LDS Patriarchial Blessings: Genuine Prophecy or Wishful Thinking ???

[ToBeLoved]

Oh no I see the error of my ways. The church isn't true. I must repent.

Jesus is waiting for you and there for your repenting needs 24/7, praise God! You go boy.

 

[ToBeLoved]

So... that gives Steve the right to disrespect other people's beliefs, and post someone else's personal document up on the web??? How is this Christ-like behavior?

I'm sure this document is floating around the internet and it was found.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I did a little research on the holy Melchizedek priesthood as referenced above.


This is from the Christian perspective:


A Priest Like Melchizedek: A Study of Hebrews 7

The New Testament often quotes the Old Testament. One of the most commonly quoted verses is Psalm 110:1: "The Lord says to my Lord: `Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.'" The Gospels tell us that Jesus quoted this verse as a scripture about the Messiah.

If we read further in this psalm, we will come to verse 4, which has a thought found nowhere else in the Old Testament. This Lord is to be a priest—not a Levitical priest, but a different kind of priest.

The book of Hebrews tells us that this verse of the psalm is also about Jesus. It briefly mentions this in chapter 5, and then again at the end of chapter 6, telling us that Jesus "has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek." Chapter 7 then explains this in more detail.

A priest without genealogy
It begins with a quick summary of the story in Genesis 14: "This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything" (Heb. 7:1-2).

First, the unusual name is explained. The Hebrew word melek means king, and tsedek means righteousness, so his name is explained as meaning "king of righteousness." And since shalom means peace, he was also the "king of peace" (v. 2). These titles are significant because Melchizedek prefigures Jesus Christ.

Then we are told that Melchizedek was "without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever" (v. 3).

From the grammar, it is not clear whether Melchizedek is like the Son in every respect, or just in being a perpetual priest. We know that Jesus had a Father, a mother, a genealogy, a birth and a death, so he was different in these respects. Scripture does not say that Melchizedek was the Son of God—just that he was "like" the Son. Hebrews 1:1-2 implies that the Son of God did not speak to the patriarchs.

However, Melchizedek had no parents that are mentioned in Scripture. His position as priest did not depend on his parents or his genealogy (unlike the Levitical priests). His priesthood was a different kind, a different order. Similarly, Scripture says nothing about his birth or death (unlike the patriarchs, who are carefully chronicled). He did not create a dynasty of priests, each dying and passing the priesthood to a son.

We might say today that he came out of nowhere, and then disappeared. Nevertheless, he remains known as a priest even today. "He remains a priest forever ... is declared to be living" (vv. 3, 8). (A similar thought may be in Luke 20:37-38—the patriarchs are among "the living.") This mysterious Melchizedek is the prototype of Jesus Christ.

Psalm 110 predicted that the Lord would be a priest in the same way: not according to genealogy, but by special appointment. This order of priests was significant in several ways: 1) it was more important than the Levitical priesthood, 2) it implied that the Levitical priesthood was temporary and 3) the new order was permanent.

Greater than Levi
Although little is known about Melchizedek, we can discern that he was very important. Abraham gave him 10 percent of the spoils of war (v. 4). The old covenant required the Israelites to give 10 percent to the Levites, but Abraham gave 10 percent to Melchizedek even though Melchizedek was not a Levite (vs. 5-6). He was getting priestly honors before Levi was even born.

From this, the author constructs a hypothetical argument: "One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor" (vs. 9-10). The author knows that Levi didn't actually pay tithes to Melchizedek, but in a figure of speech he did. The point is that Abraham is greater than Levi, since Abraham is Levi's ancestor, and Melchizedek is greater than Abraham, since Abraham paid tithes to him, so Melchizedek is greater than Levi.

Verses 6-7 emphasize Melchizedek's greatness: He not only received a tithe, he also blessed Abraham. "And without doubt the lesser person is blessed by the greater." Abraham is the lesser person—but the real point of comparison being made is with Levi.

