Rlds - Why Hasn't It Grown?

[Snow]

Back to the question that was never really addressed in the original thread...

The RLDS/CoC movement is not growing. According to what I have heard (which admittedly is not a lot) it has fractured and may now be smaller than what it once was.

Why?

Possible answers:

1. It is the true Church, but God either doesn't want it to grow or is, at minimum, allowing it to stagnate.

2. God doesn't care if it grows or not and it's current lethargy is a result of mismanagement.

3. God doesn't care if it grows and the Church itself doesn't want to grow.

I don't know but it seems to me that Churches that are growing are those that have a forceful and meaningful message that is relevant to the population... and are successful in getting their message out to the public. I don't know that the CoC has a message that speaks to the souls of non the non-CoC public.

This is what I mean. Like it or not, the LDS Church stands for something. It takes an agressive position or its core beliefs and that rallys people to its cause. The same can be said for other churches as well. The Church that don't seem to be doing well are those that are middle of the road, wishy washy organizations whose precepts seems to be driven by popularity... What do we think about homosexulatity in the priesthood? I dunno, let's take a vote! What's our stance on morality or ethics or the nature of Christ? Who knows - let's toss it up on the gallows and see how it hangs!

That kind of which-way-is-the-wind-blowing religion makes for a convenient lifestyle but does not lend itself to deep religious passion - the kind of passion that comes from a deep and abiding belief that God Himself is leading and directing the affairs of the Church.

I suggest the CoC is not, in practice, operated from above on down. It seeks to pattern itself after what the majority wants, what's popular, what's mainstream. Since it still has ties to the original LDS theology (which is considered odd by the mainstream) but wants to be mainstream itself - it is caught tween a rock and a hard place. Not mainstream enough nor unique enough to make non-members intrigued.

[Guest bat]

I always thought that it was because they don't have an army of missionaries whose sole purpose for two years of their early adult lives consists of getting as many people as possible to join their church. It's just a theory though.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by bat@Oct 30 2004, 12:30 AM

I always thought that it was because they don't have an army of missionaries whose sole purpose for two years of their early adult lives consists of getting as many people as possible to join their church. It's just a theory though.

Certainly a logical theory. Christianity never would have survived the first few decades if the early apostles hadn't branched out of Jerusalem and done just that.

[Blessed]

OKay, well, I feel I can answer this to some degree. As a member of Community of Christ, we are growing. Growing mightily? No. But there is a revival of new members being added each in every day mainly right now in Brasil, Argentina, Chile and various parts of Africa. In North America are numbers are not growing very well. However, to say we aren't just simply isn't so. We just aren't doing fast enough to be noticed.

As per Snow's insult that what we are doing is being mainstream (notice I did take offense to that) that also couldn't be further from the Truth. At our last world conference we continue as we do each and every one to come together to decide the mind and will of God. And I can share with my testimony that is happening. Does it please everyone? No. Does everyone agree? No. But the majority does decide carefully and prayerfully what we believe God is wanting in these latter days.

If people want to see what we are about then visit one of our congregations. Ask our Seventies to come and visit with you directly. It does little good to sit here and debate what is going on with another church when one does not step inside of its doors to see the fruits of their labors. It is quite distasteful to discuss it otherwise.

[Snow]

No need to be offended Blessed. I am not offened when Jenda repeated tells us tha the Church of Jesus Christ is led astray (by he who leads astray) and that BY, our prophet, was a bad, bad man. She just expressing her opinion and her opinion is only valid in so far as she is either correct or insightful.. I am just expressing my opinion.

The CoC might be adding members daily but their total membership numbers have hovered for a long long time at about 250k. It could be that the numbers that are publicy available are wrong but that's what is available.

You can take my mainstreamimization observation as a insult but I say that the the leadership would probably take it as a compliment. As time goes on, you move farther away from your roots and more towards mainstream protestantism. It seems deliberate, meaning that you are accomplishing your objectives.

Such as what?

Women and the Priesthood

The current discussion about homosexuality

The use of the crucifix and the dove

Use of terminolgy, evangelist, ministry, etc...

The name change to distant itself from the church founded by JS

De-emphasis of the Book of Mormon as well as other doctrines not in line with Protestantism

Trinitarian leanings

Abandonment of the principle of being led by a decendent of JS - what was a foundation principle of your church

Current leader was educated in a Methodist tradition

Look at your website. At a glance it could well be from any number of Protestant churches.

