Called to serve - as a CYBER Missionary?

[Hemidakota]

"I have to kill you if I told you" [humor]

[justamere10]

"I have to kill you if I told you" [humor]

Got it, thanks.

That hope is very encouraging I'm sure for those who are already anxiously engaged and pioneering. I think in time there could be so many Saints effectively and efficiently teaching the truth online that there would be a huge impact in the physical world as well. Yes, I feel that the Spirit is confirming that to me as an individual.

These are great times in which to live...

[rameumptom]

The Brethren are beginning to encourage members to have a place on the Internet and share our testimonies of the doctrine of the Restored Gospel.

However, I do agree we need to ensure we are speaking for ourselves, and not as "official" anything, as we are not. LDS missionaries have been called and set apart in their official capacity. They are also given a set of discussions to use. They are to speak officially from the guidelines and manuals they have, and nothing else. Elders should not be speaking of speculations, nor of issues that have little or nothing to do with the actual doctrine of the Church.

Yet, on this forum, we discuss a myriad of things, including speculation and differing opinions on whether the Pearly Gates swing or slide open. President Kimball noted that it didn't matter to him whether they swung or slid, as long as they opened up. I also think that pertains to psychoanalyzing people, as LDS missionaries are not set apart to resolve people's deep-set depressions, etc. So, if one is going to be a cyber missionary, a disclaimer would possibly be a good thing.

[justamere10]

The Brethren are beginning to encourage members to have a place on the Internet and share our testimonies of the doctrine of the Restored Gospel.

However, I do agree we need to ensure we are speaking for ourselves, and not as "official" anything, as we are not. LDS missionaries have been called and set apart in their official capacity. They are also given a set of discussions to use. They are to speak officially from the guidelines and manuals they have, and nothing else. Elders should not be speaking of speculations, nor of issues that have little or nothing to do with the actual doctrine of the Church.

Yet, on this forum, we discuss a myriad of things, including speculation and differing opinions on whether the Pearly Gates swing or slide open. President Kimball noted that it didn't matter to him whether they swung or slid, as long as they opened up. I also think that pertains to psychoanalyzing people, as LDS missionaries are not set apart to resolve people's deep-set depressions, etc. So, if one is going to be a cyber missionary, a disclaimer would possibly be a good thing.

Your points and concerns are all valid, I and many others are just pioneering in this new medium. Input from every seasoned online LDS word warrior and teacher of righteousness is valuable and could potentially help shape the way this work Elder Ballard refers to becomes better organized (if need be), and more efficient and effective. We have such enormous resources by way of volunteers in the Church that there is no valid reason why anti-Mormon websites and misinformation about our beliefs should any longer prevail on the Web.

Please suggest words to constitute the disclaimer that you think unofficial LDS Cyber Missionaries should present in their online communications, and technically how it can be consistently put on the monitors of everyone reading individual messages.

[justamere10]

Everyone:

In your opinion, should unofficial "LDS Cyber Missionaries" be organized into groups with volunteer leaders, sort of like physical world Missions and missionaries are organized?

If so, what kind of structure do you think would best facilitate efficiency and effectiveness in teaching the truth about LDS beliefs all over cyberspace?

Or, do you think it would be best left up to the initiative of individual Latter-day Saints to roam the Web and drop posts about our beliefs wherever they think they are appropriate, relying on the individual guidance of the Holy Spirit?

How about unofficial LDS Cyber Missionaries initiating and mutually agreeing to work in pairs similar to the physical world missionaries?

Or....

Please elaborate, thanks.

[Hemidakota]

Proclaiming the Gospel is the limitation for any member offical called from the church.

[Vanhin]

Please suggest words to constitute the disclaimer that you think unofficial LDS Cyber Missionaries should present in their online communications, and technically how it can be consistently put on the monitors of everyone reading individual messages.

Here's a suggestion:

LDS Cyber Missionaries are not affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The views expressed by LDS Cyber Missionaries are the responsibility of the individuals themselves and do not necessarily represent the position of the Church. For official Church information, please visit The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or Mormon.org.

