Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not sure why it took me until now to notice this thread, but as one who has been interested in the Mormon religion (along with the others), and as one with many members of family and friends who are Mormon, I started reading the article though without the time right now to continue. I read up to this paragraph.
"The story of the Latter-day Saints begins with a confused teenage boy. It was the spring of 1820, and the town of Palmyra, New York, was in the throes of the Second Great Awakening. Fevered Christian revivals were everywhere. New sects were sprouting, and preachers competed fiercely for converts. To Joseph Smith, a 14-year-old farm boy with little education, the frenzy was at once exhilarating and disorienting. As he would later write in his personal history, he became consumed with the question of which church to join—sampling worship services, consulting scripturians, and growing ever more concerned about the state of his soul."
I'll look forward to finishing the article and getting back to this thread maybe when time allows tomorrow, but for now all I can comment is many a thought comes to mind about what I've already read. Just this paragraph alone demonstrates something about this dynamic that begins to work on so many people at such a young age. "New sects were sprouting, and preachers competed fiercely for converts."
Isn't really the truth that matters, but who seems best at getting converts. No doubt the Mormons have found something of a "winning" formula," if you can call it that...
Not sure why it took me until now to notice this thread, but as one who has been interested in the Mormon religion (along with the others), and as one with many members of family and friends who are Mormon, I started reading the article though without the time right now to continue. I read up to this paragraph.
"The story of the Latter-day Saints begins with a confused teenage boy. It was the spring of 1820, and the town of Palmyra, New York, was in the throes of the Second Great Awakening. Fevered Christian revivals were everywhere. New sects were sprouting, and preachers competed fiercely for converts. To Joseph Smith, a 14-year-old farm boy with little education, the frenzy was at once exhilarating and disorienting. As he would later write in his personal history, he became consumed with the question of which church to join—sampling worship services, consulting scripturians, and growing ever more concerned about the state of his soul."
I'll look forward to finishing the article and getting back to this thread maybe when time allows tomorrow, but for now all I can comment is many a thought comes to mind about what I've already read. Just this paragraph alone demonstrates something about this dynamic that begins to work on so many people at such a young age. "New sects were sprouting, and preachers competed fiercely for converts."
Isn't really the truth that matters, but who seems best at getting converts. No doubt the Mormons have found something of a "winning" formula, if you can call it that...
It is only reasonable that we be selective in what we discuss within a single thread. I gave a link to a fairly lengthy magazine article -- which I doubt more than two or three people even bothered to read. A thread where all aspects of the history, doctrines, and culture of any one Christian denomination were fair game would become unwieldy and chaotic in no time at all. The article I posted link to contained a number of points which could have led to an interesting discussion on this thread. Unfortunately, some people had another agenda.
I finished reading the entire article this morning, and then I thought it would also be interesting to read all the comments in this thread to date. In part with hopes I would find a comment or two that I could quote to save me some time and trouble sharing the same thoughts. Curiously, I find many a comment about other things. Not so much about my thoughts, but I do think this comment of yours is also interesting and/or noteworthy.
First of all, if anyone is really interested in this topic, I don't know why they wouldn't read the entire article. Though a long one, it's a pretty good quick summary of what you describe as "all aspects of the history, doctrines, and culture of any one Christian denomination." Also interesting to read how the "fair game" got "unwieldy and chaotic in no time." Makes it very easy to understand much of the "unwieldy and chaotic" described in the article. Seems to me the "unwieldy and chaotic" is par for the course when it comes to these kinds of topics generally speaking, and to be expected.
The article you posted contains a rather large "number of points which could have lead to an interesting discussion on this thread." Lots of comments seem to suggest which those points might be and/or what are comments really not appreciated. If there is still life in this thread, I wonder which of those points are of the greatest interest far as you are concerned.
Personally, I'm not even sure where to begin there are so many...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
