NOM

I listened to part of a MS podcast with some Snufferites. They sound like they believe Denver is the Man to solve the problems of the apostate church. Well educated life long Mormons. They have some real conviction.

I am wondering if this latest splinter group is gaining traction. To me this is a much bigger threat to the church than all us NOMs. Someone who gives the people some substNce to their belief.

1smartdodog wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:58 am To me this is a much bigger threat to the church than all us NOMs. Someone who gives the people some substNce to their belief.

I doubt it. Overall demographic shifts are not towards more religion. Sure there are always those who will switch from one church to another, though that's hugely dominated by those who switch from one denomination within the same general religious framework. Switching from Lutheran to Methodist would be typical or even to Evangelical, but not switching to Islam, Mormonism, or Snufferism. If you're a member of the Brighamite church, LDS, there really isn't another ready home. Mainstream Christians can just go down the next block and find something similar enough to what they're used to. For Mormons, there isn't anything else comparable. Snuffer offers something quite different. It will appeal to some Mormons, but it's probably only a slim minority.

It's possible that Snuffer is a bigger threat to the Church than NOM is. NOM is pretty inconsequential as far as threats go. We'll even offer support and encouragement to people who find meaning in staying. A Salt Lake Tribune article from August estimates Snuffer followers from 5,000 to 10,0000, which is noticeable but not very significant. I doubt he'll ever attract a very large following.

As best I can tell Snuffer is quite a traditionalist. He's devoted to a male-controlled priesthood. Though I haven't seen anything, I suspect he's pretty socially conservative to many of today's hottest issues. Certainly there are those who are attracted to that sort of an approach, but it's not the way the demographics, especially with the younger generations, are shifting. The recent PPRI religious survey shows that of those 65+, only 12% are unaffiliated with a religion. For ages 50-64, it's 18%. For ages 30-49, it climbs to 26%. For the youngest group, 18-29, it is a whopping 38%. In the past, commonly people became more religious as they settled down and started having families. There isn't much reason to believe that trend will continue and maintain the higher religious affiliation percentages at the older ages. Rather, there is reason to expect it will proceed the way LGBT acceptance did, with strong, maintained shifts in the younger ages that then vector through the older ages.

I think the Church is correct in its worry that secularism is its biggest threat. That's one of the reasons they've pushed so hard for religious freedom (aka, preferential treatment and honor for religion). The major social media or regular media personalities are probably the next biggest threat, John Dehlin, Mike Norton, and others like that. They get far more attention than Snuffer and are more aligned with demographic trends. They're more about getting information out there, which is the biggest threat the Church has.

Keep in mind, that it has always been that case that by a large majority those who leave the Church don't get on NOM and talk about it, or join Snuffer, or follow Dehlin's Mormon Stories activities. They just leave.

Wouldn't it be fascinating if as many older people were leaving for Snufferism as young people are for exmormonism? I would love to see how The Brethren would contend with serious challenge from a prophet who actually claims to talk to God.

If I had to put my finger on the single biggest threat to the church (apart from its own policies and behaviors), from what I see on other forums like Reddit, I think it would have to be the CES letter. I have seen so many people say something like, "by the time I finished the CES letter I was done with the church." For many of us who have studied the issues the CES letter didn't seem like a big deal, butts new information for a lot of people who read it, all wrapped up in an easily accessible package that doesn't require much time or effort.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2017 9:15 pm If I had to put my finger on the single biggest threat to the church (apart from its own policies and behaviors), from what I see on other forums like Reddit, I think it would have to be the CES letter. I have seen so many people say something like, "by the time I finished the CES letter I was done with the church." For many of us who have studied the issues the CES letter didn't seem like a big deal, butts new information for a lot of people who read it, all wrapped up in an easily accessible package that doesn't require much time or effort.

That's a big one that slipped my mind.


If I were to try and analyze the threats overall, I think I'd try to break it down into two categories, external threats and internal threats. Or maybe that might be described better as threats to outsiders and insiders. The first concerns things that reduces the Church's perception by outsiders and reduces the Church's proselytizing and baptizing. The second concerns things that draws members out of the Church.

