There used to be seven sacraments: Baptism (cleansing the soul), Eucharist (Communion via the Lord's Supper), Confirmation (an outpouring of the Holy Spirit), Reconciliation (confession of sins), Anointing of the Sick, Marriage, and Holy Orders.
Through the process of restoring all things, Mormons have whittled it down to just the Eucharist and simply called it "the Sacrament". It is a weekly reminder to obey your Church leaders and to promptly pay your tithing. The tithing must flow.
There are some signs that membership is ticking back up.
It may be wishful thinking to believe that people as a whole will continue getting smarter and rejecting ridiculous stories like Mormonism. It’s just as possible that people fall into misinformation more now that internet propaganda is everywhere.
The Russians are great examples of just how effective a well funded organization can be at manipulating populations of people. The Mormon church is doing everything it can to share that success.
What are you referring to regarding membership ticking up?
There are some signs that membership is ticking back up.
It may be wishful thinking to believe that people as a whole will continue getting smarter and rejecting ridiculous stories like Mormonism. It’s just as possible that people fall into misinformation more now that internet propaganda is everywhere.
The Russians are great examples of just how effective a well funded organization can be at manipulating populations of people. The Mormon church is doing everything it can to share that success.
What are you referring to regarding membership ticking up?
Two thoughts, first I think it very likely the leaders of the church remain convinced that it is true. People believe things like that.
Why more temples? I have been puzzled by that but have had a thought. I have recently been very puzzled by peoples reaction to Peterson's attitude towards senior mission, an attitude that seems reasonable and unremarkable to me. I have been even more baffled by peoples reaction to the Frenchy's grave affair. Again Peterson's approach seems reasonable and unremarkable to me. It had not crossed my mind that work for the dead was some sort of emergency. But I am thinking of the fact that when I was an active member the nearest temple was some 600 miles away. I never had occasion to participate in baptism for the dead and felt no pressure to do so. Yet many people here seem to understand it as a pressing obligation. There are many more temples now which would facilitate the sense of obligation to go over and over and over again. It is ok to me that I missed all that but I suspect that the increased participation now has some effect of keeping people closer in line.Believing leadership would've course view that as a valid investment.
I might be wrong ( one of my hands isn't working lol. I be typing and the hand wasn't pressing the letters lol don't worry, I know what it is, just an odd experience) but isn't there a thing about how there is supposed to be a temple within 72 hours walking distance of every member so that in the end times we can get to a temple with our 72h preparedness pack in tow?
This isn't ticking up or down. If you remove the outliers caused by social distancing and closing churches, it's actually consistent. They did well to achieve those figures during COVID.
This isn't ticking up or down. If you remove the outliers caused by social distancing and closing churches, it's actually consistent. They did well to achieve those figures during COVID.
It's definitely nothing to write home about. But it's not the rapid decline that most anti/exMormons would wish for.
This isn't ticking up or down. If you remove the outliers caused by social distancing and closing churches, it's actually consistent. They did well to achieve those figures during COVID.
It's definitely nothing to write home about. But it's not the rapid decline that most anti/exMormons would wish for.
Doesn't look like a decline at all. You can't include the data during COVID lockdowns in an analysis because those were exceptional circumstances. If you are going to include them as evidence of a decline then you need to look at similar data for other organisations to see what effect COVID had on growth across the board. If you take a look at any organisation that studies the rate of growth of members, say growth in a different religious sect just for consistency's sake, did their rate of grown also dip by a similar figure? If so then the data change is not likely to be caused by anything to do with the church itself. But we already have a very plausible explanation for that dip.
It's definitely nothing to write home about. But it's not the rapid decline that most anti/exMormons would wish for.
Doesn't look like a decline at all. You can't include the data during COVID lockdowns in an analysis because those were exceptional circumstances. If you are going to include them as evidence of a decline then you need to look at similar data for other organisations to see what effect COVID had on growth across the board. If you take a look at any organisation that studies the rate of growth of members, say growth in a different religious sect just for consistency's sake, did their rate of grown also dip by a similar figure? If so then the data change is not likely to be caused by anything to do with the church itself. But we already have a very plausible explanation for that dip.
I might be wrong ( one of my hands isn't working lol. I be typing and the hand wasn't pressing the letters lol don't worry, I know what it is, just an odd experience) but isn't there a thing about how there is supposed to be a temple within 72 hours walking distance of every member so that in the end times we can get to a temple with our 72h preparedness pack in tow?
Two thoughts, first I think it very likely the leaders of the church remain convinced that it is true. People believe things like that.
Why more temples? I have been puzzled by that but have had a thought. I have recently been very puzzled by peoples reaction to Peterson's attitude towards senior mission, an attitude that seems reasonable and unremarkable to me. I have been even more baffled by peoples reaction to the Frenchy's grave affair. Again Peterson's approach seems reasonable and unremarkable to me. It had not crossed my mind that work for the dead was some sort of emergency. But I am thinking of the fact that when I was an active member the nearest temple was some 600 miles away. I never had occasion to participate in baptism for the dead and felt no pressure to do so. Yet many people here seem to understand it as a pressing obligation. There are many more temples now which would facilitate the sense of obligation to go over and over and over again. It is ok to me that I missed all that but I suspect that the increased participation now has some effect of keeping people closer in line.Believing leadership would've course view that as a valid investment.
I might be wrong ( one of my hands isn't working lol. I be typing and the hand wasn't pressing the letters lol don't worry, I know what it is, just an odd experience) but isn't there a thing about how there is supposed to be a temple within 72 hours walking distance of every member so that in the end times we can get to a temple with our 72h preparedness pack in tow?
I could explain that the 600 miles to nearest temple was the case over 50 years ago. There is one about 50 miles distance now. Three in the state of Washington when there were none in the time I was thinking of.
I have never heard of a 72 hour preparedness pack.I suppose one could walk a pack the 50 miles in 72 hours but why on earth would someone do that?