Also, you can visit - Mormon.org - Have missionaries contact me - to have the local missionaries of the Church contact you, or you can visit - Mormon.org - Chat Live - to chat live with the missionaries online.

Regards,

Vanhin

[justamere10]

Here's a suggestion:

LDS Cyber Missionaries are not affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The views expressed by LDS Cyber Missionaries are the responsibility of the individuals themselves and do not necessarily represent the position of the Church. For official Church information, please visit The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or Mormon.org.

Also, you can visit - Mormon.org - Have missionaries contact me - to have the local missionaries of the Church contact you, or you can visit - Mormon.org - Chat Live - to chat live with the missionaries online.

Regards,

Vanhin

Ok, I disagree with your statement that members of the Church doing online missionary work are not affiliated with the Church, and it's quite long, but how would you technically get that disclaimer to show to the viewers of each message posted other than on signture lines?

I think the short space allowed for signature lines on non-LDS boards should read something like:

"Ask only active informed Mormons what Mormons believe. Everybody else gets it wrong! Mormon.org

.

[skalenfehl]

"Ask only active informed Mormons what Mormons believe. Everybody else gets it wrong!"

This almost has a negative connotation, especially the text emphasized in bold, which may be true, but it seems uncharitable so say it thus. It might even prove to be counterproductive. There are members who have a strong testimony but are more sensitive to sharing the gospel. If I were a new convert and read this, I might feel inadequate and discouraged. If I was less active or not as educated but trying, I might feel dejected. I am sure with enough thought, prayer and inspiration an alternative signature line can be created that would be more appropriate and maybe even more effective. Just my humble opinion. I'd be willing to help come up with something more suitable if you are so inclined.

p.s. A disclaimer would be appropriate if you use one for your website, as it would not be officially owned or endorsed by the LDS church. In other words, the church isn't responsible for the words or actions of "cyber missionaries."

Edited June 17, 2008 by skalenfehl

[justamere10]

This almost has a negative connotation, especially the text emphasized in bold, which may be true, but it seems uncharitable so say it thus. It might even prove to be counterproductive. There are members who have a strong testimony but are more sensitive to sharing the gospel. If I were a new convert and read this, I might feel inadequate and discouraged. If I was less active or not as educated but trying, I might feel dejected. I am sure with enough thought, prayer and inspiration an alternative signature line can be created that would be more appropriate and maybe even more effective. Just my humble opinion. I'd be willing to help come up with something more suitable if you are so inclined.

p.s. A disclaimer would be appropriate if you use one for your website, as it would not be officially owned or endorsed by the LDS church. In other words, the church isn't responsible for the words or actions of "cyber missionaries."

I appreciate your advice. Sure let's have some ideas for a better sig line. However, I think I mentioned that the sig in question was a suggested one for NON LDS boards where probably most people have already been exposed to anti-Mormon websites and teachings. The sig I like for LDS boards appears below.

I think most unofficial websites operated by active LDS do contain a disclaimer about the site and opinions etc. on it. The impression I got from the message that began this discussion was that he was suggesting that some kind of disclaimer be carried about with I suppose every post an unofficial LDS Cyber Missionary makes on the Net?? I personally do not think that is necessary, and it is probably not technically viable.

Thanks for your always valuable input.

[justamere10]

This almost has a negative connotation, especially the text emphasized in bold, which may be true, but it seems uncharitable so say it thus. It might even prove to be counterproductive. There are members who have a strong testimony but are more sensitive to sharing the gospel. If I were a new convert and read this, I might feel inadequate and discouraged. If I was less active or not as educated but trying, I might feel dejected. I am sure with enough thought, prayer and inspiration an alternative signature line can be created that would be more appropriate and maybe even more effective. Just my humble opinion. I'd be willing to help come up with something more suitable if you are so inclined.

p.s. A disclaimer would be appropriate if you use one for your website, as it would not be officially owned or endorsed by the LDS church. In other words, the church isn't responsible for the words or actions of "cyber missionaries."

Would you be more comfortable with the following signature line for non-LDS boards?

Ask only active Mormons and official LDS websites what Mormons believe.