Since Melchizedek is greater than Abraham, he is also greater than Levi, and—most important for the book of Hebrews—his priesthood is more important than the Levitical priesthood. The Levitical priests die, but Jesus has been made a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek, a priesthood that is more important for our salvation.

New priesthood implies a new law
Now the author observes that "if perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?" (v. 11).

Note in the middle of verse 11 that the law was given on the basis of the priesthood. The law was designed with the Levitical priesthood in mind—the law and the priesthood went together. But neither the law nor the priests could bring people to perfection. That is why Psalm 110 spoke of another priesthood.

The descendants of Aaron would be replaced by a better priesthood, a better priest—and that has enormous consequences: "For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law" (v. 12). What law is changed? The law that said only Levites could be priests. Which law said that? The old covenant. This will become more clear later in this chapter, and in the next few chapters.

But first, the author wants to make certain basic facts clear. "He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe" (v. 13). We are speaking about Jesus, of whom it is said that he is a priest after the order of Melchizedek—but Jesus was not a Levite. He belonged to the tribe of Judah, and no one from that tribe was ever a priest, and Moses did not authorize anyone from Judah to be a priest (v. 14).

"And what we have said"—that is, that the law has been changed—"is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life" (vs. 15-16).

Jesus was appointed as priest not by a law that focused on genealogy, but because he lives forever at God's right hand. From this fact alone, we can see that the Law of Moses is no longer in force.

"The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God" (vs. 18-19). The law that restricted the priesthood to Levites was ineffective.

How much was "set aside"? Certainly, it was the regulation restricting the priesthood. But no one expected that restriction to produce perfection, anyway. There is more involved than just one regulation. It is "the law" as a whole that is under discussion here. The law of Moses did not have the power to make anyone perfect. The best that the old covenant could offer was not good enough.

Instead of the law, we are given a better hope, and since we have something better than the law, we are now able to draw near to God in a way that was not possible under the law of Moses.

Guaranteed by an oath
The author then uses a small detail from Psalm 110 to emphasize the importance of Jesus' appointment as priest. God himself makes an oath to appoint Jesus as high priest (v. 20). The descendants of Aaron became priests without any oath, but Jesus became priest by a special oath.

The old covenant was given by God, but here is a new word from God—not just an oath but also a promise of permanence: "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: `You are a priest forever' " (v. 21). The old priesthood is obsolete. The old regulation was set aside. A new and better hope is given to bring people to a perfection that the law could not give.

"Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant" (v. 22). Here the word covenant is used for the first time in this letter, almost casually. It will be picked up again in the next three chapters for more detailed comment, but even here it is implied to be a replacement for the inferior, ineffective law of Moses. The discussion is not just about a minor priestly regulation but a covenant, which includes many laws.

Taken from https://www.gci.org/bible/hebrews7

So, I am going to respond to this article.

I am in agreement with everything it says.

The Melchezedek priesthood only has two members, both were special, Jesus and Melchezedek. I also agree with the Bible and the article, that the priesthood and the law of the Old Testament went hand--in-hand. The priesthood was needed to make blood sacrifices for sin until the Only High Priest died. Then Jesus completely atoned for all sin and the priesthood was no longer needed.

I think it is blashpemy that the Mormon church has said that they are the priesthood in the order of Melchezedek. They clearly have no rights to it and made it up so they could seem like they had direct revelation and power from God. They should have stuck to only the Aaronic priesthood and they may have gotten away with it, but not Melchesedek. They messed up big time with that. I feel sorry for those people who hold those false positions because God will deal with them very harshly.

What i found very interesting also is not how only JS or other Prophets said they had direct revelation from God, but these people also. Mighty high perch their sitting on. But God hates pride.

As an aside while finding and reading these articles, JS said the Melchezedek priesthood was given to him by three of THE apostles. Why would the apostles give him the priesthood, the apostles never had it?

Then JS says he got the Aaronic priesthood from John the Baptist himself.

Add this to him saying He saw the face of God Himself.

I am speechless.

 

[fatboys]

Certainly. That's why this is a DISCUSSION board, and the forum is dedicated to DEBATING topics relating to religions such as the one referred to.

