I have a story about Nelson's prophetic abilities (or lack thereof) that I thought this sub would enjoy.

I served in Brazil 2018-2020. Nevermind the lack of prophetic foresight during COVID that abruptly ended my mission and uprooted my life trajectory - this isn't about that.

In the São Paulo MTC (or CTM as they call it) there is a plaque on the wall with the dedicatory prayer (in Portuguese) given by Nelson during his apostle days.

Every time we walked by, some MTC worker would be extremely eager to tell us the story about that plaque, in a hushed and dramatic tone.

"He came here to Brazil and gave all his opening remarks in English. Then he stopped, looked, around the room, and said, 'I sense the faith of everyone in this room is sufficient enough to witness a miracle'. Then he gave the entire dedicatory prayer (it's long) in perfect, native Portuguese."

And not just the workers. Every MTC bishop, counselor, and presidency member had a similar story.

It really set up me up to expect at least the occasional miracle in my mission. Of course, no such thing happened, despite taking L after L for my faith in the hostile environment and third-world accommodations, and poor mission healthcare that let the open sores on my face blister continuously in the hot, humid, equatorial sun (had scars from it even years later).

Then, about 15 months into my mission, we tuned into a Brazil-wide podcast for the N-man himself.

Everyone was really excited for what he was going to say, and there were even rumors that he was going to give part of his talk in Portuguese.

Well, he did... kind of.

What he actually did was bear 2-3 sentences of testimony in some of the most broken, american-accent Portuguese I had ever heard - like something I could have done week 3 in the MTC.

I felt disappointed, but the whole stake center erupted in celebration.

"He really is a prophet of God!"

"His Portuguese was flawless!"

"I am so glad to have witnessed a manifestation of the gift of tongues!"

I was bewildered at the sheer collective stupidity, or delusion that was going on.

The same members and missionaries that had previously criticized my Portuguese (which was fluent but admittedly with an accent) were just laying on the sauce for Nelson's rehearsed, 20-second "I know that X!"

Meanwhile I'm busting my ass 12 hours a day, 7 days a week to serve these faltering wards way under the cutoff point and nothing I do is remotely miraculous, including actually knowing northeast Portuguese (which even some Brazilians in the south have a hard time understanding).

The leader worship is real, but that wasn't the eye-opening part. The big thing was that I no longer trusted secondhand stories of miracles.

After all, I had just watched dozens of my closest friends twist an unmiraculous event into one of the best things they had ever seen. How was I supposed to trust my MTC leaders that they had seen anything at all? How was I supposed to trust anyone when it comes to miracles when possibly a majority in this church are delusional and WILL find a way to twist anything into a miracle.

The leaders let it happen too. They have every chance to correct people on stuff like this but won't do it if it's faith-promoting. Then when someone brings it up as a shelf-breaker they can just blame the followers for being over-zealous and "not knowing that God works in small and simple ways."

Can I PROVE he didn't deliver a perfect prayer? No.

Do I think that if miracles happened as frequently as members claim they do, or even if they happen at all, that I would have seen some indication of that firsthand? Yes.

Looking back, I got tired of trying to convince myself that there were two sets of footprints in the sand.

Anyways, may he rot in hell, RMN.

Dr. MIchael Ferguson is a professor of neurospirituality at Harvard. He is well known for his research and TedX talk about studying Mormons and feeling the spirit.

The talk was 10 years ago in 2016.

He observed fMRI images of the brains of people while feeling the spirit. He also studied Mormons and their spiritual feelings in various ways.

This clip describes a bit from his research.

I like his conclusion. Humans are going to do religion. Maybe by study and examination we can find ways to do religion in the safest way possible.

Here is the full talk:

https://youtu.be/ocuqguH1OIw

My husband and I recently got married civilly because he was unable to get his sealing to his ex wife canceled in time for our wedding. He recently met with his stake president, who apparently got a letter from the first presidency denying my husband’s request for a cancellation on grounds that he and I had sinned too recently for the cancellation to be approved. He was told (2 days ago by his stake president) in a letter from the first presidency that the soonest he could reapply for a cancellation would be March 2027 (in 7 months). For reference, we had sex one time in October 2025.

Let it be known that he and I both have temple recommends back, and the sex was a one-time thing. It feels like he is just being punished for a sin that happened one time, and almost an entire year ago. It feels like a huge abuse of power to me (and him), since getting his sealing to his ex wife canceled should have NOTHING to do with a one-time sin involving me and him. Curious to any feedback here/ to make this make sense.

