Defining LDS member/non-members....

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
truth dancer
High Goddess of Atlantis
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am

Defining LDS member/non-members....

Post by truth dancer »

In light of a few ongoing conversations I thought I would simply define a few terms regarding members and non-members.

Career Apostate/Anti-mormon - over-the-top, out to destroy the church, hates everything associated with it. (Decker type).

Anti-mormons - angry non-believers or those who want to destroy the church.

Apostate - those whose beliefs differ from the accepted (at the time), doctrine and who teach non-doctrinal ideas as doctrine. (Definition in the CHI).

Heretic - one who professes belief but whose believes are not aligned with official doctrine.

Non-believers - those who do not believe in the truth claims of the church.

Former member - those whose names have been removed from the rolls of the church. (Leave takers)?

Jack Mormons - those who openly do not abide by the church's teachings. (Perhaps due to WoW issues).

Inactive - those member who do not attend church.

Mormon reformers - those who believe the church is true but want to make serious changes.

Non-literalists (Internet Mormons/New Order Mormons) - those who conform teachings to their own beliefs/ideas etc.

Well informed members - those who are aware of the issues.

Literalist believers (Chapel Mormons/fundamentalists) - believes the Bible, Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, D&C, literally, historically, and factual.

Apologists/defenders - those who defend the teachings of the church.

PBM, (Pit Bull Mormons) - modern day Danites.




What should be changed? Any other terms? Did I leave out anyone? Care to elaborate?

:-)

~dancer~

Edit to add a few catagories!
Last edited by truth dancer on Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
gramps
God
Posts: 2485
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:43 am

Post by gramps »

Where would a heretic fall in there? or is that a totally different category altogether? I think, if I'm not mistaken, that's how McMurrin classified himself.
I detest my loose style and my libertine sentiments. I thank God, who has removed from my eyes the veil...
Adrian Beverland

Yoda

Post by Yoda »

Non-literalists (Internet Mormons/New Order Mormons) - those who conform teachings to their own beliefs/ideas etc.

Well informed members - those who are aware of the issues.

Literalist believers (Chapel Mormons/fundamentalists) - believes the Bible, Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, D&C, literally, historically, and factually.


Good list, TD! I would add that I think it is possible for both Non-literalists and Literalists to be Well Informed Members as well. That's where a lot of the conflict ends up happening on boards like this! LOL

User avatar
Southern Redneck
Star A
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:41 pm

Post by Southern Redneck »

people who stay in and try to reform the church might be a category

User avatar
truth dancer
High Goddess of Atlantis
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am

Post by truth dancer »

Lets see according to my online dictionary a heretic is:
a professed believer who maintains religious opinions contrary to those accepted by his or her church or rejects doctrines prescribed by that church.
2. Roman Catholic Church. a baptized Roman Catholic who willfully and persistently rejects any article of faith.
3. anyone who does not conform to an established attitude, doctrine, or principle.
–adjective


So, I have to add this to the list...

And, we can add a Mormon Reformer... one who believes the church is true but believes there needs to be changes.. how is that?

Liz... I'm thinking one person could have more than one term applied to her/him.

:-)

I'll go edit my list now!

~dancer~

Mister Scratch
Master Mahan
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:13 pm

Post by Mister Scratch »

You need a term to cover somebody like Pahoran, who is at the extreme polar opposite of Ed Decker. I.e., he goes well beyond the role of apologist, and actually seems more interested in attacking critics than defending the Church or proclaiming the Gospel. In other words, hatred for critics and anti-Mormons exceeds the person's apparent desire to defend the Church.

User avatar
truth dancer
High Goddess of Atlantis
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am

Post by truth dancer »

Good suggestion Mr. Scratch,

Hmmmm ...any name ideas for this category?

Danites? Extreme believers? LDS Bodyguards?

:-)

~dancer~

Yoda

Post by Yoda »

truth dancer wrote:Good suggestion Mr. Scratch,

Hmmmm ...any name ideas for this category?

Danites? Extreme believers? LDS Bodyguards?

:-)

~dancer~


LDS Bodyguard is kind of cute! LOL

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22509
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by moksha »

Southern Redneck wrote:people who stay in and try to reform the church might be a category

Do you think this could be further subdivided into Banned-from-FAIR and Not-yet-banned-from-FAIR?

I think TruthDancer's list is a very good one. While some categories may overlap, it is more comprehensive than others I have seen. If I were to combine a number of categories for myself, I would be a Non-literalistic-Marginalized-TBM. Even if my beliefs do not correspond with the majority's, I want my beliefs to be validated as True Blue or True Believing as well.

Thanks for compiling this list, TruthDancer
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22509
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by moksha »

Mister Scratch wrote:You need a term to cover somebody like Pahoran, who is at the extreme polar opposite of Ed Decker. I.e., he goes well beyond the role of apologist, and actually seems more interested in attacking critics than defending the Church or proclaiming the Gospel. In other words, hatred for critics and anti-Mormons exceeds the person's apparent desire to defend the Church.

PBM? Pit Bull Mormon. Both Pit Bulls and Pahoran can be vicious but have some winsome qualities as well.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Post by Runtu »

moksha wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:You need a term to cover somebody like Pahoran, who is at the extreme polar opposite of Ed Decker. I.e., he goes well beyond the role of apologist, and actually seems more interested in attacking critics than defending the Church or proclaiming the Gospel. In other words, hatred for critics and anti-Mormons exceeds the person's apparent desire to defend the Church.

PBM? Pit Bull Mormon. Both Pit Bulls and Pahoran can be vicious but have some winsome qualities as well.


Heaven knows I've tried to hate Pahoran but just can't quite do it.

Anyone who says the plural of Jesus is Jesi is OK with me.

User avatar
Southern Redneck
Star A
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:41 pm

Post by Southern Redneck »

truth dancer wrote:Good suggestion Mr. Scratch,

Hmmmm ...any name ideas for this category?

Danites? Extreme believers? LDS Bodyguards?

:-)

~dancer~
pit bull Mormon?

User avatar
beastie
God
Posts: 14216
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:26 pm

Post by beastie »

I'd like to see some way to refer to the idea that some people become so entrenched and embedded in their beliefs (whether it is that Mormonism is the "one true church", or that Mormonism is satanic in origin) that no amount of evidence will convince them to alter their stances (in the Hoffer genre of True Believers).

User avatar
truth dancer
High Goddess of Atlantis
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am

Post by truth dancer »

Hi Beastie...

I think Hoffer's term "true believer" sounds too similar to a tbm so, what about, Extreme Mormon? Rigid Believer? Fanatical Believer?

Any other ideas?

I actually used a Hoffer quote as the quote of the day on my blog! :-) That man ROCKS!



~dancer~

User avatar
Gazelam
Lightbearer
Posts: 5659
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:06 pm

Post by Gazelam »

Would I be a well informed literalist apologist?

Gazelam

P.S. What should we list for Son of Perdition? Someone who knows the church is true but fights against it for personal reasons, maybe an extreme reformer?
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato

User avatar
beastie
God
Posts: 14216
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:26 pm

Post by beastie »

TD,

I think fanatical believer probably works best. If I get another idea I'll let you know.

Post Reply