To be sure, you have the right to debate also, to offer your own ideas in reply to what the OP asked, along with whatever evidence or other information you think relevant.

In addition, you say it 'disrespects' something, but the OP doesn't take a definite stand. It presented the document and asked what we think.

We are saying this may be a discussion board but this topic should not be debated or discussed. These blessings are personal and sacred to those who choose to honor them. If they code not to you can have a discussion about it but don't expect participation from Mormons. It is offensive to Mormons and since it is against the rules to be offensive then you should not be discussing it.

 

[ToBeLoved]

We are saying this may be a discussion board but this topic should not be debated or discussed. These blessings are personal and sacred to those who choose to honor them. If they code not to you can have a discussion about it but don't expect participation from Mormons. It is offensive to Mormons and since it is against the rules to be offensive then you should not be discussing it.

I've been personally offended many, many times so that won't hold water, this is a debate forum and world religions so I don't think it's protected under a congregational SOP.

The fact is that anyone could find a document like this on the internet in Google search under images. Given that fact, I think it is far better that we have a document, rather than specualation. I mean, someone could search for 20 of these and compare them to see if the blessings/wording are the same.

 

[fatboys]

I've been personally offended many, many times so that won't hold water, this is a debate forum and world religions so I don't think it's protected under a congregational SOP.

The fact is that anyone could find a document like this on the internet in Google search under images. Given that fact, I think it is far better that we have a document, rather than specualation. I mean, someone could search for 20 of these and compare them to see if the blessings/wording are the same.

You have been offended personally about things you believe that are sacred or you are offended because your interpretation is different than ours.

 

[ToBeLoved]

You have been offended personally about things you believe that are sacred or you are offended because your interpretation is different than ours.

I would think about what is in that document if I believed in mormonism, which I do not.

I would wonder why and how they can claim to be making prophecy's DIRECTLY from the mouth of God with the authority of a priesthood that hasn't existed for over 2,000 years. I would also think about how they could claim to be of a royal priesthood that the Bible says Jesus Himself is part of and that He is the High Priest of. I would think about how the priesthood was part of specific Tribes of Israel and these people are claiming to have something that they are obviously not Hebrew. The Hebrews trained a lifetime under the previous member of the priesthood for this sacred position that was only given to a few. There wouldn't be a whole bunch of priests running around all over prophesying over people. It was specific

These are BIG red flags. I would be thinking about what they are truly saying and whose authority they are saying they have. In the Bible, prophecy is not a secret. People are told about it. Secret documents are for a reason.

Think about it.

 

[Ironhold]

Jesus is waiting for you and there for your repenting needs 24/7, praise God! You go boy.

That was sarcasm.

 

[BigDaddy4]

Possible source of the OP:

http://www.thankgodimatheist.com/mormonism/franks-patriarchal-blessing/

Appears to be posted by Frank himself, on the web. No privacy was violated.

 

[BigDaddy4]

For a self-proclaimed "restored" church, why do the lds do patriarchal blessings by one who is not the patriarch of the family? There are no New Testament references to such a blessing, and the only OT references I can think of are fathers on their death bed blessing their own sons. No "office" of Patriarch with "ordained Patriarchs" blessing unknown or unrelated children was ever established or recorded in the Bible.

 

[ToBeLoved]

That was sarcasm.

Not really. God is available for us always. He said, I will never leave you or forsake you.

That was my point. You can seek forgiveness in Jesus for anything you have done and He will forgive you. Because He is fair and just and He made that covenant with us in the New Covenant. So you have that.

1 John 1:9
9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Psalm 103:12
12 As far as the east is from the west, So far has He removed our transgressions from us.

Notice it is God who is faithful to us. So it is God's covenant with us, nothing that we do, but what God does. When He forgives our sin, it is gone. Our sin is cast as far as the east is from the west.

 

[Ironhold]

Not really. God is available for us always. He said, I will never leave you or forsake you.

No, the post that you were responding to was sarcastic.

The truth is, you have helped turn us away from mainline Christianity.