Visit: Mormon.org

[skalenfehl]

Gotcha. And I think your current signature is perfect. I don't know why I didn't notice that one.

[rameumptom]

Your points and concerns are all valid, I and many others are just pioneering in this new medium. Input from every seasoned online LDS word warrior and teacher of righteousness is valuable and could potentially help shape the way this work Elder Ballard refers to becomes better organized (if need be), and more efficient and effective. We have such enormous resources by way of volunteers in the Church that there is no valid reason why anti-Mormon websites and misinformation about our beliefs should any longer prevail on the Web.

Please suggest words to constitute the disclaimer that you think unofficial LDS Cyber Missionaries should present in their online communications, and technically how it can be consistently put on the monitors of everyone reading individual messages.

But it ISN'T a new medium. The Internet has been around for decades. Yes, there are new components to it that give more opportunities to discuss ideas, but whether it is via an email listserv group, or a chat room, it is essentially the same.

The keys to it are simple: Stay focused on the actual doctrines of the Church. If a person wishes to discuss Adam-God theories, just let them be aware that it is NOT LDS Doctrine and is mere speculation that has nothing to do anymore with the LDS Church.

The same things we would teach our friends, the milk before the meat, are what we should primarily focus upon here. Now, that being said, there's a difference between discussing evidences of the Church (Nahom being found in Arabia) and "doctrinal" speculations (Blood Atonement). Too often we chase people away by focusing on our own gospel hobbies, rather than teaching the gospel.

We do not need speculation on whether polygamy will return or not. Just a basic statement showing that we do not practice it, and Jacob (BoM) states monogamy is the standard, should suffice.

We do not need to speculate about the "curse of Cain." We do NOT know why there was a ban on the priesthood. We do know that early Church leaders and people of other Christian faiths believed that Ham cursing Canaan was a curse on black people. But it was not, nor is it, doctrine. We do know that the curse was lifted (thankfully) 30 years ago by revelation, and we are moving forward with that new revelation with gusto. Our congregations are integrated geographically, moreso than almost any other Christian Church (where segregation often still occurs by individual choice).

We do not need to speculate. We need to "teach the doctrine" and bear our testimonies. Perhaps share a few evidences, both spiritual and physical, to emphasize our testimonies and teachings. But that is it. Anything beyond that is looking beyond the mark.

Now, I know that many can do this. However, many LDS cannot. First off, many LDS do not really understand what the word "doctrine" actually means; much less understand the doctrines. As Jesus commanded Hyrum, first learn the gospel, then teach it (D&C 11).

Finally, we should follow Alma's teachings to his sons, in being "bold, but not overbearing." We should not insult people, simply because they may be insulting or ask a difficult question. Yet, we should be bold in bearing testimony, with kindness and "love unfeigned" that they will know we are their friend (D&C 121).

So, if people can go forth with such concepts in mind, then I say, let them go forth. But if they have a hard time controlling temper or ego, then they should forbear. I've seen many lists have meltdowns, simply because egos clashed. The requirements in D&C 4 for a missionary should apply here, as well. But if we are not in it for the Lord, then we are doing it for some other purpose, and we will not only fail, but we may harm the Church in so doing.

Finally a disclaimer - General Authorities place disclaimers in their authoritative books all the time, including Elder McConkie's Mormon Doctrine. We should place a disclaimer that we are solely responsible for our own statements, and that the Church has official websites that promote their official stance.

Edited June 17, 2008 by rameumptom

[justamere10]

But it ISN'T a new medium. The Internet has been around for decades. Yes, there are new components to it that give more opportunities to discuss ideas, but whether it is via an email listserv group, or a chat room, it is essentially the same.

The keys to it are simple: Stay focused on the actual doctrines of the Church. If a person wishes to discuss Adam-God theories, just let them be aware that it is NOT LDS Doctrine and is mere speculation that has nothing to do anymore with the LDS Church.

The same things we would teach our friends, the milk before the meat, are what we should primarily focus upon here. Now, that being said, there's a difference between discussing evidences of the Church (Nahom being found in Arabia) and "doctrinal" speculations (Blood Atonement). Too often we chase people away by focusing on our own gospel hobbies, rather than teaching the gospel.

