DC 132:1. JS “inquired of” God to understand why God justified Old Testament prophets having “many wives and concubines….” God did not raise the topic and force JS to live the laws of polygamy, nor did he send an angel with a flaming sword to make JS comply. The story about the angel was part of the pressure JS was applying to Zina Huntington, nothing more.

The ultimate proof that JS, not God, was the author of the idea is that JS had already married and been sealed to most of his plural wives by the date of this revelation (July 12, 1843). JS needed some way to bring Emma in line and make her accept polygamy, so JS inquired and God responded.

Premise 1: God is all good, wise and all knowing Lord of the Earth.

Premise 2: The LDS church is God's vehicle on Earth for prophecy and revelation.

Premise 3: The LDS church banned blacks from holding the priesthood until 1978.

Conclusion:. Banning blacks from holding the priesthood until 1978 was good and the best possible decision on Earth from an LDS perspective.

TL;DR Expecting kids/teenagers to figure out for themselves how to discern personal truth or personal revelation is putting too much pressure on them, which can lead to depression.

I'll explain my argument with a comparison. In 2021, the US surgeon general released an urgent advisory.

"From 2009 to 2019, the share of high school students who reported persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness increased by 40%, to more than 1 in 3 students. Suicidal behaviors among high school students also increased during the decade preceding COVID, with 19% seriously considering attempting suicide, a 36% increase from 2009 to 2019, and about 16% having made a suicide plan in the prior year, a 44% increase from 2009 to 2019."

I have a theory about what has contributed to that spike in depression. Over the past 10 years, one growing trend has been encouraging people to follow and speak their truth with advice like “your personal truth is just that, truth." One example of that is young kids in school being encouraged to discover the truth of their gender.

The problem with that idea of personal truth is many people, especially young people, don't have a defined and developed personal truth to base their life on. Most kids don't know enough about sexuality to know what 'boy' or 'girl' means, let alone understand it enough to determine their own identity and maybe make a decision that could change their whole life. So what happens to those kids and teenagers who feel pressured to follow their truth, but don't have a clear guide on how to know truth in the first place? They may repeat some phrases they hear about truth and assume they'll figure it out eventually, but that's not a stable philosophy to base their life on.

Pretending to be something you're not is mentally exhausting. That pretending and exhaustion can easily lead to depression, and pretending to be happy when you're not can make the depression worse. I'm sure the people telling kids these things have good intentions, but that doesn't make the philosophy any less dangerous. The philosophy itself is a wolf in sheep's clothing. It sounds positive and encouraging, but it's essentially encouraging people to build their house on sinking sand instead of a rock.

LDS epistemology is the same wolf, just dressed in Christian clothing. The church teaches young people to seek and follow spiritual experiences, but they don't have any clear guidance on how to recognize those experiences. Sure, LDS leaders talk about reading scripture and praying with sincerity and real intent, but none of that explains how to recognize spiritual experiences and know what's from God and what isn't. So what happens to those kids and teenagers who feel pressured to gain a testimony, but don't have a clear guide on how to do that? They may repeat other testimonies and assume they'll figure it out eventually, but that's not a reliable way to follow God. Elder Dallin H. Oaks seemed to support this model of truth when he said "We gain or strengthen a testimony by bearing it." In other words, even if you don't have a testimony yet, repeat testimony phrases as if you do, which will help you gain one for real. But just like the secular idea of 'following your truth,' this is encouraging people to build their houses of truth on the sinking sand of pretending to be something you're not.

I'm not suggesting the LDS church is responsible for the general rise in depression rates. I'm saying their beliefs are failing to offer a genuine alternative to secular ideas of personal truth. If my theory about the rising depression rates is accurate, if expecting kids to find and develop their own personal truth without clear guidance leads to depression, it makes sense that expecting kids to find and develop their own personal revelation without clear guidance also leads to depression.

Why would God want people following a system like this?

The church has made it very clear that unless a child reaches the age of accountability, they will immediately be sent to the highest place in heaven. Source: ( The Salvation of Little Children Who Die: What We Do and Don’t Know (churchofjesuschrist.org) Doctrine and Covenants 137:10 teaches that “all children … are saved in the celestial kingdom of heaven.” The only condition is that they “die before they arrive at the years of accountability.”