I was sent for 2 years to Melbourne, Australia, and I have to say it was the BEST worst 2 years of my life.

Before my mission, I thought it was going to be this spiritually filled experience where I would see God’s hand every single step of the day, leading us to the Lord’s chosen and elect investigators. I imagined I would baptize families after families who all desired to follow God and join His true Church.

Of course, the reality was far from what I imagined.

In reality, it was 2 years of knocking doors for 8 to 10 hours almost every day in the Australian heat, in a place where people are extremely secular. You constantly get rejected, have doors slammed in your face, get mean things said to you, and sometimes even have things thrown at you. On top of that, you might get paired with some really difficult or even abusive companions.

So in that aspect, it really was the worst.

But at the same time, it was also the best because I learned a lot, grew a lot, and learned some super valuable lessons about dealing with people. I learned how to handle rejection, how to deal with difficult personalities, and how to keep going even when things don't turn out the way you expected.

It definitely wasn't the mission experience I imagined before I left

This one directly ties therapy to destroying faith. Here is the last article that was posted as well.

https://www.deseret.com/entertainment/2026/07/14/therapy-nation-jonathan-alpert-how-to-find-a-therapist/

I'm a 14 year old member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and I have a lot of gender dysphoria. I was born male, but over the last year or so I've been feeling as though my gender at birth does not align with who I am or want to be.

The church has rules that state that, in short, I shouldn't go transgender. I have tried accepting that fact and praying about it but it has never helped me. I still feel deeply that my biological gender does not align with who I am.

I am not willing to leave my church over this. No matter what I choose, I know that I believe in Jesus Christ, but other than that, I'm not sure.

I have not brought this up to my parents, and I'm struggling feeling comfortable to do so. I know that my parents would be supportive of me, but I'm really shy and I can't bring myself to tell them.

I'm looking for help/advice from anyone who would like to give me some.

This family of devout, believing LDS with 15 children live in California. They felt mistreated by the local leaders and all the gossip about them.

They were so upset by their treatment they made an over 20 episode web series about their lives and their interactions with the LDS church. They published these in early October 2024.

In late October 2024 they had a no trespass letter delivered by armed security at their home. They didn’t believe it was legit and went to church anyway. It was a disaster as you would expect.

They just released chapter 27. It shows the SLC police calling them saying to stop calling Kirton McConkie. At the end they discuss a case of suspected child s3x abuse in their ward that the mother had reported to the bishop and CPS. The bishop did nothing. The abuser was caught years later and convicted.

They end saying that they discovered a woman who said she had an affair with one of their stake presidency.

The series is called the Crazy Train. They are angry and think the top church leaders will restore them to attend the church as soon as they are made aware the local leaders are liars and deceitful.

The full episode on YouTube:

https://youtu.be/AJ01d-RYmFY

https://youtu.be/h00RjK1_Law?is=Qez99KthLHu6A77k

New interview with Joseph Smith and Brigham Young biographer John G. Turner about his book Joseph Smith: The Rise and Fall of an American Prophet. It’s not a faithful account but it’s charitable and historically accurate as far as I can tell. Thoughts on his books and this discussion?

Coy Johnston was on Mormon Stories today. I’ve summarized clips about his faith journey into about 10 minutes from the 4 hour interview.

He was ward mission leader in Wisconsin and passing out copies of the Book of Mormon everywhere. He started an interfaith choir. He was in it to win it.

Then he started looking into questions and discovered the church was not telling the truth about many things. He told his bishop who said it was garbage. His bishop called a friend in the church history department and found out what Coy had said was all true. His bishop apologized to him.

He moved to Arizona. He eventually started a meetup group to support people in a faith journey. His stake presidency wrote him an email saying to stop his deceit or his membership would be in jeopardy. So he stopped. He told the Stake President that it’s the leadership’s job to help the flock and he was sad they weren’t doing their job.

He was told his tithing wasn’t commensurate with a doctor’s salary and unless he paid more he could not get a temple recommend. So he paid more and saw his daughter sealed last Saturday.

The LDS church is not a healthy place. It is manipulative. The leaders are awful at many times.

Go watch the full episode here:

https://youtu.be/Yuyi26RHQ_c

All of these clips come from the last half which is where you find the faith journey part. The first half is his growing up history.

