Runtu wrote:I wasn't making a point, at least not the one you think. I was genuinely shocked, and for whatever reason, I shared it on this thread--probably because I thought of this discussion when I saw it. I am often lacking in judgment, and this may have been the case.
We all fall and I am the poster boy for big mistakes. My ego drives me off a cliff sometimes. The rocks below insure that I remember my error and supply the motivation to do better. Sorry to hammer you on this but it did seem out of place. We all feel our friends sorrow when it happens and maybe in some way you were reaching out for some kind of support. Your heart may have been in the right place but your words rang real shallow.
bcspace wrote: Jensen insists critics overstate the LDS exodus over the church’s history.
“I have heard that our overall activity, especially in the United States, is as good as it’s ever been,” he said. “To say we are experiencing some Titanic-like wave of apostasy is inaccurate.”
I have highlighted the three most important words in Jensen's quote.
He could put it this way and still be technically accurate and honest without saying from whom he heard it or whether he agrees with it.
He then goes on to overstate the case and disagree with his own intentional overstatement. No, there is no "Titanic-like wave of apostasy." But he made it super huge in order to be able to deny it with a straight face.
(See "Straw Man Argument.")
The most troubling thing to me is no wave was involved with the sinking of the Titanic. Perhaps he should have said there is no "Poseidon-like wave of apostasy."
All the Best!
--Consiglieri
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)
consiglieri wrote: The most troubling thing to me is no wave was involved with the sinking of the Titanic. Perhaps he should have said there is no "Poseidon-like wave of apostasy."
All the Best!
--Consiglieri
Or maybe it was a typo and titanic was not meant to be capitalized.
"Remember that every typo helps a errorist."
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
Franktalk wrote:"The records of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints show membership growth every decade since its beginning in the 1830s. Following initial growth rates that averaged 10% to 25% per year in the 1830s through 1850s, it grew at about 4% per year through the last four decades of the 19th century. After a steady slowing of growth in the first four decades of the 20th century to a rate of about 2% per year in the 1930s (the Great Depression years), growth boomed to an average of 6% per year for the decade around 1960, staying around 4% to 5% through 1990. After 1990, average annual growth again slowed steadily to a rate around 2.5% for the first decade of the 21st century, still double the world population growth rate of 1.2% for the same period. Rodney Stark predicts that it could become a major world religion by the end of the 21st century if the current growth trend of between 30% and 50% per decade continues.[15]"
Always best to actually place numbers on speculation. Seems to me that the growth is still happening. Oh I admit that some go and some stay. Why must we concentrate on the ones leaving? Is there a message from the staying as well? Can we hear from both sides?
I agree. It would be a lot easier to have a discussion about membership and activity levels if the church were forthcoming with the statistical information at its disposal. What are the year-over year numbers for Sacrament meeting attendance (say, over the last 20 years)? The church has them but does not reveal them. What are the numbers for tithing revenues? What are the numbers for temple recommends issued? For Aaronic priesthood ordinations and Melchizidek priesthood ordinations? For temple marriages? For excommunications and resignations? The church has all these numbers but does not reveal any of them. Why not? If everything is as rosy as the baptism numbers suggest, why not release these other metrics so we can all see how well the church is holding onto its converts and how active the membership is? What possible harm could come from releasing these numbers?
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
Equality wrote:I agree. It would be a lot easier to have a discussion about membership and activity levels if the church were forthcoming with the statistical information at its disposal. What are the year-over year numbers for Sacrament meeting attendance (say, over the last 20 years)? The church has them but does not reveal them. What are the numbers for tithing revenues? What are the numbers for temple recommends issued? For Aaronic priesthood ordinations and Melchizidek priesthood ordinations? For temple marriages? For excommunications and resignations? The church has all these numbers but does not reveal any of them. Why not? If everything is as rosy as the baptism numbers suggest, why not release these other metrics so we can all see how well the church is holding onto its converts and how active the membership is? What possible harm could come from releasing these numbers?
Why would the church provide the data, to what end would it be released? If the only purpose is to supply ammunition to the enemy then it would make sense not to release it. I don't care about the numbers and don't know any member that would care as well. It does appear that you care. The world hates Christ and hates His Church. Why would the Church help the world? It makes no sense.
Franktalk wrote: Why would the church provide the data, to what end would it be released? If the only purpose is to supply ammunition to the enemy then it would make sense not to release it. I don't care about the numbers and don't know any member that would care as well. It does appear that you care. The world hates Christ and hates His Church. Why would the Church help the world? It makes no sense.
