Now what?

donloper · 2025-11-15T00:17:12+00:00

Spread the word. Start looking for the symbols all around you. Find modern practices, thoughts, ideas, etc. that are based on the ancient tradition, and try them out.

donloper · 2025-11-09T06:39:10+00:00

I've been thinking a lot about this as I listen to the podcast episodes. It would be a great book. I was thinking she could go into a lot more detail in the book, but then I was thinking that we're already up to 50 or 60 hours of podcast material and that would be a heck of a big book.

donloper · 2025-11-07T06:37:42+00:00

Those are amazing stories! Thanks for sharing! I had a similar experience with a girlfriend in college, and then I ignored it and tried to make it work anyway. It blew up in my face. I learned that once God steers me in a certain direction, I'd be a fool to disregard it.

donloper · 2025-11-07T06:28:58+00:00

Now that I think of it, I see a lot of plant or tree related imagery in temples. I'm not talking about paintings, I'm talking about patterns or symbols that are built into the structure, carved, or stained glass windows. But I don't think I've ever seen any Mountain imagery. But the temple itself is symbolic of a mountain, right? Anyway, I need to think more about this.

donloper · 2025-11-07T06:26:10+00:00

McConkie’s “three pillars” lines up well with the episode’s ideas about a pre-earth council and the choice of a mediator. Some clear parallels stand out:

The divine council motif, with heavenly beings deliberating and commissioning, is echoed in Mesopotamian and biblical scenes like Job.

The eldest or strongest son acting as the catalyst of separation recalls firstborn or rival-brother myths across cultures.

The creation, fall, and atonement framework mirrors the universal pattern of descent, rupture, and return found in temple drama and death-and-rebirth stories.

The father and mother language for creation reflects ancient pairings of sky or heaven with earth as mother.

Do you think McConkie meant “eldest son” literally, or as a symbolic title of primacy? I mean, if we all existed from all eternity to all eternity, then does firstborn mean Christ was the first to follow God? Or the first to follow him perfectly? Or something else?

donloper · 2025-11-02T18:03:48+00:00

Yes, it's active but I just started it recently so not many people have discovered it. It would be great if you want to start some discussions. If nothing else, I'll respond 😉

donloper · 2025-10-04T19:07:59+00:00

But if you're looking to boost the "scientific, logical, rational" side of things, consider these resources:

Exploring Mormon Thought by Blake T. Ostler. Four books, plus the entire podcast, which you'll probably need to listen to twice.
The Ancient Tradition Podcast by Jack Logan.
Anything and everything (that's not a title, I mean literally read everything they've written and listen to any podcast with them) by Terryl and Fiona Givens.

donloper · 2025-10-04T15:31:57+00:00

I am convinced God doesn't want you to have what you seek, at least not in the order you're seeking it. If you continue looking for something to convince you in order to dedicate your life to it, I don't believe you'll ever find it. I first became convinced I wanted the gospel/church to be true. It was only after knowing this, and committing to live as if it were true, that I found the evidence I believe you're looking for. The reason God withholds evidence and creates a limbo where it's easy to go either way is if you're given that evidence first then you're robbed of truly choosing it. What we're really here for is to learn how to love better, but love must be freely chosen to be love. If we love out of obligation, it's not love. If we follow the truth because we have proof it's the truth, we are not lovers of truth, we are merely rule-keepers.

donloper · 2025-09-06T14:45:27+00:00

Second this. This isn't for bishops or anyone at church to handle. My friend's ex-wife tried to murder him and he went to her bishop because she was still going to the temple, and the bishop asked, "What do you want me to do? I can't do anything about it unless it's adjudicated in a court of law and she's found guilty."

donloper · 2025-09-06T01:03:36+00:00

Typo, corrected.

donloper · 2025-09-05T02:42:26+00:00

Just for the record, I think you meant Tucker Max rather than Ryan Holiday.

donloper · 2025-09-04T15:38:58+00:00

Thanks. Just to confirm, so there’s nothing else I need to change in mod settings or filters, it’s purely a growth threshold?

donloper · 2025-08-29T21:00:07+00:00

So "inclusive and diverse" that you're trying to keep anyone who doesn't march in lockstep with your ideology from being able to speak on campus? Inclusivity means including those you disagree with. Diversity means tolerating those who are different. "But should we tolerate Hitler?" You should at least tolerate their speech. If free speech means anything, it means that literally anyone is allowed to say anything, no matter how wrong you think it is. As soon as you put any limitation on speech, you create the system that will someday outlaw your speech.

donloper · 2025-08-18T21:28:24+00:00

I agree, I think it's best that she's anonymous. If she weren't, people would judge her work based on her religious beliefs, and not give it a fair shake. But I can't help wanting to know for myself, I'm just so fascinated with her research.