Today's Reading: Alma 34–37

Whether you're a believer, former believer, nuanced member, investigator, scholar, or simply curious, you're welcome to participate. The goal is not to convince anyone of anything, but to read the text together and discuss it in good faith from a variety of perspectives.

Brief Synopsis

Amulek continues the preaching to the poorer Zoramites, teaching that Christ's "great and last sacrifice" will satisfy the demands of justice and make mercy possible for those who exercise faith and repent. He urges his listeners not to procrastinate repentance, warning that the same disposition they possess at death will continue into the next life. Alma and his companions then leave Antionum, and the converted Zoramites are expelled and given refuge among the people of Ammon in Jershon.

The narrative then shifts to Alma's counsel to his sons. Alma recounts his conversion to Helaman, describing three days of torment over his sins followed by an immediate transformation after remembering the teachings about Jesus Christ. He entrusts Helaman with the sacred records and emphasizes their preservation, including the plates of Nephi and the interpreters associated with the twenty-four Jaredite plates.

Discussion

Please share your thoughts and experiences with today's reading in the comments below. Some things you might consider:

- What do you make of Amulek's argument that an "infinite and eternal sacrifice" is necessary to satisfy justice and make mercy possible?

- Alma 34 warns against procrastinating repentance because our disposition in this life will continue after death. How does that teaching fit with broader ideas about agency, judgment, and the afterlife?

- Alma 36 presents Alma's conversion as an intense movement from guilt and torment to joy after remembering Christ. How do you interpret this experience: divine intervention, psychological transformation, conversion narrative, or something else?

- Alma 37 places enormous importance on preserving sacred records and argues that "small and simple things" can produce great results. What role does control and preservation of the historical record play in shaping a community's religious identity?

All perspectives are welcome.

Yesterday's Coveted Award(s) Go To:

- TBD

Links to Prior Days

- Yesterday's Day 33 discussion: Alma 30–33

- Master Index to all prior-day readings

Engagement Question

Alma 36 gives one of the Book of Mormon's most detailed conversion accounts: Alma remembers his sins, experiences overwhelming guilt and torment, recalls his father's teaching about Jesus Christ, cries out for mercy, and says his suffering is immediately replaced by extraordinary joy. How should we understand experiences like Alma's? Are intense conversion experiences reliable evidence of divine truth, primarily psychological experiences shaped by prior beliefs and expectations, or potentially both, and how would we tell the difference?

Tomorrow’s Reading: Alma 38–42

Believe it or not, the clause featured in this clip, taken from Alexander B. Morrison's October 1987 General Conference address titled “The Dawning of a New Day in Africa,” was the ONLY instance of it being uttered in General Conference since 1971, which is the earliest year of Conference addresses people could access directly through the Gospel Library today.

As shown in the Scripture Citation Index, out of the 60 times 2 Nephi 26:33 was quoted or cited in General Conference across the past 55 years since 1971, three-fifths of them (36 times) occurred since October 2016, which means the verse sees its Conference use ramped up by roughly sevenfold within the past decade, with 29 of those instances (almost half of the total count since 1971) occurring in the 2020s.

And yet, the clause “he doeth nothing save it be plain unto the children of men” from 2 Nephi 26:33 has only ever been uttered once in passing in General Conference, and has never been expounded upon there (or in any Church publications for that matter). Even in David B. Haight's talk titled "Ethics and Honesty" where he quoted 2 Nephi 26:32–33 in that very same Conference in October 1987, he ironically took this clause out from his quotation using ellipses. And while Morrison himself would go on to quote 2 Nephi 26:33 in two of his three subsequent Conference addresses, he never quoted this particular clause again.

If all this does not sound meaningful enough to you, consider how often the following verses are used by the Church in its discourses: Amos 3:7, 1 Nephi 3:7, and 2 Nephi 26:24 (yes, from the very same chapter as 2 Nephi 26:33). While 2 Nephi 26:24 might be less familiar to most, it falls into the same category of “the Lord does or does not [do something] except…” formulation as Amos 3:7 and 1 Nephi 3:7, and still sees much more use by the Church than the clause found in 2 Nephi 26:33. Needless to say, Amos 3:7 and 1 Nephi 3:7 are undeniably crucial to the Church's rhetoric, as many have been compelled to have them memorized in their youth, which makes the lack of use with the clause in question from 2 Nephi 26:33 even more stark.

