Sign in to follow this  
Anddenex

Itching Ears -- Alive and Well

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Anddenex said:

 

We will have to agree to disagree with this. Unanswered questions are simply the mask hiding what is really happening -- mind and heart. Reminds me of a young couple whose husband didn't attend. I asked why he didn't attend and he said I just have a lot of questions. When I asked what some of those questions were his response was, "I don't remember." In other words, I use my questions as an excuse to not attend and thus feel justified (rationalization) for their decision to leave.

Some men wont open up and just stay quiet with generic responses while relying on their better judgement.

From an organizational standpoint, where there is smoke there is fire so I wouldnt be too worried that this particular person behaves this way but that many people behave this way when it comes to finding the reason they dont attend and/or left.

Most of you that follow my posts in here know that I appear borderline anti-mormon when I am simply expressing my true feelings and questions about the church. Im just trying to find answers and make sense of my testimony in the gospel. I will NEVER open up like this to my local leaders or fellow members for fear of being labeled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

Some men wont open up and just stay quiet with generic responses while relying on their better judgement.

From an organizational standpoint, where there is smoke there is fire so I wouldnt be too worried that this particular person behaves this way but that many people behave this way when it comes to finding the reason they dont attend and/or left.

Most of you that follow my posts in here know that I appear borderline anti-mormon when I am simply expressing my true feelings and questions about the church. Im just trying to find answers and make sense of my testimony in the gospel. I will NEVER open up like this to my local leaders or fellow members for fear of being labeled.

What I am reading from you is confirming the response I provided.  The bold part is the crux. Either you have received witness from the Holy Ghost, or you haven't. If you have, no matter what questions you have, remain faithful to the witness from God. If you place your mind and heart toward God (his love is your treasure) what you are seeking will eventually come. Whether or not you accept the answer (which God is probably already trying to give you) is really up to you. Even if the answer is simply, "Be patient, and know that I am God." Or, "I may not know the meaning of all things, but I do know God loves his children and I will remain faithful (like Nephi) to his gospel/Church."

If a person is allowing their questions to remove them from the Church/the Gospel of Jesus Christ, then their questions are a "mask" hiding something deeper. We have nothing to fear -- even labels -- if we are indeed following truth, not error.

It isn't better judgement to tell someone, "I don't come to church because of questions." Then, when asked what they are and you can only respond with, "I don't kow." Or anything in like manner isn't someone truly seeking answers -- they are fine with their excuses. Similar to a popular website of members who hide their names because of a lame fear that isn't true, but because they want it to be true they hide their name to justify their decisions (similar to the CES Letter author). They aren't really looking for answers, as the answers are there, they are simply using their questions as an excuse/rationalization (pride).

EDIT - So I am not misunderstood the "you," "your," and other terms are "generally" speaking not specifically aimed toward you.

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

What I am reading from you is confirming the response I provided.  The bold part is the crux. Either you have received witness from the Holy Ghost, or you haven't. If you have, no matter what questions you have, remain faithful to the witness from God. If you place your mind and heart toward God (his love is your treasure) what you are seeking will eventually come. Whether or not you accept the answer (which God is probably already trying to give you) is really up to you. Even if the answer is simply, "Be patient, and know that I am God." Or, "I may not know the meaning of all things, but I do know God loves his children and I will remain faithful (like Nephi) to his gospel/Church."

If a person is allowing their questions to remove them from the Church/the Gospel of Jesus Christ, then their questions are a "mask" hiding something deeper. We have nothing to fear -- even labels -- if we are indeed following truth, not error.

It isn't better judgement to tell someone, "I don't come to church because of questions." Then, when asked what they are and you can only respond with, "I don't kow." Or anything in like manner isn't someone truly seeking answers -- they are fine with their excuses. Similar to a popular website of members who hide their names because of a lame fear that isn't true, but because they want it to be true they hide their name to justify their decisions (similar to the CES Letter author). They aren't really looking for answers, as the answers are there, they are simply using their questions as an excuse/rationalization (pride).

EDIT - So I am not misunderstood the "you," "your," and other terms are "generally" speaking not specifically aimed toward you.

This is what made (makes) my conversion so difficult for me.  I don't have a witness from God on most things.  I do have a confirmation from God that I am supposed to be part of this church, even if I don't entirely know why.  It makes so many of the questions I have difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Grunt said:

This is what made (makes) my conversion so difficult for me.  I don't have a witness from God on most things.  I do have a confirmation from God that I am supposed to be part of this church, even if I don't entirely know why.  It makes so many of the questions I have difficult.