In both cases, it really is the Church that is the biggest threat. As noted, its policies and behaviors cause the biggest problems. It was a silly little policy change that finally drove my wife out. It was current Church behaviors and teachings that finally made me give up. It was the November Exclusion Policy that drove lots of people out. And on and on. The Church's policies and behaviors give all the other people the ammunition.

Snuffer, Dehlin, Runnells, Norton, etc., for the most part present internal threats. While the Church may no longer claim them as members, their impact is primarily to other members. Few outsiders will bother to pay any attention to them. Even for potential converts most of that will be pretty irrelevant. The CES Letter is abbreviated, but it's still really long and takes quite a bit of attention. Most conversions are entirely emotionally based and have practically nothing to do study or logic. (This is a human trait, not uniquely connected to Mormonism.)

Externally, news stories and the general state of information about the Church are most significant. The Church wants to push their message out, but that's not particularly newsworthy. The Church's actions and policy changes are newsworthy and repeatedly show the Church in a poor light. Here is also where Norton's actions might be more significant. He claimed that it was his efforts that made Savannah's testimony a big, worldwide story. It's hard to know just how much is due to him but it's possible he was instrumental in spreading it. (Again, it was really the Church causing the issue to begin with.) Norton's temple videos are more likely to catch the attention of outsiders than Dehlin, Runnells, and certainly Snuffer.

And then the big threats, which the Church really can't hold back try as it might, are the growth of individualism and equality. These changes in society are internal and external threats. As the gulf widens between what members experience in society and what they experience in church, it will strengthen some in the Church, but it will cause far more to leave. Outsiders will see that gulf and will perceive less reason to pursue interest in the Church. It's got to be tough to interest outsider Millennials in the Church and even when they settle down and have families there is little reason to think their interest will grow.

Really good analysis, Jeffret.

I have a pet theory that the Internet is changing the ethics of the Millennial generation and younger (and to some extent, those a little older) in a way that brings them out of step with LDS church leadership.

Growing up with the Internet, you get a sense that absolutely everyone screws up, big time. There's no way to hide it anymore. Nobody gets the luxury of pretending that they and the organizations they belong to are perfect. This could be great for the LDS church given its penchant for prejudice and its occasionally sordid history. Unfortunately for the church, to cope with this new Age of Dirty Laundry and Closet Skeletons, Millennials have come to regard transparency, repentance and willingness to change together as the gold standard for trustworthiness, rather than the appearance of unchanging perfect behavior.

(I have specific examples from the recent CEO change at my rather large tech company, but I'm not ready to dox myself yet. In short, though, before the change, we were floundering. After the change to a younger CEO who gets the new ethics, which are reflected in his public behavior and in changes to company policy and direction, we aren't.)

Another ethical change comes from the fact that Millennials are exposed from a young age to many other ways of being and many other worldviews. The argument could be made that the Q15 and Q70s are exposed to the same things with all their traveling, but 1) they're exposed to only specially curated, Mormonized versions, and 2) they get almost all of this exposure late in life. Because of this, LDS church leaders still use "us vs them" arguments and boundary enforcement to try to keep people in, even while the utility of doing so drops. For example, when they make an "us vs them" argument, and "them" is someone that hearers already regard as "us," the argument either falls flat or pushes hearers away. Millennials tend to include a lot more different kinds of people in "us."

(I'm not saying they're not tribal. They're human, after all. They just tend to draw their boundaries to encompass more kinds of people.)

Another ethical change is to the character and importance of loyalty. Internet social groups don't often foster deep relationships, and people usually belong to a lot of them. It's easy to drop one and pick up another. Having so much choice turns community and belonging into a buyer's market. The sensibilities and expectations of a buyer's market transfer from cyberspace to meatspace, specifically the ideas that 1) any group needs to earn your loyalty rather than simply expecting it, and 2) loyalty is less important among virtues than it has been.

I want to be careful to not present a false dichotomy. These ethical changes have actually been happening for hundreds of years, brought on by democratic systems of government, easier access to education and knowledge, cheaper transportation, and ubiquitous communication. The latest change has been a sudden and dramatic leap, caused by bidirectional, low-latency, high-bandwidth communication, and cheap information storage and retrieval.