It appears that not releasing the data gives their enemies just as much to talk about and allows these "enemies" to project membership data without worrying that the Church will contradict them. The only reason not releasing the numbers would better protect the Church is if they have something to hide.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
The Mormon church should just reform the membership roles. IF they haven't seen someone in some period of time (say a year), just automatically kick them off the roles. IF they want to come back and be reinstated, they can ask to be. Membership should be a privilege, not a trap and people don't value free or cheap either. For example, I was an ex-mormon atheist and living far outside the "norms" of Mormonism for almost 10 years. During that period, I was hardly a good example of what being a Mormon is all about and certainly an embarrassment to the church. But, as far as the church was concerned, I was still a Mormon on their roles. IF I were an "active" Mormon, I would find that highly insulting and ridiculous.
Also, there is no good reason for the church to not report the "true" numbers of members of the church. I'm sure it is probably around a million "active" members anyway, and allowing their critics (a.k.a. as "enemies" in Mormon-lingo) to conjecture about that number is just as destructive.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Themis wrote:Interesting that this comes out now. I suspect that drifting's source is accurate. The problem is that Jensen does not give any numbers, so it is very subjective, and he probably defines titanic quite differently then Kirtland apostasy. It also sounds like he is back peddling a bit after seeing the reaction it is having. Reassure everyone like bcpace that all is well.
The actual numbers would be interesting (a secret?). If it's only 5%, that means that there is no one left in 20 years.
Exactly. Looking at it another way, If 3% of faithful, BIC members between the ages of 20 and 40 leave each year, then the chances are about 50/50 that a BIC member will make it to age 40 still believing.
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.
It's funny that when Jensen said the Church was suffering a great apostasy recently, apologists went to great lengths to discount what he was saying, mitigate what he was saying and reinterpret the words he sed to try and get him to appear to say something else.
Now he reverses his opinion and suddenly his words are concrete, in context and he means exactly what he says.
The Apostles speak as Prophets when they agree with the apologists, at all other times they are speaking only as men...
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Equality wrote:I agree. It would be a lot easier to have a discussion about membership and activity levels if the church were forthcoming with the statistical information at its disposal. What are the year-over year numbers for Sacrament meeting attendance (say, over the last 20 years)? The church has them but does not reveal them. What are the numbers for tithing revenues? What are the numbers for temple recommends issued? For Aaronic priesthood ordinations and Melchizidek priesthood ordinations? For temple marriages? For excommunications and resignations? The church has all these numbers but does not reveal any of them. Why not? If everything is as rosy as the baptism numbers suggest, why not release these other metrics so we can all see how well the church is holding onto its converts and how active the membership is? What possible harm could come from releasing these numbers?
Why would the church provide the data, to what end would it be released? If the only purpose is to supply ammunition to the enemy then it would make sense not to release it. I don't care about the numbers and don't know any member that would care as well. It does appear that you care. The world hates Christ and hates His Church. Why would the Church help the world? It makes no sense.
Earlier in this thread you said the following:
Franktalk wrote:"The records of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints show membership growth every decade since its beginning in the 1830s. Following initial growth rates that averaged 10% to 25% per year in the 1830s through 1850s, it grew at about 4% per year through the last four decades of the 19th century. After a steady slowing of growth in the first four decades of the 20th century to a rate of about 2% per year in the 1930s (the Great Depression years), growth boomed to an average of 6% per year for the decade around 1960, staying around 4% to 5% through 1990. After 1990, average annual growth again slowed steadily to a rate around 2.5% for the first decade of the 21st century, still double the world population growth rate of 1.2% for the same period. Rodney Stark predicts that it could become a major world religion by the end of the 21st century if the current growth trend of between 30% and 50% per decade continues.[15]"
Always best to actually place numbers on speculation. Seems to me that the growth is still happening. Oh I admit that some go and some stay. Why must we concentrate on the ones leaving? Is there a message from the staying as well? Can we hear from both si
So, first you quote baptismal statistics and growth projections, arguing that doing so is "always best" rather than relying on speculation. Then you say that you don't care about the numbers and you don't think the church should release the numbers in its possession, speculating that doing so would only provide ammunition to the church's enemies. Do you see any contradiction in your two posts that I have quoted here? You argue against the critics' speculation about retention and activity rates in the church, you say numbers are better than speculation, and then you turn around and argue that speculation is preferable to the actual numbers. That doesn't make any sense to me. If the critics are wrong, and the church is actually experiencing net growth and an increase in member activity, why not prove the critics wrong by releasing the numbers?
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo