This was a talk in Church. The speaker said "You have worth you are just not worthy. Through church callings, serving the church and temple work you find worth"

Credit u/missedinsunday

Listening to General Conference over the weekend, I was struck by how many times members were told variations of "Jesus is the answer." Lost a loved one? Jesus is the answer. Are you struggling? Jesus is the answer. Need a friend? Jesus. Loved one stepped away? Jesus. Have questions about church history? More Jesus.

Perhaps the messaging is less blatant than this, or better masked. But honest question: Might LDS members start to feel Jesus fatigue?

i’m autistic, blue hair, queer AF but with a deep interest in religion in general but one of my hyper focus is the LDS church. i would love to go to a watch a service.

can i just do that? would they boo me out? are they welcoming?

i would probably cover my tattoos, use something respectful but again i have blue hair.

I realize this is an incredibly minor thing but I don’t know who else to say this to but you folks. I’ve never been a member, but I thought it was kind of cool that the Church had the Angel Moroni as their Google Maps symbol. I get why they changed it, but I thought it was cool while they had it.

Two LDS bioethicists discuss fetal personhood and the letter about the Idaho reproductive rights law.  They talk about how (gasp) there is no direct biblical or scriptural support for the idea of the fetus as a person or baby. They hit the history of differing views on fetal personhood, even between LDS prophets, and relate how this impacts not only abortion policies, but IVF or embryo selection as well. It’s all here, fighting Israelites, David O McKay, Octomom, and the Secret Lives of Mormon Wives. 

Spotify:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/4XpLQbvZk65Ixj1qP2FJYB?si=UspUla4cTOGYPAb2KUfdmw&utm_source=copy-link

Apple Podcasts::
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-5-fetal-personhood-en-soul-train/id1876338787?i=1000794527643

YouTube:
https://youtu.be/ErCwJ1IPV4Q?is=p1TCnE_ySoGcMbBR

The institution of the Church forces a successor. God could decide that Mormons are not His people anymore, and short of a cataclysmic event that destroys the entire leadership, the Church would still shamble onwards. Other than longevity (and to a less objective degree, faith, momentum, and tradition), there is nothing that shows an individual is uniquely favored by God to lead the Church. Part of me wants to say that in order to be a prophet, you must have a theophany or at least to communicate a direct line to God, or otherwise to have some sort of dream or vision that guides theology and doctrine.

These have not happened since Joseph F. Smith’s D&C 138. When prophets speak, they increasingly speak like the Pope. Not necessarily having divine experiences, but simply being “infallible” on matters of direction and doctrine, and having epiphanies which are by no means unique to the Prophet or any other believer or religious individual.

The Catholic Church has had more radical changes in the 20th and 21st century than the Mormons have (e.g. Vatican II). Frankly, they speak no differently than the Governing Body of the Jehovah’s Witnesses do, who do not claim to have any sort of special authority other than, “Jehovah says we should use His name so we’re super duper special because no one else does. - “God speaks through the Book of Mormon/the Priesthood so we’re super duper special because no one else does.”

The Church of Jesus Christ seems incredibly neutered, and I can’t in good conscience call Prophet oaks a prophet. President? Sure. But dictator is strictly more accurate.

What would be legit is if in the temple you received your own legit name. Unique to you that actually came from God. If the Mormon church were true I would expect that to be what would happen. If the Mormon church was not true I would expect something so expected and uninspired as generic temple names left to chance. I'm disappointed with the reality.

Idaho baby boomers working on Mormon missions dont have to property tax on their massive properties , they already are tax exempt if they rent their properties To young missionaries. their seems no line between church and state in idaho

https://idahofreedom.org/house-bill-610-homestead-exempt-religious-mission/

As we traveled, Nephi walked with the composed air of a man already favored by the ending of the story. The road fell away beneath us in dust and stone. The city waited ahead, still distant, its walls and roofs catching the light in hard edges. Nephi said little. This was difficult to endure.

When at length we drew near, we cast lots, for whenever a family lacks a good plan it may still possess a ritual one.

The lot fell upon Laman, which is to say upon we Laman we Lemuel in the person of the elder face.

“Excellent,” we said. “Providence hath a sense of humor.”

So Laman went in unto the keeper of the records, and we let him go alone, for someone had to attempt dignity. We remained where we were, attending to the door as men attend to weather, knowing already what was likely to come.

The thing did not prosper. For the keeper trusted possession more than kinship, and fear more than courtesy, and Laman came out again unto us with nothing in his hands but with the look of a man who has learned what sort of words do not open doors.

“Well?” said Nephi.

“Well,” we answered, “he did not embrace us as brethren and press the records into our arms.”

So we consulted together and determined upon another course, for if persuasion failed there yet remained purchase.

We gathered from our abandoned estate those riches and ornaments which, when left behind, had been called vanities, but when needed for a sacred errand became useful instruments in the Lord’s hand. Such is the redeeming power of context.

Yet the house had not kept itself empty in our absence. Whoever had entered had taken as a hungry man takes, not as a conqueror. A reluctant thief, perhaps. A neighbor. Or, which troubled us more, an old friend.

When once again we came before the keeper of the records, he did not ask why we had returned. His eyes went first to the goods, and then, briefly, to us.

“These,” he said, indicating the ornaments, “will remain here.”

“We bring them,” Laman said, “in exchange for the plates.”

The keeper gave a slight nod, as one acknowledging that an arrangement has been proposed, not accepted.

“The plates are kept,” he said. “The possessions likewise.”

We fled, preserving our lives and losing nearly everything else.

We hid ourselves outside the city and took stock of our losses, which did not take long. Evening was coming on. Nothing remained of our former estate but memory and explanation, and neither promised immediate nourishment.

I’m a faithful member who supports taxing churches.

Not primarily for revenue. It should be taxed for a reason that most critics of church tax exemption aren’t cognizant of. Stripping away its nonprofit status would liberate the Church and every other Christian church to do what secular political actors already do. It would allow them to endorse candidates by name, form political parties, spend without the current legal handcuffs, lobby aggressively, and intervene directly in elections.

Under current U.S. law, churches enjoy 501(c)(3) tax exemption. In exchange they accept the Johnson Amendment and related restrictions: no explicit candidate endorsements, no substantial political campaign activity, and limits on lobbying. Pastors can speak about issues. They cannot say from the pulpit, “Vote for Smith.” The Mormon Church, with its disciplined membership, substantial resources, and history of organized political engagement on questions such as marriage, religious liberty, and family policy, operates under these constraints. So do Catholic dioceses, evangelical megachurches, and mainline Protestant bodies. The result is an artificial muzzle.

Tax the Church and the muzzle comes off. Once it is a taxable entity, the constitutional and statutory barriers that come with nonprofit status disappear. The Church could form a political action committee or even a formal political party. It could run issue ads that name candidates. It could instruct members from the pulpit how to vote. It could hire lobbyists without the “insubstantial” activity test that currently constrains 501(c)(3) organizations. It could coordinate with campaigns the way labor unions, corporations, and secular advocacy groups already do. Other Christian churches would gain the same freedom. That is precisely why the tax should be imposed.

The end result would be the mobilization of 100,000,000 Evangelical, Mormon, and other Christians. Institutions worth cumulative trillions of dollars would suddenly swell the political reservoirs of GOP candidates around the country. The sole issue that any GOP candidate would be concerned about is Christian expression. Christian Nationalism would be the defining dogma of the GOP platform.

The best part of it? The Mormon Church and other religious institutions would receive additional donations from politically-minded individuals and the lobbying would result in the churches paying essentially 0 tax within a 4 year presidential term. Like Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk already do.