You can say that I am factually wrong about the above or you can say that although the above is true, it doesn't indicate a slide into the mainstream but think it is pretty clear what's going on. Look 25 years into the future, do you think that the CoC will be more prostestant than it is now? Or more Mormon? Is there any real doubt.

[speedomansam]

since we're expressing opinions, how come nobody's directly expressed the opinion that the RLDS church isn't true, therefore the spirit doesn't manifest itself to people as a witness to its divinity? i mean, who would believe a crazy story about Jospeh Smith if the spirit didn't testify that the LDS church was true?

It's just an opinion, nobody get offended.

[PinkBlankie]

Sorry, Don't want to sound imm DUMB i guess, but what is RLDS??

thanks,

Blankie

[Jenda]

Originally posted by PinkBlankie@Nov 1 2004, 04:00 PM

Sorry, Don't want to sound imm DUMB i guess, but what is RLDS??

thanks,

Blankie

Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

[Jenda]

Originally posted by speedomansam@Nov 1 2004, 02:56 PM

since we're expressing opinions, how come nobody's directly expressed the opinion that the RLDS church isn't true, therefore the spirit doesn't manifest itself to people as a witness to its divinity? i mean, who would believe a crazy story about Jospeh Smith if the spirit didn't testify that the LDS church was true?

It's just an opinion, nobody get offended.

*jenda shakes her head not understanding why speedomansam hasn't read through the other thread about the RLDS

[Fatboy]

Originally posted by Jenda+Nov 1 2004, 05:16 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jenda @ Nov 1 2004, 05:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--speedomansam@Nov 1 2004, 02:56 PM

since we're expressing opinions, how come nobody's directly expressed the opinion that the RLDS church isn't true, therefore the spirit doesn't manifest itself to people as a witness to its divinity? i mean, who would believe a crazy story about Jospeh Smith if the spirit didn't testify that the LDS church was true?

It's just an opinion, nobody get offended.

*jenda shakes her head not understanding why speedomansam hasn't read through the other thread about the RLDS

Now now, Jenda, he was asking a question. There are so many abbreviations out there I would never guess what it meant even after reading the full name. Just a hang up I have.

As for those who state that the Lord is not with them, come on guys we have the same roots. They are doing their best to live up to what they know. I think that will be important in the next life as well.

[speedomansam]

Originally posted by Jenda@Nov 1 2004, 05:16 PM

*jenda shakes her head not understanding why speedomansam hasn't read through the other thread about the RLDS

well, whenever i see a 4 page thread, i assume it's usually full of random rants and subjects not relating to the topic, so in my laziness i didn't want to read through all that. but, since your reply, i read through the other RLDS thread. and, it was full of rather pointless discussion on tithing, with very little discussion on the RLDS and people's opinions on it (hence snow created this thread!)

in any case, my original post still stands. nobody directly expressed that opinion in either thread, so i don't get your headshaking (and if you mean i should have done a search through the forum archives to find info on the RLDS, then... meh. that's definitely too much work).

and fatboy, good point.

does anybody understand physics? i have too find out how to find the coefficiant of friction by tomorrow...

[Guest Unorthodox]

Originally posted by Snow@Oct 29 2004, 07:46 PM

The RLDS/CoC movement is not growing. According to what I have heard (which admittedly is not a lot) it has fractured and may now be smaller than what it once was.

Why?

Poor marketing. No warm fuzzy tv commercials.

[Blessed]

Originally posted by Snow@Oct 31 2004, 12:14 PM

Women and the Priesthood

The current discussion about homosexuality

The use of the crucifix and the dove

Use of terminolgy, evangelist, ministry, etc...

The name change to distant itself from the church founded by JS

De-emphasis of the Book of Mormon as well as other doctrines not in line with Protestantism

Trinitarian leanings

Abandonment of the principle of being led by a decendent of JS - what was a foundation principle of your church

Current leader was educated in a Methodist tradition

With the one exception that our current leader attended a seminary... and what the big deal about that is??? I don't know why you even pointed it out?!?!

The rest is absolutely correct -- YOUR opinion.

I guess the ridicule of what other's hold as sacred beliefs even though different from yours is allowed on this board... hmmm. So much of the Second great commandment... doesn't seem to take effect on this board.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Blessed+Nov 1 2004, 07:38 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Blessed @ Nov 1 2004, 07:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Oct 31 2004, 12:14 PM

Women and the Priesthood

The current discussion about homosexuality

The use of the crucifix and the dove

Use of terminolgy, evangelist, ministry, etc...