I think all religions are feeling the ethical mismatch. Ours happens to be a mostly fundamentalist gerontocracy, which can be a big disadvantage, but one that values education, which can be a big advantage.

As far as the Snufferite and similar movements, I think their freshness appeals to many conservatives, but that they'll have as hard a time surviving as any other fundamentalist group has as the Millennials take over running the world.

I think you're spot on Reuben.

While the effects are most noticeable among the Millennial generation, I'm confident it will vector through other age groups. Typically, social change comes from the younger generation who then change the culture as they age. In the case of LGBT acceptance, though, the changes were much quicker. While the support is greatest among the young, the level of support increased rapidly through each generation. I'm convinced this due to many of the factors you describe. While the internet and other things have had a dramatic impact on the Millennial generation, they're also significant for older generations. It's not just about LGBT, but many other issues play into the same arena. Feminism in particular, as it is strongly tied in with LGBT issues. And the impacts of the #MeToo movement, The Silence Breakers and the pussy hats are not likely to go away. They're all tied together and match the same demographics as those involved in the shifting religious landscape.

Mormon church leaders don't experience that same type of growth and change from their travels. One of the biggest factors is that they know, because of who they are and the position they've achieved that they are right. They are doing god's will. Whatever feels good to them is right. They're strongly rooted in their stronghold in Salt Lake City. When they travel, they're not looking to learn more challenge their existing preconceptions. By the very purpose of their travel they're looking to spread their beliefs and impose their culture.

One thing to keep in mind when discussing these dangers to the Church is that overall, they're still pretty stable. Unlike other religions, they haven't reached the point yet of actually decreasing membership. Their membership is pretty stable with perhaps a slight growth. That's a pretty big accomplishment at this point. Yet, the publicly available numbers have been trending the wrong way for them the past few years. If they continue, they'll start to see actual decreases before too many more years. For the massive amount of resources they put into growth, they're seeing very little return.

Snuffer was on the right side of the leaked PowerPoint if I recall. Dehlin and OW one the left and porn and wanting to sin in the middle.

Denver Snuffer has the appeal of a charismatic leader. He appeals to those people who have qualms about the commercialized nature of the LDS Church. Charismatic leaders eventually go the way of old soldiers, but the corporate Church will be perpetuated via new board members instantly becoming prophets, seers, and revelators through its bylaws. In the Old Testament days, prophets only came around sporadically and there was no mechanism to vote one onto the board whenever a vacancy occurred.

Wonder what it would be like to choose a prophet, seer, and revelator via a random lottery? The argument could be made that God chose the lotto numbers generated by His computers. It would be a hoot if the winning ticket was sold at a gas station in Franklin, Idaho or at the Keno counter in Wendover, Nevada.

An alternate method could be through Progressive Prophet-Seer-Revelator 5-way Slots, where all direct descendants of the Mormon Royal Houses would be allocated one pull of the lever and whoever had two cherries or better would be the next one chosen.

the Snufferites may be a bigger threat than they seem. I was bothered by a lot of things at church, but I couldn't bring myself to seriously explore the problems of mormonism within the context of the church not being true. I ran into Rock Waterman's blog (he's pretty much in the Snufferite camp) and that started me on a path where I was exploring the possibility that the current institutional church was false but the origins and doctrine were true. Once I was in the mindset of looking at the church critically, it was a short trip to seeing that the entire thing was made up. In fact, I found NOM through Rock's blog where he referenced it in one of his posts.

My dad seems to be following my path. He ran into Rock's posts independent of me. We were discussing the issues recently and I laughed at one point when he was rebutting something I was saying about polygamy and I said he sounded like me 2 years ago.

The Snufferites are a gateway to looking at the church more critically. Once you are in the mindset that it is possible that the church isn't true, everything falls into place pretty quickly.