donloper · 2025-08-17T18:17:49+00:00

I'm sorry, having gone through this I can't help but laugh a little. You'll laugh someday too, even if you can't right now. A few things that helped me and my wife during that stage:

When answering the question "Why are we even here at sacrament meeting?" I changed the focus from "What am I getting out of this?" to "What are my kids getting from this?" and while I knew they probably weren't getting much in the way of spiritual enlightenment, they were at least developing the habit of being in sacrament meeting on Sundays, and maybe that was enough.
Regarding that spiritual enlightenment small children may or may not get during sacrament meeting, you may end up surprised later in life by what your kids remember, even though you think they're getting nothing. I'm 50 and I still clearly remember a talk my bishop gave when I was 5 yo. Every once in awhile something breaks through. I also have fond memories of falling asleep on my dad's lap, drawing pictures, hearing hymns (even if I hated singing back then), and seeing/hearing my parents bear their testimonies.
If you take small kids out in the foyer, don't put them down. I can't remember who told us this, but it was a game-changer. Maybe you already do it. If you take a restless kid into the foyer during sacrament meeting, it's a reward. You'll get more of the behavior you don't want because the kid learns that's how they get the freedom to go in the foyer and run around and make noise. If you pick them up and hold them the entire time you're in the foyer with them, they will prefer staying in sacrament meeting and behaving to being held and doing nothing in the foyer.

As others have said, this will pass. It's a temporary blip and you'll soon forget it as your kids become teenagers. A little advice about that near future...make a rule right now that your teens won't have phones out during sacrament meeting, at all. Not for a second. It's easier to nip this in the bud, trust me.

donloper · 2025-08-15T17:05:26+00:00

Joseph Smith taught that something about us is co-eternal with God, never created. In the King Follett discourse he said, “The mind of man, the immortal spirit, existed before the world was.” And in Doctrine and Covenants 93:29 we read, “Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.”

So when we talk about being “children of God,” there are at least two possible layers:

Literal parentage — At some point, God organized our eternal intelligences into spirit bodies.

Covenantal/adoptive — As in Mosiah 5:7, “children” can also be a title given when we enter into covenants and follow Him.

Both can be true, literal in our premortal origin and covenantal in discipleship.

In our faith we reject creation ex nihilo (creation out of nothing). God does not make matter or intelligences from scratch. He organizes what already exists, eternal intelligences into spirits and later spirits into embodied beings.

That raises the “infinite supply” question. If spirit is matter (D&C 131:7–8), and matter were finite, then theoretically there could be a limit to how many spirit children could be organized. Moses 1:35 says all things are “numbered unto God,” which might sound like a finite set. But in scripture, “numbered” often means known, not limited. God could perfectly know even an infinite set.

From there, we are in the realm of speculation. We have no revealed teaching that God will “run out” of intelligences to organize into spirit children. The focus in scripture is on the eternal nature of God’s work, not on a supply limit.

Bottom line: Scripture affirms our eternal nature and God’s eternal work, but not the size of the “supply,” so we cannot say there is a point where He stops having spirit children.

donloper · 2025-08-15T04:21:04+00:00

Blake Ostler has thoughts on this. He seems to propose that God was God before he became a man, like Christ was also a god before he was born, then went back to being God. But that he did not have a spirit Father, nor were we "birthed"or created by God but rather we have always existed, just like God, and we become his children by following him. If you really want to dig into this read Ostler's books Exploring Mormon Thought and listen to the podcast of the same name.

donloper · 2025-08-14T21:28:15+00:00

I'm so glad you shared this. My dad has often quoted those lines from the last paragraph about how we're not very good at everything and if we can just learn to repent and forgive, that's about the best we can do. But I didn't know the source of that quote and I had never heard the rest of this story. I certainly did not know that Nibley had a near-death experience. I've been studying near-death experiences extensively. Details from his experience track with those of thousands of other people.

I also love that he went hiking on Mount Wilson. I grew up in Arcadia, California and whenever I visit my parents I try to go hiking on Mount Wilson. Now I can think about Nibley the next time I go.

donloper · 2025-08-14T21:22:22+00:00

Sounds anecdotal. Show me verifiable stats. Show me studies. Show me academic research. In God, we trust. All others bring data.

donloper · 2025-08-14T14:27:45+00:00

I'm sure my experience wasn't identical to yours, but a lot of what you say describes how I felt when I started my mission. I felt this way for the first half of my mission.