 

[Hammster]

ADMIN HAT ON


It appears that my last Hat was ignored as this thread is still not on topic. This isn't even thread drift, which happens. So if this thread doesn't return to the topic, we will have to resort to staff actions.


ADMIN HAT OFF

 

[ToBeLoved]

Possible source of the OP:

http://www.thankgodimatheist.com/mormonism/franks-patriarchal-blessing/

Appears to be posted by Frank himself, on the web. No privacy was violated.

That's what I said. This stuff is already on the internet.

No, the post that you were responding to was sarcastic.

The truth is, you have helped turn us away from mainline Christianity.

So, I respond with Biblical love telling you about Jesus. I really do not know all that your doctrine teaches about forgiveness.

If you turn away from mainline Christianity, that is your choice because of the doctrine you choose to believe. I have only, ever pointed you to the Word of God. So, don't lay a guilt trip on me because I know what I have said and I have been honest.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Let us please get back on topic.

 

[menschtx]

LDS members receive a "Patriarchial Blessing" which makes many predictions. Is this genuine prophecy or wishful thinking. I say the latter.

Here is an example for consideration:

When you consider the source of this and the teachings of Joseph Smith you begin to understand the misguided endeavor to bring people into a life as a Mormon. Galatians 1: 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. We as believers in the truth of the real Jesus will try to help those who have mislead to understand any doctrine set forth is one not based on the real truth.

 

[Commander Xenophon]

I don't know where you got this but Patriarchial Blessing are considered sacred and private, we don't flaunt them to the world. Posting it here is almost sacrilegious.

They are blessing and all blessing are predicated upon obedience and in accordance with faithfulness as the blessing states.

One major objection I have with Mormonism is the intense secrecy with which you enshroud various aspects of your faith, such as "Patriarchal blessings," your "Temple services," and so on. It makes me wary of Mormonism in general.

Christianity at one time did restrict access to the Gospel to catechumens, and to the Eucharist to the baptized (a vestige of this remains in the Dismissal of the Catechumens found in various ancient liturgies); however, even then, when Christianity was at its most secretive, in the Second Century, St. Justin Martyr fully explained Christian worship, including the mystagogy of the Eucharist itself, the most sacred rite of the early church, in a letter to the Emperor.

Even now, the Mormon church refuses to completely enumerate or describe the Temple services or document their temple liturgies to outsiders. Some things are described, and known, like endowment, sealing, proxy baptism and so on, but most of what is actually known comes in the form of exposees surreptitiously videos leaked by people with a Temple Reccommend who presumably became disgruntled.

Therr are relatively few religions at present which shroud their rites with the same secrecy as the Mormons. Of the major religions, off the top of my head, the only ones I can thinkmof that maintain such secrecy are certain Native American tribal religions, some rites in Shinto involving the Japanese Emperor, the Druze Religion, which cloaks nearly all of its activities in secrecy, and furthermore has a hereditary clerical sect of Gnostics who alone know all the doctrines and are responsible for the spiritual guidance of the (also hereditary) laity, the Syrian Alawis (but not their Turkish Alevi counterparts, who have very similiar beliefs), and in all probability. some esoteric branches of Hinduism and Buddhism (for example, Shugendo I think is secretive). Also, I believe the initiation ritual of the Yarsani Kurds, whose faith is very similiar to the Yazidis, but open to proeselytes, is secret, but I am not positive on this point.

~

Now, are Patriarchal blessings legitimate prophecies? Possibly. In Orthodox Christianity, some monastic elders are rumored ro be clairvoyant, but we tend to downplay this sort of thing as we feel our faith should not be based on signs and wonders. Furthermore, the process by which one receives a blessing from such a monastic is not a formal process of appealimg toma Patriarch for a written letter. Rather, in the case of St. Seraphim of Sarov, a hermit known to be a miracle worker, the pious would turn up at his hermitage in the woods outside of Sarov and receive a blessing and advice.

