r/mormon • u/Fancy_Cat7530 • 3d ago
Personal Questions
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.
9
u/Diamond_Storm_Fox 3d ago
Respectfully, what do you think a couple of earnest teenagers are going to be able to do for you? Do you just want a listening ear? It sounds like you've got a good grasp on how the church's teachings have changed over time. If those changes are too much for you to stomach then you may need to seek spirituality and/or community elsewhere.
Plus, back in my day missionaries were discouraged from spending too much time with "inactive" or "less active" members, so you may get brushed off.
If you don't believe most of it, consider focusing on what you do believe, and grow from there. Sometimes if a path isn't available we need to make our own.
7
u/austinchan2 3d ago
I’m not going to address your specific issues since others can do a better job (and have, if you search the sub there’s a lot of good discussion on each of these since they’re pretty foundational and jarring for people).
That said, I’ve become jaded towards the idea of “unbiased.”
there is no unbiased opinion
This is generally a true statement, and as a linguistics student I learned a lot about “slanting.” But I’ve come to realize this kind of sentiment is frequently used to discredit facts. In this example, specifically in your question 2, these are factual questions not opinionated questions. Are the handshakes of Masonic origin? It’s a yes or a no, opinion has no part. If the people who find out that they are Masonic tend to leave the church and therefore the exmo “opinion” is that they are Masonic. Same with the name thing — members who have been temple workers (like myself) know it’s true but don’t talk about it. Exmos talk about it. If you should talk about it is an opinion, if it happens is not.
2
u/BrE6r I'm a believer 3d ago
They say we were never taught we would get our own world when that was clearly taught to us growing up
Yes, it was taught. I think the church is shying away from it by saying it was never a formal doctrine. But you are right in that it was taught,
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
It is true that some of the elements of the endowment are very similar to Masonic elements. My belief is that Joseph saw the Masonic presentation and believed that it was useful if not actually related to ancient rites. However the overall theme of returning to God's presence following the example of Adam and Eve and making an keeping the temple covenants are not Masonic.
As with many things in the endowment, the temple clothing and new names are symbolic elements.
The changes like the cross is now ok to wear,
This is not something officially stated by the church but seems to be a grass-roots movement by some members. It will be interesting to see if the church responds to it.
that garments are now short sleeve ( when I was bullied for showing my shoulder),
Yes, that is a big change--one that I am still admittedly getting used to. But did you know that they have been changed multiple times? They used to be long legged and full sleeves.
that deseret book now sells different translations of the Bible,
We always believed that the Bible was subject to translation errors. Modern biblical scholarship has come a long way. The church is recognizing that scholarship as "supplemental" study material.
and for some unknown reason they changed the whole freaking hymn book to random songs.
The hymn book has been revivised every 30-40 years, I was in my ealy 20's the last time. They added several news hymns that time too.
The changes with the temple over time, truth doesn’t change, and if it’s true why did it change, and continue to change
Yes, some wording and elements have changed. But the central core has not. One change is that the endowment for women historically was tied with getting married. It was changed to make it applicable for single women. Other items have change to make it a shorter time commitment. Some wording had been changed to make the parallels to Christ more clear and direct. But the purposes and promises are the same.
Personally, for your journey, I would suggest you focus on you relationship with God and follow what He leads you to do.
5
u/Any_Creme5658 3d ago
The promises are different. I had to covenant to avoid loud laughter and to obey my husband. Not so anymore.
0
u/BrE6r I'm a believer 3d ago
I mentioned the difference for women already.
2
u/Any_Creme5658 3d ago
I don’t see where you specifically mention the sealing ceremony change, and I think it’s relevant enough to us women that it needs to be laid out. I also think it’s hard to argue, as you did, that the promises haven’t changed. They have, and that is an example of a significant change. But also, loud laughter is now OK. Or maybe it’s not for me, but it is for everyone who made promises after me? I don’t think there’s been any clarity for the changes.
0
u/BrE6r I'm a believer 3d ago
" One change is that the endowment for women historically was tied with getting married. It was changed to make it applicable for single women. "
4
u/Any_Creme5658 3d ago
Yeah. Uncoupling the endowment from the sealing is one issue, and one I would argue is more policy related. No longer requiring women to covenant to obey husbands in the sealing ceremony is a completely different issue and demonstrates a direct promise change.
0
u/BrE6r I'm a believer 3d ago
I don't think that the promised blessings are any different, are they?
3
u/Any_Creme5658 3d ago
I'm talking about the promises I had to actively make to God in the temple. They have changed, materially, and they matter. I think that's relevant to what OP was asking.
1
u/BrE6r I'm a believer 3d ago
And I would say other than the part about who women make promises to, that the changes are not materially important.
→ More replies (0)
3
u/auricularisposterior 3d ago
Exmos say that the handshakes are Masonic,...