The church also believes that the embryo has a spirit in it. The First Presidency in 1909 shared the following, “The body of man enters upon its career as a tiny germ embryo, which becomes an infant, quickened at a certain stage by the spirit whose tabernacle it is, and the child, after being born, develops into a man.”

Thus, having an abortion will guarantee aa soul saved and sent to heaven. This means having as many abortions as possible is a righteous act as it is sending souls to heaven.

This seems really messed up to me...

Edit: Yes, abortion is a sin, but is taking the sin worth bringing a soul to heaven? It’s really an analysis of why are we on earth. If it’s just for a body and we want as many people in the celestial kingdom as possible why is this not done? Why are we on Earth for 99.9% of people to not get to the highest kingdom because they cannot complete the requirements.

Many LDS apologists claim there are two primary tests people can use to know the church is true. I've talked a lot about the Moroni 10:3-5 test, but I want to also talk a bit about the John 17:7 test.

John 7:17 If anyone’s will is to do God’s will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority.

"The latter-day discussions of this scripture have taken on an expanded meaning. It is that one must keep the commandments in order to receive a testimony of the gospel. For example, if one begins to keep the law of tithing (even if he does not yet believe in the principle), he will soon gain a testimony of the truthfulness of the law. The concept is that correct action precedes spiritual knowledge; doing precedes knowing; obedience begets testimony."

https://gospeldoctrine.com/new-testament/john/john-7

I wouldn't say that's a bad principle, but it's very limited in usefulness. Teachings like tithing, mercy, and 'love your neighbor as yourself' are not unique to the LDS church. Following them may support the claim that God exists, but they don't support the claim that the LDS church is true. Any false teacher could teach people to follow those principles, which may have a positive impact on their lives, but that doesn't mean everything else they teach is true.

The LDS church does have some unique beliefs about doctrines like salvation, grace, and the atonement, but those are all related to the afterlife. We can't see the full positive or negative impact of those beliefs in this life, so what is the point of following that test for them? If a test of truth requires you to die to see if something is true, it's not a good test.

Many LDS apologists support their model of epistemology by using an analogy of sense perception. The idea is that we can perceive and evaluate spiritual experiences in ways similar to how we perceive the world around us through sight, hearing, touching, smelling, and tasting. But that analogy has at least 3 significant problems.

1. Our senses are not naturally reliable.

I had an eye exam recently and one of the many tests involved reading numbers made up of colored dots surrounded by other colored dots. They were testing to see if I had developed color blindness. Even though I hadn't reported any difficulty with color over the past 30+ years, they still needed to test to be sure. Even with something as simple as perceiving color, doctors don't take it for granted that my perception is correct.

I passed the tests, so I can confidently say "I'm not color blind," but can I say the same thing about my spiritual perception? My color vision was verified by someone other than me, someone with the tools and training to check that kind of thing. With spiritual perception, I can't have anyone else who can test my spiritual senses to make sure they're accurate. I'm left to basically figure it out for myself, which brings me to the next point.

2. Our maturity has a big impact on our spiritual discernment.

How does someone know they're ready to discern spiritual experiences? The LDS church baptizes children as young as 8-years-old, and their baptism requires the person to profess faith the LDS church is true, which suggests they're mature enough to discern their spiritual experiences. But apologists I've listened to and read have said the process often takes a lot of studying, praying, and comparing experiences to know the truth. How can kids that young have enough spiritual and life experiences to correctly interpret them?

Some Mormons I've talked to said they didn't get confirmation until they were teenagers. That may be more mature than 8, but they're still dealing with puberty and a whole range of confusing experiences at those ages. The human brain doesn't even fully develop until 25-years-old. How can someone accurately discern spiritual experiences over long periods of time when their emotional and mental senses are still developing?

There may be times where it's difficult to trust our physical senses, like with optical illusions or seeing a mirage. But both of those can be further evaluated with other senses, like simply touching them. It's much harder to compare an experience that happens today with one that happened months or years ago, especially when that previous experience happened at a different stage a maturity.

There's also the issue of spiritual maturity. Suppose someone starts learning about the church as an adult agnostic. They don't have faith in God yet, but they're willing to give it a chance, so they start reading scriptures and praying. After a few years of praying and developing faith in God, they decide to officially join a church. How should they discern their spiritual experiences? Were the spiritual experiences in their first year as reliable as those in their third year? If not, when does someone know they're ready?

