Why So Few Faithful?

[_maklelan]

I was browsing the threads here last week and couldn't help but wonder why there are so few faithful LDS people frequenting this board. We have a small handful of LDS posters who continue to post here, and a few posters in the middle who appear to honestly be objective about things, but for the most part the threads are self-congratulatory and self-indulgent anti-Mormon accusation and speculation. I admit that some of the issues are ones that I've wondered about myself, but upon further inspection the threads often fail to produce anything in the way of progress. Much of what is presented here is reactionary whining. We get it. Can we discuss something important?

There are very intelligent people here who have experience in many areas, but there are so few real investigations into anything incredibly relevant. I think that that lack of real discussion that is of value to both Mormons and non is a cause for so few LDS posters. The other cause, in my opinion, would be the antagonism toward, and lack of support for, opinions that are not in line with those of the proprietors and most outspoken posters on this board. Those outspoken people can often spoil a decent thread for others and reduce a poster's desire to respond.

My attendance here and at MAD has waned of late because of my rapidly shrinking free time, but I would love to see more LDS posters here, and I think the first thing that needs to happen is more intelligent discussions, less self-congratulation, and less bullying. Just my thoughts.

[_Bond...James Bond]

There are quite a few lightweight threads on MAD too. I think that's just the nature of message boards. People want to talk about lightweight stuff sometime.

This board is a haven for people to bring their complaints about other boards. If MAD wasn't so unfair with the banning stick people would be over there debating rather than here complaining.

Bullying? Like the MAD mods constantly do with their threats, warnings, suspensions and bannings? Not to mention Pahoran and Juliann and the rest who are protected by the Mods? At least here it's just the other posters who act the jerk every now and again. The MD mods are at least usually above the fray.

As to the lack of LDS posters: invite them! I actually spend time at a few other places throwing out mormondiscussions.com as a place to debate stuff freely. Word of mouth is the way message boards grow. Juliann invited many of the LDS people from ZLMB to FAIR/MAD. You could invite a few this way if you wish.

[_Yoda]

I would love to see a larger variety of faithful LDS posters on this board. Mak, if you have any friends, please feel free to tell them about us.

Frankly, I could do without the bullying as well. I don't like it from either side.

[_harmony]

Okay, let's think this through.

What does it mean, to want more LDS posters here? What is this site like, for TBM LDS posters?

1. Bearing testimony isn't enough. LDS posters have to really know their stuff, because many of the non-LDS posters and some of the fencesitters know the very same stuff really well and aren't afraid or intimidated by LDS posters bearing their testimonies. Unlike in the mission field, the bearing of testimony here is a last ditch effort that constitutes admitting the testimony bearer just lost the debate. Personal testimony is worthless here.

2. Expect everything to be challenged here. LDS posters have to be unafraid of others dissecting their beliefs, feelings, hormones, etc. Even the most basic beliefs are challenged here. Few people's faith can withstand that kind of microscopic inspection day after day. Those that can are usually the battlescarred.

3. LDS posters have to be unembarrassed by past leaders' actions and speeches. And they have to give the critics a free hand in exposing the stupidity, gullibility, and manipulativeness of past leaders to the light of honest discussion, even when it makes them uncomfortable.

4. LDS posters have to cut non-LDS posters some slack in the language department. If a poster is intimidated by the occasional F word, this website is not a comfortable place.

5. LDS posters have to understand that LDS apologetics is their worst enemy. It's not the critics that cause the most embarrassment; it's the apologists.

6. LDS posters have to know church history, church governance, doctrine, policy and personnel, and they have to know how to defend it. Most think they know it all, but it's not until they get on the debate battlefield that they begin to realize the holes in their own arguments.

I give you props for continuing to return, Mak. Most are too chicken to venture out into the real world, where the arguments aren't tempered and the debates aren't moderated. [/i]

[_Jersey Girl]

mak

and I think the first thing that needs to happen is more intelligent discussions

Well, then start them.

Jersey Girl

[_maklelan]

Okay, let's think this through.

What does it mean, to want more LDS posters here? What is this site like, for TBM LDS posters?

1. Bearing testimony isn't enough. LDS posters have to really know their stuff, because many of the non-LDS posters and some of the fencesitters know the very same stuff really well and aren't afraid or intimidated by LDS posters bearing their testimonies. Unlike in the mission field, the bearing of testimony here is a last ditch effort that constitutes admitting the testimony bearer just lost the debate. Personal testimony is worthless here.

I agree, which is why I've never bothered to use my testimony as any kind of leverage in a debate.

2. Expect everything to be challenged here. LDS posters have to be unafraid of others dissecting their beliefs, feelings, hormones, etc. Even the most basic beliefs are challenged here. Few people's faith can withstand that kind of microscopic inspection day after day. Those that can are usually the battlescarred.

Well, I take issue with you saying this, because when people come here and challenge the most basic presumptions of your weltanshauung you can get pretti irritated. Like below:

3. LDS posters have to be unembarrassed by past leaders' actions and speeches. And they have to give the critics a free hand in exposing the stupidity, gullibility, and manipulativeness of past leaders to the light of honest discussion, even when it makes them uncomfortable.

If I challenge this gross generalization I am accused of being a blind-faith, morgbot, lack of objectivity moron. The door has to swing both ways. I don't mind having the basic assumptions of my beliefs challenged, but when those people get huffy about their criticisms being challenged I get annoyed.

4. LDS posters have to cut non-LDS posters some slack in the language department. If a poster is intimidated by the occasional F word, this website is not a comfortable place.

You can't follow your own rules?

5. LDS posters have to understand that LDS apologetics is their worst enemy. It's not the critics that cause the most embarrassment; it's the apologists.

I believe when you make such banal generalizations you make your argument less respectable.

