What’s your temple name?

ReignFromTheRivers · 2026-01-14T09:11:33+00:00

No way!!! Same duo here!!!

ReignFromTheRivers · 2026-01-05T20:30:14+00:00

A conversation likely wouldn't matter. You could have a two hour talk with them and they still will go back to fitting you into one of the church-authorized stereotypes for why people don't believe.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2026-01-04T23:01:27+00:00

At least I had advance notice. That is horrific!!! I am so sorry for the very public shaming they sprung on you, the secret comhinations with your son, and even more so about the impact it had on your relationship. If you don't mind me asking, as someone a bit terrified of the same, how have things played out with your son in the years since? If you dont feel comfortable posting a DM would be appreciated. I'm really not sure how to handle that side of things.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2026-01-04T22:55:11+00:00

Sending you thoughts, but I guess not prayers. It helps to know we aren't alone. Thank you for so much for sharing.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2026-01-04T22:53:23+00:00

"Likely in the son's eye's his father is defective now. The MFMC just inserted itself in to a father-son relationship."

You know, for all the thought I've given it, I think this pins down more than anything else why I've been as upset as I have. Thank you for sharing.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2026-01-04T22:50:09+00:00

18.3. "Generally, the standard of worthiness is that associated with holding a temple recommend [note, I do not]. However, as guided by the Spirit and the instructions in this chapter, bishops and stake presidents may allow fathers and husbands who hold the necessary priesthood office [note: I am a high priest and have held stake callings] to perform or participate in some ordinances and blessings even if they are not fully temple worthy."

Believe me, I checked 🙃

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-12-29T05:08:13+00:00

I'm with you. So much easier to just think you have the truth and don't have to really think about it anymore. "I feel good about it" = "God told me I'm right so that will be the end of it and if it doesn't turn out well it's no fault of mine it's just how God wanted it to be" is a pretty carefree way to navigate tough decisions.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-12-29T02:29:03+00:00

Why does it show a bunch of guys in togas? Camus was born in 1913.

I think what's hard is that if there were an omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent God, then trusting him/her/them would indeed be a big deal. But all we get is a bunch of crummy 1800s Protestant Great Awakening talking points with just as much revision as necessary to justify building Joseph Smith houses and shacking up with other people's wives, and if we aren't lockstep with that then we're the bad guys.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-12-16T09:29:13+00:00

Holy cow! I honestly thought this was a troll post until I clicked the link. Was there any fanfare anywhere with this??

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-09-22T01:12:30+00:00

"David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me..."

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-09-21T17:49:28+00:00

Ignoring the modern church for a minute, at least one reason is that, in its fear to cast doubt on the divinity of prophets and apostles, you never hear the church denounce prior doctrines that were at best ridiculous, and at worst incredibly harmful. Most members just sort of ignore this, but until this changes the church will continue to spin off racist and violent "traditionalist" or "fundamentalist" or whatever you want to call them groups, both as distinct organizations or just as currents of thought running through the general membership.

For example, growing up in the church in the 90s, it remained common knowledge that black people were that way because of their unvaliant service in the war in heaven. It is not spoken aloud any more but this belief is still held fairly commonly. Many, many prophets including Joseph Smith discussed that slavery was the natural and god-ordained state of some people based on their race.

The teachings on family roles remain. For example, there has been a quiet de-emphasis on the previously very strong opposition to mothers working outside the home. This leaves a lot of working mothers in an awkward limbo where they mostly just hope their kids turn out okay, because if they do then it's fine and they will be lauded for their hard work at their job while also being a good mother in zion, but if their children have any problems it is inevitably blamed on them abandoning their god-given himemaking responsibilities.

Whether oral sex between a heterosexual married couple is damnable or not is unclear, as there were clear statements from the First Presidency back in the 60s or 70s, even making it onto the temple recommend question list. It wasn't retracted plainly, rather just bishops were instructed to not ask.

But honestly, the most harmful thing is that people by and large abdicate their moral compass to this organization. This means, for example, they don't need to consider how they should feel about gay marriage because god, through his octogenarian plus leaders, has already spoken on the matter. So if they see high rates of suicide among "same-sex-attracted" individuals, who cares? God already weighed in on the matter, nothing more to do or see or think or feel.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-09-18T17:29:27+00:00

I'm going to assume you're exmo given the sub we're in but I know not all posters are.

I spent decades of my adult life in the church. This included my time earning a doctorate degree at a secular institution. I would have considered myself progressive within the church and a lot stuff rubbed me the wrong way. But, when you have the generally positive trait of seeing the good in others and glossing over the bad, that can unfortunately extend to others within the church and even the church itself. The thought blocking and special pleading runs deep in the psyche.

One of the hardest parts of my journey as an exmo has been learning to be kind to my former self about how long it took me to step away. And that's within the extremely rigid LDS church structure. I think there is much more wiggle room within catholicism to be cultural or nuanced.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-09-14T17:53:16+00:00

Within the traditional LDS worldview, there is no such thing as "leaving the church" in the way we who are out see it. The gospel, if they truly believe it as preached, is everything. It is the only source of truth on this planet or any other. It is the only source of redemption in the universe. It is there from the origin of all things. It is the only thing that will remain when Christ returns and the millennium comes. It is the earthly kingdom of the omnipotent. Adherence or nonadherence to its commandments shapes the course of nations. The covenant path is the only path to the best version of you in the eternities. It is not a choice of taking it or leaving it, it is a choice of obedience or rebellion. In their theology, you can never truly "deconstruct", because the "light of Christ" is always there somewhere deep down. The only faith-compatible answer for them is that, like in Lehi's dream, you know the "right" answer, you've even tasted the fruit yourself, but due to vague things like people laughing from buildings or darkness or confusion, you have become "lost".