3. We don't have any instructions for how it's supposed to work.

This would all be easier to understand and accept if there any detailed instructions on how we're supposed to discern these experiences. The closest thing we have are a few verses in the Bible that vaguely mention prayer and the Spirit. At best, those verses only give us half the puzzle. Even if we interpret them as telling people to 'Pray to know the truth,' that doesn't say anything about how we can reliably discern an answer.

Difficulties in sense perception can be studied. Books can be written about the subject and we can develop exercises for people to deal with those challenges.

Where are the instructions on how to discern spiritual experiences? The implication seems to be that we're expected to pray and figure the rest out for ourselves. One of the fundamental ideas of the LDS church seems to be that we need a prophet leading us, and if the church didn't have a prophet, it would be in danger of falling into apostasy. How has any LDS prophet led on this issue? Where are the LDS instructions on spiritual discernment, the primary way to know truth?

As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day-Saints I see some members look at Russell M. Nelson as the designated prophet, seer and revelator. So, what is that? What does it mean? As we learn in Church dogma, our current prophet speaks for Christ, whom is at the helm.

So, Nelson is getting direct information from Christ on what his brothers and sisters need to know on this earth. And we know that another way of saying this is that whatever is given to us through Nelson, our prophet, from God or Christ, is "Doctrine". And Doctrine never changes, because God/Christ is perfect and does not change. Ok…

We also have many examples of prophets in the scriptures warning the people of hard times to come, letting them know what they need to do to fend off the calamities of the world. A prime example of that is the Passover where the people were told to place the blood of a lamb on their thresholds to protect their children.

Now fast forward to October Conference 2019…Where is the warning and direction given to God's children whom are member of God's only true church to prepare for the calamity of Covid 19? What specific direction was given to the only authorized Church and Prophet that has all the keys of the Priesthood (Priesthood is the authority given to man to act in God's name) to receive revelation direct from God on the face of the earth? I see nothing. I see a lot of rehashed dogmas that are told at every conference. We might have a specific theme, but nothing earth shattering. To me, Covid 19 is earth shattering…

President Nelson even told us in his opening statement of the April 2020 conference that he didn't anticipate this at all. So, what is a prophet again? Did we get warned? If Nelson had no idea, then is the heaven's closed? Or do we not have a prophet. Or does God and/or Christ not want to let us know how to prepare? If that is the case, then why do we even need a prophet if we are not going to get information that would help us prepare to live our lives safer?

This pandemic is a major blow and heartache to everyone who lives on this earth. According to Christians and Mormons alike we are God's children. And God has not given us any warning or direction through, as we are told, the only true prophet on this earth authorized to speak on God's behalf?

We only have a few conclusions, in my opinion:

• God does not care for His children enough to warn them so they might lessen their suffering if they heed His counsel.

• We do not have a Prophet, as defined by examples, in the bible, of the prophets of old.

• God can't or won't give us guidance and direction for His own reasons

If any of these are true, we are on this earth to figure it out on our own. For whatever reason God is not helping, outside of the fact that, if the rest of the dogma is true, He built this world for us to gain experience, and this world is in motion and God will not or cannot intervein allowing us to gain the experience all on our own.

So where does that leave us today? I personally don't know, except for the fact, I do believe that I need to be the best person I can be, help my fellow brothers and sisters here upon this earth. Be kind to all I meet. Take care of my family the best I know how. That is all I can do at this time.

According to various LDS apologetics articles I've read, key factors of receiving a witness from the Spirit include (1) having a sincere heart and real intent, (2) praying multiple times, (3) being worthy of the Spirit's influence, (4) having a spiritual gift to receive a witness, and (5) refined spiritual sight. Would that be an accurate reading of the LDS system of how we're supposed to know and verify truth claims?

If so, it sounds like having a lot of faith in ourselves and what we can do. Nothing in the Bible suggests humans should have that much faith in our own spiritual discernment. I do believe God reveals truth through the Spirit, but that doesn't mean our spiritual discernment is perfect. Prayer and seeking guidance from the Spirit are an essential part of the Christian faith, but Jesus and the Apostles never said it was the primary way we know what to believe.