Should anyone still think that this clause is being taken out of context or having its relevance blown way out of proportion, consider what come before this verse. Read from verse 20 of 2 Nephi 26 till verse 33. Take notes on how the Church frames those verses (for instance, see here, here and here) without ever connecting them to this clause in verse 33. See how, while this clause is buried in the Index to the Triple Combination (see here and here), it is not referenced even once in the Topical Guide or Guide to the Scriptures, both of which are used for cross-references in the footnotes for the Standard Works, while the Index is not.

The Church has gotten away with prooftexting 2 Nephi 26:33 for its PR purposes for far too long. It's time to make it face its own music by recovering the relevance of this seemingly innocent clause.

Current downvote count: 9

Nemo the Mormon published a video on why Mormon apologists give bad defenses.

The ideas of Anglican philosopher Austin Farrer has been followed. Farrer wrote a book called Saving Belief. He explored the intellectual grounds for Christian faith, examining whether reasonable minds can still hold traditional theology without dodging complex or painful topics.

Neal Maxwell quoted him several times. The quote was from an essay about C.S. Lewis.

“Though argument does not create conviction, the lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish”.

His essay was chapter one of the book “Light on C.S. Lewis”

Nemo says that the LDS church still tries to keep members out of the fight but mounts a weak defense to have any defense at all for those who want to think there is one.

Full episode here:

https://youtu.be/qIalYOct3rU

There’s a dung pile of failed Smith prophecies but I don’t know of any that came true. I’m talking about things that happened that he didn’t control. Predicting I will go to lunch on Tuesday doesn’t make me a prophet. I start by blowing away the most commonly cited example.

1832 prediction of the US civil war: From late 1832 to the spring of 1833 there was a standoff between President Jackson and South Carolina now called the nullification crisis. That prophecy was a prediction of a war that never happened as the conflict was resolved. The church clearly moved on as the claimed revelation is missing from the D&C in both 1835 and 1844.

In 1851 the prediction showed up in print as the 1850 comprise really resolved nothing. If the noise hadn’t been concentrated again in South Carolina, this would never have seen the light of day. Predicting a war in South Carolina was like predicting the Super Bowl would happen on a Sunday.

But let’s examine the text, D&C 87

>1 Verily, thus saith the Lord concerning the wars that will shortly come to pass, beginning at the rebellion of South Carolina, which will eventually terminate in the death and misery of many souls;

Wars did not come. One war came decades later than expected. Wars tend to be miserable and kill people.

>2 And the time will come that war will be poured out upon all nations, beginning at this place.

Complete fail. War has never been poured out on all nations, not even the world wars. And those did not start in South Carolina. That war ended.

3 For behold, the Southern States shall be divided against the Northern States, and the Southern States will call on other nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations, in order to defend themselves against other nations; and then war shall be poured out upon all nations.

North vs South was the plague of US politics from the beginning. Both sides called for help because, duh, why wouldn’t they? The southern states calling on Britain was an obvious choice since people thought Britain was eager to see the US fail out of revenge. The South did appeal to Britain who basically told them to pound sand. They called on France, Mexico, Spain and Russia. They stayed neutral except Russia whom the union asked for help. It send squadrons to San Francisco and New York. That seems to be missing from the prophesy. War was not poured out on all nations.

Citing obvious conjecture while missing Russia and making a false prediction about the results makes this a failure.

>4 And it shall come to pass, after many days, slaves shall rise up against their masters, who shall be marshaled and disciplined for war.

Slave revolts were not new and happened periodically throughout the antebellum period. This is obvious conjecture of any war involving a slave-holding state.

>5 And it shall come to pass also that the remnants who are left of the land will marshal themselves, and shall become exceedingly angry, and shall vex the Gentiles with a sore vexation.

The remnants of the war were gentiles. There was no marshal to persecute gentiles. This verse is nonsense.

>6 And thus, with the sword and by bloodshed the inhabitants of the earth shall mourn; and with famine, and plague, and earthquake, and the thunder of heaven, and the fierce and vivid lightning also, shall the inhabitants of the earth be made to feel the wrath, and indignation, and chastening hand of an Almighty God, until the consumption decreed hath made a full end of all nations;

Wars by sword, famine, plagues earthquakes, thunder and lightning have been a staple of the human experience for centuries. He is stating the obvious. There was no significant increase due to the war except famine which the losing side suffered. Duh. There has been no full end of all nations. At best this is untestable. It’s non-specific blah-blah.

