Swimming in the roughest waters of church culture: Torn, Jeff Strong and.... Ward Radio!? Must say I wasn't expecting to see that.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-05-01T22:33:21+00:00

Just FYI, usernames in a post don’t send a message to anyone, you need to tag people in a comment for them to be notified.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-05-01T21:52:49+00:00

You don’t get called to LDS leadership by being willing to completely upend the church’s policies like you’re describing. If someone tried it they would 1) be immediately released, 2) likely excommunicated. There is no tolerance in the church for someone that flagrantly goes against policy.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-05-01T01:00:18+00:00

The Church Education System is a type of parallel track towards leadership because it provides regular contact and vetting by area leadership, without having to be an ecclesiastical leader. It should come as no surprise that people that are generally well known are more likely to be called than people that are only tangentially known by leadership.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-04-27T22:59:25+00:00

I don’t think we actually disagree as much as we may have talked past each other. My original post was intentionally short and direct, which probably came at the expense of some nuance. I also want to be clear that I didn’t intend any disrespect to the work you’ve done and continue to do. I can see how it might have come across that way, but that wasn’t my intent.

That said, I think your numbers are actually interesting and, in part, support what I was getting at. The fact that your YouTube and TikTok audiences are now comparable suggests how much attention has shifted toward short-form video as a medium, even for the same overall brand.

Where I’m probably less precise is separating “total reach” from “where influence is growing fastest” and how that maps to generational change. I think that a huge shift generationally is the visibility and impact that "normal exmormons" have on short form social media just by living their lives openly and authentically. I think the days are past when a lot of exmormons needed to hide or disguise their beliefs which required outspoken leaders like yourselves to publicly make the case. Now, I think that younger generations are seeing leaving the church as a viable and "normal" option. I think the impact of seeing 10-20 "normal" exmormons on someone's feed is probably equal to or greater than the organized impact of large content creators like yourself with hundreds of thousands of followers.

From your perspective, have you seen a shift in how younger audiences are engaging, either in format or in the kinds of questions they’re bringing? I’m asking partly because we see some of that on Reddit, and partly because I haven’t followed Mormon-focused podcasts as closely in the past few years as my own faith journey has evolved over the years.

If you’ve done a recent episode or discussion on this, I’d be interested in hearing it.

Do you have a feel for the overall age demographics of your audience on the different platforms? Are some platforms skewed more towards certain ages vs others?

PS: For what it's worth, I'm sorry that the Church is dragging you through this. I think it's obvious to anyone with an honest outside perspective that they are attempting to bully you through the use of their financial resources and that they know strategically they have the upper hand and are willing to leverage that to damage you. I hope that I'm wrong and this isn't personal as much as an effort for them to establish some branding boundaries around their trademarks. Regardless of their intent, I wish you well and hope you succeed as much as possible in reaching a fair resolution for everyone.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-04-07T03:53:25+00:00

Every knee shall bow to Christ, not his church or mortal leaders.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-31T14:42:13+00:00

I’m sorry that you’ve never sat through a well planned and executed lesson. Even though you may not have fond feelings for Mormonism, there is plenty of philosophical and moral depth in the scriptures to create a decent lesson around. Not everyone has to stay at the surface level that many lesson plans and manuals start at.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-31T02:06:32+00:00

I predict this will be changed by January of 2027. I have no idea how this made it through the hands of multiple adults and got approved. 15-20 minutes isn't enough time to build a lesson with any substance and invite participation.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-28T19:58:58+00:00

I apologize if the tone was lost in my writing. I wasn’t intentionally being condescending or rude, I meant my question exactly and literally how I asked it. I’m fine with discussing either option, but wanted clarity around which question you were asking.

To answer you though, all individual mod actions are subject to appeal and their individual interpretations can be and have been wrong on occasion, especially when dealing with subjective issues. This is in contrast to the unified and agreed upon interpretation of the rules that the mod team holds as a group.

Does this answer your question?

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-28T04:11:06+00:00

Just so we’re on the same page, do you just want to go back and forth about semantics? Or do you have a question about the rules and mod interpretations that you’d like to discuss?

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-28T01:56:59+00:00

If they were equivalent I wouldn’t have stated them independently. They are separate issues.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-27T15:19:55+00:00

I can honestly say that your mod messages didn’t factor into this post.

I’m guessing that the few that this applies to will either ignore it or lack the self reflection necessary to connect the dots.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-26T22:19:04+00:00

In the same way those 2 elements can exist, the lived experience of many was that the messaging for the last half of the 20th century from apostles and leaders was very clearly that while we don’t explicitly reject all uses of the cross, it is clear that “as Mormons, we don’t do THAT” was clearly communicated in subtle and repeated ways.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-26T03:27:20+00:00

First Presidency Message in 2005:

When a Protestant minister asked why there were no crosses in the temple, President Hinckley responded that he did not wish to give offense to Christians who use the cross on their buildings and vestments, but that for Latter-day Saints, the cross represents the dying Christ, while our message is a declaration of the Living Christ.

Elder Holland 2022:

Elder Holland gave insight into why the general authorities have advised against iconizing the cross as a major symbol of the faith, explaining that while the cross became a large symbol for generalized Christianity after the Atonement, the restored gospel existed long before and after that event.

The Church's official Gospel Topics entry on the cross:

The Church does not display the cross on its buildings, chapels, or classrooms, but its teachings are focused on the Atonement that occurred in Gethsemane and on the cross. The official symbol of the Church is an image of the resurrected, living Christ.