I read Brigham Young believe in multiple Earths & each have there own Savior, Tempter & Adam & Eve. I read that some LDS believes they will rule over their own world & have their own children spirits born on these worlds & also have a Christ figure & Satan like figure in them & this will be a cycle continuing for infinity. Is this a common believe among LDS today or is this view as Brigham pious religious speculations or personal theology? Ive also read there is a wide spectrum of believe among individual LDS but they all have to agree with binding doctrines in standard works of the Bible, BOM, D&C & POGP? Is the idea of Brigham Young & the idea of LDS being Gods having their own planets binding doctrines in LDS members of just speculations some have? I am a curious none member asking this question. Thank you if you answer my questions?

The "mild drinks" that are specifically suggested as a good thing in verse 17 are a direct reference to beer and no official doctrine I'm aware of has ever contradicted that.

I don't drink. I never have. But I'm pretty sure having a hamburger in June is more frowned upon in scripture than drinking beer.

The LDS Church has many good things about it. Below is a list of things that I see LDS members searching for without seemingly realizing that these things have been in the Catholic Church all along, in service to Jesus Christ. The Catholic Church already had these aspects to better and to fuller extent for 18 centuries before Joseph Smith was born.

There are many side-topics to this, but I'd like to discuss how LDS might think that they "restored" something that never disappeared. To this day, the Catholic Church outperforms the LDS (e.g. making disciples of all nations).

1. There is a living infallible magisterial authority ( Pope and Cardinals ).
2. People need to strive for sainthood.
3. Recognition of the Latter Days
4. Importance on Works of Faith
5. Emphasis on Family and Community
6. Heaven has many levels of exaltation
7. Strive for union with the divinity of God
8. Genealogy is important
9. Make disciples of all nations. The Catholic Church converted Europe and has baptized members in all nations.

As another example of the Catholic Church excelling, the Catholic Church has many orders of Monks, Priests and Nuns that dedicate their lives in service of God. It is the world's largest Charity, by far.

The Catholic Church has it's operational issues too, such as bad clergy, but so does the LDS , and likely to higher ratios.

As an aside, it seems like Joseph Smith and the LDS Church was not aware of these things in the Catholic Church. The British had spread a lot of propaganda against the Catholic Church and made it illegal to be Catholic in 11 of the 13 colonies. This is ironic, because devout Catholics like Christopher Columbus were first to the Americas centuries before (1492).

My claim is that Sodom was destroyed not because of tolerance for same-sex romance, but because of its wholehearted embrace of sexual violence.

When God sent messengers to warn Lot and his family to leave, the men of the town wanted to "know" them, an apparent euphemism for something sexual. If we assume that God's messengers were not going to consent to this, then it was not merely sexual immorality; it was an act of violence, an attempt to violate their sexual agency.

The sentence "this was after the wickedness of Sodom" seems to say that this was standard procedure for Sodom. Their pride and inhospitality were so great that they would literally rather violate travelers than feed them and shelter them.

My reading is supported by the behavior of Lot's daughters. After he and they escaped, they weren't confident they would ever get to bear children. So, they took turns drug-raping their own father via alcohol to get pregnant, imitating the culture where they had lived.

Corollary 1: My argument assumes that sexual violence and sexual immorality are different sins. It also leads to a related implication: sexual violence is much more severe, in God's eyes; hence, Sodom was destroyed in a particularly spectacular fashion, similar to cities who murder God's messengers.

Corollary 2: If correct, then my reading serves as an indictment on Christianity, for its failure to understand this lesson. It especially serves as an indictment on those of us who have the Book of Mormon, because we have such beautiful passages on human agency, and yet we still have not conceptualized sexual violence as especially severe sin for violating that agency.

I lean towards the text of the revelation. I believe Joseph Smith that it came from the Lord to him, so with that I believe that the Lord has said that beer is OK (contrary to church statements) and that I should eat meat only when I absolutely need to (which the church seems to have forgotten about since Wilford Woodruff).

What are your thoughts? Do you follow what a prophet says, even when it contradicts what has already come in a "thus saith the Lord" fashion?

When I started to read the BOM I noticed in many places the phrase “the Lord God”. In the King James this phrasing is most always typed with LORD being all caps or GOD being all caps.