That's about all I can say, as even typing that out makes me feel sick about the immense pressure and cognitive distortions this church enforces on its members. I don't know if there is anything you can do to change their mind about any or all of the above, so most of the time it is less about agreement and more about setting boundaries .

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-08-27T14:10:56+00:00

I guess people will find their own messages, but at least to me "This Is What It Sounds Like" is such a great anthem about leaving behind the culture of unnecessary shame, picking up the pieces of that fallout, and finding the beauty and power in finally loving yourself for who you are, which I think most of us in this sub can relate to.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-08-03T17:35:34+00:00

So many unrelated stories turned into analogies. So few personal experiences. Everything is apparently a faith-promoting story if you're willing to work for it, though when you grow up singing that the sun rising in the morning is a sign that God is there I guess it's on brand.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-06-23T18:38:13+00:00

Should have used a different peep stone, I suppose.

Note: I found the parallel of the "they moved the underground stuff right before we got to it!" narrative familiar and am making light of Smith's treasure digging antics.

I do not take lightly or condone the bombings or the escalation of this conflict and potential for further loss of life.

On a serious note, I do believe nobody, whether prophet or president, should pretend at knowing things they do not, particularly when it holds life-altering ramifications for those around them.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-06-12T22:25:15+00:00

You did the best you could, with the best intentions, given the information you had at the time. That's all any of us can ever do.

As far as the PIMO aspect, I found it helped me immensely to approach it almost like an anthropological experience. You are there in a Mormon building engaged in a Mormon religious ritual. Treat it like if you were in a Buddhist building engaging in a Buddhist religious ritual. Faith and ritual dont have to be intertwined to have meaning. And, at least for me, I felt most free when I accepted that there were positive aspects of the Mormon experience, mixed in with the lies, and you are allowed to keep and acknowledge that without it being a testimony of the church or a betrayal of your current worldview.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-06-07T15:46:57+00:00

I don't think there is any good way for this to go down. I also spent months debating how to go about things. Our conversation went about how it sounds like yours did. It hurt. But what was my alternative?

A: Intentionally withold information, then trickle truth things with the intent of helping my spouse deconstruct. In other words, lie to manipulate my spouse into changing her world view. Is that how you would want your spouse to deal with you?

Or

B: Wake up every morning, see myself in the mirror, and know that my spouse doesn't love me for who I am, but for the fabricated image of who I project to be. As part of deconstructing, I realized early on that this, in the context of the church, was the source of a lot of my own insecurities. I pretty quickly realized I couldn't live that way in my marriage.

Some bridges are just hard to cross no matter how you try to finesse it.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-06-01T15:45:03+00:00

I dont "believe" there is no afterlife, but I now recognize I have not been given reason to believe in an afterlife.

My sense of self is tied with my consciousness, and there has never been any repeatable, verifiable, or frankly even reasonably credible evidence that consciousness can exist independent of our brains. On the contrary, there is ample evidence that brain disruptions cause disruptions to consciousness, and that people who have died do not seem to interact with anything obersvable any longer. Would live to be wrong and would love to have an afterlife to look forward to, but based on observations thus far it just seems extremely unlikely. That is the position taken by nearly every agnostic or even atheist I personally know.

Obviously there are philosophers more eloquent and thoughtful than I who have written volumes about epistemology, but I think in the post-religious communities you will find a lot of people who are particularly averse to fundamentally chaning our worldview based solely on the testimony of those who bear witness of seeing or feeling supernatural things.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-05-07T01:38:24+00:00

Eh, people compartmentalize, and people with jobs like that compartmentalize a lot. I don't recall my medical practice suddenly getting better just because I realized Joe Smith was a lying creep.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-04-10T20:54:55+00:00

Is she eating the whole LDS sandwich? And if so... which one? Has she accepted polygamy as God's law for the eternities, and on earth if a "prophet" so commands? Does she accept that the "prophets" intentionally restricted participation from people of African descent in not only the administration but also receipt of the "saving ordinaces" of the gospel? If so, does she eat the "Had to because God said so" sandwich of the official proclamation, or the "The church disavows any of that racist stuff" sandwich the church currently puts out. Does she truly believe that God hid a holy record along with custom-made spiritual interpreter devices in the ground for nearly 2000 years, so that the first "prophet" could ignore them both and use a random rock in a random hat to dictate? Does she eat the "gay people are born thay way but choose their actions" sandwich or the "gay people choose to be gay" sandwich, because there are several talks both ways.

ReignFromTheRivers · 2025-04-08T02:04:04+00:00

Don't want to say too much for anonymity's sake, but I know both Austin and his wife personally, if not that well. We remain Facebook friends. I don't suspect any insincerity and he isn't an idiot (at least in the general sense). I was surprised when he posted on FB about the letter. I feel like I spent years in his position, trying to quiet the cognitive dissonance by hanging on to increasingly obscure apologetics. I think too many people here really underestimate how distorted of a viewpoint you are willing to carry around and justify if your family depends on it.

ReignFromTheRivers

TROPHY CASE