The name change to distant itself from the church founded by JS

De-emphasis of the Book of Mormon as well as other doctrines not in line with Protestantism

Trinitarian leanings

Abandonment of the principle of being led by a decendent of JS - what was a foundation principle of your church

Current leader was educated in a Methodist tradition

With the one exception that our current leader attended a seminary... and what the big deal about that is??? I don't know why you even pointed it out?!?!

The rest is absolutely correct -- YOUR opinion.

I guess the ridicule of what other's hold as sacred beliefs even though different from yours is allowed on this board... hmmm. So much of the Second great commandment... doesn't seem to take effect on this board.

You REALLY don't know why I pointed it out? Seriously?

Your Prophet, Seer and Revelator, Grant McMurray, didn't just attend a seminary. He graduated with a master's of divinity degree at St. Paul School of Theology in Kansas City, a United Methodist seminary, whose stated mission is "educate persons for leadership in the ministry of the church."

That's not bad or evil, but it is a significant reflection of how your church seeks to become less like the Church of Jesus Christ and more like a mainstream Protestant church.

You can brush off my observations by calling them "[MY] OPINION," but the things I wrote are factual matters. If I am factually incorrect, by all means correct me - however I don't think you will.

Blessed, why on earth do you think that I am ridiculing your church? I am criticizing it but I am not contemptuously holding it up to scorn. I think that your church is every bit as valid of the other protestant churches it is becoming more and more like. Obviously your church doesn't think that is a bad thing (else they wouldn't do it) so why are you bothered by it?

It doesn't anger me that you don't think the Church of Jesus Christ is true (to it's claims) Why get all bent when I think the same about you?

[Snow]

Oh,

...and just what "sacred beliefs" do you think I have trampled?

[Fatboy]

Originally posted by Blessed+Nov 1 2004, 08:38 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Blessed @ Nov 1 2004, 08:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Snow@Oct 31 2004, 12:14 PM

Women and the Priesthood

The current discussion about homosexuality

The use of the crucifix and the dove

Use of terminolgy, evangelist, ministry, etc...

The name change to distant itself from the church founded by JS

De-emphasis of the Book of Mormon as well as other doctrines not in line with Protestantism

Trinitarian leanings

Abandonment of the principle of being led by a decendent of JS - what was a foundation principle of your church

Current leader was educated in a Methodist tradition

With the one exception that our current leader attended a seminary... and what the big deal about that is??? I don't know why you even pointed it out?!?!

The rest is absolutely correct -- YOUR opinion.

I guess the ridicule of what other's hold as sacred beliefs even though different from yours is allowed on this board... hmmm. So much of the Second great commandment... doesn't seem to take effect on this board.

Blessed I don't think Snow was trying to offend. My goodness this is a pleasant board compared with one Jenda and I have been on. So when someone is pointing out that your president was schooled by traditional trinitarian beliefs which was not part of what the founder Joseph Smith believed in, then one has to wonder why he was schooled in religion in the first place. Joseph Smith wasn't. Neither was Joseph Smith III. How many of your presidents have gone to mainstream christianity schools of theology?

[Jenda]

Originally posted by speedomansam+Nov 1 2004, 07:18 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (speedomansam @ Nov 1 2004, 07:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Jenda@Nov 1 2004, 05:16 PM

*jenda shakes her head not understanding why speedomansam hasn't read through the other thread about the RLDS

well, whenever i see a 4 page thread, i assume it's usually full of random rants and subjects not relating to the topic, so in my laziness i didn't want to read through all that. but, since your reply, i read through the other RLDS thread. and, it was full of rather pointless discussion on tithing, with very little discussion on the RLDS and people's opinions on it (hence snow created this thread!)

in any case, my original post still stands. nobody directly expressed that opinion in either thread, so i don't get your headshaking (and if you mean i should have done a search through the forum archives to find info on the RLDS, then... meh. that's definitely too much work).

and fatboy, good point.

does anybody understand physics? i have too find out how to find the coefficiant of friction by tomorrow...

Sorry for shaking my head, it's just that Snow doesnt' miss an opportunity to express the opinion that we are not the true church, and I just thought that if you had read the other two threads (the one about Joseph Smith, III and the other one about the RLDS) you would have seen his opinion expressed there somewhere.

[Snow]

I don't think that is so Jenda.

We have discussed the succession in the presidency before and I challenged your interpretation on how things ought to be but prior to this topic I can't recall having questioned 'the truthfulness' of the CoC.