We do not need speculation on whether polygamy will return or not. Just a basic statement showing that we do not practice it, and Jacob (BoM) states monogamy is the standard, should suffice.

We do not need to speculate about the "curse of Cain." We do NOT know why there was a ban on the priesthood. We do know that early Church leaders and people of other Christian faiths believed that Ham cursing Canaan was a curse on black people. But it was not, nor is it, doctrine. We do know that the curse was lifted (thankfully) 30 years ago by revelation, and we are moving forward with that new revelation with gusto. Our congregations are integrated geographically, moreso than almost any other Christian Church (where segregation often still occurs by individual choice).

We do not need to speculate. We need to "teach the doctrine" and bear our testimonies. Perhaps share a few evidences, both spiritual and physical, to emphasize our testimonies and teachings. But that is it. Anything beyond that is looking beyond the mark.

Now, I know that many can do this. However, many LDS cannot. First off, many LDS do not really understand what the word "doctrine" actually means; much less understand the doctrines. As Jesus commanded Hyrum, first learn the gospel, then teach it (D&C 11).

Finally, we should follow Alma's teachings to his sons, in being "bold, but not overbearing." We should not insult people, simply because they may be insulting or ask a difficult question. Yet, we should be bold in bearing testimony, with kindness and "love unfeigned" that they will know we are their friend (D&C 121).

So, if people can go forth with such concepts in mind, then I say, let them go forth. But if they have a hard time controlling temper or ego, then they should forbear. I've seen many lists have meltdowns, simply because egos clashed. The requirements in D&C 4 for a missionary should apply here, as well. But if we are not in it for the Lord, then we are doing it for some other purpose, and we will not only fail, but we may harm the Church in so doing.

Finally a disclaimer - General Authorities place disclaimers in their authoritative books all the time, including Elder McConkie's Mormon Doctrine. We should place a disclaimer that we are solely responsible for our own statements, and that the Church has official websites that promote their official stance.

.

Elder Ballard recently referred to the Internet as "New Media", that's what I was referring to.

Your points are all good of course and for those who are not seasoned LDS netizens it might be best to just post messages containing two or three paragraphs answering the question: "Why am I a Mormon?" Followed by a recommendation to visit mormon.org for more information and to ask questions.

But seasoned Latter-day Saints are very capable of starting threads called "Ask a Mormon" and following through with them. I've already mentioned such a thread that I started on the Hannity board about six weeks ago that already has some 3500 posts and 40,000 views.

You can't expect to feed people in cyberspace only milk, because tasty chunks of MEAT are all around them!

In my opinion the sage scriptural advice to not cast one's pearls before swine is NOT applicable in cyberspace. The pearls have already been cast, all over the Internet. Even sacred things from inside our temples are available on anti-Mormon websites. People who are asking questions about our beliefs have generally already been fed a lot of that. We must respond accordingly, as guided by the Holy Spirit of course, and always calmly, accurately, and respectfully.

It is my opinion that seasoned LDS Cyber Missionaries should not hesitate to teach anything they know to be true, with the exception of course of those things we learn in holy temples that we are not to speak of.

That's how I see it.

.

[rameumptom]

And I have no problem with Cyber missionaries teaching doctrine. Let's just make sure it is doctrine being taught, or at least prefaced with: In my personal opinion.... So as to ensure no one mistakes it for Church doctrine.

One of the things that irks me more than anything are the "spiritual twinkies" that Elder Holland warned us about a decade ago in General Conference. Too many Sacrament talks and online discussions end up being all fluff and empty spiritual calories.

And we need to learn what the doctrines are and teach them. The reality is, while writings at fairlds.org are great as support writings (and I've written and edited a few), they will not convert anyone. Only the Spirit borne of testimony of the true doctrines of the Church will convert. Elder McConkie and other GAs have boiled it down nicely to just a few concepts: 1. God lives. 2. Jesus is the Christ and Redeemer of mankind. 3. The Gospel has been restored in the last days through Joseph Smith. 4. The Book of Mormon is the word of God.

