Post
by hawkgrrrl » 06 Aug 2019, 12:57
I have mixed reactions to this.
- I agree with nibbler that the church is tougher on its members and less welcome to the fringe members than it is welcoming to converts.
- I do think the church is mostly a positive force for converts in their lives, but there can be an eventual diminishing return, and of course, they were attracted to it because it already resonated on some level (it matched or spoke to their own good desires).
The core problem is that it's one prescription for glasses, and it really does improve things for people who need that specific prescription (for others, not so much), but in time, your prescription changes, and you outgrow the prescription you used to need, or you need progressive lenses, or you develop astigmatism. But if you are born into the church, it may not fit you at all except for the fact that you were raised that way.
It also can erode faith in God for many because once you buy the "one true church" and "all others are an abomination" line, if you have doubts or questions after that, you are going to doubt EVERYTHING religious: God, Jesus, you name it. After all, every other church wasn't ever an alternative. It was an abomination!
Ultimately, I think the correlation effort went further than just the curriculum and budgetary oversight. The church has a very narrow program for human development, and you either fit the mold they are pushing you into, or you are the problem. That just doesn't work for everyone long term. Converts choose it. Those born into it don't.
I do agree that converts make the church better, but really just at the local level. They only make the church (as a whole) better in terms of increasing the numbers, kind of like when the Borg assimilate a planet.