In this respect, St. Seraphim marked an interesting departure from the earliest Orthodox monks, the Desert Fathers like Ss. Anthony the Great, Pachomius, and Macarius, who were like St. Seraphim hermits. but who tended to avoid contact with the laity and even other monks as much as possible (although who would if pressed sometimes grant blessings). St. Seraphim was known for giving deeply penetrating spiritual advice, and was the definitive example of an Orthodox starets or gerons (spiritual elder), whereas the Desert Fathers more often than not were reticent to give advice to individuals, and when they did, tended to focus on counsels relating to how one ought to keep to the ascetic life.

Now, one of the blessings of the Orthodox and indeed the Roman Catholic church is the large number of monastics and other elders who have a blessing to serve as spiritual fathers, and who can impart, in person, the kind of advice that the very limited number of Mormon Patriarchs seem to prefer to dispense through what looks like, if you will forgive a certain brutal frankness on my part, a form letter.

 

[ToBeLoved]

i am getting a clearer picture from the LDS website.

The Father and Son appeared to JS. Then the angel Moroni. Then John the Baptist gave them the Aaronic priesthood, so they have the power to direct all and any angels in heaven. Then three apostles appeared and gave him the Melchezedek priesthood (which I don't think the apostles would even have the authrity to give) and why would not the Father and Jesus have given JS this Melchezedek priesthood if they appeared earlier to JS, BEFORE the apostles. Through this priesthood, they believe that they have the power and authority of God Himself to direct ALL things in HEAVEN and on EARTH.

So we have

* God the Father

* God the Son
“The Priesthood is everlasting. The Savior, Moses, & Elias—gave the keys to Peter, James & John


* angel Moroni

* John the Baptist
- Gave them Aaronic priesthood
“Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins. …


“He said this Aaronic Priesthood had not the power of laying on hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, but that this should be conferred on us hereafter; and he commanded us … that I should baptize Oliver Cowdery, and that afterwards he should baptize me. (https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/12/...-aaronic-and-melchizedek-priesthoods?lang=eng)

* Three apostles Peter, James and John & John the Baptist
- Gave them Melchezedek priesthood or the 'Son of God' priesthood.
“The messenger who visited us on this occasion and conferred this Priesthood upon us, said that his name was John, the same that is called John the Baptist in the New Testament, and that he acted under the direction of Peter, James and John, who held the keys of the Priesthood of Melchizedek, which Priesthood, he said, would in due time be conferred on us” (JS—H 1:68–72; emphasis in JS—H 1:70, 72 added).

There was no one living in mortality who held the keys of this Priesthood, therefore it was necessary that this messenger, who held the keys of the Aaronic Priesthood in the Dispensation of the Meridian of Time, should be sent to confer this power

“The Priesthood is everlasting. The Savior, Moses, & Elias—gave the keys to Peter, James & John on the Mount when they were transfigured before him. The Priesthood is everlasting, without beginning of days or end of years, without Father, Mother &c.—

<It> came down, down in regular succession. Peter James & John had it given to them & they gave it up [to us]

This priesthood is also to remain upon the earth untill the Last remnant of time. This holy priesthood we confered upon many. And is just as good and valid as if god had confered it in person.” 42 (https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/12/...-aaronic-and-melchizedek-priesthoods?lang=eng)

- Gave them the title of Apostle
To begin, the scriptures clearly attest that the foretold restoration of the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood and bestowal of apostolic authority were accomplished. In September 1830 the Lord unmistakably confirmed this fact when he spoke to the Prophet Joseph Smith of “Peter, and James, and John, whom I have sent unto you, by whom I have ordained you and confirmed you to be apostles, and especial witnesses of my name, and bear the keys of your ministry and of the same things which I revealed unto them” (D&C 27:12).

- Allowed them to gift others with the Holy Spirit

During the appearance of John called the Baptist, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were informed that the Melchizedek Priesthood, with its power to bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost, “would in due time be conferred on us” (JS—H 1:72).