This is because in the earliest manuscripts the Tetragrammaton is located in these instances, therefore the Translators of the KJV substituted it with LORD all caps or GOD instead of spelling out the Divine name. It may be possible that Joseph Smith did not know this about the KJV, and being influenced by this he too would have written “the Lord God” several times; only not with its capitalisation. Thinking this sounds biblical and ancient. However, in reality, the ancient manuscripts have YHWY(Yahweh) God, not “Lord God”. This is peculiar, if the BOM was written by ancient Jews in America why would these Jews imitate the KJV? Would they not have written the same as the Jewish prophets wrote like Isaiah; Writing “YHWH God” and not Lord God? Especially since they had the writings of Isaiah in their possession.

let's say there are a hundred different religious leaders preaching a hundred different things. They all say that theirs is the one true path. They tell you that the only way to confirm it is within your heart after prayer. Then they tell you that if your heart told you one of the other leaders was correct that's actually not the holy spirit. That's actually Satan talking to you.

This is so clearly a logical fallacy. you can't just say that anyone who disagrees with you is automatically Satan by definition. It's such an obvious cop out. Mormons know that they are just one of many people claiming to be the one true path to god. They know that there is no actual way to confirm whether or not they are correct. And yet they very confidently claim to be the only correct path and confidently claim that any instincts that tell you otherwise are directly from Satan without any proof of Satan even existing. they take anything bad that happens as proof of Satan and anything good that happens as proof of God.

I guess my claim is that this is very clearly horseshit, and a manipulative way to always be right (or never be right).

Edit: so far no one has effecteively debated me on this using any evidence or logic. A lot of people running me around in exhausting circular logic about how "if it's real you know," but no one's willing to give me an actual example of HOW a person would know that God is answering their prayers.

As someone from a Roman Catholic background, pretty much all my spellwork is based on intercession of the Saints and calling upon the Archangels for help with very specific prayers along with used of blessed items using symbolism of angels and saints that have been blessed by priests such as a medal of Saint Archangel Michael or wearing the brown robes worn by Franciscan clergy during rituals or fasting before a ritual to emulate Saint Margaret of Cortona's life before calling for her aid in intercession.

I know as far as Islam goes, the Shia sect believes Saints can intercede directly through prayers asking for their help and Sufi culture has a rich tradition of occultic Islam where you call upon angels and converted Jinn for help.

Additionally in Judaism, I seen the concept of asking the Tzadik for help while praying esp at the graves in some sources and some Jewish prayers involving calling out the Archangels such as the Shema prayer (in this specific example you call the angels to be beside you at a certain direction).

So does this concept exist in the LDS Church? If so, what are Saints called in Mormonism? Does the religion call upon Archangels for magical acts like protection from demons and miraculous healing of diseases and so on? Bonus question, how is Mary seen? In Catholicism she is considered the strongest Saints, so powerful that she is ranked Queen of Heaven in addition to being the Theotokos or Mother of God. How high do the Latter Day Saints revere her?

So in February the Church's area authority updated the guidelines for YSA Wards to state that, with regards to the law of Chastity, homosexual dating relationships would be treated similarly to heterosexual couples.

A person who is dating someone of the same gender would only need to repent with the bishops help if they do something that a heterosexual couple would need to repent of, etc. I.e. kissing doesn't require losing a temple recommend now.

What do you think about this? Is this actively detrimental to the end goals of encouraging temple marriage? Was this one of those changes that has had a positive effect?

Disclaimer that I shouldn't have to give - bisexual, temple recommend holding member here.

If the main purpose of life is to gain experience via trials, temptations, pain, etc., does that imply that eternity will be filled with that, even when you're exalted?

The topic I am interested in discussing is the difference between belief and knowledge. I am of the understanding that without seeing God, we do not know certain things are true, but we do have reason to believe.

This became a prominent topic for me while serving my mission in West Texas. I would sit in the living rooms of friends that I taught and profess to know the Book of Mormon was true, God is our Father, and that Jesus is the Christ. I started to notice that those words felt empty as I said them. This was concerning as I was devoting two years of my life to this. As I was studying I came across a talk that highlighted the phrase found in Mark 9:24 "Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief." This became a personal mantra, lifting the weight of knowing, and acknowledging that while I didn't "know", I did believe and that was enough.

In Ether, the brother of Jared's faith is made perfect. "...for he knew that it was the finger of the Lord; and he had faith no longer, for he knew, nothing doubting." When the brother of Jared saw the Savior, he could no longer have faith because it had transcended into a knowledge.

