Do you have any thoughts as to why people become inactive?


Sunday21
 Share

Recommended Posts

Show me where I or anyone said anything of the sort.

 

If you are going to throw out such offensive accusations you had best be able to back them up.

 

Brother, you say it with practically every reply.  You outright called my perspective silly, and my perspective is that people who go inactive because they're not feeling comfortable or welcome in Church shouldn't be written off.  If you think that's silly then you've proven my point.  If you want to refine your comments and agree that they shouldn't be written off then that's great.  I would hope you'd feel that way, but that definitely isn't coming across in your replies.

 

So if you choose to be offended by me calling you on that then by all means go ahead if it helps you.  I stand by what I said.

 

Now since this is getting more and more contentious I'll excuse myself from this thread to go enjoy my weekend.  Have a  good one, everybody  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brother, you say it with practically every reply.  You outright called my perspective silly, and my perspective is that people who go inactive because they're not feeling comfortable or welcome in Church shouldn't be written off.  If you think that's silly then you've proven my point.  If you want to refine your comments and agree that they shouldn't be written off then that's great.  I would hope you'd feel that way, but that definitely isn't coming across in your replies.

 

So if you choose to be offended by me calling you on that then by all means go ahead if it helps you.  I stand by what I said.

 

Now since this is getting more and more contentious I'll excuse myself from this thread to go enjoy my weekend.  Have a  good one, everybody  :)

 

Let's be clear here just for anyone following along: What I called silly is the equation of faithfulness and inactivity. If that is, indeed, your solid stance, then I did call that one aspect of your perspective silly. 

 

Moving right along in the conversation, you claim accordingly that I advocate writing inactive people off, and apply fault to that:
 

People like yourself whose response comes across as "Well it's their own fault for being too weak to carry on through."

 

...which is an inaccurate, false conclusion that doesn't follow from what I've said at all. I contend, quite plainly throughout that I do not believe in writing anyone off (I'm not sure how you can't understand that. I guess you need a statement. So here: I do not believe in writing anyone off. Which I believe you well know despite your antagonistic determination to try and make me look like the jerk you're claiming me and other members to be), or that it's a matter of blame or a single source of fault. In point of fact, I strongly believe that we have a responsibility as members to help others feel loved and included as best we can. Your claim that my point of view is contrary to this is inaccurate. Moreover, simply saying I'm coming across that way holds no water. I never said or implied anything of the sort. So how is it that I'm coming across that way? Oh...because you choose to read a bunch of stuff into what I'm saying that I didn't. Funny how that works.

 

In other words, we have two perspectives being debated:

 

1. It's the active member's fault that people go inactive because the active members are jerks.

 

2. It's sometimes the fault of the active members (who are, indeed, sometimes jerks) and also the fault of the one who chooses to let such things, or even sometimes their own flawed interpretations of such things, drive them inactive.

 

The second is balanced. The first is not.

 

Then, however, you take the second and twist it, interpreting it to mean -- it's ONLY the fault of the person who goes inactive.

 

Beyond being an incorrect assessment of the idea being expressed, you then determine to make it personal by also accusing the person with that opinion of advocating the "writing off" of said inactive people off. But, of course, your interpretation of what I have said is wrong in the first place, so the assessment is flawed from the get go.

 

The simple and plain fact is that there is no such claim, implication, or even tone being applied. It is all in your interpretation.

 

So you go on and enjoy you weekend. But maybe you should reconsider the ground you're standing on -- the claimed self-righteous, it's-all-the-inactive-people's-fault-and-responsibility baloney that I never said.

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me discuss for a moment why I believe understanding that testimony and faith are the important and appropriate parts of the equation (and the underlying root of the issue).

 

First:

 

Life is hard and we will all face extreme challenges throughout. We will all be tested to our limits. That is what life is for. We are here to find out if we will endure through the trials of life and remain faithful in spite of those trials. Whatever those trials may be, financial ruin, health, death of loved ones, relationship problems with family/members/bishop, confusion about historical issues, etc., the trial remains. Will we stay faithful? The challenge is not to remove the challenges.

 

Now I know that comes across a bit strange when applied to the issue at hand. And I would not and do not advocate by that that we should intentionally create problems. We should never purposefully hurt others. But that is different than a realization that these things are going to happen, and dealing with them is part of life.

 

If we are dealing one-on-one with a jerk, it behooves us to try and help them by whatever means we appropriately can (as led by the Spirit) to not be a jerk.

 

If we are dealing with one who has let their faithfulness falter because someone else was a jerk, it behooves us to try and help them by whatever means we appropriately can (as led by the Spirit) to not let such things affect their faithfulness.

 

This sort of promotion is perfectly in line with the teachings of our Savior, who taught us plainly to turn the other cheek, to walk twain, to give them our coat, and to forgive until ninety times nine.

 

Moreover, from our direct ability to affect other's lives, how can we expect to change the millions (particularly with a condemnatory post on an internet forum) vs. our ability to affect an individual who has been hurt or betrayed. And how can we possibly help the person who has been hurt or betrayed by embracing the "Yeah...it's all their fault. I'd go inactive too! You can only put up with so much!" sort of sentiment, rather than the actual teachings of the gospel, as partially hinted at above related to Christ's teachings, and plainly taught through a myriad of other principles such as long suffering, humility, and endurance.

 

Really, is it going to more effective to stand up and preach to the members that they need to not be jerks (to which almost every one of them will respond in their minds, "I'm not a jerk", whether they are or not), or to go out after the lost sheep, serve them, love them, bear testimony to them, pray with them, and generally succor them, helping to lead them to humility, forgiveness and understanding?

 

The simple fact is that the only way to help anyone is to help them better embrace humility. This applies to the jerk, and it applies to the one offended by the jerk. But as an effective approach, it strikes me that setting out on a crusade to purge the church of jerks is rather futile. Perhaps, instead, we should set out on a crusade to influence our neighbors, friends, loved ones, and even fellow forum members, one at a time, by the preaching of the plain truths of the gospel, which does include, certainly, the don't be a jerk ideology, but also includes, the forgive, forget, and cling to faithfulness ideology -- which for some strange reason, whenever anyone espouses this side of the coin, seems to draw a befuddling overabundance of contempt and wrath.

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share