I don't know how old Denver Snuffer is, but it would be interesting to see how his movement reacts to a leadership change. A strength and weakness of the LDS church is its centralized authority. When Snuffer dies, would there be a mechanism to carry it through to the next generation?

moksha wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:12 pm An alternate method could be through Progressive Prophet-Seer-Revelator 5-way Slots, where all direct descendants of the Mormon Royal Houses would be allocated one pull of the lever and whoever had two cherries or better would be the next one chosen.

Sounds like you took Advanced Decision Making 601 at the University of Nevada Las Vegas.

Culper Jr. wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:36 pmI ran into Rock Waterman's blog (he's pretty much in the Snufferite camp) and that started me on a path where I was exploring the possibility that the current institutional church was false but the origins and doctrine were true.

If Snuffer and Waterman were as capable at picking up followers as they are at helping people see behind the curtain of LDS leadership they would probably get a lot of people moving on to a post-corporate kind of mormonism, but I think they're (especially Waterman) more useful for helping people find a way out. Waterman's biggest impact has undoubtedly been in convincing people that they're overpaying on tithing. The church probably wouldn't have been quite as hasty to excommunicate him if he wasn't hurting the bottom line.

I find the snufferites stuck between being TBMs and NOMs. They want to believe that JS was a prophet, and that all of his magic was true, and yet not believe in the current leaders.
Over time, they will drift away from JS and his teachings, and then what? Not sure. Many have already taken the hard road of leaving the formal church. Leaving the Snufferite movement will be even easier.

Culper Jr. wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:36 pm the Snufferites may be a bigger threat than they seem. I was bothered by a lot of things at church, but I couldn't bring myself to seriously explore the problems of mormonism within the context of the church not being true. I ran into Rock Waterman's blog (he's pretty much in the Snufferite camp) and that started me on a path where I was exploring the possibility that the current institutional church was false but the origins and doctrine were true. Once I was in the mindset of looking at the church critically, it was a short trip to seeing that the entire thing was made up. In fact, I found NOM through Rock's blog where he referenced it in one of his posts.

+1
Although, I think that they are just as willing as mormons to draw a line in the sand where they will not extend critical thinking. As with anything else, it will attract a certain element. I have learned that I am not good at drawing lines about things I wont think about, and that is why it was also a short trip for me to seeing that the whole thing was made up. But some elements, sensing that, will go just far enough to resolve their current issues, and no farther.

I am listening to the podcast right now. I have not gotten to the meat episode where I assume they will talk about issues, but so far I have kind of been inspired by the Strongs. While I dont agree with the way they have gone with their dissatisfaction I really respect them for their excitement and enthusiasm. They have found something that makes them happy, engages them, and they had to do some thinking to get there. Good for them.

It seems the LDS Church thinks Denver Snuffer a big enough threat for Elder Oaks to take Elder Turley from the history department for an unannounced visit at a tri-stake meeting in Boise in 2015 in order to argue against his movement.

While not mentioning his name, of course.

And while denying that Snuffer was the real reason they went there.

http://kutv.com/news/local/lds-church-h ... se-prophet

consiglieri wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2017 6:35 pm It seems the LDS Church thinks Denver Snuffer a big enough threat for Elder Oaks to take Elder Turley from the history department for an unannounced visit at a tri-stake meeting in Boise in 2015 in order to argue against his movement.

While not mentioning his name, of course.

And while denying that Snuffer was the real reason they went there.

http://kutv.com/news/local/lds-church-h ... se-prophet

And it seems like they're fighting an uphill battle in trying to dissuade people from following prophets who claim actual revelation and personal visitations from Christ (and the promise of those kinds of experiences for yourself) in favor of sticking with those who claim no such experiences and are actively redefining miracles as things like people dying anyway after a priesthood blessing, praying to know which road to take and being inspired to take the wrong road, voting on a policies written by a law firm, and buying a snack with spare change found in the gutter.

I listened to the second round of interviews from a Snuffertite. I am both impressed and appalled at the same time. These people dove in head first came up and drank the Kool Aid in gulps. I am trying to get my head around how otherwise intelligent and sincere people can get so caught up in something like this. If I had to pick a thread in both interviews it was that the people had been searching for a lifetime for some kind of divine witness. Hungry for something more than monotone Mormonism they found Denver Snuffer.