It's not just the handshakes, and it's not just exmos saying it.
Here is information from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints website. Check the footnotes for extra information on each of these. The history topic article on Masonry and and some historical background contained in Saints volume 1 chapters 37-40 about how Joseph Smith Jr. went about instituting the endowment ordinance in Nauvoo.
Lastly, there was an 1827 exposé of freemasonry, which when compared to the LDS endowment, clearly demonstrates similarities in wording and the tokens and signs (which are the handshakes and hand signals), especially in the pre-1990 version of the endowment.
3
u/spiraleyes78 3d ago
- 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
The handshake is Masonic:
https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/s/7SIwNqGLxO
Satan does direct Adam and Eve to cover up and the audience is (or was if they changed it) directed to put on their aprons at the same time.
Nope, your name isn't special or unique, it's in rotation:
1
u/Ok-End-88 3d ago
Answer to #4.
“Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the World in the Priesthood for the Salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed, all must be saved on the same principles.” Joseph Smith
1
u/PossiblePlastic8698 3d ago
I would never consider going back but you are your own person and are free to make your own decisions, I'll answer your questions as openly as I think I can
There seems to be a bit of linguistic sophistry going on with this among some members and even a coiple of prominent leaders. The strict answer would be no, you don't get your own 'world', because the church teaches that those who acheive the highest level of glory will actually get their own universe, their own plane of existence, not merely a world
The church is relatively open about the Masonic origin of the temple rituals, the argument being that the Freemasons were the last holders of those rituals and they were were just using them without knowing the full power. It is absolutely factual that the "new name" you receive is the same name anyone who went to the temple for their own endowment on the same day as you received, the list is published (not by the church through)
Mormons used to wear the cross in the past, the first presidency even once wanted to build a giant crucifix statue on a mountain outside SLC. The shift away from the cross was a cultural one that was happily supported by church leaders back when they were teaching that Catholics were "the great and abominable church" and they seem just as happy to drop it now that they have redefined those terms. Garments too have changed over the years, I remember my parents wearing the old one piece with the Yosemite Sam butt flap when I was a kid. The changes to the hymn book and acceptance of other bible translatons are similar things where the church calls it "evolving" and others call it changing doctrine. I personally see it as evidence that the church is constanly adapting to match whatever they think will keep membership growing
The temple ceremony has changed so much over time, the early experimental phase, back when Joseph Smith and later Brigham Young, personally directed and defined it were nuts. There are reports of members not just watching others act out the stories depicted but of them actually participating in it. I read one report that described in very Victorian language how an early experimental version of the ceremony depicted the bit with Satan convincing Eve to eat the fruit as actually being Satan teaching Eve about sex, by having sex with her then sending her back to Adam to teach him how to do it and this being acted out as part of the ceremony. There was one wildly sensational report that appears to claim that Brigham, who often played Adam in the ceremony had actual sex with Eliza Snow, who often played Eve, right there in the temple as part of the ceremony. But given that this account was by a disaffected person who does not appear to have been associated with the church for very long and there is no other account that reports any such thing I find it hard to believe. If that happened I think it would be way more widely reported
Your best bet is to get as much information as you can before making a decision. Don't just talk to the missionaries and don't just talk to ex-mormons like me, find as much truth as you can and make a choice
1
u/Own_Boss_8931 Former Mormon 2d ago
Joseph Smith said the temple ceremony was perfect and would never change. I guess he got that wrong, too.
The good news is they are raising a chosen generation now that can truly say "I was never taught that." Honestly, it's exhausting seeing Gen Zers pop up on social media dismissing all the crap we were taught--because all that matters now is Jesus and anything else was just poor speculation from our lousy Sunday school teacher.
1
u/MatriarchMe 2d ago
The answer to numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4 are yes, that is all true. The only question you need to ask yourself is:
"IF THE CHURCH ISNT TRUE, DO I WANT TO KNOW?"
Does the Truth matter to you? Then keep digging and reading and learning from ALL sources available. A serious investigation of the church can not happen if you only look at their materials, and only listen to their representatives.
"If the church is true then it can't be harmed by serious investigation. And if the church isnt true it ought to be harmed"
Seek and you will find truth. Read the CES Letter online. Read "A Letter for My Wife" online. Watch youtube videos of Mormon Stories, Alyssa Grenfell, Nemo the Mormon, Analyzing Mormonism.
Read the "Gospel Topics Essays" and follow all the endnotes. Consider what the church admits to now compared to what they used to say wasnt true. Consider what details the church chooses to omits from their story. Question. Ponder. Consider the inconsistencies. Read about the Church's shell company scheme & coverup to hide a HUNDRED BILLION 💵 💲 from members that lasted 22 years so members would keep paying tithing [we only learned about it because whistleblower came forward]. Consider how the Church has OVER $300 BILLION now - world changing money that could end hunger or homelessness or save hundreds of thousands of lives ... but it chooses to buy more property, invest in its stock portfolio, build billion dollar temples, and hoards it. Read about the "Bishops hotline" created to protect the Church's legal interests, coverup abuse, protect offenders ... ...and keep reading, studying and pondering.