If we can gear people toward these concepts, to ponder and pray about them, THEN we are making a difference. Arguing over whether the book of Abraham was written from sen-sen manuscript is a distraction at best from getting people to obtain a testimony of spiritual things through spiritual means.

BTW, I do like your new sig. But I would slightly change it to:

__________________

Every member online a CYBER Missionary!

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or Mormon.org)

http://www.LDS1.org

[justamere10]

And I have no problem with Cyber missionaries teaching doctrine. Let's just make sure it is doctrine being taught, or at least prefaced with: In my personal opinion.... So as to ensure no one mistakes it for Church doctrine.

One of the things that irks me more than anything are the "spiritual twinkies" that Elder Holland warned us about a decade ago in General Conference. Too many Sacrament talks and online discussions end up being all fluff and empty spiritual calories.

And we need to learn what the doctrines are and teach them. The reality is, while writings at fairlds.org are great as support writings (and I've written and edited a few), they will not convert anyone. Only the Spirit borne of testimony of the true doctrines of the Church will convert. Elder McConkie and other GAs have boiled it down nicely to just a few concepts: 1. God lives. 2. Jesus is the Christ and Redeemer of mankind. 3. The Gospel has been restored in the last days through Joseph Smith. 4. The Book of Mormon is the word of God.

If we can gear people toward these concepts, to ponder and pray about them, THEN we are making a difference. Arguing over whether the book of Abraham was written from sen-sen manuscript is a distraction at best from getting people to obtain a testimony of spiritual things through spiritual means.

BTW, I do like your new sig. But I would slightly change it to:

__________________

Every member online a CYBER Missionary!

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or Mormon.org)

http://www.LDS1.org

.

I understand your concerns and possibly because of concerns like that eventually the Brethren might offer some training and maybe some structure and bounds specifically for LDS Cyber Missionaries??

I'm a little concerned about your statement:

"Let's just make sure it is doctrine being taught..."

How would you go about policing that?

I bear you my personal witness that the Holy Spirit IS involved in this work. I believe that He will be with every sincere right living LDS Cyber Missionary who teaches truths calmly and respectfully even in dark places.

And THAT in my opinion is much better than warnings and cautions in our time in cyberspace. I believe that there are possibly tens of thousands of Latter-day Saints right now who are very capable of making a big dent in that sea of misunderstandings about our beliefs.

I think that one of the most effective ways to do that is to start threads called "Ask a Mormon" on non-LDS websites and then let the Holy Spirit guide your responses, as he SURELY will if you are faithful and sincere.

In addition to Hannity, I write on other non-LDS sites. I started an Ask a Mormon thread recently in a place where I knew nasty people were likely to gather. I expected mocking and insults and I got it. But as day after day I responded calmly and respectfully to every post, they began to turn about and show me respect and encouragement.

A bit later I found out there were two inactive LDS among the writers. I think they were favorably impressed, as were eventually the others, the Spirit guided my responses. But you need an exceptionally thick skin to work in such an environment, not everyone is prepared to be a Word Warrior, but many are good steady Teachers of Righteousness once the crowd has been softened...

Then there's the lurkers, I think as Cyber Missionaries we are often writing for the sometimes hundreds of lurkers whom we never get to know, but God knows. That thread I spoke of now has had almost three times more views than any other thread in that forum has ever had. My signature pointing to mormon.org is all over it and is likely to remain there for many months for the Spirit to guide people to or other LDS Cyber Missionaries to find, bump, and carry on.

I think we need to be BOLD and respectful my brothers and sisters and fellow LDS Cyber Missionaries. The Spirit WILL guide us. And we will reap a harvest, of that I am beginning to get reports.

With God, ALL things are possible...

[rameumptom]

.

I understand your concerns and possibly because of concerns like that eventually the Brethren might offer some training and maybe some structure and bounds specifically for LDS Cyber Missionaries??

I'm a little concerned about your statement:

"Let's just make sure it is doctrine being taught..."

How would you go about policing that?