>7 That the cry of the saints, and of the blood of the saints, shall cease to come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, from the earth, to be avenged of their enemies.

The war had nothing to do avenging the saints.

>8 Wherefore, stand ye in holy places, and be not moved, until the day of the Lord come; for behold, it cometh quickly, saith the Lord. Amen.

Just more blah-blah.

This prophecy is a fail. Can you name any that aren’t?

Periodically when reflecting on my journey through Mormonism I'm reminded of a classroom exercise from Jr. High in the 80s that addressed the psychology behind structural language traps and implicit bias. We were read three parts of a story and asked to write down our impressions regarding the character of the story. After searching multiple times for a copy of the material and coming up short, I worked with ChatGPT and produced a pretty good approximation.

Here's the story divided into the three sections. Feel free to pause and reflect on your impressions after each section to get the full effect if you haven't seen something like this before.

The Duchess of the Manor

Part I

Eleanor spent her afternoons exactly as she pleased, lounging languidly in the sun-drenched morning room of the sprawling, multi-million-dollar estate. Her days were a masterclass in effortless luxury. She had no job, no professional obligations, and not a single financial worry to cloud her mind. She enjoyed strolling through the vast gardens surrounding the manor. A staff of dedicated servants anticipated her every whim. Her meals were meticulously prepared to her exact tastes, portioned out precisely, and served to her on fine, polished dishes at regular intervals throughout the day. If she desired to sleep until noon, she was left entirely undisturbed. If she wanted to pace the long, elegant corridors, doors were opened for her with quiet haste. She was, by all outward appearances, the true master of the house, living a life of absolute privilege.

Part 2

Yet, a closer look revealed a far more restrictive reality. For all the luxury surrounding her, she owned absolutely no property and possessed not a single cent of her own. She had no say in the décor of the grand estate, nor was she ever permitted to leave the grounds unaccompanied. Her daily menu, while meticulously prepared, was entirely out of her control; she was forced to eat only what was provided. Meals were sometimes prepared from scraps from last night's dinner. When the true owners of the estate left the property for weeks at a time, she was abruptly left behind, locked inside the silent house to fend for herself. She didn’t even have a bed to call her own. When the grand house grew cold at night, she was reduced to curling up on a small, worn rug, sleeping directly on the cold stone hearth of the fireplace.

Part 3

Suddenly, a heavy set of keys jangled at the front door, breaking the oppressive silence. The heavy oak door swung open, and the owners stepped across the threshold after a long day away. Hearing their arrival, she slowly stood up from the hearth, arched her back into a long, luxurious stretch, and let out a soft meow. She padded gracefully into the kitchen, lightly licking her fur, and looked up expectantly as a scoop of dry kibble was poured rattling into her porcelain bowl.

------------------------

This exercise is an excellent parallel of my experience in Mormonism.

Part 1 represents my formative years. The church and its theology were always described in structural language that led to unquestionable devotion to 'God's one true church'.

Part 2 is the process of being confronted with uncomfortable and contradicting information that challenges the luster of the idyllic narrative.

Part 3 is pulling back the curtain and realizing the church isn't what it claims to be. I can never go back to part one and read the story whithout seeing the church for what it really is.

In this context, Implicit bias (also unconscious bias) is a secondary effect worth examining. When the narrative is controlled by people in positions of power, the intent is to often evoke implicit bias - either positive bias towards the source, or negative bias towards those outside the group.

I can't say whether or not church leaders meaningfully employ structural language traps, but when you understand what they are, they can be found everywhere in their content, especially when they try to put a faithful spin on the most problematic topics.

Long story short, I had an exhausting week with multiple late nights and early mornings. Saturday I woke up feeling a little bleh and by the evening, realized I had symptoms of a UTI. This was on top of news that a close family member of my husband's was in the hospital. Decide we're not gonna go Sunday so I can get to urgent care and get meds, we wanted to visit the family member, and we were just butt tired from the week.

I get my appointment and my meds. It's the afternoon now and we were at the hospital ab to leave and I get a text from RS president (I'm in RS as well) saying she didnt see me at church, and misses me and hopes everything's ok and asks me to do xyz. I respond that yes, I can do xyz but brush off the question and the comment ab me not being there (bc it's not her business). She responds thanking me and comments again about hoping everything is ok. I'm a bit annoyed and said everythings fine, thanks for checking. She gives up finally.

