wanted to say, but how he chose to say it that got him banned  (significant ridicule is the usual banning offense outside insisting on discussing politics that I remember seeing over time).

My memory is it was the how as well. 

[LoudmouthMormon]

Pity - 0 posts remain:

https://www.mormondialogue.org/profile/3108-consiglieri/content/

[Analytics]

5 hours ago, Calm said:

This forum has plenty of critics. My guess is that it wasn’t what he wanted to say, but how he chose to say it that got him banned  (significant ridicule is the usual banning offense outside insisting on discussing politics that I remember seeing over time).

Yes, I don’t recall the details, but “significant ridicule” sounds about right.

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

You said that "Either this guy doesn’t know what the term “thriving industry” means, or he is hoping his listener does not."  That sounds like you are saying that either he's stupid or he's lying and hoping his audience is stupid.  Am I misunderstanding your meaning?

I shouldn't have used nefarious.  It's a stronger condemnation than I meant to imply.  I should said you were accusing him of bad intent.  

I would say I was accusing him of ad hominem attacks, of being dishonest in a couple of his apologetic arguments, and of misunderstanding why podcasters do what they do. But he did all of it with good intents, as he understands “good”. But he thinks it is “evil” to tell the truth about a religion if doing so might threaten somebody’s ability to have faith in said religion, and I think he is wrong about that. 

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I don't have an opinion on his podcast (but I thought he was losing sponsors and put out a plea for more money?  Have I gotten him confused with someone else?) but I remember him fondly as a poster here. 

I think it’s like PBS; regularly pleading for donations is part of the gig. I would expect the amount they get goes up and down in cycles. But yes, he was a great poster here. I frequently remember thinking that if I were in his ward, I’d go to church for his gospel doctrine lessons.

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I don't have any reason to doubt your explanation of his podcast and why he does it. Did that other guy imply or state that ex-members are only critical of the church for the money?  Sincere question as I didn't listen to his stuff.

Sort of. His basic point is that John Dehlin and Bill Reel constitute a “thriving industry” that is trying to cynically make money. He claims that in order to maximize their profits, they deliberately cause as many faith crises as possible so that they can then help their victims to navigate and deal with those faith crises. He claims that is their basic business model and that it is “evil" to facilitate people questioning their religious faith.

Edited August 24, 2024 by Analytics

[Analytics]

5 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Guess I should have clarified: Global membership trends.  No need to be so Americocentric with a global church.

Perhaps. But it would be interesting to measure who has a better understanding of the details of the religion--the African members who are joining, or the American members who are leaving.

5 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

You know the difference between anecdotes and data as much as I do.  Or maybe not?   Anyway, I see your 5 named individuals, and raise you 4 different organizations: 

This century: 
2005: https://www.moregoodfoundation.org/about-us/
2020: https://bhroberts.org/about and it's https://ldsbot.com/

Quirky young energetic GenZ rising up and taking their place in LDS apologetics:
https://mormonr.org/
https://saintsunscripted.com

In other words: For every one apologist who may be well known in one circle who leaves the church, umpteen fresh new ones appear, appealing to fresh audiences.  Prove me wrong.

What is it that you think we are arguing about? if you think apologists have proven that a dispassionate and thorough evaluation of the Church’s truth claims indicate that it is exactly what it claims to be, then I congratulate you for your victory.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Pity - 0 posts remain:

https://www.mormondialogue.org/profile/3108-consiglieri/content/

No, that only shows no posts in the last year. If you click on “see their activity” and then click on “posts” it will show all posts that are still somewhere on the board (some threads have been deleted when it was necessary to meet a limit to storage capacity, I don’t think that’s been necessary for quite sometime, so anything posted in the last decade should still be somewhere).

consig has about 95 pages worth of posts, I think it’s 20 or 25 posts per page, so around 2000.

https://www.mormondialogue.org/profile/3108-consiglieri/content/?type=forums_topic_post&change_section=1

His earliest posts were in 2011, but there are only 2 of them and then there’s posts from Dec 2015.  That’s kind of weird, but maybe he decided to be a lurker instead for a couple of years or was an infrequent poster and just happened to have posted on deleted threads in 2011-2015.

added:  looks like he posted more before the 2011, maybe under another name? as bluebell welcomes him back and consign says it’s been 5 years.  

Edited August 24, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Analytics said:

But he thinks it is “evil” to tell the truth about a religion if doing so might threaten somebody’s ability to have faith in said religion

Does he actually say that or does he believe what you are labeling here as “truth” is misrepresentation or maybe speculation or otherwise untruth for some reason?  Or are you just speculating about his attitude on this based on your perception of his behavior?

Edited August 24, 2024 by Calm

[bluebell]

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

I frequently remember thinking that if I were in his ward, I’d go to church for his gospel doctrine lessons.

I remembering thinking the same.

[Analytics]

15 hours ago, Calm said:

Does he actually say that or does he believe what you are labeling here as “truth” is misrepresentation or maybe speculation or otherwise untruth for some reason?  Or are you just speculating about his attitude on this based on your perception of his behavior?

I have a hard time understanding his point of view, because I don’t understand how saying things that are verifiably false could cause a faith crisis; in my way of thinking, the cause of faith crises are good points that are out of harmony with orthodox beliefs. 

In any case, speaking specifically of Bill Reel and consiglieri and the other hosts of Mormon Discussions he says:

Their version of Church history and Church doctrine is dishonest, unethical, and at its root pure evil.  If you are a member of the Church who has been impacted by LDS critics' negative information, please remember:  You have fallen victim to their strategy of getting wealthy off the backs of people in a faith crisis, which they helped cause.