I bear you my personal witness that the Holy Spirit IS involved in this work. I believe that He will be with every sincere right living LDS Cyber Missionary who teaches truths calmly and respectfully even in dark places.

And THAT in my opinion is much better than warnings and cautions in our time in cyberspace. I believe that there are possibly tens of thousands of Latter-day Saints right now who are very capable of making a big dent in that sea of misunderstandings about our beliefs.

I think that one of the most effective ways to do that is to start threads called "Ask a Mormon" on non-LDS websites and then let the Holy Spirit guide your responses, as he SURELY will if you are faithful and sincere.

With God, ALL things are possible...

Well, it sounds like you are taking the proper steps to doing it properly. I have seen some LDS writers, whose "missionary work" has made me cringe at times, because they felt that attacking the attackers was all there was to missionary work.

I agree we can make a positive change on the Internet. I know there is no real way to police it. But through training, encouragement, and guidance, perhaps we can help everyone to realize there are better ways and bad ways to preach/share the gospel. We send young men to the MTC and give them the Preach My Gospel manual and a set of specific support books to work from (no, they do not include the Journal of Discourses). Perhaps we should consider using these texts as much as possible in our own efforts online.

[justamere10]

Well, it sounds like you are taking the proper steps to doing it properly. I have seen some LDS writers, whose "missionary work" has made me cringe at times, because they felt that attacking the attackers was all there was to missionary work.

I agree we can make a positive change on the Internet. I know there is no real way to police it. But through training, encouragement, and guidance, perhaps we can help everyone to realize there are better ways and bad ways to preach/share the gospel. We send young men to the MTC and give them the Preach My Gospel manual and a set of specific support books to work from (no, they do not include the Journal of Discourses). Perhaps we should consider using these texts as much as possible in our own efforts online.

Sound advice, thanks for participating in this thread.

[Vanhin]

Ok, I disagree with your statement that members of the Church doing online missionary work are not affiliated with the Church, and it's quite long, but how would you technically get that disclaimer to show to the viewers of each message posted other than on signture lines?

I think the short space allowed for signature lines on non-LDS boards should read something like:

"Ask only active informed Mormons what Mormons believe. Everybody else gets it wrong! Mormon.org

.

"LDS Cyber Missionaries" are not an affiliate program of the Church, and in my opinion it's not appropriate for people associated with them to give the impression that they are. What the disclaimer means is that the Church is not reponsible for the activities of "LDS Cyber Missionaries", since they do not operate as official representatives of the Church.

Here's a shorter version for you.

LDS Cyber Missionaries are not official representatives of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and their views do not necessarily represent the position of the Church. Please visit Mormon.org to contact the official missionaries of the Church.

Regards,

Vanhin

[justamere10]

"LDS Cyber Missionaries" are not an affiliate program of the Church, and in my opinion it's not appropriate for people associated with them to give the impression that they are. What the disclaimer means is that the Church is not reponsible for the activities of "LDS Cyber Missionaries", since they do not operate as official representatives of the Church.

Here's a shorter version for you.

LDS Cyber Missionaries are not official representatives of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and their views do not necessarily represent the position of the Church. Please visit Mormon.org to contact the official missionaries of the Church.

Regards,

Vanhin

That has potential. How do you bring that to the attention of those who read messages posted by unofficial LDS Cyber Missionaries? (Keeping in mind my concerns about using the signature line for that purpose.)

Thanks for helping brainstorm this by the way...

And another by the way, I don't think other than on the clearly marked and disclaimed "LDS Cyber Missionary" board www.lds1.org that anyone is going to post messages on non-LDS websites in the name of "LDS Cyber Missionary", though that is possible of course.

[Elphaba]

Hopefully you don't seriously think that everyone writing on this board needs to publish a disclaimer that they are not writing as an official representative of the Church.

Of course not.

But if someone is running, and promoting, a website discussing Church doctrine, then yes, I would insist his posts contain a disclaimer. The one Vahnin suggested is excellent.

You seem to have missed the following sentence from the opening post of this thread:

"Well, I've posted the story of how that hit me elsewhere but suffice it to say that although I haven't been officially called as an LDS Cyber Missionary, that's what I've been doing."