The phrase "I know" is common terminology in the Mormon community. It is often paired with phrases like "With every fiber of my being" or "Without a shadow of a doubt" You can attend a testimony meeting and hear this from almost any member. I think this could potentially stem from hearing the apostles and prophets testimonies (which, if they truly are special witnesses of Christ, then they do know). I also think that we don't want to sound as if we have any doubts.

This misunderstanding is potentially harmful to members of the congregation. There is pressure to claim to know certain truths. If this was better understood, it could create a safer environment for honest questioning and doubt. Members wouldn't feel the need to have a perfect testimony, but rather an honest one.

I no longer say that I know that God is real, that Christ suffered the atonement, and the Book of Mormon is true, but I strongly believe those things. I am relying on Heavenly Father to help my unbelief.

I've shared this with some friends/family and have received mixed feedback. I would enjoy hearing perspectives and opinions.

Thanks,

What is the definition of an Apostate Mormon and where do they end up in eternity?

the telestial?

or

hell/outer darkness?

And where will hitler end up?

He never heard the LDS gospel so he has a chance to be taught in spirit prison, right?

The spirit missionaries get to go there and teach him the gospel, correct?

If he repents in spirit prison for killing all those Jews and starting a world war, he should be able to get to at least the telestial, right?

Because he never heard the one true gospel. He didn't know.

​

My question is basked in a thought I had: I have heard the Mormon gospel and I outright reject it, I reject its Jesus, I reject its god, i reject its principles, because it absolutely makes no sense to me and I have not met a single LDS that can and will answer my questions in order to save my soul. Maybe I don't deserve saving. My LDS family doesn't think so. Their Gospel doesn't ask them to reach into the fire an pull people out. sorry, mini rant, over.

So, Since I was born LDS, baptized at 8, ordained a teacher, I had that "I believe joseph smith testimony" that everyone has thing going for me, my dad was a bishop and I left, and reject it now, removing my name and records from their corporation...... Does that make me apostate? and will hitler, who committed genocide against the people of God have a higher degree of glory than I will? Because I heard the gospel and he didn't.

thanks, cheers.

I'm afraid of church and it's members, but I love the gospel. I hope this is better subreddit since the others keep blocking my post.. I'm looking for answers and open to any and all kind of responses.

I was born in the church, but never taught the gospel. My parents neglected and spiritually abused me and my siblings (child services kept coming to our house all the time) and they forcibly dragged us to church. I never owned my own pair of scriptures or knew what was going on in class and I only remember laminate cards and cake on the day of my baptism. My parents played it off that myself and all my siblings we were apostolic to our family ward when we got big enough to stop going and I think that had a massive effect on me in the years I would try to return. My dad served a mission and both my parents held callings in the church and knew lots about the gospel so you would never have guessed they were monsters to their children and mentally ill addicts behind closed doors.

I've forgiven them, but I have major trust issues with people who are Christian especially those who are LDS. This is weird because I love the gospel and read and pray as often as I can, but I don't go to church and don't want to other than for my desire to go to the temple. I look at church members as (1) a legitimate threat of further spiritual abuse (either incidental or intentional), (2) a reminder of how wrong my life went and (3) a reminder of how misunderstood and complicated my experience is and will always be among typical members of the church.

I have ptsd episodes at church over really small ridiculous things. My frequent one is when people interrogate me on which ward I came from and whether I'm baptized when first meeting me and the other is everything about the cultural social hell that is Relief Society. I don't like the facebook friend requests I get from complete strangers who are members and seeing their creepy professional-family-photo-only profiles. Just because they go to church and have a "clean and righteous" social media presence doesn't make them good people or people I can trust. I feel pressured to add them because otherwise it would be mean and wrong and let them invade my profile and judge everything I've ever posted or said.

I know in my heart that I have a very warped paranoid and wrong perspective of lds members and that I'm actually judging other people rather than vice versa part of the time, but my brain and my body do not know these things when I'm actually there or dealing with the people. I can be in full fight or flight mode and experience a colorful range of emotions being inside of church. It's an exhausting sometimes traumatic mental battle that I have to do alone since my husband isn't a member. I really want to find practical steps for someone like me that gets me to the temple someday.