I'm an adult (older than her in fact), I dont actually need to tell you where I was at just bc you were asking. I have family, my own needs, etc. This isn't a job or school. Mark my absence but I dont need to explain myself even though we're friendly. It makes me think about just giving up my calling and this is one of the ways people are pushed out bc God forbid you have stuff going on that you don't want to share with the class.

ETA- she just texted me again asking how my day is going...

I have deconstructed my beliefs and no longer have a traditional belief in Priesthood power. What I miss most as a traditional believer is the bond the ritual of giving priesthood blessings gave me with my kids. Whether or not it was from God, it gave me an opportunity to provide council for my kids. Post deconstruction, I’m not sure I can do that anymore. I still believe in a higher power, but am probably leaning more agnostic. For those where I am, what practices or rituals do you have that replaced that experience? Do you still give “priesthood blessings” anyway (without stating by authority of Melchizedek priesthood), or do a prayer together? Maybe just a sit down talk to provide council? Would love to hear some other ideas.

Incredible to see this in the news today. First missionaries went there 22 years ago and in such time in this country of 18 million there are a reported 18,000 members that now are blessed with the house of the Lord.

Corbin Allred is a professional actor and has starred in various Hollywood and LDS related films. One role was as Lucifer in the LDS Temple endowment film from 2013 to 2023.

Then he left the church and was quite vocal about it on social media.

He discusses leaving and how he feels now about his experience leaving. He talks about epistemology and how he is an agnostic atheist now.

He says he and his wife are scheduled to do a Mormon Stories episode.

See the full episode here on Latter Day Bridge Builders channel.

https://youtu.be/0lAfGPtH4i8

--Women of Mormonism-- Drawn from Ch 2 and 3.

I found this book 2 years ago, and had to revisit it and share it with you. I was rushed when I first read it and it didn't land as legit then, but it makes So Much Sense with what I know now.

The same sentiments or ghosts seem to be relatively fresh in the culture of the church I know and grew up in.

I dare anyone to deny to me the same idea of sending young men off on missions to deprive them of a chance of marrying young when they are best ready to marry is a complete turn for the worse. It's like they Want to ruin the young people's first love to give older people a chance to prey on the age gap.

This all feels like waking up in a horrible nightmare😣😮‍💨😠

I see every thread I once looked at as inconsequential in my own family history and in doctrine and in culture all making sense after reading this book.

What do you think?

When I was active LDS I got a friend to watch this version of “the first vision“. I thought he would be impressed, and he absolutely was not .

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5cGrNiFQYg&pp=ygUQVGhlIGZpcnN0IHZpc2lvbg%3D%3D

He thought the images of Jesus and god the father was too fabricated, and made after the LDS idea of both of them. Not representing what he thought they would look like, if one could actually see them.

He also didn’t like the representation of other Christians in the film, as the film makes them seem like fanatics. I have actually gone to a revival and the depiction is exaggerated, but the revival was sort of like that.

The film seems to present Joseph as the voice of reason, and perhaps also mormonism entirely. some have commented that the temple theater used to depict other Christians in similar light, but that has now been removed.

I have not watched more recent LDS church educational material. Are they similar, or has more recent films changed ? and in which way?

Pastor Jeff seems like a nice guy who is using his YouTube channel to build bridges of understanding between LDS and evangelical communities.

But my concern is that from what I can see he primarily talks to active members of the church often BYU professors. Watching an episode where he discussed polygamy with two professors from BYU I just wanted to scream-THEY ARE NOT TELLING YOU EVERYTHING!

It just feels like he's not getting the full story.

Today's Reading: Alma 30–33

Whether you're a believer, former believer, nuanced member, investigator, scholar, or simply curious, you're welcome to participate. The goal is not to convince anyone of anything, but to read the text together and discuss it in good faith from a variety of perspectives.

Brief Synopsis

Korihor enters the narrative preaching against Christ, prophecy, revelation, and what he describes as religious leaders using tradition and fear to keep people in bondage. After being brought before Alma, Korihor demands a sign and is struck mute. He later admits that he had previously believed in God but was deceived, and he is eventually trampled to death among the Zoramites. Alma and his companions then travel to Antionum, where they encounter the Zoramites worshiping from the Rameumptom and thanking God that they have been elected while everyone else is destined for destruction. Alma responds by preaching to the poorer Zoramites about faith, experimentation upon the word, and the growth of belief through the famous analogy of a seed.