And perhaps you missed the question mark in the thread title.

Of course I did. That is my point.

With regard to readability, a person will start to read a paragraph, and if the copy does not immediately engage the reader, it is very likely the reader will move on until she finds something that does engage her.

Your post is a perfect example. Your opening remarks had nothing to do with the gist of your post; therefore, I missed them.

Of course, not everyone will miss them, perhaps even the majority won't. But I did, and I am usually very thorough when reading posts.

Yet if you post a disclaimer, like the one Vahnin suggested, the eye will see it, and the message will be very clear that you are doing this on your own.

I did notice your logo, which I agree looks very professional. It effectively draws the eye to it. But because of this, I assumed your logo indicated you are an official entity of the Church. What you need is a disclaimer that draws the eye to it as well so there will be no confusion you are doing this on your own.

I note however your apparent opposition to the term "LDS Cyber Missionary" but it's not clear to me why . . . .

I am not opposed to the term. I am adamant you need a disclaimer, such as the one Vahnin suggested.

Then there would be no confusion as to whether you have been personally called by the Church, or if you are doing this on your own.

So which of those three words would you rule out?

All of them if you do not include a disclaimer.

By the way, I am NOT an official representative of the LDS Church at this time. :-)

So what? Your posts are ambiguous about this, and as I said, as happened with me, at least some people reading them are going to think you are an official representative of the LDS Church.

I am just an ordinary individual member taking the initiative to do things online that I consider to be potentially efficient and effective towards helping clear up the mountain of misunderstandings about LDS religious beliefs and practices. >snip<

I understand that I am just one of hopefully tens of thousands of Saints who are, each in their own way, teaching Gospel truths on the Internet. If anyone cares to use the words "LDS Cyber Missionary" to describe to others what they are doing on the Internet, then I will conclude that I have contributed something positive to what is emerging from Elder Ballard's recent requests for help.

Just be sure you add a disclaimer.

By the way, I visited your site today. You really need to work on recognizing when you are being condescending, and then keep it out of your posts.

I also noted you made it very clear your posts were your opinion only. I will continue to insist you need an official disclaimer; however, your efforts made a difference. Good for you.

Elphaba

[abqfriend]

I am not a member of the LDS. Your original post sounds great! The LDS Church should be complemented for using personal one on one contacts with others is sharing your faith message. The LDS should be further complemented in using the Media to reach others.

Many Christian groups including my own-The Roman Catholic Church-are not as Media friendly or one-on-one friendly in sharing their faith.

The Internet is indeed how many of us communicate and get to know others. What you suggest sounds great. What the members of your church mention to you sounds great too.

God bless your ministry in reaching out to others.

[justamere10]

I am not a member of the LDS. Your original post sounds great! The LDS Church should be complemented for using personal one on one contacts with others is sharing your faith message. The LDS should be further complemented in using the Media to reach others.

Many Christian groups including my own-The Roman Catholic Church-are not as Media friendly or one-on-one friendly in sharing their faith.

The Internet is indeed how many of us communicate and get to know others. What you suggest sounds great. What the members of your church mention to you sounds great too.

God bless your ministry in reaching out to others.

Thank-you so much for your feedback, I really appreciate your kind words.

Enjoy the day.

[justamere10]

....

By the way, I visited your site today. You really need to work on recognizing when you are being condescending, and then keep it out of your posts.

Elphaba

Some people choose to label even professors and teachers "condescending" because they teach others the things they know.

But you have judged me "condescending" and publicly declared that I am, so perhaps you would be so kind as to post here a few quotes from www.lds1.org where I come across as condescending, so I can learn from you, thanks.

[Elphaba]

Some people choose to label even professors and teachers "condescending" because they teach others the things they know.

It's more likely they are labeled condescending because they are.

But you have judged me "condescending" and publicly declared that I am, so perhaps you would be so kind as to post here a few quotes from www.lds1.org where I come across as condescending, so I can learn from you, thanks.

I'd be glad to; however, I've only been able to log on to the site once, though I've tried numerous times. And even then, I was never been able to open a thread.

Elphaba