I'm not really sure where to go from here. I read and pray and try to come back, but the social stratusphere and insular culture really messes me up. Can I sit in the lobby of church and listen to sacrament through the speakers? Do I have to go to classes and relief society and hold callings to be worthy to go to the temple? I just feel so handicapped and like the church doesn't have answers for people like me. In my heart of hearts, maybe I'll never measure up and I really am all the spiritually abusive things my parents said I was. Or maybe Christ is keeping me out of church because he knows it's not a good time? I'm open to all kinds of responses.

Star: I guess this will be my forum for debate, I suppose I could speak to the moon crowds as well. This is my first post, however I am ecstatic that I found this forum! I have hundreds of questions. My first one...... I know active LDS say that joseph is a true prophet, how can we reconcile his prophecies not coming to pass? How do we trust him with our eternal souls for the truth if what he said, never happened?

In my opinion, mormonism began with belief in the trinity (Christians would declare this as monotheism, although that's debatable.) The book of mormon seems to have many references showing this belief. While I would say later mormon teachings (pearl of great price, king follett sermon etc) would express Henotheistic belief. Then of course the Adam-God teachings and The Father and The Son doctrinal exposition make things murky. Thoughts/opinions?

UPDATE: Clarification of Requirements to Participate:

I realize I was unclear on some things, and I apologize. Thank you to everyone who has already completed the survey and to those of you asking questions and giving me feedback.

- Be POMO for a minimum of 6 months

- Both those who have officially resigned and those who haven't are welcome to participate.

Hello everyone,

My name is Emma Yataco. I'm a UC Berkeley Undergraduate Researcher currently studying the effects of conversion/de-conversion from the LDS Church.

As an ex-mo I am deeply curious about the effects of joining/leaving religion. For the past two years I have been studying conversion/de-conversion in the LDS Church and recently began looking at Kingdom Hall as well.

I want to invite you to participate in my study by first completing the Preliminary Screening Survey.

Here is a link to my research profile. https://hsp.berkeley.edu/haas-fellows/detail/3379

If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at emmayataco@berkeley.edu or feel free to send me a direct message.

Thank you!

We've been made according to Gods likeness. We have similar physical characteristics. If He has a body he has a race. At least this is my deduction. But of he has one race, then he could not be the origin of races. How do we explain then the existence of many races if God has one race?

My deductions so far lead me to 2 possible alternatives:

1. The secular explanation, scientifical consensus of adaptation depending on the conditions of the geographical zone where groups of people developed.

2. God has many wives, and she might have one wife that is white, another that is black, amerindian, asian, Arab, Jewish, etc. So the origin of races would be explained in direct relations to Heavenly Mothers.

This is pure speculation. I acknowledge that, but interesting topic to discuss about nonetheless.

I expect mainly LDS opinions since my premise rests on the foundation of LDS theology, but theories from people of other faiths are also welcome.

Thank you.

I post this here, because r/latterdaysaints algorithm doesn't allow me to, and I'm tired and upset of trying to figure out what is the specific word said algorithm doesn't like.

Not long ago I went astray. I was baptized around 8 years ago, went to a full-time mission and served obediently. I always was the type of member that followed the counsel of leaders with blind faith, trusting in their capacity as the Lord's annointed.

My faith began to tremble on the mission. All the leaders there were friends, many of them I knew they weren't obedient, but since their pals were the APs, they got to be DLs, ZLs or even APs, and I, who strived to be exactly obedient got nothing whatsoever. But the final blow to my faith was when I came home. I was taught that since I served the Lord, it was his turn to reward me. But then every single thing I expected to go well for me, it went bad. I started blaming myself "You forgot to read the Scriptures today", "You forgot to pray today", and thus, I was never worthy of the help of God and the Spirit. That degenerate into frustration, and eventually in depression. Until one day I decided to end it all and remove myself from the train of thought that made me feel that way (Which was, I thought, the Gospel).

I spent like a year like this (I came back form my mission 2 1/2 years ago). I went full liberal. I partied, I had sex (which wasn't really that special to be honest), I talked against the leaders, I even joined exmormon subreddit, but I left it since I don't feel identified with it anymore... But now, after reading some stuff, some good books and seeing the current status quo of the world: Zionism, feminism, abortion, LGBTQ movements, globalism, capitalism (mammonism) and cultural marxism, which has infested our governments and brainwashed our children into individualism and materialism.

All the moral values, the beautiful perception of life that we lack today, is precisely what the Church teaches, and what the world desperately needs. So I'm thinking of coming back (which at the time is impossible because of the quarantine). I even started reading again the Book of Mormon, which always fascinated me due to it's insightful passages.