God took the gospel and salvation from the world because of the Apostacsy and gave the gospel and the power to preach it only to JS and the Mormons.

https://www.lds.org/topics/melchizedek-priesthood?lang=eng
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1985/11/the-oath-and-covenant-of-the-priesthood?lang=eng

**
Through the authority of the Melchizedek Priesthood, Church leaders guide the Church and direct the preaching of the gospel throughout the world. In the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood, “the power of godliness is manifest” (D&C 84:20). This greater priesthood was given to Adam and has been on the earth whenever the Lord has revealed His gospel. It was taken from the earth during the Great Apostasy, but it was restored in 1829, when the Apostles Peter, James, and John conferred it upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery.

“There are, in the church, two priesthoods, namely, the Melchizedek and Aaronic” (D&C 107:1). The Melchizedek Priesthood, which is “after the Order of the Son of God” (D&C 107:3), is the greater of these. It “holds the right of presidency, and has power and authority over all the offices in the church” (D&C 107:8). It also holds “the keys of all the spiritual blessings of the church” (D&C 107:18). It is named after a great high priest who lived during the time of the prophet Abraham (see D&C 107:2-4; see also Alma 13:14-19).

https://www.lds.org/topics/melchizedek-priesthood?lang=eng

Sorry everyone, I'm trying to organize notes. Thought someone might find it interesting. Will be updating it.



Things I find particularly blasphemous:

* Mormons think they have the authority to distribute the indwelling Holy Spirit to others. Only the Mormons have this power.

* Think they have the power to direct angels (no wonder they say the Son of God is the brother of satan).

* Mormons are the only ones who can preach the gospel (not the same gospel as Christians) a different gospel. A false gospel.

* Claim lineage from the 12 Tribes through the blessing Jacob bestowed on Joseph;s son Epheram. And that they can pass down their own blessings onto others (see document in the OP) through the physical inheritance through the bloodline of Ephraim.

Wow. I have to try to take this all in and all the Biblical ramifications of what they are saying. I am floored.

 

[Albion]

We are saying this may be a discussion board but this topic should not be debated or discussed..

That's what I thought you were saying. I'd recommend going to a Mormon-only discussion board if you want to censor non-Mormons from addressing issues relating to Mormon practice. That way you won't have to be offended and, after all, you already know that there are people who are critical of some Mormon practices and beliefs, so that's nothing new to you, but you at least won't be offended by such discussions.

By the way, every other denomination represented here has endured what its people consider unfair judgments posted on these forums about their churches, from "Henry VIII started his own church because he wanted a divorce" (in my own case) to "Roman Catholics worship the Pope" to "Pentecostals are crazy orgyasts" to "Martin Luther was a radical bent on destroying the Church rather than reforming it." And all of them have, at times, included postings of documents or quotations from such sources.

I'm not sure why Mormons should feel special in this regard.

 

[Jane_Doe]

One major objection I have with Mormonism is the intense secrecy with which you enshroud various aspects of your faith, such as "Patriarchal blessings," your "Temple services," and so on. It makes me wary of Mormonism in general.

Christianity at one time did restrict access to the Gospel to catechumens, and to the Eucharist to the baptized (a vestige of this remains in the Dismissal of the Catechumens found in various ancient liturgies); however, even then, when Christianity was at its most secretive, in the Second Century, St. Justin Martyr fully explained Christian worship, including the mystagogy of the Eucharist itself, the most sacred rite of the early church, in a letter to the Emperor.

Even now, the Mormon church refuses to completely enumerate or describe the Temple services or document their temple liturgies to outsiders. Some things are described, and known, like endowment, sealing, proxy baptism and so on, but most of what is actually known comes in the form of exposees surreptitiously videos leaked by people with a Temple Reccommend who presumably became disgruntled.

Therr are relatively few religions at present which shroud their rites with the same secrecy as the Mormons. =

I always laugh when people say "Mormons are secret"... it's hardly like we encourage nearly every young person to serve a 2 year full-time mission to share Mormon beliefs, members all ages to be engaged in "every member a missionary", have people online (like here) trying to set the record straight, and so many other venues/efforts. I can barely think of a church which most MORE effort into putting themselves out there!

I find that the more accurate complaint from people is "how dare you (a random stranger) not let me stick my nose into every aspect your private life-- death to privacy!".