That's compounded by the fact that even most members can't seem to get on the same page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Grunt said:

This is what made (makes) my conversion so difficult for me.  I don't have a witness from God on most things.  I do have a confirmation from God that I am supposed to be part of this church, even if I don't entirely know why.  It makes so many of the questions I have difficult.

And thus why I love these words from Nephi, "And I said unto him: I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things." We don't have to have every question answered, nor do we need to know everything. We simply need to remain faithful to what the Lord has witnessed, while keeping our eye on the tree of life.

Stay true to that and then we will be like Joseph F. Smith, "It is not by marvelous manifestations unto us that we shall be established in the truth, but it is by humility and faithful obedience to the commandments and laws of God. When I as a boy first started out in the ministry, I would frequently go out and ask the Lord to show me some marvelous thing, in order that I might receive a testimony. But the Lord withheld marvels from me, and showed me the truth, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little [see 2 Nephi 28:30], until he made me to know the truth from the crown of my head to the soles of my feet, and until doubt and fear had been absolutely purged from me. He did not have to send an angel from the heavens to do this, nor did he have to speak with the trump of an archangel. By the whisperings of the still small voice of the Spirit of the living God, he gave to me the testimony I possess. And by this principle and power he will give to all the children of men a knowledge of the truth that will stay with them, and it will make them to know the truth, as God knows it, and to do the will of the Father as Christ does it. And no amount of marvelous manifestations will ever accomplish this." (emphasis mine)

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Grunt said:

This is what made (makes) my conversion so difficult for me.  I don't have a witness from God on most things.  I do have a confirmation from God that I am supposed to be part of this church, even if I don't entirely know why.  It makes so many of the questions I have difficult.

Here is another quote you may like Grunt from Joseph F. Smith, "To the faithful Latter-day Saint is given the right to know the truth, as God knows it; and no power beneath the celestial kingdom can lead him astray, darken his understanding, becloud his mind or dim his faith or his knowledge of the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It can’t be done, for the light of God shines brighter than the illumination of a falsehood and error; therefore, those who possess the light of Christ, the spirit of revelation and the knowledge of God, rise above all these vagaries in the world; they know of this doctrine, that it is of God and not of man." (emphasis mine)

Anything, any question, any person seeking to destroy faith in God's Church/Gospel can and will be overcome if we possess the light of Christ, the Spirit of revelation. I know this to be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 11:58 AM, Grunt said:

This is what made (makes) my conversion so difficult for me.  I don't have a witness from God on most things.  I do have a confirmation from God that I am supposed to be part of this church, even if I don't entirely know why.  It makes so many of the questions I have difficult.

Just like you I had a confirmation from the HG that what I was doing was true, what was I doing? I was in the first month of serving a mission which I also equated to the church being true, but I like your words better..."I am supposed to be part of this church". That phrase leaves open the possibility that the church has human error.

 

On ‎11‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 12:07 PM, Grunt said:

That's compounded by the fact that even most members can't seem to get on the same page.

This is where I think the church becomes a crux to the Gospel. The Gospel is for everyone but church, at least in its current state, isn't.
Presidents Nelsons move toward "home learning/worshiping" and less "church" is a step in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

Just like you I had a confirmation from the HG that what I was doing was true, what was I doing? I was in the first month of serving a mission which I also equated to the church being true, but I like your words better..."I am supposed to be part of this church". That phrase leaves open the possibility that the church has human error.

 

This is where I think the church becomes a crux to the Gospel. The Gospel is for everyone but church, at least in its current state, isn't.
Presidents Nelsons move toward "home learning/worshiping" and less "church" is a step in the right direction.

The Church holds the keys to the temple ordinances, which are requisite to exaltation.  Is exaltation “for everyone”?  

(I’m open to the possibility that the answer to that question may be “no”.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2019 at 10:49 PM, brotherofJared said:

This makes me wonder why anyone still goes to this church. Everyone sins.

I have to disagree. Sin is not the cause of people leaving the church. I think they leave the church because they had a question and didn't get an answer that satisfied them. People remain active in church as long as their questions do not become the focus of their satisfaction. There are a lot of questions that cannot be answered right now. Most people who face these questions and stay are willing to accept that we don't have all the answers and will wait for a brighter day. Some people just ignore their questions and some people make their questions a hill they are willing to die over. It seems that once a person is confronted with the dilemma of a void instead of an answer, the wound festers and gets infected so that after a time, all the person can see is all that is wrong or is perceived to be wrong with the church.