But I still have issues.

1. I'm mexican, latino, tan-skinned, black-haired, black-eyed, and I can't assimilate that TBOM says that such phenotypical traits of my ethnicity are a curse. I think my physical characteristics should be a badge of honor because its part of my part of the history of my people.
2. How can I follow the prophet, if Pres. Monson released the November 2015 policy, and Pres Nelson back then said it was revelation from God, but now Pres Nelson has received a revelation to remove it. Am I supposed to believe that God changed His mind in 5 years? And more examples like that.

I know about all the historical stuff that is often cited, but I knew about that before the mission and didn't care, I could look past that as well. I don't know if I'll ever be a fully believing member again, to be honest, I don't see that being the case (though the reasons beyond what I already wrote don't belong here, maybe in the debate subreddit). But I want to go back.

Long story short, I don't have a testimony. I want to go back to Church, because it's a safe haven from the world. But I don't know if I'll ever recover that testimony. Right now I can't say "I know this is true", not even "I believe this is true", but what I can certainly say is "I hope this is true".

So if you have any advice or comments, I'd like to hear them. Thank you if you took the time to read this.

I just removed a half a dozen posts. Nothing was hugely wrong with them as much as it was that this just wasnt the appropriate sub for them. This sub is for debate and discussion. I removed one Discord spam post, a few soapbox posts, and a few people just copy and pasting posts removed from other subs and trying to make it look like debate by inviting thoughts and opinions at the end.

Here's a new rule to at least keep things a little cleaner.

Your post title must clearly summarize the content of the post. If I see a post titled "Wondering" or "Hey new member here and I have a question" or anything like that, Im going to remove it.

In addition, the post itself must present a clear and discernible topic for debate. Im more than happy to leave up anti-mormon posts or topics, your person disagreements with the church or whatever, but dont just copy and post some post from your local pastor's blog and then add "Thoughts?" at the end. We'll do the work if you do the work.

I found this article when searching for archeological evidence for mormonism.

Many of these seem to be not evidence for Mormonism, but counters to evidence against Mormonism. To me, the only compelling piece of evidence on the list was the altar at Nahom.

However, when fully examined, this does not constitute (IMO) convincing evidence. See here

"Although the actual location of NHM is plausible when compared to Lehi's purported route, his change of direction on the Arabian peninsula, the timeframe (~600 BC) matching the archaeological dates, and the ancient burial ground found there, one non-LDS author has suggested a valid reason why Nahom and NHM may not represent the same location"

What we really have from these evidences is that some parts of Mormonism are plausible, but there's no compelling evidence that they are probably true.

From wikipedia:

"The Book of Mormon mentions several animals, plants, and technologies that are not substantiated by the archaeological record of the period 3100 BC to 400 AD in the Americas. The Institute for Religious Research posted on their website a 1998 letter from National Geographic Society stated that they were unaware of any archaeological evidence that would support the Book of Mormon. "Sheep" are mentioned in the Book of Mormon metaphorically at various places in the Nephite record but are conspicuously absent in the list of animals observed in the New World upon the arrival of the Nephites. "Swine" are referred to twice in the Book of Mormon, and states that the swine were "useful for the food of man" among the Jaredites. There have not been any remains, references, artwork, tools, or any other evidence suggesting that swine were ever present in the pre-Columbian New World."

Given the lack of evidence for most archeological claims for the book of Mormonism, one altar at a plausible location does not constitute compelling evidence (IMO).

Sorry if this came across as rude. This is all my opinion and I'm open to having my mind changed.

I'm looking more for a discussion here rather than a debate to see what LDS members think about the trumpet falling.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/18/us/earthquake-salt-lake-temple-moroni/index.html

Is it a sign from God? If so, what does it mean ?

It seems like the message is that God wants the lampstand to be removed.

Rereading an early post I see that it was noted that the Mormon Church has about 14 million members. The last Pew Research number I read indicated that its activity rate was about 29 point something or other. Not sure how they defined active It is likely that a large percentage of the names contained on official rolls are people who have have had no activity within Mormonism for many years, if ever, like the baseball baptisms in England in the 50s and 60s, virtually inactive since soon after joining. Is it really legitimate to claim 14 millions members which gives the impression that all are busily involved?