6. LDS posters have to know church history, church governance, doctrine, policy and personnel, and they have to know how to defend it. Most think they know it all, but it's not until they get on the debate battlefield that they begin to realize the holes in their own arguments.

The same can be said of you and your pseudo-emic perspective about the church.

I give you props for continuing to return, Mak. Most are too chicken to venture out into the real world, where the arguments aren't tempered and the debates aren't moderated. [/i]

Words don't scare me. I could really care less about people using bad language, but what I grow tired of is the same tired arguments and whining.

[_harmony]

Okay, let's think this through.

What does it mean, to want more LDS posters here? What is this site like, for TBM LDS posters?

1. Bearing testimony isn't enough. LDS posters have to really know their stuff, because many of the non-LDS posters and some of the fencesitters know the very same stuff really well and aren't afraid or intimidated by LDS posters bearing their testimonies. Unlike in the mission field, the bearing of testimony here is a last ditch effort that constitutes admitting the testimony bearer just lost the debate. Personal testimony is worthless here.

I agree, which is why I've never bothered to use my testimony as any kind of leverage in a debate.

2. Expect everything to be challenged here. LDS posters have to be unafraid of others dissecting their beliefs, feelings, hormones, etc. Even the most basic beliefs are challenged here. Few people's faith can withstand that kind of microscopic inspection day after day. Those that can are usually the battlescarred.

Well, I take issue with you saying this, because when people come here and challenge the most basic presumptions of your weltanshauung you can get pretti irritated. Like below:

3. LDS posters have to be unembarrassed by past leaders' actions and speeches. And they have to give the critics a free hand in exposing the stupidity, gullibility, and manipulativeness of past leaders to the light of honest discussion, even when it makes them uncomfortable.

If I challenge this gross generalization I am accused of being a blind-faith, morgbot, lack of objectivity moron. The door has to swing both ways. I don't mind having the basic assumptions of my beliefs challenged, but when those people get huffy about their criticisms being challenged I get annoyed.

4. LDS posters have to cut non-LDS posters some slack in the language department. If a poster is intimidated by the occasional F word, this website is not a comfortable place.

You can't follow your own rules?

5. LDS posters have to understand that LDS apologetics is their worst enemy. It's not the critics that cause the most embarrassment; it's the apologists.

I believe when you make such banal generalizations you make your argument less respectable.

6. LDS posters have to know church history, church governance, doctrine, policy and personnel, and they have to know how to defend it. Most think they know it all, but it's not until they get on the debate battlefield that they begin to realize the holes in their own arguments.

The same can be said of you and your pseudo-emic perspective about the church.

I give you props for continuing to return, Mak. Most are too chicken to venture out into the real world, where the arguments aren't tempered and the debates aren't moderated. [/i]

Words don't scare me. I could really care less about people using bad language, but what I grow tired of is the same tired arguments and whining.

You asked why LDS don't post here as a general rule. I told you my perspective. If you don't like it, that's not my problem. And no, I don't have a problem with language. I live and work in the real world, not the artificial atmosphere at BYU.

And Mak... one more time: I'm as LDS as you are. My TR is as good as yours. My testimony and faithfulness is as deep as yours. That I don't revere what you revere is not a fault or a problem; it's simply a different worldview.

And if I have to tell you what apologists and apologetic arguments are embarrassments, you haven't been around long enough. Stick around. Read Wade in a debate with Mr Scratch, read Brant in a debate with Trixie/beastie, read Daniel when he's in a bad mood, and then maybe you'll learn what embarrassment really feels like.

[_maklelan]

You asked. I told you my perspective. If you don't like it, that's not my problem.

I know. And I'm just responding to perspectives that I believe highlight exactly what I was pointing out in my original post.

And Mak... one more time: I'm as LDS as you are. My TR is as good as yours.

No it's not. It may get you in, but know just as well as God that you're not worthy to hold it. You would have to lie to get it renewed. You openly oppose the teachings of the church.

My testimony and faithfulness is as deep as yours. That I don't revere what you revere is not a fault or a problem; it's simply a different worldview.

That's laughable.

And if I have to tell you what apologists and apologetic arguments are embarrassments, you haven't been around long enough. Stick around. Read Wade in a debate with Mr Scratch, read Brant in a debate with Trixie/beastie, read Daniel when he's in a bad mood, and then maybe you'll learn what embarrassment really feels like.

You think I give a crap about your perception of apologetics? You can't even lie to my face without exposing yourself.

[_Gazelam]

I love the looks I get when I tell people in my ward that I defend the church on the internet against anti's. Its hard to describe, its like I just said the F word in church. I guess the internet has a bad reputation or something. I keep waiting for the one who will ask where I post and will want to join in. Hasnt happened yet.

[_harmony]

No it's not. It may get you in, but know just as well as God that you're not worthy to hold it. You would have to lie to get it renewed. You openly oppose the teachings of the church.

No, I openly oppose the stupidity of church leaders, now and in the past. You need to look at the TR questions again, Mak. There's nothing in there that says I have to revere leaders, past or present, that I have to put Joseph Smith or any other prophet on a pedestal and ignore his character, that I have to worship him or any other prophet. This is still Christ's church, and as a member of it, you are out of line. You have no stewardship over me, and you are not qualified by stewardship or proximity to call me to repentence, which is one of the things that makes me doubt your story. You've no more been in ward leadership than Vegas has. If you had been, you'd know you have stepped over the line into judging that which is not yours to judge. You are not worthy to judge my worthiness, because you are not my bishop. You are not worthy to judge my honesty, because you hold no stewardship over me. And you've never seen me oppose the teachings of the church. I oppose the teachings of men, not the teachings of God. That you cannot tell the difference tells me a lot about your lack of both perception and personal revelation.