But there are some who leave because they can do better outside the church than they can inside the church, I mean money-wise. There is the lure of instant popularity among a group of people who are very hungry for dirty laundry. I was listening to one disaffected member who spent a good deal of time explaining to these hungry listeners about how he cheated on his wife because the Holy Ghost told him too. I had to wonder how far these people were willing to go to get their dirt. He was very popular even though he wasn't a person who I would think was trustworthy.

 

To the degree that Elder Richards (and others of his era) alleged that the primary reason for leaving the church was hidden “sin”, and by “sin” they meant affirmative sinful acts above and beyond mere intellectual curiosity—I don’t doubt that that summary was substantially correct through the 1960s and 1970s and 1980s.  I’m not sure it’s really a safe assumption in 2019.

That said:  I think if we’re spending the majority of our lives in a state of being reconciled to God and His will, and communing meaningfully with Him on a regular basis—I think that’s ordinarily going to give us the spiritual “oomph” we need to get through the questioning and philosophical/historical questions that are more wont to come up now than they were thirty or forty years ago.  

And frankly, if I’m not living in that kind of state of grace—whether due to sin or sloth or simply not having made it a priority—at the end of the day, that’s still most likely to be on me.  Quite bluntly, most of the people I’ve known who left the Church—while fine folks—were never quite as devoted Saints as they claim to have been; and I daresay most people on sites like MormonStories and its ilk are in a similar boat. 

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

The Church holds the keys to the temple ordinances, which are requisite to exaltation.  Is exaltation “for everyone”?  

(I’m open to the possibility that the answer to that question may be “no”.)

Men hold the keys, the church is just an entity that organizes people. The church can be re-organized (policy changes/3hr vs. 2hour service/ HT vs. Ministering/ lessen leadership meetings etc..), rebranded (Mormon..LDS..The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints) but the priesthood keys and gospel are permanent.

 When I talk about the church having problems its more about the social aspect/ human error and how when you gather a bunch of people together personalities will be different and cause some to be uncomfortable or offended. God doesn't shun/ label or judge us within the four walls of the chapel, other people do that. If this is what is happening in "church" then yes, church is not for everyone and church is not of God.   

Due to my work schedule a couple of years ago my bishop told me I only had to take the sacrament to maintain my temple recommend and to try attend sacrament meeting at least once a month and it didn't have to be in my ward it could be in another ward whose meeting time was more convenient. Sunday school and EQ are important but not necessary.

As technology continues to advance it is becoming possible to worship and learn the gospel of Jesus Christ in our own homes where the priesthood keys can still be ministered without the social drama found in a church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

Men hold the keys

Specifically, the leaders hold the keys.

16 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

the church is just an entity that organizes people

Not so. The Church is nothing less than the kingdom of God on the earth.

16 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

God doesn't shun/ label or judge us within the four walls of the chapel, other people do that. If this is what is happening in "church" then yes, church is not for everyone and church is not of God.

You are wrong.

16 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

Due to my work schedule a couple of years ago my bishop told me I only had to take the sacrament to maintain my temple recommend and to try attend sacrament meeting at least once a month and it didn't have to be in my ward it could be in another ward whose meeting time was more convenient. Sunday school and EQ are important but not necessary.

So since your bishop gave you specific instructions for your particular situation at that particular time, therefore you can generalize that and make broad statements about what is and is not necessary? I disbelieve you.

16 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

As technology continues to advance it is becoming possible to worship and learn the gospel of Jesus Christ in our own homes where the priesthood keys can still be ministered without the social drama found in a church.

You do not have a clue as to what you're talking about, PP. Worship and gospel learning have always been home-centered. That has been the plan, at least. But the fact that the Lord himself commanded his Saints to meet together often to pray and worship gives the lie to your statement above, "social drama" and all.

Edited by Vort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

As technology continues to advance it is becoming possible to worship and learn the gospel of Jesus Christ in our own homes where the priesthood keys can still be ministered without the social drama found in a church.

Technology has advanced to meet this criteria over 50 years ago when we first witnessed Jackie Kennedy decorating the White House in our home televisions.

Of course, sacrament meeting goes beyond the duties of a Patriarch presiding over his home and is symbolic of the Last Supper where Christ gathered his disciples to break bread.  The gathering is an important aspect of that meeting so much so that Priesthood holders can only administer the sacrament under the expressed authority of the keys of the Bishop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Technology has advanced to meet this criteria over 50 years ago when we first witnessed Jackie Kennedy decorating the White House in our home televisions.

