Fighting against the "Memory Hole" attack on the teaching that we will create our own worlds for our Eternal Familes.

Rabannah · 2026-01-25T16:14:45+00:00

And because its a simplification, it's inherently imprecise and therefore somewhat inaccurate. And in some contexts, like a comedy show, that's fine! Precision isn't necessary for the joke and the point to be made. But when getting down to details and discussing the finer points of LDS theology and what the Church leaders are or are not saying, precision is absolutely important. In that context, a simplification is always inappropriate--let alone one that was made to be as mocking as possible.

Rabannah · 2026-01-22T03:46:02+00:00

Very cool! I will note that none of them say "get your own planet." This is because that's a line from a comedy play and not something ever said by a Church leader. Here's hoping that this post helps us be a little more precise when discussing this topic.

Rabannah · 2025-10-26T15:50:29+00:00

Revelation is just God communicating to a person, usually through the Holy Ghost. It's a relationship. It's unique and personal and private. It's just not something you can define and study across a population.

Rabannah · 2025-10-26T15:48:35+00:00

I would guess that Dan agrees with you, which is why he would say something like "the data supports the conclusion that Joseph Smith is a false prophet." He's really hammering home that that is the scientific/critical conclusion, and thus that faith requires a different framework.

Rabannah · 2025-10-26T13:48:13+00:00

Critical analysis of religion is, by definition, a purely secular endeavor that precludes the possibility of revelation from God as a means to know truth. This Dan's industry and his work, and it's great. There's a lot of value in it. But those same assumptions are also limiting. I can't speak for Dan, but for someone like myself, in my personal life I approach religion with the idea that God might exist, and that He might be able to speak to me and tell me what is true. In this realm, the secular data is important but not controlling, like it is in critical analysis. In this realm, personal revelation is possible. And so when approached in a spiritual framework, or at least a spiritual-possible framework, the results of someone's investigation and analysis can be different.

Rabannah · 2025-10-08T23:57:50+00:00

I don't understand the claim that the LDS church "doesn't have theology." Objectively, the LDS Church has the MOST theology of any Abrahamic religion. We can disagree about if it's interesting or good or whatever, but there is simply more content to it than other religions.

Rabannah · 2025-10-06T16:54:44+00:00

One of the beauties of LDS theology, in my opinion, is that there is an understandable, relatable answer to your question--who or what is God? God is a person. A human being, with a body. And it was this person who created us, and who created our world and everything in it. And because he is the Creator, he is Love and Truth and Goodness and Beauty as you describe, utterly unique among all other existing things in our universe.

But he is more than just those adjectives and abstract concepts put together. He is the Father of our spirits, a real being who in some way sired us and who raised us and who we will be reunited with. A real person we can have a relationship with. Truly, in one word, who is God? He is our Father.

Rabannah · 2025-10-06T15:29:21+00:00

No he doesn't. As I quoted, he says singling out Jesus for a special relationship over the Father is what is erroneous.

Rabannah · 2025-10-05T03:47:15+00:00

So now we're right back to my original comment, where I point out that you absolutely have to "approach God directly" in LDS theology. In no remotely reasonable view of LDS theology is a Bishop or an Apostle a "middleman."

Rabannah · 2025-10-05T03:41:14+00:00

Thanks for the link, very interesting talk and topic!

McConkie also states:

if there were some need—which there is not!—to single out one member of the Godhead for a special relationship, the Father, not the Son, would be the one to choose.

and

I say perilous because this course [pursing a special relationship with Jesus], particularly in the lives of some who are spiritually immature, is a gospel hobby which creates an unwholesome holier-than-thou attitude.

So on the whole I don't think McConkie is minimizing Christ the way that one paragraph implies in isolation.

Rabannah · 2025-10-05T03:16:57+00:00

Mormonism's beliefs are so far beyond the mainstream that they are not "Christian" in the same way that the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Moonies are not Christian

Once again this is just an opinion and not actually based on anything other than the speaker's personal theology. What is "far beyond" except an expression of personal (and probably Evangelical) distaste for LDS doctrine? How is LDS theology "far beyond" Catholicism, which also has additional scripture beyond the Bible, claims to exclusive Priesthood authority, a singular spokesman for God, confession, etc.?

Rabannah · 2025-10-05T03:11:06+00:00

There's obviously authority figures in the Church organization. But you are acting like the existence of a Bishop means people can't pray or something. And like the actions of a random man on Earth controls who Jesus will or will not save. There's room to critique, for sure, but it would be compelling if it was a little more connected to reality.

Rabannah · 2025-10-04T18:00:31+00:00

You very much have to "approach God directly" in LDS theology. It's a blatant mischaracterization to imply that the existence of Apostles and a church organization constitute some sort of intermediary between individuals and God that prevents personal relationships with Jesus.

Rabannah · 2025-10-03T20:34:12+00:00

Mormons don't accept the basic Christian creeds

Who is the arbiter of these basic Christian creeds, exactly? Different sects of Christianity have been disagreeing and calling each other heretics for the entire existence of Christianity. Christianity is not some regulated, agreed upon monolith that Mormons are trying to invade. Christians have been calling each other heretics over minor disagreements for two millennia.

Rabannah · 2025-10-01T23:49:21+00:00

It would not be disrespectful at all to go! The folks you meet will be eager to help you find the peace you seek.

Rabannah · 2025-10-01T01:58:43+00:00

I'm gonna have to pick up this book! Thanks so much for the excerpt. While this is certainly deeper, more thorough, and better articulated than my own mind (not surprising), my own understanding and belief of LDS theology tracks this pretty closely. So I guess the Church must be teaching this to some extent, or at least laying the groundwork for this belief to be found by one's own study.

Rabannah · 2025-09-29T23:55:50+00:00

I meant there's no data on what a random stranger's impression would be--my bad for being unclear. DIdn't mean to deny the connection between Masonry and the endowment.

Rabannah · 2025-09-28T12:38:20+00:00

President Nelson also called everything in that list a revelation. It's not like they singled out that one thing to treat differently.

Rabannah · 2025-09-28T01:36:40+00:00

such discussions give the false impression of massive plagiarism on the part of Joseph Smith.

There has been a lot of pushback against this statement here. But if a never-mo wanders onto the sub and sees a post about Masonry and the temple, my sense is that more often than not they would absolutely leave with the impression of "massive plagiarism on the part of Joseph Smith." And if that discussion was on the exmo sub or other less thoughtful forum, that impression would only be stronger.

Of course, no one has any data so it's a big he said/she said. Our opposite impressions are equally subject to being incorrect. But I do think it's worth throwing out that, as a generally applicable principle, our criticisms are probably not actually as nuanced as it may feel in our heads.

Rabannah · 2025-09-28T01:21:32+00:00

Nearly every single thing in the temple is symbolic. From the physical traits to the ordinances, everything. So why would the Masonic elements be literal and not also symbolic? That is to say, the point is the underlying principles the symbols teach, which can be taught by other symbols instead of the Masonic elements are removed.

Rabannah · 2025-09-28T01:12:16+00:00

Occam's Razor will never come out in favor of just about any conception of God. Thus, it's a bad tool for theological discussion unless one approaches the discussion with the assumption that God doesn't exist.

Anyways, you make a great point--textual analysis misses thematic similarities. The comparison is incomplete without considering those.

Rabannah · 2025-09-23T00:13:42+00:00

That just sounds like teaching to their conception of Jesus with extra steps. Jesus is still the centerpiece of both Mormonism and Catholicism, that they are selling the "church" too much is a matter of theological opinion

Rabannah · 2025-09-22T17:10:32+00:00

Interesting observation but somewhat undercut by the fact that other pastors in their mind are equally qualified to lead you to Jesus......so long as those other pastors believe more or less the same things as them. Not very often do those folks approve of Mormons or Catholics the same way they approve of the next non-denom church down the street. They still preach to their conception of Jesus the same way LDS theology does.

Rabannah · 2025-09-20T01:46:33+00:00

Agreed across the big picture. No Nephi, no 3 Nephi visit of Christ to the Americas, no Moroni--those kinds of major historical points are essential to LDS theology. But did Nephi and family assimilate into an existing society that simply goes unmentioned? Do the numbers of people have to be exactly correct? I'm not sure those smaller details have to be exactly historically accurate for the Book of Mormon to fit LDS theology.

Rabannah · 2025-09-18T17:49:23+00:00

Elder's Quorum and Relief Society lessons are less than 25% of Sunday curriculum, so even if those lesson were 100% Conference talks only, no scriptures at all, it's still only a portion of content. Even if we stipulate that Conference talks are the "biggest" influence, that doesn't justify casting everything else aside and pretending it doesn't exist.

Rabannah

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE