fn1 I think that you and others may have gotten confused with the term ‘defend’ thinking that I mean to produce a long apologetic formal defense of something. No, I mean simply to stand by an idea in the face of any perceived opposition. For instance, a believer in the idea that Joseph Smith saw God might defend the idea in the face of any perceived questioning or doubting by saying, “I prayed and asked God and could feel the spirit testifying the truthfulness of the first vision.”

fn2 As opposed to belief-specific service, such as proselytizing or temple service, which is recognized as serviceable only by cobelievers (I don’t know, might you or other believing active Mormons regard Southern Baptist proselytism to Mormons in Utah an act of service or Muslims praying in a mosque an act of service? I doubt it). Voluntarily attending to the sick and needy, by contrast, is recognized as serviceable by a large swath of the human population (at least we can hope that most human beings regard that to be serviceable).

Which person is more likely to be considered a Mormon? Not only by other Mormons but by non-Mormons?

1) A person who believes in all or at least most of the foundational doctrinal and historic claims of the church, but is rarely at church and doesn’t usually involve his or her self in church functions and initiatives. (Calling, temple, tithing, activities, etc..)

2) A person who holds some unorthodox or unusual beliefs in some cases but is often or always at church and is very involved (calling, temple, tithing, activities, etc.)

I think it would be apropos to conclude by tying my string of comments back in with the OP. Who gets to be Mormon? About anyone who desires to, but all those wishing to become Mormon or remain Mormon must be willing to interact with a group of people who places heavy emphasis on a number of doctrinal and historical propositions, probably much more than other religious groups, such as the Buddhists or liberal Protestant groups.

To the person whose Mormonism is primarily doctrinal intellectual, that’s a good start — if he or she makes it a lived religion, that’s when the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ can become most meaningful.

I am almost not sure what we are discussing anymore and as coincidence would have it, mine is the 99th comment. Suffice it to say, you and I see mormonism as focusing on different things.

SilverRain, Mormonism = doctrine first, service second. I don’t see how that’s obtuse. At any rate, you don’t seem to have addressed my original objection to your comment.

Mirrororrim-It’s Story Trek. I think Mormons do it, but the stories are not strictly Mormon. It’s just an example of how sharing stories can bond people together rather than drive wedges, and how you can do it for the people, and not for an agenda.

And I will definitely check out Mormon Tracks. I didn’t know there were any other websites that do something similar to Mormon Stories. I’ll have to see how they compare.

And I also think it’s fair to be more skeptical of someone who makes money off of what she or he is saying. That is the very reason I often question the statements made by paid apologetics, religion teachers, and public relations representatives. If someone wants to do one of those things for her or his career, that’s his or her choice and I’m not going to judge it. But I think that person needs to accept the heightened public incredulity that comes with that, just in the same way a public business like McDonald’s needs to know that people should question any claims they make to be better or cheaper than their competition. They may still be right, but it’s their job to go above and beyond to prove it to us.

(for the record I prefer Wendy’s, but I’m a vegetarian so it probably doesn’t matter)

I think you are strangely focused on some aspects of mormonism just so you can ignore the rest of it

Yes, there is a lot to Mormonism. But the Joseph Smith story, the BOM, and the authority of the current leaders are foundational. As I mentioned in comment 91, it all starts with emphasis on those issues, service and other aspects of Mormonism are secondary. And you are strangely in denial of this. It is like you want Mormonism to be something that it just isn’t.

Those doctrinal and historic propositions are the reason that mormons do service… including missionary work. If the church is what it says it is, then missionary work and temple work are tremendous services in deed.

Here, you seem to be confirming what I’ve been saying all along: key doctrinal and historical propositions are emphasized first in Mormonism, then service. Also, bear in mind that missionary service is primarily devoted to getting others to subscribe to the church’s foundational doctrinal and historical assertions, so it isn’t really an act of general charity mentioned in comment 56, although it may involve such, but mostly only secondarily. Of course, in order for the ever time- and resource-consuming missionary work and temple construction/attendance to be considered acts of service to humankind, it is all contingent upon the church’s doctrinal and historical claims reflecting reality. For if the claims aren’t true, then these so-called services are nothing but giant wastes of time and money. Hence the church’s primary goal is to promote and defend its foundational doctrinal claims. I think that you agree with me more than you like to admit.

Those who follow the Savior are the real-deal

Would you be willing to say that a Mormon who accepted Joseph Smith as a lustful fraud, the Book of Mormon as a 19th century fabrication, and the current leaders as old men with antiquated opinions about gays and women could still be a ‘real-deal’ Mormon by being involved in acts of general charity and the following of Jesus’ words as recorded in the New Testament?

At the beginning of my mission…

Our discussion has nothing to do with whether you are doing the convincing as a missionary or the spirit. The fact remains that missionaries are asked to go around and tell people first and foremost about Joseph Smith being God’s and Jesus’ emissary, the Book of Mormon being a second testament of Jesus Christ, and current Mormon leaders having authority to administer God’s affairs on earth. Do you deny that that is the case?