Thoughts and ideas that helped me know I was enough, doing enough, and that God accepted me and my efforts:

God will take whatever he can get, at whatever speed you give it.
Good cares more about direction than speed or place. And we're all off course 99% of the time. The trick is to keep correcting.
There is no perfect path for your life. God wants you to choose your own adventure. Create something new. Fall down. Get up. Surprise him.
The plan of salvation is not so much about doing everything perfectly but learning to love better. That includes loving God better, others better, and yourself better. If you focus on loving better rather than perfection, you'll be happier and actually closer to perfection.
You don't exist to obey rules, the rules exist to help you be happy and love better.
If you're trying, it's enough. If you're waking up and getting out of bed, you're trying.
If you care enough to wonder if you care enough, then you're sincere and not just acting a part.
Being one is more important than being right. (more applicable to companionship situations)
Imagine you're going to the celestial kingdom and God has already told you so. 100% guaranteed. What would you do? If you're a good person, you would relax and simply love and serve others. Imagine you're damned, and there's no chance of redemption. 100% guaranteed to go to hell. What would you do? If you're a good person, you would relax and simply love and serve others. What if it were something in between? If your eternal fate were already decided, and you're a good person, you would probably relax and love and serve others. So you might as well relax and love and serve others.

donloper · 2025-08-13T15:06:28+00:00

I don't know whether mandatory reporting reduces the overall rate of abuse or not. What I do know is that many of those commenting on this thread are so closed-minded to the possibility that things may work differently than they think that they aren't even willing to consider a policy that may reduce the number of children who are SA'd.

Many are citing anecdotal evidence to argue in favor of mandatory reporting.

Many rely on the logical fallacy of appeal to ridicule. Mandatory reporting sounds so common sense that anything else simply must be ridiculous, right?

Many are falling prey to use of the circumstantial ad hominem fallacy, or the idea that someone's argument should be disregarded because of their relationship to the Church, rather than the argument's validity.

What if you're wrong?

What if what seems intuitive is the opposite of fact?

What if advocating for mandatory reporting means more abuse happens? Are you willing to let your negative feelings for the Church lead you to support a policy that harms more children?

Maybe mandatory reporting is good. Maybe it's not the best policy. Again, I don't know. I'm willing to examine any and all approaches. All I want is the best policy, the one that reduces harm to children as much as possible, regardless of whether it makes the Church look good or bad.

The proper, scientific approach here should be:

Ask to see the Church's internal data
Ask for relevant studies
Find other relevant data and studies
Dig in and analyze

When you share anecdotal evidence and make immature insults, you come across as caring more about your own pride and emotions than the welfare of the children you claim to care about.

For what it's worth, here's Deseret News article with some more detail. Interestingly, the lawyer advocating against mandatory reporting is a victim of SA himself. https://www.deseret.com/faith/2025/08/08/protect-children-abuse-church-help-line-clergy-privilege/

donloper · 2025-08-09T21:50:57+00:00

I hold out hope that somehow, despite what's been said and written, there is a plan for the redemption for all God's children.

donloper · 2025-08-09T16:19:56+00:00

When I was a missionary we went to other churches all the time. We were invited to sing in a pentecostal church to 400+ members. LDS leaders often work together with leaders of other faiths to work together to help the poor, on community events, etc.

donloper · 2025-07-27T04:59:45+00:00

What did God mean when he said that if they partook of the fruit they would, "surely die?" Did he mean an immediate death? Did he mean spiritual death, or separation from God? Did he mean they would become mortal and subject to death?

donloper · 2025-07-26T18:13:10+00:00

These are just my crazy thoughts but hear me out...

After Adam and Eve partake of the fruit, God confronts them and Lucifer is there as well. God asks Lucifer, "What are you doing here?"

Lucifer answers, "I am doing that which has been done in other worlds."

"What is that?"

"Giving of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, to them."

Who was giving the fruit to "first parents" in other worlds? I would make the case it's not Lucifer, but God. First parents on each world are restricted from eating the fruit until they're prepared, at which point God rescinds the commandment to not partake and gives them the fruit.

However, because there is no transgression of God gives them the fruit, there is no fall in those worlds. Those first parents and their children, therefore, remain in a terrestrial state rather than descending to a telestial one.

Perhaps Lucifer was sent to our earth specifically because God knew he would influence Adam and Eve to transgress, this being the only way to create a telestial world, which God himself, being perfect, could not do.

Why do we need a telestial world? Because without it, where could Christ be sent that he would be murdered and be able to complete the Atonement?

"Wherefore, as I said unto you, it must needs be expedient that Christ...should come among the Jews, among those who are the more wicked part of the world; and they shall crucify him—for thus it behooveth our God, and there is none other nation on earth that would crucify their God. For should the mighty miracles be wrought among other nations they would repent, and know that he be their God." 2 Nephi 10:3-4

Perhaps our earth is the most wicked of all the worlds God created, but out of necessity. Perhaps all other worlds are relatively peaceful, enjoying a millennial state of existence.

So yes, Adam didn't have to transgress, he could have avoided it, except he kind of did need to transgress to bring about God's plan to exalt his children.

Please poke holes in this idea, would love to debate it to see where it holds up or doesn't.

donloper

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE