Anti-Mormonism ineffective? So says bsix

[_Who Knows]

D'oh, you are correct. I estimate 12,000,000 Mormons and 6,000,00000 world population, which equals .002, which equals .2%.

I guess the secret's out: I suck at math.

Thanks A-man for setting me straight.

You should have stuck with your first answer. It was probably more accurate.

[_Sethbag]

There are actually more like 6.5billion people, and only more like 3.5million active LDS, which makes .00054 of the population, or .05%. I'd say Guy was closer the first time. 99.95% of people in the world are not active Mormons.

Anyhow, it's hard to understand why they claim anti-mormon stuff is so ineffective when the overwhelming majority of "anti-mormons" participating on that forum are in fact former TBMs who got wise thanks to anti-mormon material. And by anti-mormon I mean things that aren't puff pieces in favor of the church. I was actually tipped over the edge by Larson, Compton, and Quinn, with most of that being Larson and Compton.

[_asbestosman]

which makes .00054 of the population, or .05%. I'd say Guy was closer the first time.

He was closer the second time because the order of magnitude of the error was smaller.
.05 / .001 = 50
.2 / .05 = 4

It is true, however, that the absolute error was smaller the first time, but I think order of magnitude is the appropriate measure here because otherwise 0% would be closer to the truth than .2%, but something just seems terribly wrong with that.

Anyhow, it's hard to understand why they claim anti-mormon stuff is so ineffective when the overwhelming majority of "anti-mormons" participating on that forum are in fact former TBMs who got wise thanks to anti-mormon material.

I wouldn't claim that anti-mormon stuff is ineffective, but I think the participation is skewed by self-selection. People who experienced it (and indeed conintue to interact with family/friends who believe it) will be more likely to care about participating on message boards.

And by anti-mormon I mean things that aren't puff pieces in favor of the church. I was actually tipped over the edge by Larson, Compton, and Quinn, with most of that being Larson and Compton.

So what do you think will be the effect of Rought Stone Rolling? Will it be similar to the others?

[_Sethbag]

I think Rough Stone Rolling will be difficult for some people, but for a lot of the kind of people who will read it, it has enough of a positive spin on things to help them rationalize it. The Compton and Larson books utterly lacked this kind of spin. Things in RSR like the Lord using peepstones and treasure-seeking to "train" Joseph how to be a prophet take something that should be absurd to people and cast it in a light of "hmm, well this smart guy who wrote this book obviously knows a lot more about this stuff than I do, and he's OK with it, so...", if you know what I mean.

[_CaliforniaKid]

It's kind of depressing to me that CaliforniaKid didn't dispute my comment about the number of "fundamentalist kooks" in his congregation. I was kinda' hoping for a graph showing that I had the wrong impression about the majority of EVs. It's a bummer, man.

Well, most of the people in my congregation aren't "kooks" in the sense of being adversarial, right-wing, war-mongering, gay-bashing, brain-washing crazies like the ones who secretly distribute inaccurate anti-Mormon DVDs or hold anti-gay rallies. But they do tend to hold a belief in biblical inerrancy, which makes them fundamentalist kooks in the sense you used it in your post above. Just wanted to clarify, lest I cause unnecessary alarmism. ;-)

[_Bryan Inks]

Yes, Utah Mormons tend to be a "different" variety of LDS. It seems to be primarily social for them. If they do not care about the theological arguments against it, it might be because they really don't care about theology at all. It is all about getting along with their social group.

It's probably the case for those who have grown up in the church. And utah just happens to have a ton of those.

Those who have converted probably actually cared about the theology enough to join the church, so the reverse would probably be true.

Those who grew up in the church probably just never care one way or the other - it's just the lifestyle they grew up with and are comfortable with. I can't tell you how many times I heard in the MTC "I never had a REAL testimony until I got here to the MTC" (in other words "I didn't really care until I came here"). And even then, I wonder how many of them were just phonies - saying it because everyone else was saying it. I did. ;)

To some degree I agree with what you are saying, however, there are exceptions to this in a lot of ways. Myself, Keene, a mutual friend, and a 14 year old girl that started debating with me are some quick examples that pop into mind.

I do know, having been in Utah sine 1998, that of all the kids that I grew up with, only one or two of them are still active, believing members. And one of them believes that it's a crock but stays active for his parent's sake.

[_Mephitus]

Well, at the time of moving here to utah, i was still a believer. And yes, it is a very different attitude towards Mormonism here. Its very deeply ingrained in the social structure and visibility of practice (both seeing others and being seen). And was one of the first things that impressioned me that there where really "differences" in non-utah vs utah Mormons.

[_Who Knows]

He was closer the second time because the order of magnitude of the error was smaller.
.05 / .001 = 50
.2 / .05 = 4

You're right. I was thinking he said .001 or .1%.

[_Who Knows]

And ABMan - couldn't this be the 'logic' that you require?

Part of the reason we come to earth (we are told in the LDS church) is to 'prove' ourselves, to be tested against god's commandments.

What good is this 'test' if > 99% of the people who come to earth, don't even really get to take it?

The LDS response might be something like 'well that's why we have work for the dead - so that everyone will get the opportunity in the next life'. But then, can we really say this life is the test then?

It just doesn't add up logically.

hopefully i explained what i was thinking well enough.

[_asbestosman]

And ABMan - couldn't this be the 'logic' that you require?

Part of the reason we come to earth (we are told in the LDS church) is to 'prove' ourselves, to be tested against god's commandments.

What good is this 'test' if > 99% of the people who come to earth, don't even really get to take it?

The LDS response might be something like 'well that's why we have work for the dead - so that everyone will get the opportunity in the next life'. But then, can we really say this life is the test then?

It just doesn't add up logically.

hopefully I explained what I was thinking well enough.

It's not quite what I'm looking for. It's not solid enough because it relies too heavily on our opinions about significance.

I think much of the world has heard of the church and many more people have had an opportunity to learn of it thanks to the Internet, missionaries, and so on. I think it's up to each individual to search for the truth.

Furthermore, I think people can also take part of the test without taking all of it. Perhaps they didn't realize that the test comes in multiple parts. Again I think much of the burden is on them to discover this, but for those who have not, they will still benefit from the experiences they had and the tests they did take. There are many people who about the Bible and that is at least a very important step.

Finally, I'm not so sure that this life should be viewed as a test so much as an exercise or a learning experience. I think almost everyone can learn something by coming to Earth. Now granted, there are many who die too quickly to learn much. There are also many who have various mental challenges. Perhaps the reason the plan doesn't seem to fit for them is because they aren't really able to understand the message in the first place, so the message is given more specifically with us as the audience in mind -- people who have learned many things from Earth life.

Look at something more along the lines of my response to the Joseph Smith quote grampa75 gave us from Joseph Smith about a ring and the eternity of spirits. But instead it would need to be a more much more fundamental.