Of course, sacrament meeting goes beyond the duties of a Patriarch presiding over his home and is symbolic of the Last Supper where Christ gathered his disciples to break bread.  The gathering is an important aspect of that meeting so much so that Priesthood holders can only administer the sacrament under the expressed authority of the keys of the Bishop.

What about the idea of wards meeting virtually online. I know lots of inactives that love the gospel but due to social drama/insecurities will not attend services. Bread and water placed in front of the computer while the priesthood with presiding bishop bless it???

I completed an online bachelors degree last year without physically meeting any teacher/counselor/ or classmate. Everything was email, forums and virtual classrooms. It was amazingly effective. This type of stuff was not available 50yrs ago.

I think HMSA health insurance started online video teleconference appointments for basic primary care issues. Imagine getting diagnosed and prescribed medicine by talking to a physician on a computer screen.

How much longer will the church continue to shrink due to lack of implementing the tools and resources that the Lord has placed right in front of our faces.

Edited by priesthoodpower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Vort said:

Specifically, the leaders hold the keys.

Not so. The Church is nothing less than the kingdom of God on the earth.

You are wrong.

So since your bishop gave you specific instructions for your particular situation at that particular time, therefore you can generalize that and make broad statements about what is and is not necessary? I disbelieve you.

You do not have a clue as to what you're talking about, PP. Worship and gospel learning have always been home-centered. That has been the plan, at least. But the fact that the Lord himself commanded his Saints to meet together often to pray and worship gives the lie to your statement above, "social drama" and all.

It is interesting how we talk about that.

You know that the early church had TWO Organizations, that of the Church and that of the Kingdom of God?  Both had the apostolic leadership (I think) but while one was divided into the leadership of stakes, the other was under the Council of 50.

At least Joseph Smith and Brigham Young had this organization working (and John Taylor for much of it though it basically ended when church leaders had to go underground).

So what is the truth?  What they said, or what is stated online currently (I am making this specific division as it is found online, but it is not necessarily something stated from the pulpit itself as far as the definition goes...which means that technically it may not have changed).

This can trouble MANY people regarding what is true or not.  I see this as a prevalent item that people bring up.  They have many questions and many times it deals directly with the differences between the Church at various times. 

This is a MAJOR problem that I see with the Church today.  There is a strong perception that the Church is calling past prophets liars.  When Brigham Young all the way to George Albert Smith declared that denying those of African descent the Priesthood as doctrine, and then we say there was no reason and that this was due to racist policies...people who can read have questions regarding this.  It seems in many people's eyes as if they are calling the statements and proclamations (for example, the proclamation of 1949 which declared the 'policy' doctrine, similar to our Proclamation to the Family today) of past Prophets as false doctrine, lies and other things.

This apparent idea that some hold indicates that the Church is trying to tear down it's own leaders in order to build upon their skulls and skeletons of the past.  At times these members who start asking these questions come to the wrong conclusions and see it as the Church contradicting itself or lying about it's past history.

Is this the right attitude to possess?

No.

But it is there.  Your own statement has one of those contradictions that people wonder about. 

I also have my own answers in this regard.  For example, when talking about contradictions between what was in the Church previously and the Church essays I will point out that the essays are written with the best ability of those faithful in the Church with a secular view in mind.  It is from this Secular view that they try to apply the techniques of the historians craft (among other things) to find the best historical dialogue.  This means that this is not necessarily written in a Faith promoting or from a point of view favorable to the early church, but one from which historically one can find basis from both pro and anti Mormon sources (and a great deal of this stuff comes from these Church essays, which I feel was one of the worst strategies the Church has ever come up with, but that's a personal take).

I think part of the problem is there is NO WHERE for them to turn to ask the HARD questions.  I think this forum can act to try to help at times, but more often they turn to other sources.  Other locations have a much larger internet presence where people can ask these types of questions.  Unfortunately, this larger presence seems to be from those who are Anti-Mormon and against the Church.  They are asking these questions, they are getting answers, but they are from the enemies of the Church rather than those who are faithful in the church.

I think this is an area the Church should work on (both from a retaining the Members and building the Members as well as a Missionary viewpoint).  It is not appropriate for Sabbath day service to have such question and answers, but people NEED to have a place where they can ASK these questions.  They are going to get them from somewhere.  If not from us, from our enemies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

What about the idea of wards meeting virtually online. I know lots of inactives that love the gospel but due to social drama/insecurities will not attend services. Bread and water placed in front of the computer while the priesthood with presiding bishop bless it???