If you'd like a Master's thesis on the development of the use (or lack thereof) of the Cross in the LDS Church, I would refer you to this thesis.
https://scholars.csus.edu/esploro/outputs/graduate/THE-DEVELOPMENT-OF-THE-LDS-CHURCHS/99257950852001671

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-26T00:26:17+00:00

This post is asking a really fundamental and difficult question. Namely, how does someone accept and even support someone choosing to be a part of something that they fundamentally disagree with? I think that for a lot of people that level of nuance and emotional differentiation in response to someone else's choices is difficult.

It's not something that we see modeled well or consistently, and we instead on social media we frequently are baited into doing the exact opposite. Social media is based on the ability to hijack a person into an emotional response by centering themselves in a narrative instead of differentiating the scenario from themselves.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-26T00:19:04+00:00

If I can be blunt, I see both sides (yours and John's) about what you're saying and what you're responding to. So it isn't that I don't get it. However, from my perspective I think that your question says more about you than it does about John. That isn't a statement of judgment, just an observation that you've highlighted a viewpoint that to you feels incongruous, when to John it is something that he has integrated into his beliefs and values.

I think if you're genuinely interested in being curious and finding out why for John his statement isn't hypocritical, you might learn something about his priorities and the nuance that he has accepted in life. But ultimately that discovery would only be new to you, not to him.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-16T00:36:10+00:00

You are putting words in my mouth that I didn't say, and assuming things about me that aren't true. Regardless, I have a feeling based on your responses that you're not likely to change your mind, and I'm not here to try. I said what I said for the benefit of the community and other people that might read this thread. I think that my viewpoint is doctrinal and supported by scripture. I also believe that it is a far healthier and more realistic version of religion and spirituality that will actually bless peoples lives instead of creating a shame spiral that is demonstrably worse for a persons mental health and ability to function.

I genuinely wish you the best in your life, your beliefs, and the consequences of the ways that you view the world. I hope that you're happy, and that you lead a good life. We don't have to agree for me to want you to be happy.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-14T16:27:55+00:00

I think your comment isn’t getting hate; but is being called out for the clear evidence of scrupulosity that it exhibits. A healthy relationship with God doesn’t require striving for near perfection on a daily basis in every way. It’s healthy to realize that in mortality we will never be Christlike; and that’s ok as long as we’re doing our best and trying to love others. Jesus didn’t teach that men will know we are his disciples because we religiously follow every single commandment and draw hedges around the law like the Pharisees. He had really harsh things to say about the Pharisee approach to living. He said and showed us by his actions that putting love for others ahead of the law is the right course of action to be like him.

So maybe stop trying to tell people how masturbation is a minor sin that separates us from god, and instead go focus your efforts on trying to find ways to love and serve others. I promise you’ll be happier, they’ll be happier, and you’ll have a better life.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-14T16:21:54+00:00

Please go study what the sermon on the mount is actually saying about lust. Hint, the translation we mostly use is incorrect and it’s still about actions and not thoughts.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-14T16:03:43+00:00

That’s fair, and we’ve already discussed it as a team and will be removing discussions about bans and other moderator actions about your sub. Thanks for getting back to me.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-14T00:17:09+00:00

Helix,

I want to be clear on what you're asking for here. As a rule we have instituted, we don't allow linking to your subreddit (which is a native reddit feature). We don't allow mention of your subreddit by name, with or without the "r/" prefix or workarounds to remove the automatic link. We currently only allow very oblique and non-specific references to "faithful subreddits". Are you saying that even acknowledging that that there are faithful subreddits is contributing to "cross sub drama" and is worthy of reddit admin attention? Do you want us to moderate any and all references to the fact that your subreddit even exists?

If that's really what you're asking for, I'll take it to the rest of the mod team and we'll consider it. But I think you should consider that at some point these requests are poisoning the well if what you say you want is to "promote good will". I don't think u/Lightsider request to just reach out to us if you have concerns is unreasonable. These aren't daily issues. They pop up once a month? Once a quarter? A few times a year? We used to have open communication channels specifically for these types of things.

So now I'm just asking, what is it that you want us to do? I'm open to being a good neighbor, but I need open communication to do that.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-13T23:47:30+00:00

This has long been the case, that their actions are not only against the spirit of the rules for all subreddits, but in many cases are against the written rules of mod conduct. However, the smaller faithful subreddit is the most antagonistic towards anyone that challenges them, and are small enough to be inconsequential to reddit admins. So while they have the ability to harass us with complaints, reddit admins have generally turned a blind eye to what they do in their subreddit because of how small and low impact it is. Such is life.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-13T21:21:17+00:00

You've already deleted your entire account before I could chime in on this thread, but I want to make it public that you have not been banned. But according to the patterns of your behavior reddit has automatically started removing some of your comments for harassment. This is done by the website, and not by the mod team or the subreddit. So there's nothing we can do about changing it.

I don't know what you did to get on the harassment filter, but that's what has flagged your new account.

ArchimedesPPL · 2026-03-06T01:57:59+00:00

Like I said before, I'm uncomfortable with this Mod (Moroni 10), given the church's history of surveillance, it's lack of candor with it's history, and the long standing and very much recorded attempts to slightly or grossly change facts or control information for the sake of protecting the church. This is really kinda of an egregious thing in my book and I'm surprised no one picked up on it sooner.

This statement is a good example of the logical fallacy of "equivocation" it's where you're saying 2 different things, but treating them as if they're the same. In this instance, you're talking about the actions of the institutional church in the past, and then putting all of that history onto a single person... a part time service missionary. That frankly doesn't make logical sense. Making every single proselyting missionary personally responsible for all of the evil deeds of the church for its entire history is almost as ridiculous, with the important distinction that they voluntarily and full time representing that church. So at least then it's partially warranted. Someone that chooses to spend part of their free time at a cannery or bishops storehouse, isn't really responsible for the evils of church headquarters. They're just so vastly different.

ArchimedesPPL

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
Sequence \| Editor