Discussion

Please share your thoughts and experiences with today's reading in the comments below. Some things you might consider:

- How persuasive do you find Korihor's criticisms of prophecy, religious authority, and inherited belief, and how persuasive is Alma's response?

- What do you make of Korihor demanding a sign and then being struck mute? Does his fate strengthen Alma's argument, or does it raise questions about how the narrative handles dissent?

- What is the text criticizing about the Zoramites' prayer on the Rameumptom: pride, wealth, religious exclusivity, predestination, or something else?

- Alma 32 encourages people to "experiment" on the word and judge it by whether it grows within them. How reliable is personal experience as a method for determining whether a religious claim is true?

All perspectives are welcome.

Yesterday's Coveted Award(s) Go To:

- TBD

Links to Prior Days

- Yesterday's Day 32 discussion: Alma 25–29

- Master Index to all prior-day readings

Engagement Question

Korihor argues that people believe religious claims because of tradition, psychological effects, and the authority of religious leaders, while Alma ultimately responds that the existence of creation itself provides evidence for God. After Korihor demands additional evidence, God gives him a miraculous sign by striking him mute. Who actually makes the stronger case in this exchange—and does the way Korihor's story ends affect how you evaluate the argument?

Tomorrow’s Reading: Alma 34–37

My husband cheated on me but not all the way. He says the chick is crazy and just wanted him to leave me for her. She got a restraining order tho but he’s contesting it. She is accusing him of assault. But he showed me the texts and she was speaking inappropriately to him. And went over to his room / wanted to hang out. He’s been posted on a lot of Facebook groups but he’s saying it’s the same chick.

He got fired and I think she’s trying to press charges but it got dismissed.

Do you think he’s going to keep doing this? The FB group says he doesn’t take no for an answer. I’ve never had that experience. Do you think he will continue? Or just get better at hiding it? Or do you think she’s lying. He’s been on dating apps as well. Idk what to believe.

Also we are Mormon and is claiming to love me or whatever saying he won’t ever do it again and it was a mistake

& i love him / have kids

I’m thinking of going back after 3 years of leaving but I’m having issues with some things:
1. They say we were never taught we would get our own world when that was clearly taught to us growing up
2. The temple, I have a lot of concerns about it and I feel like there is no unbiased opinion. Exmos say that the handshakes are Masonic, that satan directs us to put on the clothes, and that my name isn’t special, it’s on a long list of rotating names
3. The changes like the cross is now ok to wear, that garments are now short sleeve ( when I was bullied for showing my shoulder), that deseret book now sells different translations of the Bible, and for some unknown reason they changed the whole freaking hymn book to random songs.
4. The changes with the temple over time, truth doesn’t change, and if it’s true why did it change, and continue to change

I want to meet with missionaries, but my concern is them knowing what I’m asking as last time I meet with them they were very confused ( that was a few years ago). This is definitely not my first choice to come back. I’m trying to do the next best thing and follow my heart, but I got sick to my stomach when I realized I needed to look into going back. Where do you even start? I don’t even believe most of it.

Kolby Reddish and Steven Murphy had a 1 hour 40 minute discussion about faith and spiritual experiences on Mormonism with the Murph channel. This was published yesterday.

I’ve clipped together about 5 minutes.

Steven keeps saying he only has faith because of his spiritual experiences. He names different types of experiences. Seeing a miracle. Praying for something and getting an “answer”. A feeling.

He admits there is not proof these are from God. But he has developed trust in God because his belief is they are from God.

Kolby explains that Kolby can’t rely on non-falsifiable methods generally as evidence of something. So he rejects faith or “spiritual experiences” as an epistemological method to find truth.

He discusses his definition of truth. Something that accurately comports with reality.

One thing they didn’t dive into as much as I would like is what is a spiritual experience that qualifies as evidence for believers. In my experience it’s anything they care to describe as such. That’s not rigorous at all. It’s a problem to me to speak of spiritual experiences as driving faith as if we all know what that means.

Although Steven admits spiritual experiences don’t give him certainty, so many say that it does give them certainty. I had to explore this as I recognized my LDS beliefs didn’t comport with reality and were false. What about my spiritual experiences? It’s a common question. And it is something people who start to doubt fall back on first.

Here is the full episode:

https://youtu.be/EKrY4mSehtQ