I completed an online bachelors degree last year without physically meeting any teacher/counselor/ or classmate. Everything was email, forums and virtual classrooms. It was amazingly effective. This type of stuff was not available 50yrs ago.

I think HMSA health insurance started online video teleconference appointments for basic primary care issues. Imagine getting diagnosed and prescribed medicine by talking to a physician on a computer screen.

How much longer will the church continue to shrink due to lack of implementing the tools and resources that the Lord has placed right in front of our faces.

If God's purpose was to "increase membership" in the Church then there's no point in covenants.  But of course, simply increasing numbers is not God's purpose.  God's purpose is to bring people into covenant and that covenant REQUIRES that people serve others.  No amount of technological advancement can wipe that requirement out of the covenant.  Being able to "avoid people" is contrary to the covenant as it is nothing more than self-serving (Love Ourselves) devoid of charity (Love Others).

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

What about the idea of wards meeting virtually online.

I like this idea, but I feel sorry for people who rely on the ward for their social life. I know a ton of people who seem to have no social life outside of the church. That would be very hard on them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

I know lots of inactives that love the gospel but due to social drama/insecurities will not attend services.

One way of dealing with a deficiency or phobia is to scrupulously avoid it. Another way is to heal it. The Church generally biases toward the latter.

7 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

Bread and water placed in front of the computer while the priesthood with presiding bishop bless it???

"Just place your hands on the television and say, 'Jesus, I BELIEEEEEVE!"

7 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

How much longer will the church continue to shrink due to lack of implementing the tools and resources that the Lord has placed right in front of our faces.

Gratefully, that's not your problem to try to solve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, priesthoodpower said:

 

How much longer will the church continue to shrink due to lack of implementing the tools and resources that the Lord has placed right in front of our faces.

Not that my preference means ANYTHING, but I prefer it shrink rather than be diluted.  I think changes by the First Presidency and Quorum recently will lead to a stronger core.  I think the changes we've seen (at least in my ward) regarding missionary work will add the strong to that core.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

So what is the truth?  What they said, or what is stated online currently (I am making this specific division as it is found online, but it is not necessarily something stated from the pulpit itself as far as the definition goes...which means that technically it may not have changed).

I don't see much difference with the two organizations mentioned and how we once had the High Priest quorum ward level and Elders Quorum ward level, and now we have one quorum of high priests and elders. The truth is Article of Faith #9. It is just as plausible as the Church strengthens -- people actually live their testimony -- we may witness once again a separation of the two quorums at ward level.

So, what is truth? What is revealed in our day is the Lord's truth -- at this time -- for us. People simply need to look with an "eye of faith" to their questions, not with an "eye of doubt."

Quote

There is a strong perception that the Church is calling past prophets liars.  When Brigham Young all the way to George Albert Smith declared that denying those of African descent the Priesthood as doctrine, and then we say there was no reason and that this was due to racist policies...people who can read have questions regarding this.  It seems in many people's eyes as if they are calling the statements and proclamations (for example, the proclamation of 1949 which declared the 'policy' doctrine, similar to our Proclamation to the Family today) of past Prophets as false doctrine, lies and other things.

I do not think the Church ever said "there was no reason." I am pretty sure they specified they are unable to pinpoint/find the exact revelation/reason for the ban. These two concepts are completely different.

1) There is no reason

2) There appears to be a reason (we have statements) but are not able to find any written record that specifically lets us know. This is in fact the Church's fault for not keeping good records, which is what we are experiencing now. How many times did the Lord say, and even today, that we are to keep good records?

3) They clearly specified the decision though required the revelation from the Lord. This gives the default, if something requires revelation from the Lord to be removed, then obviously some revelation was given, although we are not able to find/locate the exact reason (again Church's fault for not having good records).

Are you able to point out where they said "there was no reason"? What I read, I sure didn't see them stating that.

Quote

I think part of the problem is there is NO WHERE for them to turn to ask the HARD questions.  I think this forum can act to try to help at times, but more often they turn to other sources.  Other locations have a much larger internet presence where people can ask these types of questions.  Unfortunately, this larger presence seems to be from those who are Anti-Mormon and against the Church.  They are asking these questions, they are getting answers, but they are from the enemies of the Church rather than those who are faithful in the church.

The first statement I don't find to be true. There is a place to turn, if they are asking and seeking with an "eye of faith." They turn to God and trust in his love and given witness.

I think this forum can help, but can also turn someone with an "eye of doubt" away real quick. If a person comes to this forum with an "eye of faith" they will have answers that they can then take to the true source of all knowledge and wisdom pertaining to the kingdom of God on earth -- the Lord.

Sadly you are correct. People are getting answers (opinions over history and taking the opinion as fact) from disaffected members or all out anti-Mormons. Because they rely on "humans" to give answers (even church leaders can only do their best, just like missionaries can only do their best) but true comfort and answers come from one source -- the Holy Spirit.

Quote

I think this is an area the Church should work on (both from a retaining the Members and building the Members as well as a Missionary viewpoint).  It is not appropriate for Sabbath day service to have such question and answers, but people NEED to have a place where they can ASK these questions.  They are going to get them from somewhere.  If not from us, from our enemies.

True, and I think the Church is working on that, at least from what I can view.

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

It is interesting how we talk about that.

And by the way, I am grateful you are part of this forum. You have a knowledge of history I can't compare with, and can present ideas in a way that are "gems" of truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MormonGator said:

I like this idea, but I feel sorry for people who rely on the ward for their social life. I know a ton of people who seem to have no social life outside of the church. That would be very hard on them. 

MG, you are a convert and you grew up learning how to be friends with anyone and everyone. Mormons grow up only associating with other Mormons and that becomes their safe haven. I am an example of that and I see it all the time.

The social possibilities are endless as the internet connects the world, current church culture boxes members in to a single ward for their social life and that is sad. What is even sadder is when ward boundaries split the ward a part, or one family moves into another ward then all of sudden we are not friends anymore. We claim to be a WORLDWIDE church but little do we realize we operate like a WARD-wide church. One of many instances of this mentality is when our Stake Pres. gets up a few times a year to chastise us for the low baptism rate in our wards, he says that we are not doing enough to talk to our neighbors, yet the people I have most influence over are co-workers or friends that live in other towns, I guess member missionary work is not that important if it doesn't benefit the ward.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

Mormons grow up only associating with other Mormons and that becomes their safe haven. I am an example of that and I see it all the time.

This statement would be more accurate by stating, "Members who grow up in areas with a higher populace of members will often associate with other members. Members who grow up in other places (i.e. California) will learn to become friends with multiple people."

Having grown up in California, none of my best friends were members. None of my neighbors were members. My high school class graduated with eleven members of the Church. Three of my best friends (non-members), whom I consider my brothers, and often refer to them as my brothers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

MG, you are a convert and you grew up learning how to be friends with anyone and everyone. Mormons grow up only associating with other Mormons and that becomes their safe haven. I am an example of that and I see it all the time.

The social possibilities are endless as the internet connects the world, current church culture boxes members in to a single ward for their social life and that is sad. What is even sadder is when ward boundaries split the ward a part, or one family moves into another ward then all of sudden we are not friends anymore. We claim to be a WORLDWIDE church but little do we realize we operate like a WARD-wide church. One of many instances of this mentality is when our Stake Pres. gets up a few times a year to chastise us for the low baptism rate in our wards, he says that we are not doing enough to talk to our neighbors, yet the people I have most influence over are co-workers or friends that live in other towns, I guess member missionary work is not that important if it doesn't benefit the ward.

 

 

You chose to not move outside your circle.  I'm not social with most members in my ward.  I'm not social with most people at work, either.  Most of my friends fall outside my normal circles because I seek out people and organizations to socialize with.    

We're supposed to minister to others.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

MG, you are a convert and you grew up learning how to be friends with anyone and everyone. Mormons grow up only associating with other Mormons and that becomes their safe haven. I am an example of that and I see it all the time.

Yup, agree totally. Though ironically I only developed that ability in college, not when I was growing up. Like I said, I agree with you totally about Mormons generally associating only with other Mormons. In fairness, most people only associate with those who share their views and values. It takes an effort to befriend those who think differently than they do, so most people don't bother trying. 

31 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

 The social possibilities are endless as the internet connects the world, current church culture boxes members in to a single ward for their social life and that is sad. What is even sadder is when ward boundaries split the ward a part, or one family moves into another ward then all of sudden we are not friends anymore.

Yup, agree totally. I've seen it happen. 
 

31 minutes ago, priesthoodpower said:

We claim to be a WORLDWIDE church but little do we realize we operate like a WARD-wide church.

Great point. Yup, agree totally. 

 

 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this