1smartdodog wrote: ↑Sun Dec 31, 2017 8:16 pm I listened to the second round of interviews from a Snuffertite. I am both impressed and appalled at the same time. These people dove in head first came up and drank the Kool Aid in gulps. I am trying to get my head around how otherwise intelligent and sincere people can get so caught up in something like this. If I had to pick a thread in both interviews it was that the people had been searching for a lifetime for some kind of divine witness. Hungry for something more than monotone Mormonism they found Denver Snuffer.

Yeah, I don't see the appeal either. When you see the obvious problems of the mainstream Church, it seems to me the obvious answer is that it was never, ever what it claimed to be. Most of the problems of the mainstream Church were baked in from the very beginning - the Snufferites are trying to move the Church back in time, but it's not like it was any truer back when Joseph Smith pulled all it out of his butt. There are pretty much insurmountable problems from the very beginning, and I really don't understand how someone sees the problems now without recognizing the problems from the moment 14 year old Joseph Smith didn't walk in the Not-Really-Sacred Grove and didn't see God the Father and/or Jesus Christ and/or an angel and/or lots of angels, depending on which version Joseph happened to be telling at the time it was recorded.

Moving from one fantasy world to another doesn't get you any closer to the truth.

The power point slides on issues leading people away from the church had Denver Snuffer and Need "something more" on the same side. That's no mistake.

Many people are straight up bored with the church. The church experience has been stripped to the bone, both temporally and spiritually. Temporally in that they want to run wards as cheaply as possible, and spiritually in that there doesn't even appear to be an attempt at inspiration. Church is the same recycled thing week after week, month after month, and year after year, nothing ever changes and it doesn't appear as though anything will change in the foreseeable future.

The modern LDS church is content to coast on past inspiration and effort. Just look at the 2nd and 3rd hour curriculum for this year. Recycled Old Testament classes and recycled conference talks.

Maybe the church is too big for its own good? By that I mean that if they were to actually attempt to produce new learning material it would have to go through the lawyers, the correlation committee, and be translated into 100 languages. The Sunday School Presidency may look at all that effort and say f-it, let's just start the 4 year cycle from the beginning and go golfing.

This is where I see the appeal of the Snufferites. People at church are starving to death spiritually for something fresh. The LDS church doesn't look like it will provide it. Just look at the powerpoint, they view the people that "need something more" as threatening. Let that sink in for a second. They're more concerned about how much a threat the people that feel they need something more are than they are with trying to provide the people with something they need.

Enter the Snufferites. Mostly believing members that feel like the corporate church has died on the vine. They believe the myths but want an experience that is more alive.

deacon blues wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2017 4:57 pm I don't know how old Denver Snuffer is, but it would be interesting to see how his movement reacts to a leadership change. A strength and weakness of the LDS church is its centralized authority. When Snuffer dies, would there be a mechanism to carry it through to the next generation?

I would say he is about 65.

What leadership change? There is no centralized authority. If he died, maybe people who relied on him would fall apart and go off the deep end - but it seems to me that people are going off the deep end anyway. I think that if he died, it wouldn't affect me, personally. In fact, the further I go, the more I rely on God (or the thing inside that I believe is either God or is connected to God) instead of other people.

I am realizing, more and more, that what one believes is (or should be) a choice. For example, I look at the evidence that JS was a pedophile (in our day; in his day, marrying young was fairly normal) and an adulterer and at the evidence that he was not, and it looks like a toss-up to me. Altered journals, convenient "memories", a revelation conveniently found when BY wanted justification for his polygamy (but not written by any of his scribes), etc. versus his public teachings. So I choose what I want to believe since the evidence is inconclusive.

That was just an example. And I don't have a problem with people choosing to believe differently.

What I don't like is when people are trained or coerced into believing that they have to obey some high and holy men who try to control not only their behaviors, but their thoughts and who they meet with (can't teach your kids what you've been learning or you'll get in trouble, can't have friends over on a regular basis if you're going to talk about religion; baseball is okay, though). And I really don't like religions that feel it is their right to destroy marriages. And heaven forbid if your personal line of revelation conflicts with the priesthood line of revelation.