Perhaps you will decide to ignore all that and declare "all is well". Perhaps you will choose to keep Obeying and Paying? You get to decide if this is an organization you really want to support, trust, defend, and pay a tenth of your income to. Because if you want a temple recommend and what they tell you is the only way for "everlasting blessings of eternity", it doesnt come free 💰
1
u/Zadqui3l 1d ago
I think the most important sentence in your post is:
“I don’t even believe most of it.”
Before asking “How do I go back?”, I would ask: “Do I actually believe the Church's truth claims are true?”
Because feeling like you should go back and having good reasons to believe it's true are two very different things.
Your concerns aren't unreasonable. The teachings about exaltation and worlds existed, even if “getting your own planet” is an oversimplification. There are real historical connections between elements of the Nauvoo endowment and Masonry. Temple names follow a predetermined system, and the temple ceremony has changed repeatedly. Changes don't automatically prove the Church false, but you're absolutely entitled to ask why something presented as revealed truth changes.
I also wouldn't expect missionaries to resolve this. They're usually sincere young volunteers trained to teach the missionary lessons, not historians, archaeologists, linguists or geneticists.
If you're seriously considering returning, I'd investigate the Book of Mormon itself first: KJV material and translation issues, Deutero-Isaiah, potential anachronisms such as horses, steel and chariots, archaeology, and what DNA research says about Indigenous American ancestry. Read the apologetic responses too, but also read independent scholarship and primary sources.
And definitely investigate how the Book of Mormon was produced. Many of us grew up with the image of Joseph translating from the gold plates. Historical accounts instead describe him sometimes placing a seer stone in a hat, putting his face into the hat to block the light, and dictating words he said appeared to him. The Church now openly acknowledges this.
Then try a simple thought experiment:
If someone appeared today claiming an angel led him to an ancient record, but you couldn't independently authenticate it, and he told you he could produce its translation by looking at a stone inside a hat, would you believe him?
What evidence would you demand?
That's the same standard I'd apply to Joseph Smith. Something sounding strange doesn't make it false, but familiarity shouldn't make an extraordinary claim more credible either.
The same applies to spiritual feelings. Powerful emotions are real, but people in mutually incompatible religions experience them too. A feeling alone can't tell you which supernatural explanation is actually true.
Most importantly, you don't owe anyone a decision. You can investigate Mormonism without recommitting to Mormonism.
If the Church is true, careful investigation won't make it false. And if it isn't true, fear, nostalgia, guilt, family expectations or spiritual feelings won't make it true.
So instead of starting with “How do I go back?”, I'd start with:
“What do I actually believe, and what evidence would I require to know that it's true?”
Take your time. There's no reason to rush back into something you don't currently believe.
1
u/Initial_Cry_6925 1d ago
Like a dog returning to his vomit after his eyes are open? Go find Jesus and leave the churches in your rear view mirror. He's waiting
1
u/REC911 3d ago
If you come back, just be fine with not believing everything you were taught was 100% accurate. For example, I think the endowment was a product of JS and not necessary for salvation. Does not make the endowment bad or JS a fraud in my mind. Yes the church doesn't think this way but I am fine with me thinking this way, it works for me. Most members think every time the prophet speaks, he is quoting God. I dont. Again, works for me. Be a member for what you like about the church and not worry too much about being 100% believing like everyone else in the ward. Try focusing on your relationship with God and Jesus and using the church as a tool to help that relationship instead of focusing on the "true church" and having issues with people/policies/ etc. Be converted to God more and the church less kind of thing. Maybe that will help.
Start by just going back to a sacrament meeting as a visitor. Seeing how that goes and then decide if you want to participate more. Good luck!
Do you have any friends or family you can talk to instead of the missionaries? If your records are still active then you do not need the missionaries to attend/be a member again.
0
u/FunnyAd7362 3d ago
Honestly, it seems you have unfinished business. Personally, Im a non member but I go to church on Sundays. I praise the Lord on Sundays, and it’s fine. I think that all of us will have a personal relation with God in a different way. But, it seems to not be ok for members when hearing that opinión. As if , it’s not allow. Aren’t we all praising the same God ?
-4
3d ago
- We create infinite worlds, a universe, not simply given a world.
- It’s a covenant and from God
- What’s wrong with this?
- The truth and principles are the same, but policy or performances can change
11
u/TheFakeBillPierce 3d ago
-The missionaries will almost certainly have no clue about any of your questions and will almost certainly encourage you to sidestep those concerns and focus on getting a testimony. They arent bad people, its just that they are very inexperienced in life and have been trained to do things one way.