Mormon Church Trying to Keep the Wheels On

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris-Wa1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Regarding the changes to missionary activity, I wonder if the practicality and cost factors are, at least part of the issue. The success rate of knocking on doors is EXTREMELY low…so rare as to be negligible.

By the same token, I wonder if this is also going to happen with JW’s too? I have seen fewer in the last ten years than the previous ones and I live about two blocks from one one of their “churches”.
 
That’s missionary work in the US. Most if the missionaries I know go to foreign places where the culture of knocking on doors is different.
 
True…I’m only familiar with their work here.

Do you, or anyone, know what the success rate is outside the US? Are statistics available? Or is that secret stuff?
 
Tracting door to door is bad everywhere. I served my mission in Thailand. I had five baptisms in two years which was pretty good for Thailand. At least 90 percent of my work was door to door.
 
Last edited:
Obviously one of the benefits of door to door mission work is getting the occasional convert even though quite rare. What other benefits do you think the church is looking at in continuing the missions? Does it help solidify the faith for the missionaries? Teach apologetic skills? Any other that would be the justification for such an expensive endeavor?
 
Missionary door-to-door work does not produce a lot of converts. More converts come by way of members making friendships and introducing them to the church, and also by someone converting to marry a Mormon. Overall, though, conversions are declining. The church leadership used to announce the growth numbers at General Conference. They have recently stopped doing that. Also, the church does not fund the missionaries. Families pay the expenses for their kids’ missions. That way the church can instead fund high-end shopping malls, retain expensive law firms like Kirton & McConkie, and purchase large tracts of land in Florida for future Mormon utopias.
 
Same here. Different answer every time. You would think they would have that answer down by now so at least the missionaries are consistent. After all, it’s only THE most important reason why the Mormon church was needed in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Crocus said:
Is this documented?
Does everyone get to go?
Click to expand...

Look at number 67.

I think Chris was being a little bit tongue-in-cheek about the Mormon utopias, but maybe he was serious. As far as I know, there are no Mormon utopias and there are no, “I get to go, you don’t” kinds of places, however, my understanding of the New Jerusalem in Missouri is that it will be by invitation only.
 
I like the Mormons, because on the whole it seems like they do live their faith. Long ago, I lived in a small rural town, and missionaries came to my door. I took some Mormon Bible study with them (I wasn’t a Catholic at the time). They were such nice boys and so intent on their evangelizing. But what was I supposed to do if they managed to convert me? Move? The closest Mormon church was probably a couple of hundred miles away. So it’s not clear to me why the Mormons send their missionaries out to convert people who can’t possibly attend their church anyway.

But I did admire those guys, plodding up and down rural-suburban roads, preaching their word. I told my husband that if there was a Mormon church around, I would think about joining. Well, he was a history major, and he went into Smith and bronze plates, and he said if you join the Mormon church, you have to swallow all of this unlikely history. And I said that people believe what they want to believe. In any case, as I said, no Mormon church around, so it was all academic. But I did enjoy my sessions with those wonderful boys.
 
Last edited:
Yes, you must have a testimony of the restoration in order to be a Mormon. Acceptance of the great apostasy, which never happened, and the subsequent restoration, which never happened, is foundational to Mormon beliefs.
 
That’s a good question. I think they believe that all authority was lost after the last Apostle died and everything was corrupt after that. But why use a bible that was corrupt? And they believe that John continues to walk the earth with 3 Nephites? Sounds like a contradiction. I could be wrong.
 
lilypadrees said:
What do Mormons consider the great apostasy to be?
Click to expand...
They don’t even know. You’ll get as many different answers as people that you ask. It’s a huge boondoggle.
Apache75 said:
I think they believe that all authority was lost after the last Apostle died and everything was corrupt after that. But why use a bible that was corrupt? And they believe that John continues to walk the earth with 3 Nephites? Sounds like a contradiction. I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And you’ve only scratched the surface. According to Mormons, the last Apostle never died. He remains on the earth today. If he had the priesthood and still has it, then it was never taken from the earth. Same with the three Nephites. So there was no need for a restoration. Then Mormons get into this thing about how he/they had the priesthood, but not the authority, or didn’t have the keys, etc. But then John, along with the angels Peter and James, gave the priesthood and the keys to Joseph and Oliver . . . the keys which he didn’t have to give in the first place. And John was described as an angel while he was and is still a mortal. Ugh . . . SMH.

And it gets deeper . . . much deeper. It’s like I said in an earlier post:

“Oh what a tangled web we weave. When first we practice to deceive.”

The “great apostasy” is a great lie.
 
Last edited:
This was on Wikipedia, which, I know is not always a credible source, but someone with the time might be able to verify if this is written from a Mormon authorized source or not. Anyway, it says this:

“The LDS Church declares that all Priesthood leaders with authority to conduct and perpetuate church affairs were either martyred, taken from the earth, or began to teach impure doctrines, causing a break in the necessary apostolic succession.”
  1. The LDS Church does not believe that the Apostle John was martyred, so it couldn’t be that one.
  2. The LDS Church does not believe that the Apostle John was taken from the earth, but was allowed to tarry upon the earth until the Second Coming, at which point, he will be changed from mortality to immortality at the twinkling of an eye. (Same with the Three Nephites). So it couldn’t be that one.
  3. I’m fairly confident that the LDS Church does not believe that the Apostle John “began to teach impure doctrines”, so it couldn’t be that one, either.
What’s left?
 
Where the heck did the Mormon story about the Apostle John continuing to live until the Second Coming originate? I mean, if John is still roaming the earth, why would he go into hiding? Or did he bump his head and forget who he is? If there was one of the original Twelve Apostles still alive and roaming the earth, I would think that would be a pretty big deal. Sounds more like the plot of Highlander.
 
Are they aware that humans don’t and cannot become angels? They are completely different from us mere humans.
 
No, Mormons do not see angels the same way most of Christianity and Judaism does. The traditional understanding of angels is that they are an entirely separate race of beings created by God as servants. They never were and will never be humans. In Mormonism, angels are resurrected humans or people in heaven who have not yet received mortal bodies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top